HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/09/03 HASTINGS
PLANNING COMMISSION
June 9, 2003
Regular Meeting
7:00 pm
Vice-Chairman Greil called the meeting to order at 7:03 pm.
1. Roll Call
Commissioners Present: Alongi, Greil, Hollenbeck, Truax, and Twedt.
Commissioners Absent: Anderson
Staff Present: Planning Director John Hinzman, Associate Planner Kris Jenson, HRA
Director/Heritage Preservation Commission (HPC) Staff Liason John Grossman
2. Approve May 27, 2003 Planning Commission Minutes
Motion by Commissioner Truax, Second by Twedt to approve the Minutes of the May
12, 2003 Planning Commission as presented by staff. Motion passed unanimously.
3. Greg Jablonske - Preliminary and Final Plat #2003-41 - South Oaks 2nd Addition.
Director Hinzman stated that the item was incomplete and had been removed from the
agenda. No further action was required.
M. Steven Haas - Variance #2003-10 - Vary from Shoreland and Zoning Front Yard
setback- 1009 3rd Street East.
Planner Jenson provided background information on the request.
Vice-Chair Greil opened the public hearing at 7:07 pm. Hearing no comments from the
public, the hearing was closed at 7:08 pm.
Commissioner Alongi questioned what the front yard setback is on the home directly to the
west of applicant's, which faces Washington Street.
Planner Jenson stated that the dimension was not measured.
Mr. Haas, the applicant, stated he would guess that the setback is about 16'.
Commissioner Alongi asked the applicant if he had anything to add to the report or reasons
why the variance should be granted.
Mr. Haas said he did not.
Vice-Chair Greil clarified that the Shoreland issue with this variance was the same
requirement as the front yard setback per the zoning code.
Commissioner Twedt stated that the 37' setback from 3rd Street East for the property to the
west of Mr. Haas' wasn't a true setback because the home faced Washington Street rather
than 3rd Street.
Director Hinzman stated that using the adjacent properties is somewhat of a gray area, and
that Staff looked at the directly adjacent properties on the same side of the street.
Commissioner Truax stated that he visited the site and studied the area on Monday
afternoon.
Planning Commission Action:
Commissioner Truax moved and Commissioner Hollenbeck seconded a motion to
recommend denial of the requested variances for 1009 3rd Street East to the City
Council, based on the following findings of fact:
No hardship exists for the property.
The existing home complies with current setback requirements. The granting of a
variance to the front yard setback would change the structure from legal conforming to
legal non-conforming.
Upon vote taken: Ayes: 3, Nays: 2, Twedt and Alongi dissenting. Motion passed.
City of Hastings - Review and Recommendation on Proposed Heritage Designation
of Site - 502 7th Street West.
Director Hinzman provided a brief background provided that this request and the next
agenda item were for the same property.
HRA Director/HPC Staff Liason John Grossman presented the background information on
the request. He also added that currently the site does not fall under the review authority of
the HPC.
Director Hinzman also noted that the property owner's attorney submitted a letter to the City
that was attached to the Staff memo.
Commissioner Twedt questioned a letter that was supposed to have been attached to the
attorney's letter.
Commissioner Twedt asked for clarification that the current property owner was opposed to
the designation.
Director Hinzman stated that the property owner was opposed to the designation.
Commissioner Alongi asked why the designation process was going forward.
HRA Director Grossman stated that the property owner's permission is not required for
consideration, although the property owner's wishes are taken into account.
Commissioner Truax stated his concern that the process was a burden to the property
owner.
HRA Director Grossman stated that personal feelings aside, the Planning Commission's role
is to determine the site's compatibility with the Comprehensive Plan.
Director Hinzman summarized language from City Code Chapter 2.18 which describes the
duties and requirements of the Heritage Preservation Commission.
Commissioner Twedt asked what was the value added to the home if this designation were
to be put into place.
HRA Director Grossman stated that much f the value is in the eye of the beholder, but that
preservation has been important to this community.
Commissioner Twedt was looking at the value added from a wider perspective and not
strictly a monetary one.
Vice-Chair Greil invited the property owner to speak to any issues he wished to address.
Patrick Mancino, read a letter from Maxine Clapp, addressed to the HPC. This is the letter
that was supposed to have been attached with the attorney's letter to the City. Ms. Clapp's
letter expressed her desire not to have the property be designated, and Mr. Mancino stated
that he also did not wish for the property to be designated as a heritage site.
Please Note: A copy of the letter has been attached to the minutes. KJ
Commissioner Alongi asked Mr. Mancino when he was
heritage designation process.
Mr. Mancino responded that it was about May 15th or 16th.
made aware of the proposed
Vice-Chair Greil stated what the Planning Commission's role was in the evaluation process,
but expressed concern that this could be seen as the City trampling on a property owner's
rights.
Commissioner Alongi suggested delaying of the nomination process until the owner can
follow through on the building plans.
Director Hinzman clarified the timeline for proceeding on these items. The designation
recommendation will be forwarded to the City Council for their July 7th meeting. This is when
the public hearing is scheduled for the actual designation. The variance request, which is
the next item on the agenda, will have the Planning Commission's recommendation
forwarded for the June 16th meeting, and most likely a decision will be made at that point.
Commissioner Alongi asked if the building permit could be revoked if the designation is
voted into place during construction.
HRA Director Grossman stated that the HPC could review the permit.
Vice-Chair Greil asked if this was all a mute point, seeing as how construction could easily
begin before a designation is put into place.
Commissioner Alongi expressed grave misgivings about the whole process and the pitting of
one neighbor against another.
Commissioner Truax asked why the home was not approved for designation in 1976 when
originally nominated.
HRA Director Grossman stated that a National Register Survey was done, which included
much higher standards for designation. Five years ago, another survey was done by an
architectural historian, and this home was not listed among the top 20 to consider for
designation.
Vice-Chair Greil stated that because of the new owner, the application was being made at
this time, because it was seen as an opportunity for designation.
Jackie Boler, 402 7th St W, is also a member of the HPC and prepared the application for
designation consideration. Ms. Boler summarized her process for completing the
application, as well as reviewed information from the Downtown Master Plan that applied to
the site.
Vice-Chair Greil stated that the Commission was aware of the language in the Plan, and that
a later agenda item was the official recommendation on new zoning code language to
implement the Plan's recommendations.
Commissioner Truax inquired if at the most recent HPC meeting any other heritage
designations were considered.
HRA Director Grossman stated there were no other applications considered.
Commissioner Alongi asked Ms. Boler if she had attempted to contact the property owner to
discuss the application process.
Ms. Boler stated that she had been ill earlier this year, and the home was vacant as well.
Earlier this spring she contacted neighbors about meeting with Ms. Clapp about the
application, however none of the neighbors felt comfortable contact her about the process.
Commissioner Truax asked if a list of properties had been identified as potential heritage
preservation sites.
HRA Director Grossman stated that a list does exist as a result of a study that was done
several years ago.
Vice-Chair Greil clarified that the Planning Commission was being asked for a
recommendation, and that the City Council still had the final vote on the designation of the
site.
Commissioner Twedt stated that he was planning to make a motion to deny, but wanted it
clear that it was not a statement against the HPC or preservation of properties in the City.
Planning Commission Action:
Commissioner Twedt moved and Commissioner Alongi seconded a motion to
recommend denial of the proposed heritage designation of 502 7th St West to the City
Council.
Upon vote taken: Ayes: 3, Nays: 2, Greil and Hollenbeck dissenting. Motion passed.
Patrick Mancino - Variance #2003-43 - Addition to a non conforming structure -
502 7th Street West.
Planner Jenson presented background information on the request.
Commissioner Twedt stated he was somewhat confused by the contradictory Staff
recommendations on this item and the previous heritage preservation designation of the
same site.
Director Hinzman stated that purview from which the Planning Staff reviews a request will be
different from the HPC's view due to the ordinances under which the request falls. Planning
Staff is only commenting on the variance request and how it relates to the Zoning ordinance.
Vice-Chair Greil asked if this item would be reviewed by the Planning Commission if the
request were to construct a detached structure.
Director Hinzman stated that Planning Commission/City Council review would not be
required if the structure were detached.
Commissioner Alongi inquired if the carriage house was being removed.
Mr. Mancino stated that the carriage house would remain, and that one reason for attaching
the proposed structure to the existing home is the city ordinance that there can be no more
than one detached structure over 120 square feet.
Planning Commission Action:
Commissioner Alongi moved and Commissioner Twedt seconded a motion to
recommend approval of the variance for an enlargement of a non-conforming
structure at 502 7th Street West to the City Council, based on the following findings of
fact:
1. The existing structure was constructed prior to the adoption of a zoning ordinance.
2. That literal interpretation of the code would deprive the applicant of rights commonly
enjoyed by others.
3. The proposed addition would not further encroach into the required setbacks.
Upon vote taken: Ayes: 5, Nays: 0. Motion passed.
City of Hastings - City Code Amendment #2003-38 - Chapter 10 (Various
Sections) - Downtown Master Plan
Director Hinzman presented background information on the request. There was a public
hearing on this item at the May 27, 2003 meeting, at which the Commission tabled the
request to refine the language of the proposed changes.
Planning Commission Action:
Commissioner Truax moved and Commissioner Hollenbeck seconded a motion to
recommend approval of the ordinance changes as presented in the Staff report.
Upon vote taken: Ayes: 5, Nays: 0. Motion passed.
8. Other Business
Director Hinzman provided an update of City Council actions and upcoming planning items.
Adjournment
With no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:30 pm.
Respectfully submitted,
Kristine Jenson
Recording Secretary
MAY 17, 2003
THE CONDITION OF MY HEALTH PRECLUDES MY ATTENDING THIS MEETING. I HAVE
ASKED MY SURROGATE SON, PATRICK MANCINO TO READ MY STATEMENT.
I WAS SURPRISED, HURT AND FINALLY ANGERED THAT A STRANGER HAD INITIATED
CONSIDERATION OF MY PROPERTY AT 502 W. 7TH ST. FOR DESIGNATION AS A HERITAGE
PRESERVATION SITE WITHOUT MY KNOWLEDOE OR APPROVAL.
WHILE THE HOUSE, PARTICULARLY THE INTERIOR. IS CHARMINO I DO NOT CONSIDER IT
WORTHY OF HISTORIC DESIONATION FOR THE REASONS LISTED BELOW. I AM NOT AN
ARCHITECTURAL HISTORIAN BUT I WAS 1N CHAKOE OF THE ARCHITECTURE LIBRARY AT
THE UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA FOR 5 1/2 YEARS.
1. THE HOUSE IS NOT IN A DESIGNATED DISTRICT.
2, THE HOUSE IS NOT UNIQUE. THERE ARE SPLENDID EXAMPLES OF THIS
ARCHITECTURAL STYLE IN DESIGNATED DISTRICTS.
THE SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION INDICATES THAT THE HOUSE WAS
CONSIDERED FOR DESIO~IATION IN 1976 WHEN IT WOULD HAVE HAD THE
ENTHUSIASTIC SUPPORT OF ITS OWNER, RUTH MORTON.
IF IT WAS NOT WORTH DESIONATION THEN, WHY IS IT BEINO CONSIDERED
NOW?
A NOTE SUGGESTS '~IAT THE ASPHALT SHINGLE SIDINO HAS BEEN ON THIS
HOUSE LONG ENOUGH TO BE CONSIDERED A CHANOE WORTH RESPECTING AS
AN EXAMPLE OF HISTORIC SIDING."
THIS IS NONSENSE. THE SIDINO CAN BEST BE ~)ESCRIBED AS DEPRESSION-ERA
UOLY. EXAMPLES OF IT AND THE PERIOD IT WAS IN USE CAN BE FOUND IN
ANY ARCHITECTURAL LIBRARY.
IN THE COVER LETTER AND NOMINATION FORM, MENTION IS MADE OF RUTH
MORTON'S INTEREST IN HISTORY AND CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE PIONEER
ROOM. I SUPPORTED HER INTEREST AND HAVE BEEN CONSIDERING ADDING
TO HER CONTRIBUTIONS. I AM SENSrrIVE TO THE NEED FOR HISTORIC
PRESERVATION. I SPENT THE LAST 30 YEARS OF MY SERVICE AT THE
UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA IN CHAROE OF THE UNIVERSITY ARCHIVES. I
RETIRED FROM THERE AS ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR AND ARCHIVIST EMERITA.
IN CONCLUSION, I WANT IT UNDERSTOOD I DO NOT SUPPORT THIS INITIATIVE, NOR DO I
WANT THIS HOUSE CONSIDERED FOR DESIGNATION AS A HERITAOE PRESERVATION SITE.
SINCERELY,
MAXI B. CLAPP