Stillwater Planning Commission recommends against special-use permit for religious activities at 1307 North Husband Street

The Stillwater Planning Commission on May 20 voted to recommend that the City Council find a requested specific use permit (S.U.P.) for religious institutions at 1307 North Husband Street "not an appropriate use for the property based on impacts to surrounding the vicinity," a motion that passed on a 2-yes, 1-no, 1-abstain vote.

The recommendation follows a staff presentation and more than a half-dozen neighbors testifying in opposition to the request by K Life to use an accessory structure and portions of a house on the 1.8-acre parcel for religious gatherings and programs. City planning staff told the commission that churches are permitted in RSS and RT zoning only with an S.U.P. and that approval would change applicable building and fire code requirements for the site.

Why it matters: Neighbors said frequent gatherings have already occurred at the site and argued regular assemblies would change the block's residential character, increase traffic and parking demand and generate noise that would be exempt from the city's noise ordinance for religious uses. Staff noted the accessory structure was permitted and inspected as a residential accessory building with a 5-foot side setback; if used for church activities it would be subject to a 15-foot side setback unless a variance is granted by the Board of Adjustment.

City planning staff described the property and zoning context in detail, showing aerial and street views and noting the high school to the west and single-family homes surrounding the site. "The land development code allows for church and other religious institutions in the small lot, single family residential, and 2 family zoning district with a specific use permit," staff said. Staff recommended conditional approval to the City Council if the commission chose to recommend approval, with the condition that a variance be granted by the Board of Adjustment to cure the setback nonconformity.

Neighbors said the site has been used for recurring K Life events without an S.U.P. and raised multiple concerns. Resident Renee Rule, who lives next door at 1315 North Husband, told the commission: "My objection has 2 main points. Number 1, having this organization right in the middle of our block does not preserve the integrity of our neighborhood." Don Rule, also at 1315 North Husband, said: "We share a 207 foot property line with the, K Life, facility," and described frequent activity that he said faces his front door.

Other neighbors described unmaintained yard conditions and cited prior events they characterized as noisy or disruptive. Tom Hennessey and Barbara Miller provided photographs and accounts of events; Miller said prior representations to neighbors about parking and use were not documented in writing. Several commenters pressed for clearer limits on hours, parking and landscaping if the use were allowed.

Applicant Matthew Clark, identified in the hearing as the property owner of 1307 North Husband Street, said the property had been abandoned before purchase, that existing uses have continued at roughly the same pattern since a prior meeting, and that his group intends to pursue code compliance, variances and building permits if the S.U.P. moves forward. Clark said his group had been seeking low-cost locations to meet and that "we have every intention to follow every code that may be put into effect." He also acknowledged maintenance lapses on parts of the property and said code enforcement had just posted a seven-day notice related to tall grass.

Staff answered technical questions from commissioners about parking, setbacks and landscaping. Planning staff said parking for churches is calculated by building area (staff cited 1 space per 60 square feet for churches in their corrected calculation) and that a full drainage study and commercial landscaping standards would be required if the property were converted to commercial standards tied to religious assembly. Staff also said complaints and photographs submitted May 8 prompted code enforcement action earlier in the week.

During deliberations commissioners weighed neighborhood character and frequency/density of events against the applicant's stated community purpose. One commissioner said a continuing pattern of activity had given neighbors a "trial run" of the proposed use and that required parking and site upgrades would make the site feel commercial in the middle of a residential block. Another commissioner noted staff's recommendation for conditional approval and asked whether conditions could address the neighbors' concerns; staff said conditions, including development standards and operational rules, could be attached to an S.U.P.

A motion to recommend denial to City Council was made and seconded. The commission recorded the motion as passing, 2 yes, 1 no, 1 abstain. Staff advised that alternatives remain: the commission may recommend approval with conditions that include a Board of Adjustment variance to cure the side-yard setback; recommend denial; or request more information and table the item. Because the commission recommended against the S.U.P., the matter will move to the City Council with the commission's negative recommendation.

Next steps: If the City Council pursues the request despite the commission recommendation, the applicant would need to secure any required variances from the Board of Adjustment, obtain building- and fire-code approvals, submit a commercial landscaping plan and resolve parking and drainage requirements before religious assembly could be authorized for the accessory structure. Code enforcement will continue to address tall grass and any unpermitted uses reported to the nonemergency line.

The Planning Commission also noted that the next regular meeting is scheduled for June 3.