PROCEEDINGS OF THE ST. CLOUD ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS. A meeting of the St. Cloud Zoning Board of Appeals was held on June 16, 2009, at 7:00 p.m.

Transcription

1 PROCEEDINGS OF THE ST. CLOUD ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS A meeting of the St. Cloud Zoning Board of Appeals was held on June 16, 2009, at 7:00 p.m. in the City Hall Council Chambers. Members present were Fandel, Long, Bright, Mathews, and Ohman. Ugochukwu was absent. Approval of Minutes: Bright moved to approve the minutes of the May 19, 2009 Zoning Board of Appeals meeting. The motion was seconded by Fandel and carried by a vote of (Ohman abstaining). Variance Request/Mark Ochu: opened the public hearing and invited testimony on a request from Mark Ochu for approval of a variance from Article 16, Off-Street Parking and Loading, Section 16.7, C., which does not permit motor vehicles to be parked or stored within a required front yard, interior side yard or street side yard setback area and Section 16.8, A., which requires all off-street parking spaces to be a minimum of 9' wide by 19' deep. (Location: 801 4th Ave. So.) (VAR ). The following persons testified: Mark Ochu The variance request was prompted by a violation notice he received th Ave. So. from the City Health Dept. for illegal parking. He explained that two wheels of his vehicle were off of the driveway. The Health Dept. indicated parking needs to be on a paved surface. He started paving and then received a letter the day after stating that what he was paving was turning into a parking pad which was in violation of the Land Development Code. He claimed that the mission statement of the Planning and Zoning Office indicates that a goal is to create an aesthetically pleasing environment. His house was built in 1882 only 2 or 3 from the property line. The Zoning Ordinance was not in existence at that time. Enforcement of a modern day code on a historic structure does not lend to an aesthetically pleasing environment. To eliminate more green space by taking out the hedge and parking off the alley or paving an area west of the garage in the back yard would not be in keeping with the historic character of the property. He said he is requesting a 0' setback rather than a 15' setback before a parking space can start. The staff memo states that he would not meet the code for an 18 wide parking area required for two spaces. He referred to a picture 1

2 in the packet of the proposed driveway expansion and stated that there is a small area to the left of the car that adds another 3 to the width of the driveway. The driveway is actually 15 wide including the area that is within the setback. He referred to the Southside Neighborhood University Master Plan. He stated he is the only single family residence in the area except for one on 5th Ave. He referred to the map on page 22 of the Southside Neighborhood University Master Plan which indicates his property as public use. He has been designated a century home and is in a historic district. Tom Mathews Board member Mark Ochu Tom Mathews Mark Ochu Tom Mathews Mark Ochu Tom Mathews Dave Broxmeyer Senior Planner He asked Mr. Ochu how long he has owned the house. He said he bought the house in 1974 or 1975 and has done extensive exterior restoration work. He asked applicant if he agrees with staff s recommended condition that the parking space must be at least 9 in width. He would understand the value of a 9' wide parking space if this were a rental property. He believes he can provide the 18' required for two parking stalls. In driving by the property, he noticed paving stones. He selected paving stones so that the parking area can easily be altered or removed in the future. He picked a pattern that he believed would be compatible from an historic standpoint. He noted that staff s third recommended condition is that the driveway and parking space must be paved with materials consistent with the requirements of the LDC and asked staff if the paving stone would comply. Yes; the proposed interlocking brick pavers would meet the LDC requirement for paving material. Steve Ludwig He spoke in support of the request. Changes have occurred over the Admin. VP, SCSU years in the planning for that area. SCSU planned to acquire that th Ave. So. property for parking at one time. Due to historic preservation efforts and St. Cloud, MN the designation of the Barden Park historic district including applicant s property and the one adjacent to it, the University s intent changed with respect to this property. The home and its configuration does not lend itself to use by the University. Whatever is necessary to make the structure more viable as a single family home is beneficial to maintenance of that property and the historic district. On-street parking is extremely restricted because it is adjacent to Barden Park and the University. The age of the house and the typical relationship of the driveway to the street for a narrow lot makes it attractive for parking adjacent to the driveway. He believes the proposed parking area size is more consistent with the use of the property and will have less impact 2

3 than a larger parking area off the alley. Parking off the alley may give the impression that it is additional parking for the University since most of the University s parking is directly off the alley. Granting of the variance will ensure the long term integrity of the historic district. There being no one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. Fandel moved to grant the variance as he was persuaded by the applicant s responses to the application questions, citing under #1, The layout will be in a pattern consistent with the historic period of the house. Parking a vehicle on the proposed pad would not extend past the property line into the boulevard ; and, under #2 The practical difficulties of strict enforcement would involve the loss of green space, and damaging the historic nature of the home which has been carefully preserved. The proposed location of the pad would be the least intrusive and maximizes green space which also is a mutual benefit and enhancement to the adjacent Barden Park and included the following conditions: 1) The site plan approved by the Zoning Board of Appeals shall be the only site plan approved for this property; 2) The parking space must be at least 9 in width; and, 3) The driveway and parking space must be paved with materials consistent with the requirements of the LDC. The motion was seconded by Ohman. Letters of support were received from Beth Cragle of 201 Ramsey Pl., Judith Dorn of th Ave. So., and Paul Cotton of th Ave. So. Mathews offered two amendments to the motion, i.e., to reduce the required width of the parking stall from 9' to 8 1/2' and assumed applicant s sketch would be incorporated as the site plan; and, adding a condition that staff develop a statement that would incorporate terms and conditions of granting the variance; and, within 10 days of completion of the project, the homeowner (applicant) sign the statement acknowledging the terms of the variance and that he complied with those terms. noted that staff has recommended that the parking space must be at least 9' in width and asked Mathews if he would object to supporting staff s recommendation for a 9 width. Mathews withdrew his amendment to require only an 8 ½ width and agreed to staff s recommendation for a minimum 9 width. Mathews amendment to include a statement to be signed by the applicant (homeowner) was agreeable to the maker of the motion (Fandel) and the seconder (Ohman). The motion with the friendly amendment carried unanimously. 3

4 Variance Request/Apartments 2 Go (, Larry Heim, and Fred Mehr) on Behalf of Henkemeyer Properties LLC c/o Central McGowan, Inc.: opened the public hearing and invited testimony on a request from Apartments 2 Go (, Larry Heim, and Fred Mehr) on behalf of Henkemeyer Properties LLC c/o Central McGowan Inc. for approval of the following variances: Article 8, Section 8.3, R3A District - maximum lot coverage, total minimum open space, minimum open space in rear yard setback, building street side yard setback; Article 16, Section 16.3, C. - interior and street side yard parking setbacks and Article 16, Section 16.13, C., number of off-street parking spaces for multiple-family dwellings in an R3A District. The applicants are requesting to change an existing 28-bed residential facility into a market rate apartment containing four two-bedroom apartments, four one-bedroom apartments, and an on-site rental office. (Location: 815 University Drive South) (VAR ). Mathews recused himself due to conflicting professional relationships associated with agenda items 4, 5, and 6. The following persons testified: They have reconsidered and would like to convert the space into six th St. NE two-bedroom apartments. Sartell, MN Allen Bright He asked Mr. Mehr if he is aware of staff s recommended conditions. He is agreeable to those conditions. The two four-bedroom units in the basement would be vacant or used for storage, and the two-bedroom unit would be a rental office and files. He noted that this building was used as a residential facility and asked if the proposal is strictly for apartments. The former use was as a residential group home. The proposal is strictly for market rate apartments, storage, and office. If the fence or guard rail must be installed on the south, he questioned how applicant will remove snow and where the residents will park. They have a survey indicating space for 12 parking spots. Regarding snow removal, the other partner, Larry Heim, owns th Ave. So. where there is a similar situation. Some snow could be put on the north and east sides. The remainder would have to be hauled away. He asked where a dumpster would be located and recommended that it be enclosed. 4

5 It would be near the rear door and enclosed. He asked if he could accommodate parking and still have room for a dumpster. A huge dumpster isn t necessary; a smaller one can be emptied several times a week. There being no one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. Bright moved to approve the variance request subject to the following conditions: 1) The dwelling units on the first floor must be eliminated. The first floor can only be occupied by office and storage space. The office space shall only be utilized by the property owner and shall be subject to Section 14.3R of the LDC. The storage space shall only be used by the property owner and building tenants; 2) The remaining four-bedroom dwelling units on the upper two floors must be converted into two-bedroom dwelling units, resulting in a maximum of six two-bedroom dwelling units in the entire building; 3) The southern two parking spaces must e moved further to the east so they don t interfere with the alley clearway area; 4) Snow is not permitted to be stored in a location that impacts parking and access aisles; 4) Snow is not permitted to be stored in a location that impacts parking and access aisles; 5) A 2.5 to 3 fence or guard rail must be installed along the southern property line to keep vehicles from encroaching onto the public sidewalk; 6) A minimum of 12 off-street parking spaces must be provided on-site, and the existing parking lot must be restriped according to the approved site plan; 7) The west end of the existing timber retaining wall must be repaired or replaced; 8) A screened dumpster location that does not interfere with parking spaces and access aisles must be shown on the site plan; 9) The property owner agrees that the first floor of the building shall be subject to periodic inspection by city staff; 10) Upon completion of the interior renovation project, the applicant must sign and return the Statement of Completion to the St. Cloud Planning and Zoning Department; and, 11) The site plan approved by the Zoning Board of Appeals shall be the only site plan approved for the property. Fandel seconded the motion, and it carried by a vote of (Long opposed; Mathews abstaining.) 5

6 Special Exceptions Permit/Central Minnesota Receiving and Referral (Detox) on Behalf of Central Minnesota Mental Health Center: opened the public hearing on a request from Central Minnesota Receiving and Referral (detox) on behalf of Central Minnesota Mental Health Center for a special exceptions permit for the expansion of a non-conforming office and clinic complex in a residential district. The St. Cloud Zoning Ordinance prohibits the expansion of an existing non-conforming non-residential use in a residential district without a special exceptions permit. The applicant received a special exceptions permit in 1993 and 2008 for previous expansions of the residential facility. This special exceptions permit would allow a larger building addition to be constructed compared to the 2008 approved site plan (Location: th Street North) (SEP ). The following persons testified: John Greenwaldt In 2008, the ZBA approved expansion of the detox facility. In getting the Operations Manager finances together and redoing plans, they attempted to find a way to Central MN Mental Health make the crisis beds come together with detox. The previous request Center was to increase from 16 to 20 beds, 5 of the beds being crisis beds. The th St. No. previous request allowed them to flip detox and crisis so that the crisis St. Cloud, MN people are toward the back of the facility rather than being around the people who are in for detox residential treatment. The expansion could accommodate a handicapped bathroom. Currently, the crisis team of 3 to 4 staff members is located in the administrative building which is detached from the detox center. The additional square footage being requested would allow staff to be right next to the crisis patients. John Greenwaldt Evan Larson GLT Architects He noted that the location of the new addition goes into the utility easement area which was vacated. He asked why applicant isn t expanding into the center area. There is a courtyard in the center with sidewalks that staff use to go from building to building. Funding went through for the plans for the additions requested under the special exceptions permit (SEP) that was approved in The plans have been submitted to the state plan reviewer, and they have commented that from an operational standpoint, it would be preferable to include additional staff in the addition adjacent to Northway Dr. The request is to add an additional 8 onto the addition that was approved in 2008 which will also accommodate 3 to 4 staff. Applicant is attempting to separate the crisis functions from detox and to have staff closer to the crisis area. He noted that funding approval has been received for the additional square footage. He added that there is a 15 setback requirement from the property line. The addition would be almost 27' from the property line. 6

7 Chairperson Bright Dave Broxmeyer Senior Planner He asked staff if the special exceptions permit and the conditional use permit public hearings can be held simultaneously. They can be held as one public hearing, but two separate motions are required. There being no one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. Bright moved to approve the special exceptions permit which would allow a larger building addition to be constructed than what was approved in 2008 subject to the following conditions: 1) The site plan approved by the Zoning Board of Appeals shall be the only site plan approved for this property; and, 2) That upon completion of the building addition, the applicant must sign and return the Statement of Completion to the St. Cloud Planning and Zoning Department. Fandel seconded the motion. noted the letter of support from Dale and Karen Kleinschmidt of 1053 Borgert Ave. No. The motion carried by a vote of (Mathews abstaining) Conditional Use Permit Request/Central Minnesota Receiving and Referral (Detox) on Behalf of Central Minnesota Mental Health Center: opened the public hearing on a request from Central Minnesota Receiving and Referral (detox) on behalf of Central Minnesota Mental Health Center for approval of an amendment to a conditional use permit site plan. In September of 2008 the Zoning Board of Appeals approved a conditional use permit for a residential facility to increase the number of beds from 16 to 20. This requested amendment will keep the number of treatment beds at 20, but would allow a larger building addition for office and storage needs. (Location: th Street North) (CUP ) There being no one wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. Fandel moved to approve the conditional use permit subject to the following conditions: 1) The site plan approved by the Zoning Board of Appeals shall be the only approved site plan for the construction of the residential facility; 2) The building addition cannot exceed 1,400 sq. ft. in area; 3) Maximum occupancy within the residential facility is limited to no more than 20 residents; 4) Any significant alterations to the structure or site improvements associated with the residential facility as shown on the approved site plan shall require the conditional use permit to be amended; and, 5) That upon completion of the building addition, the applicant must sign and return 7

8 the Statement of Completion to the St. Cloud Planning and Zoning Department. The motion was seconded by Ohman and carried by a vote of (Mathews abstaining) Other Business: Mathews acknowledged the Mayor's promise to appoint a new member to the Board but noted that there is still one position to be filled. Fandel said it was his understanding that the Zoning Board would be participating in a test period for GIS; however, he has not received the link. Broxmeyer explained that the IT Dept. is having security issues at this time and is not sure when it will be accessible. Zoning Board of Appeals/Planning Commission/City Council Training Session: Broxmeyer informed the Zoning Board that a training session has been scheduled for July 20, 2009, from 6-8 p.m. for the ZBA/Planning Commission/City Council. The training will be given by the League of MN Cities. Information will be provided prior to that training. Adjournment: There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 7:45 p.m. Thomas Mathews, Secretary 8