Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2022-07-27 CPC Packetillwaftr • The Birthplace of Minnesota 216 4th Street N, Stillwater, MN 55082 651-430-8800 www.ci.stillwater.mn.us PLEASE NOTE: Planning Commission meetings are streamed live on the city website and available to view on Channel 16. Public can participate by attending the meeting in person at City Hall in the Council Chambers, 216 4th St N, by logging into https://stillwater-mn.zoomgov.com/j/1608779021 or by calling 1-646-828-7666 and enter the meeting ID number: 160 877 9021 REVISED PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING July 27th, 2022 REGULAR MEETING 7:00 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL III. APPOINTMENT OF VICE -CHAIR IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Possible approval of minutes of June 22nd, 2022 regular meeting minutes V. OPEN FORUM - The Open Forum is a portion of the Commission meeting to address subjects which are not a part of the meeting agenda. The Chairperson may reply at the time of the statement or may give direction to staff regarding investigation of the concerns expressed. Out of respect for others in attendance, please limit your comments to 5 minutes or less. VI. CONSENT AGENDA (ROLL CALL) - All items listed under the consent agenda are considered to be routine by the Planning Commission and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion on these items unless a commission member or citizen so requests, in which event, the items will be removed from the consent agenda and considered separately. 2. Case No. Findings for Hassis Resolution adopting findings of denial 3. Case No. Findings for Cardinal Resolution adopting findings of denial VII. UNFINISHED BUSINESS VIII. PUBLIC HEARINGS - The Chairperson opens the hearing and will ask city staff to provide background on the proposed item. The Chairperson will ask for comments from the applicant, after which the Chairperson will then ask if there is anyone else who wishes to comment. Members of the public who wish to speak will be given 5 minutes and will be requested to step forward to the podium and must state their name and address. At the conclusion of all public testimony the Commission will close the public hearing and will deliberate and act on the proposed item. 4. Case No. 2022-48: Consideration of an ordinance amending Chapter 31 of the City Ordinance, as it pertains to medical cannabis, cannabidiol (CBD) products and hemp growing and performance standards 5. Case No. 2022-44: Consideration of a Variance for the construction of a Deck exceeding the allowable impervious surface. Property located at 1830 White Pine Court. 6. Case No. 2022-46: Consideration of a Variance for the construction of a Deck at a reduced rear yard setback. Property located at 3493 87' St N. 7. Case No. 2022-50: Consideration of an Interim Use Permit for outdoor events and seating for Zephyr Theater. Property located at 601 Main St N. 8. Case No. 2022-47: Consideration to amend City Code Section 31-315 and Section 31-325 allowable uses in residential and non-residential districts to establish appropriate locations for massage establishments. 9. Ordinance Amendment: Consideration to amend City Code Section 31-315 and Section 31-325 allowable uses in residential and non-residential districts to allow short-term housing rental units. IX. DISCUSSION X. FYI — STAFF UPDATES XI. ADJOURNMENT ilivater THE 1INTNYLACE OF MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 22, 2022 REGULAR MEETING 7:00 P.M. Chairman Dybvig called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Present: Chairman Dybvig, Commissioners Cox, Hoffman, Knippenberg, Steinwall, Swanson, Councilmember Odebrecht (via Zoom) Absent: None Staff: Community Development Director Gladhill, Assistant Planner Gutknecht APPROVAL OF MINUTES Possible approval of minutes of May 25, 2022 regular meeting Motion by Commissioner Hoffman, seconded by Commissioner Steinwall, to approve the minutes of the May 25, 2022 meeting. Motion passed 6-0-1 with Commissioner Swanson abstaining. OPEN FORUM There were no public comments. CONSENT AGENDA Case No. 2022-28, Resolution adopting Written Findings for Denial of a Variance to Exceed the Maximum Allowable Garage Area of 1,000 Square Feet at 7155 Melville Court North, Stillwater, Minnesota Case No. 2022-26, Variance to the allowed impervious surface coverage in order to construct a deck. Property located at 3490 87th St N in the TR district. Paul and Luane Bruggers, property owners. Case No. 2022-30, Variance to the sideyard setback for an addition/remodel. Property located at 1204 4th Ave S in the RB district. Katie Kangas, applicant and Michael and Nicole Willenbring, property owners. Motion by Commissioner Cox, seconded by Councilmember Odebrecht, to adopt the Consent Agenda. Motion passed 6-0-1 with Commissioner Swanson abstaining. UNFINISHED BUSINESS There was no unfinished business. PUBLIC HEARINGS Case No. 2022-36: Consideration of a Variance for an addition. Property Located at 1792 Greeley St S in the BP -I District. Chris Hassis, Property owner. Assistant Planner Gutknecht explained that the property owner/applicant is requesting a Variance to the Sideyard (Interior) Setback in order to construct an 8,500 square foot addition to the west of the existing building, to create a space for body technicians and detail departments to increase efficiency; no new services are being added. The applicant is also requesting a deviation from the design standards required for the West Stillwater Business Planning Commission June 22, 2022 Park area for the 85' x 104' pole building type constructed building with "Pro -rib steel panel" walls and roof. The existing building, consistent with design standards, appears to be a combination of painted block work area with a styled front office with stone veneer and lap siding, but is currently nonconforming in regard to the side yard setback. The required sideyard setback for the addition is 20 feet. The owner is proposing a 3.7-foot setback, to match the existing building's nonconforming setback. Staff recommends that Planning Commission approve the requested 3.7-foot sideyard setback variance and deny the requested deviation to the required design standard for lack of practical difficulty being shown. Chris Hassis, owner of Hassis Paintworks, showed photos of neighbors' buildings which have the same siding as proposed. He stated he is willing to apply another siding material on the 15- foot portion of the new building that is exposed to the road. Tom, builder from Sunnyside Construction, showed a panel of an alternative material, adding that the cost of upgrading to a potentially conforming material would be $100,000 not considering potential engineering issues that may be caused by the additional weight. He stated that the building is hidden from the road. Councilmember Steinwall asked if there are options to match the existing building. Tom replied that using siding matching the current building would cost more than $1-2 million, a very big hardship. Community Development Director Gladhill stated that the panel shown would not comply with the minimal design guidelines in the West Business Park area. He will work with the applicant to find alternative solutions. Chair Dybvig opened the public hearing. A person identified as BP Gas (via Zoom) asked what is the nature of the expansion? Mr. Gutknecht replied it is to create more space for the existing business operation but not expansion. Chair Dybvig closed the public hearing. Commissioners Hoffman and Steinwall remarked that the setback variance is reasonable but the Commission cannot grant a variance to design standards for economic reasons. Motion by Commissioner Steinwall, seconded by Commissioner Cox, to approve Case No. 2022- 36, Variance to sideyard setback for an addition at 1792 Greeley St S, with the typical staff - recommended condition stating that any changes must come back to the Planning Commission for review. All in favor. Motion by Commissioner Steinwall, seconded by Commissioner Hoffman, to deny Case No. 2022- 36, Variance to West Stillwater Business Park District Design Standards for an addition at 1792 Greeley St S, based on the Planning Commission's inability to grant variances based on economic hardship. All in favor. Mr. Gladhill stated staff will contact the applicant about possible economic development tools. Case No. 2022-37: Consideration of a Variance for the construction of a deck. Property located at 424 Grove St S in the RA District. Ronald Cardinal and Stacy Franklin. property owners. Mr. Gladhill reviewed the case. Ronald Cardinal and Stacey Franklin are requesting a Variance to allow a deck within the corner side yard setback of 30 feet. The existing home is considered a lawful nonconforming use due to a deficient setback. The approximately 272 square foot Page 2 of 7 Planning Commission June 22, 2022 deck is proposed to be 15.5 feet from the side property line abutting Pine Street West. Staff finds the requested variance is not in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the zoning code, is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, nor has practical difficulty been established. Therefore, staff recommends denial of the application. Commissioner Steinwall asked if there are alternatives to the design. Mr. Gladhill replied that the deck could be accessed from the exterior without the need for the 4' walkway, though it may not be convenient. Ron Cardinal, property owner, stated from the current wall to the property edge is 34' rather than 15.5', so the 4' walkway would still be 30' back and would be behind a green area, a sidewalk, and 13' of trees and bushes. Due to roof height, this is the only method of getting to the deck. Mr. Gladhill stated that a survey has not been provided but he is confident that the existing setback is 10-12' measured from aerial photos, or about 20' at most, and Mr. Cardinal disagreed. Chairman Dybvig opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. Chair Dybvig closed the public hearing. Commissioner Steinwall suggested tabling the case to allow the applicant and the City time to determine the existing setback. Commissioner Cox pointed out that staff has also said the proposed variance would alter the essential character of the neighborhood which is a concern. Motion by Commissioner Cox, seconded by Commissioner Swanson, to deny Case No. 2022-37, Variance for the construction of a deck at 424 Grove St S. All in favor. Case No. 2022-38: Consideration of a re -subdivision. Property located at 805 Hickory St W in the RB district. Daved Najarian, property owner. Mr. Gutknecht stated that the applicant is requesting to split their lot into two lots. The existing residence is located on the east side of the lot and consists of a dwelling, detached garage, shed, and patio. The west portion of the lot is vacant. The proposal would split the existing 15,758 square foot parcel into an 8,059 square foot parcel (Parcel A) and a 7,699 square foot (Parcel B). Parcel A would contain the existing residence; a new single-family home is proposed for Parcel B. Staff recommends approval of the lot split with four conditions. Commissioner Steinwall asked if the 27% structural impervious surface coverage noted in the staff report for Parcel A would be after subdivision, and Mr. Gutknecht stated yes. Commissioner Cox asked if the planned removal of the hot tub and patio would get the property below the 25% maximum impervious surface coverage, and Mr. Gutknecht replied the impervious calculations on the survey did not include the hot tub or patio. Mr. Gladhill added that staff can work this out administratively so a lot coverage variance would not be required. Daved Najarian, property owner, said he is open to adjusting the amount of coverage. Chair Dybvig opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. Chair Dybvig closed the public hearing. Page 3 of 7 Planning Commission June 22, 2022 Motion by Commissioner Cox, seconded by Commissioner Hoffman, to approve Case No. 2022-38, re -subdivision of property located at 805 Hickory St W in the RB district, with the four conditions recommended by staff, adding Condition #5 stating the applicant must meet the 25% impervious surface coverage on Parcel A. All in favor. Case No. 2022-41: Consideration of Preliminary Plat, Final Plat, Conditional Use Permit for new Retail Development at 2001 Washington St, Mikden of Stillwater, LLC, property owners. Mr. Gladhill stated that the City has received a series of applications in order to facilitate the infill development of two retail parcels along the south property line of 2001 Washington Ave. referred to as the former Herberger's Site. The process is complicated as a portion requires City Council approval while a portion can be approved by the Planning Commission. Given the split approval authority, the Planning Commission may want to refer all final actions to the City Council with recommendations. From an Economic Development Goal and Policy standpoint, staff supports the request. However, staff has potential concern about traffic safety and congestion internal to the site as well as the surrounding public roadway system, and has requested a traffic study from the applicant to better understand the impacts of this additional development on existing infrastructure. Staff would also recommend a traffic study to model future levels of service at both entrances along Washington Avenue as well as the intersection of Washington Avenue and West Frontage Road. Staff fully supports approval of Lot 2 (Caribou) as it complies with applicable Zoning Code Requirements. Staff desires additional feedback and direction from the Planning Commission before supporting Lot 3 (future development) as it relates to future improvements to West Frontage Road and Washington Avenue. Councilmember Odebrecht asked about the 60 day clock, and in regard to the PUD, what are Public Works Director Sanders' thoughts on solving what will be an obvious safety issue? Mr. Gladhill replied the 60 day clock will likely need to be extended. He said Public Works Director Sanders shared concerns about the intersection and avoiding a situation where the City must buy property in the future, but Mr. Sanders had stated it wouldn't be fair to hold up Caribou Cabin because there is not a plan yet. He said that Public Safety staff voiced concern about the interior traffic circulation and stacking, and their recommendation is that until there is an internal traffic study, they don't feel comfortable recommending approval. Commissioner Steinwall noted that the Commission must hold a public hearing on the PUD. Secondly this public hearing was noticed for both the preliminary plat and final plat and she didn't see any materials with respect to the final plat. She added that City ordinance and state statute requires review by MnDOT and the County. Mr. Gladhill answered that the project has been sent to MnDOT for review, including how it fits with the development occurring on the south side of Hwy 36 in Oak Park Heights. No County roads are involved so the County need not review. Commissioner Swanson asked when the frontage road will be improved. Mr. Gladhill replied is it not in the City's CIP at this point. When preparing the 2023 budget, staff will request some planning dollars for a transportation study for this intersection. Commissioner Cox asked, if some of the retention pond is taken away, is that a concern for impervious surface coverage? Mr. Gladhill replied it is absolutely a concern and staff has had a conversation with Brown's Creek Watershed District. Stormwater management is noted on the site plan for Caribou Cabin Page 4 of 7 Planning Commission June 22, 2022 and a future site. The future frontage road will require a reconfiguration of stormwater ponds, however the City can't hold up a project that meets all the zoning standards. Michael Givens, part of the ownership and management of Mikden of Stillwater, stated it has taken a year to get to this point and Caribou's patience is waning as the developers struggle to get answers on the future frontage road and MnDOT's intent with the corridor. One of the three lots proposed is laid out where the frontage road would run through, and Caribou Cabin has been positioned far enough off what could be a future intersection. With DiaSorin warehouse and Harbor Freight being the existing tenants, there is currently very little traffic on the site. There are 652 parking stalls on the site so it is over -parked currently. Commissioner Cox asked how current traffic would move into the Caribou Cabin area and out onto the street. Mr. Givens replied that most traffic will enter and exit the main entrance to the property which is the second entrance to the north. This will keep the drive -through stack off the front of the building. Mr. Gladhill added that the southern entrance onto Washington is currently shown as right -in, right -out. Public Safety staff recommends that it be ingress only; they don't want traffic to exit there and then U-turn. The plan is to have a continuous frontage road and not dead-end. Commissioner Steinwall asked if a parking calculation has been done assuming a more intensive use that might take place going forward. Mr. Gladhill replied that the site went from retail, which has the most intense parking requirements, to warehouse. If a more intense use came forward, a review would be required at that time. Staff recommends moving forward with Caribou Cabin and the site plan. The PUD for the second lot can be addressed when more is known about the frontage road and Washington Avenue. Mr. Givens added that the warehouse has a five year lease that began June 1, 2022, with two five year options to extend. It is difficult to provide a legitimate traffic study without knowing what the second user will be. Chair Dybvig opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. He closed the public hearing. Commissioner Swanson acknowledged it is a nice location for a retail improvement but a very tricky traffic situation. There is a median so there will be more controlled egress but he has concerns about U-turns. Commissioner Cox also voiced traffic concerns. She would favor moving forward with Caribou/Lot 2 and not addressing Lot 3 until there is a new business proposal for that space. Commissioner Steinwall said she understands the property owner has been working with Caribou for some time but the Commission is not in a position to grant a CUP for a drive - through without further info about traffic. Secondly, if Lot 3 is to be addressed later, then a new preliminary plat is needed because tonight's materials address three lots and an outlot. Third, final plat approval is premature without further info about internal traffic flow and impacts of this particular use of this corner. Councilmember Odebrecht suggested referring the case to the Council to get Public Works engaged and come together with a more cohesive concept. Page 5 of 7 Planning Commission June 22, 2022 Commissioner Steinwall disagreed, stating the Planning Commission has a duty to make recommendations to the Council. Mr. Givens noted that they plan on retaining all these lots long into the future. On the third outlot, they are only asking to create the lot at this point. Its future use would have to come back through the Commission and the Council at a later date. Mr. Gladhill recognized that it is not 100% certain that that reserved outlot provides sufficient right of way. In terms of the second lot for a future user, he said if the Commission grants plat approval, it is giving certain entitlement. His role is to help businesses and find solutions. Chair Dybvig pointed out the Commission is providing a recommendation on the plat, and making a decision on the CUP. Approval of the CUP for Lot 2 would allow them to have the drive -through and the Commission could add the strong statement that if future uses proposed for Lot 3 generate any traffic issues such as a drive -through, it would be more appropriate to do a traffic study at that point. Commissioner Steinwall said, given the number of issues in play, the Commission should wait for comments from MnDOT before sending the case on to the Council. Motion by Chair Dybvig, seconded by Commissioner Knippenberg, to recommend that the City Council approve Lot 2, and to raise concern about Lot 3 in that there doesn't appear to be a road or a street for an access point. Motion passed 6-1 with Commissioner Steinwall voting nay. Motion by Commissioner Steinwall, seconded by Councilmember Odebrecht, to table action on the CUP until the July Planning Commission meeting. Motion failed 2-5 with Commissioners Swanson, Hoffman, Knippenberg, Cox and Chair Dybvig voting nay. Motion by Commissioner Cox, seconded by Commissioner Hoffman to approve the CUP for a drive - through on Lot 2 contingent on the plat being approved. Motion passed 6-1 with Commissioner Steinwall voting nay. Case No. 2022-43: Interim Use Permit Ordinance. Mr. Gladhill explained that as the City evaluated long-term policy on outdoor uses such as outdoor seating/dining and outdoor events following two years of relaxed rules during the COVID-19 Pandemic, the City learned how these uses might be able to be expanded long-term and administered in a better way. The City Council has already addressed events and outdoor seating in public spaces. This ordinance focuses on events and outdoor seating on private property. Currently, outdoor seating/dining and outdoor events on private property is allowable as a Conditional Use in most areas of the City. Conditional Uses are allowable uses that require Planning Commission approval (not an administrative/staff approval); the Planning Commission can attach reasonable conditions to mitigate reasonable concerns. The struggle the City has had with this approach in the past is that once approved, the approval is perpetual with the land and does not expire unless there is a violation of the terms of the agreement. The approval transfers to future owners. Often the City finds a particular request reasonable at the time, but isn't comfortable with a perpetual approval. In response, the City Council directed staff to introduce a new tool known as an Interim Use Permit. This essentially functions as a Conditional Use Permit, but will expire. The expiration can be tied to a specific date or an event in time. Interim Uses are essentially authorized by Statute to address uses that may be acceptable under Zoning Code today, but may not be acceptable in the future. This draft ordinance also streamlines administration after initial approval. The initial Interim Use Permit Page 6 of 7 Planning Commission June 22, 2022 approval must be granted by the Planning Commission. From there, annual renewals may be processed administratively. Chair Dybvig noted that if the use is discontinued for three months, the IUP expires three months following the date that it is no longer in use. He questioned how this would work in light of outdoor dining which cannot take place in the winter. Mr. Gladhill replied staff can work with the City Attorney to craft language to cover wintertime breaks in use. Commissioner Steinwall suggested the ordinance be rewritten so it states that the interim use permit terminates on change of ownership. She also voiced concern about renewals. Mr. Gladhill explained the IUP is not like a license that must be renewed every year - it is intended to continue for a little longer by design. Chair Dybvig noted that, since violation of any condition set forth leads to revocation, if there are no problems with outdoor event, perhaps it should not require review every 10 years. If there is a lapse of a year, the use would have to come before the Commission as a new use. He also stated a public hearing should take place. Chair Dybvig opened the public hearing and there were no public comments, so he closed the public hearing. He recapped discussion, stating that the Commission is recommending the addition of a time limit, an expiration for non-use, expiration with a change in ownership, and that it could be by event versus by date. Motion by Commissioner Hoffman, seconded by Commissioner Steinwall, to recommend the City Council adopt an Interim Use Permit Ordinance, Case No. 2022-43, recommending those four items discussed above. All in favor. NEW BUSINESS There was no new business. DISCUSSION Chair Dybvig noted that the Commission will need to elect Vice Chair at the next meeting. FYI STAFF UPDATES There were no staff updates. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Commissioner Knippenberg, seconded by Councilmember Odebrecht, to adjourn the meeting at 9:26 p.m. All in favor. ATTEST: John Dybvig, Chair Tim Gladhill, Community Development Director Page 7 of 7 RESOLUTION NO. CITY OF STILLWATER RESOLUTION ADOPTING WRITTEN FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL IN PART AND DENIAL IN PART OF TWO VARIANCES AT 1792 GREELEY STREET SOUTH, STILLWATER, MINNESOTA WHEREAS, the City of Stillwater received a Variance application from Chris Hassis, on behalf of Hassis Paintworks L.L.C. ("Applicant"), 1792 Greeley Street South, legally described on Exhibit A ("the Property") regarding the construction of an 8,500 square foot addition, specifically requesting two variances on the Property: (1) Variance to the side yard (interior) setback of 16.3 feet ("Setback Variance"); and (2) Variance to deviate from required design standards of the West Stillwater Business Park Design Review District ("Design Variance") (collectively "Variances"); and WHEREAS, regarding the Setback Variance, the Applicant has an existing nonconforming structure at the Property that is 3.7 feet from the side yard and while the Applicant could replace the existing structure with the same size in the same location without a variance, the addition expands the structure, thus making the Setback Variance necessary; and WHEREAS, the side yard setback requirement for the West Stillwater Business Park Design Review District is 20 feet, resulting in a 16.3 foot Setback Variance; and WHEREAS, regarding the Design Variance, the Applicant requested a variance to allow for leniency from the West Stillwater Business Park Design Review District design standards, indicating the variance was needed due to economic hardship. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered the Variances at its June 22, 2022 meeting, held a public hearing, and following the hearing, approved the Setback Variance (7-0); and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission determined that the Design Variance did not meet the practical difficulties test and voted to deny this portion of the Variance request (7-0); and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission now adopts this Resolution to support its findings for approval in part and denial in part, of the Variances. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of Stillwater hereby adopts the following written findings for approval of the Setback Variance: 1 1. The requested Variance is consistent with all the requirements for granting a Variance as described in City Code Section 31-208. Specifically, the proposed use is a reasonable use of the Property, the circumstances are unique to the Property, the variance will not alter the essential character of the locality, and economic consideration is not a factor. AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of Stillwater hereby adopts the following written findings for denial of the deviation from the Design Variance: 1. The requested Variance was not consistent with all the requirements for granting a Variance as described in City Code Section 31-208. Specifically, the proposed use is not a reasonable use of the Property, the circumstances are not unique to the Property, and economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Approved this day of , 2022. ATTEST: 2 EXHIBIT A Legal Description of the Applicant's Property The North One Hundred Twenty-two (122) feet of the South Three Hundred Twenty- two (322) feet of the Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section Thirty- three (33), Township Thirty (30) North, Range Twenty (20) West, lying West of the centerline of County Highway No. 66. Washington County, Minnesota. PID 33.030.20.32.0014 Torrens Property — Certificate No. 79644 A-1 RESOLUTION NO. CITY OF STILLWATER RESOLUTION ADOPTING WRITTEN FINDINGS FOR DENIAL OF VARIANCE AT 424 GROVE STREET SOUTH, STILLWATER, MINNESOTA WHEREAS, the City of Stillwater received a Variance application from Ronald Cardinal and StacyJo Franklin ("Applicant"), 424 Grove Street South, legally described on Exhibit A ("the Property") regarding the construction of a 272 square foot deck; and WHEREAS, Applicant has an existing nonconforming structure at the Property that is approximately 20 feet from the side yard; and WHEREAS, Applicant could replace the existing structure with the same size in the same location without a variance, however the deck expands the structure, thus making a setback variance necessary; and WHEREAS, the requested variance is for a 14.5-foot variance from the RA one -family district corner side yard setback requirement of 30 feet; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered the variance at its June 22, 2022 meeting, held a public hearing, and following the hearing, denied the variance (7-0); and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission now adopts this Resolution to support its findings for denial of the variance. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of Stillwater hereby adopts the following written findings for denial of the variance: 1. The requested variance was not consistent with all the requirements for granting a variance as described in City Code Section 31-208. Specifically, the circumstances are not unique to the Property, the variance would alter the essential character of the locality, and economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Approved this day of , 2022. 1 ATTEST: 2 EXHIBIT A Legal Description of the Applicant's Property Commencing at the northwest corner of Lot Six (6), Block Six (6), MCKINSTRY & SEELEY'S ADDITION TO STILLWATER, as amended by MYRON SHEPARD'S PERFECTED PLAT OF THE CITY OF STILLWATER, DATED MAY 21, 1878, according to the recorded plat thereof on file in the office of the Register of Deeds of Washington County, Minnesota; thence south on the west line of said Lot Six (6) and extensions thereof to the north line of Pine Street; thence east on the north line of Pine Street to the west line of Grove Street; thence north on the west line of Grove Street to the north line of Lot Six (6); thence west on the north line of Lot Six (6) to the place of beginning, together with any portions of any vacated street contiguous thereto. PID 29.030.20.44.0042 Torrens Property — Certificate No. 70728 A-1 i11wati THE BIRTHPLACE OF MINNESOTA DATE: July 27, 2022 TO: Stillwater Planning Commission FROM: Kori Land, City Attorney SUBJECT: CBD products, medical marijuana and hemp growing ordinance BACKGROUND In 2014, Minnesota passed the THC Therapeutic Research Act ("Act"), legalizing medical marijuana. That same year, the federal government passed the 2014 federal farm bill, allowing the growing of hemp containing less than .3 percent THC. In 2019, Minnesota authorized the sale of CBD products containing less than .3 percent THC. In November 2021, seeing the popularity of CBD shops, the Stillwater City Council passed a moratorium prohibiting any new CBD uses or the expansion existing CBD uses in order to study the use and determine if zoning and/or licensing regulations are appropriate. Then, in May of 2022, on the last day of the legislative session, in the middle of the Health and Human Services omnibus bill, the legislature passed new laws surrounding the sale of CBD products, which went into effect on July 11 and which has exploded CBD product sales. While Stillwater was ahead of the curve with the moratorium, we were not prepared for this new legislation for CBD products. The City Council has discussed the topic several times this summer and provided direction on zoning and licensing regulations. To that end, we are proposing zoning ordinance amendments to appropriately place these types of uses with public health, safety and welfare performance standards. The proposed zoning ordinance attempts to accomplish the following: • Defining CBD exclusive retail stores as those that derive more than 50% of their gross revenue sales from CBD products. Then, breaking down CBD stores into 2 types: o Those that sell intoxicating CBD products o Those that sell non -intoxicating CBD products 1 CBD products, under the new law, effective 7/1/22, cannot be sold to anyone under 21. There are packaging and labeling requirements under the new law so the packaging cannot be kid -friendly or look like a product sold to kids or look like an existing food product. The packaging must be child -resistant and tamper -evident. Each product can have no more than 5 mg of THC per serving and have no more than 50 mg of TCH per package. (for example, if 8 edible CBD gummies = 1 serving, then each package can contain no more than 80 gummies) There are no state or federal agencies regulating the sale of CBD products, therefore, cities are left to determine what regulations are appropriate for their own communities. • Defining CBD products into 2 types: intoxicating and non -intoxicating o Intoxicating products means the products that produce intoxicating effects and may include but are not limited to products made with Delta 8, 9 and 10. o Non -intoxicating products means products that do not produce intoxicating effects. • Defining incidental CBD sales as those CBD sales that are not typically part of the primary business or do not make up a majority of sales for the business. (i.e. massage therapy businesses, drug stores, or gift shops who may have a kiosk with a few CBD products) • Allowing only intoxicating CBD exclusive stores to sell CBD intoxicating products. No other business can sell CBD-intoxicating products • CBD exclusive stores are only allowed in the BP-C, BP-0 and BP -I. Non - intoxicating stores are a permitted use and intoxicating stores would require a CUP. • Distance requirements are in place from other CBD exclusive stores and from schools • Security plans are required for intoxicating CBD stores, no drive-throughs would be allowed and no outdoor storage. • Incidental sales of non -intoxicating CBD products are allowed in any non- residential zoning district, meaning any business could sell non -intoxicating CBD, as long as it is not their primary business. • Allowing Medical distribution facility in the BP-C, BP-0 and BP -I with an Interim Use Permit (IUP) for a maximum of 3 years, with a security plan and distance requirements from schools and residential property, as already required in state law. • Allowing Medical labs in the BP -I with an IUP • Allowing Hemp Growing Operations in the Ag as a permitted use, as long as they have 200 contiguous acres, and they cannot sell on site. Prohibited Uses Medical marijuana manufacturing and hemp manufacturing are prohibited within the city as those uses tend to produce nuisance -related problems. The ordinance also prohibits any sales of CBD products that contain more than .3% THC. While this prohibition on intoxicating CBD products is state law today,2 in the event the Minnesota legislature legalizes recreational marijuana, the City's specific identification of the prohibition on 2 Technically, it is also prohibited under Federal law as anything over .3% is a Schedule 1 illegal drug. 2 selling anything over .3% would not allow any business to immediately sell recreational marijuana upon adoption of state law (unless the state law pre-empted local zoning). This prohibition would allow the City time to study if and where recreational marijuana should be allowed. Upon adoption of zoning and licensing regulations, the moratorium will terminate, or by November 2022, whichever comes first. RECOMMENDATION Hold the public hearing and recommend approval of the attached Ordinance. ACTION REQUESTED Move to recommend approval of an Ordinance Amending City Code Chapter 31, Section 31-101, Section 31-325, Section 31-315, Regarding Medical Cannabis, Cannabidiol (CBD) Products and Hemp Growing and Section 31-514.1 Regarding Performance Standards for Cannabis -Related Uses 3 City of Stillwater Washington County, Minnesota ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CITY CODE CHAPTER 31, SECTION 31-101, SECTION 31-325, SECTION 31-315, REGARDING MEDICAL CANNABIS, CANNABIDIOL (CBD) PRODUCTS AND HEMP GROWING AND SECTION 31-514.1 REGARDING PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR CANNABIS -RELATED USES The City Council of the City of Stillwater does ordain: SECTION 1 AMENDMENT. Chapter 31, Article 1, Section 31-101 of the City Code, Definitions, is hereby amended by adding the following definitions: CBD means a compound of the cannabis plant known as cannabidiol. CBD retail establishment - intoxicating means a business that sells any intoxicating CBD products and derives more than 50% of its gross revenue from the sale of any CBD products (intoxicating and non -intoxicating) or related devices. CBD retail establishment — non- intoxicating means a business that sells CBD products but all of them are non -intoxicating CBD products and derives more than 50% of its gross revenue from the sale of any CBD products or related devices. CBD products means and includes industrial hemp products and hemp derived products. CBD incidental sales means any business that sells or provides CBD products as an incidental part of its business but is not a CBD retail establishment (intoxicating or non -intoxicating). Edible cannabinoid (CBD) product means any product that is intended to be eaten or consumed as a beverage, contains a cannabinoid in combination with food ingredients, and is not a drug. Hemp or Industrial Hemp means the definition provided under Minn. Stat. § 18K.02 subd. 3, as may be amended. Hemp manufacturing means the ability to facilitate the manufacturing of industrial hemp. Intoxicating cannabinoid (CBD) products means products made from substances extracted from certified hemp plants that produce intoxicating effects when consumed by any route of administration. These include but are not limited to products made with Delta-8, Delta-9 and Delta-10. Medical cannabis means the definition provided under Minn. Stat. § 152.22, subd. 6, as may be amended. Medical cannabis distribution facility means a facility operated by a medical cannabis manufacturer for purposes of distributing medical cannabis in accordance with Minn. Stat. § 152.29, subd. 1(a), as may be amended, and the requirements of the commissioner of Minnesota department of health or other applicable state law. Medical cannabis laboratory means an independent laboratory permitted to test medical cannabis produced by a medical cannabis manufacturer in accordance with Minn. Stat. § 152.29, subd. 1(b), as may be amended, and the requirements of the commissioner of the Minnesota department of health or other applicable state law. Medical cannabis manufacturer means the definition provided under Minn. Stat. § 152.22, subd. 7, as may be amended. Nonintoxicating cannabinoid (CBD) product means products made from substances extracted from certified hemp plants that do not produce intoxicating effects when consumed by any route of administration. SECTION 2 AMENDMENT. Chapter 31, Article III, Division 3, Section 31-325 of the City Code, Allowable Uses in Non -Residential Districts - Retail, is hereby amended as follows: ALLOWABLE USES ZONING DISTRICTS CA CBD VC BP-C BP-0 BP -I CRD PA PWFD PROS HMU NC Retail Medical Cannabis Distribution Facility IUP IUP IUP CBD Retail Establishments non -intoxicating P P P CBD Retail Establishments - intoxicating CUP CUP CUP Laboratories Medical Cannabis Laboratories IUP 2 SECTION 3 AMENDMENT. Chapter 31, Article III, Division 3, Section 31-315 of the City Code, Allowable Uses in Residential Districts, is hereby amended as follows: ALLOWABLE USES ZONING DISTRICTS A-P LR CTR RA TR CCR RB CR TH CTHR RCL RCM RR HMU16 Growing of Industrial Hemp P SECTION 4 ENACTMENT. Chapter 31, Article V, Division 2, Section 31-514.1 is hereby enacted as follows: Sec. 31-514.1 Cannabis -Related Uses Subd. 1. Medical Cannabis Distribution Facilities shall comply with the following performance standards: (1) The maximum length of an interim use permit shall be three years. Interim use permits granted pursuant to this section are not transferable and terminate upon sale of the facility or discontinuance of use; (2) A security plan stating how the facility will address public health, welfare and safety concerns including, but not limited to: parking, traffic flow, security, fencing, lighting, window and door placement, landscaping, and hours of operation as approved by the Police Chief; (3) The distance limitations on locations of facilities in relation to a public or private school provided for under Minn. Stat. § 152.29, as may be amended, are incorporated herein. A facility shall not be closer than 200 feet of a zoning district that allows single family, two-family, townhomes, or multi -family dwellings; (4) All facilities shall be setback from all property lines a minimum of 25 feet; (5) Facilities are prohibited from operating drive-throughs; (6) No exterior storage shall be allowed. Subd. 2. Medical cannabis laboratories shall comply with the following performance standards: (1) The maximum length of an interim use permit shall be three years. Interim use permits granted pursuant to this section are not transferable and terminate upon sale of the facility or discontinuance of use; (2) A security plan stating how the facility will address public health, welfare and safety concerns including, but not limited to: parking, traffic flow, security, 3 fencing, lighting, window and door placement, landscaping, and hours of operation as approved by the Police Chief; (3) A laboratory shall be setback from all property lines a minimum of 25 feet; (4) No exterior storage shall be allowed. Subd. 3. Growing of industrial hemp shall comply with the following performance standards: (1) A minimum of 200 contiguous acres is required for the hemp growing operation; (2) The hemp grower must be licensed by the State pursuant to Minn. Stat. Ch. 18K; (3) The sale of CBD products is not permitted on the same property as the hemp growing operation. Subd. 4. The sale of CBD products shall comply with the following performance standards: (1) Only CBD retail establishments -intoxicating are allowed to sell, display, or provide intoxicating CBD products. (2) All CBD retail establishments —intoxicating shall have a security plan stating how the facility will address public health, welfare and safety concerns including, but not limited to: parking, traffic flow, security, fencing, lighting, window and door placement, landscaping, and hours of operation that is approved by the Police Chief; No CBD retail establishment —intoxicating shall have a drive -through, walk-up window service, sidewalk displays, sales or outdoor storage or sandwich board signs; (4) There must be at least 1,000 feet between all CBD retail establishments (intoxicating and non -intoxicating); All CBD retail establishments (intoxicating and non -intoxicating) shall be located at least 500 feet from any school when measured in a straight line from the edge of the building wall or tenant wall space in which the establishment is located to the property line of the school or licensed day care facility; (6) CBD incidental sales of non -intoxicating CBD products are permitted in any non- residential district. (3) (5) Subd 5. The following cannabis uses are prohibited within the City: (1) CBD products that contain more than .3 percent tetrahydrocannabinol (THC). (2) Medical cannabis manufacturing. (3) Hemp manufacturing. 4 SECTION 5 SUMMARY PUBLICATION. Pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 412.191, in the case of a lengthy ordinance, a summary may be published. While a copy of the entire ordinance is available without cost at the office of the City Clerk, the following summary is approved by the City Council and shall be published in lieu of publishing the entire ordinance: The ordinance regulates CBD products, medical cannabis, and industrial hemp growing operations within the City of Stillwater, prohibiting the sale of CBD products that contain more than .3 percent tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), as well as medical cannabis manufacturing and hemp manufacturing. Medical cannabis distribution sites and labs will be limited to the properties within the Business Park. Industrial hemp growing operations require 200 contiguous acres to operate and cannot sell CBD products on site. The sale of intoxicating CBD products with THC are only allowed in the business park in stores in which more than 50% of their business is CBD products. Non - intoxicating CBD products can be sold as incidental sales in any business district. SECTION 6 EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and publication according to law. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Stillwater this day of , 2022. ATTEST: Beth Wolf, City Clerk CITY OF STILLWATER Ted Kozlowski, Mayor 5 i11watr THE BIRTHPLACE OF MINNESOTA DATE: July 27, 2022 TO: Honorable Chair and Planning Commissioners FROM: Ben Gutknecht, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: Variance Request in the TR: Traditional Residential District; Variance to exceed required impervious surface requirements for the construction of a deck at 1830 White Pine Ct, CD 2022-44. BACKGROUND David and Kristal Richards, the applicants and property owners of 1830 White Pine Ct are requesting consideration of a Variance to the maximum allowable impervious surface of 25% as limited by the Shoreland Overlay district. The applicant is requesting a Variance to allow total impervious surface of approximately 31.6% in order to construct a 216 square foot deck. The existing impervious surface on the property is approximately 29.6%. It appears the bulk of this existing impervious surface was approved during the single-family dwelling permitting process, which includes the dwelling and driveway. Further, elevated doors for future deck access were installed at time of the single-family dwelling permit, indicating plans of constructing a future deck. Staff inquired with Brown's Creek Watershed District (BCWD) to gather more information on the assumed impervious surface and stormwater runoff requirements for this subdivision and this Property specifically. Per review by BCWD, the area of the development of which this lot is in has an assumed impervious surface allowance of 38% per lot. The applicants specific request is for a Variance to Section 31-402 subd.7 (j). to increase the maximum allowed impervious surface from 25% to 31.6%. ANALYSIS State Statute Chapter 462.357 requires that cities consider the following standards when considering a Variance. This is also known as the `practical difficulty' test. • The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the zoning ordinance. • The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner. • The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. • Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. FINDINGS: Variance to the Required Maximum Impervious Surface: • The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the zoning ordinance. o The proposed construction of a deck within the TR district is a reasonable use and consistent with development within the TR district. Further, the proposed deck brings the impervious surface to 31.6%, well under the assumed allowable impervious set by the BCWD. • The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner. o The existing owner did not create the current nonconforming impervious surface of 29.6%. Additionally, they did not install the doors leading to the assumed future deck after the dwelling was constructed. • The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. o Granting the variance to approve the construction of the proposed deck will not alter the essential character of the locality. Many homes within the TR district commonly enjoy decks, further, multiple homes within the applicant's cul-de-sac boast decks. • Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. o The request to increase the impervious surface for the construction of a deck is not based on economic considerations alone, as it would likely be less of an economic impact to construct a deck and follow strict compliance of the zoning ordinance. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that Planning Commission approve the requested increase to the impervious surface for the construction of a deck with the following conditions: 1. Plans shall be substantially similar to those found on file with CD Case No. 2022- 44. 2. All changes to the approved plans will need to be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director. Any major changes will need to go to the Planning Commission for review and approval. ACTION REQUESTED Motion to approve the Variance to Section 31-402 subd.7 (j). to increase the maximum allowed impervious surface from 25% to 31.6% for the construction of a deck for property located at 1830 White Pine Ct, based on the above findings and conditions within this report. Dear Stillwater Planning Commitee, We are requesting a variance for our property to allow for a small deck. We propose to use the land in a reasonable manner and therefore have reduced the desired size of the deck, to take into consideration the shoreland overlay. We have also chosen to remove the stairs in an effort to reduce structure size and need for additional footings. We feel we are in a unique position to apply for this variance because the builder of our home (Tollberg) included a sliding glass door and ledger board on the back of our home to accommodate a deck, without first checking to see if a deck was allowed through the city. We fully understand the protection of the shoreland overlay, but not having a deck on a home that was clearly built/designed to accommodate one will eventually reduce our property value and in turn reduce the value of neighboring properties. The majority of houses on our street have a deck on their homes (some of which were approved through the same variance process), therefore the variance if granted will improve the character of the neighborhood greatly. We are using top rated composite decking materials and the decking colors are esthetically pleasing to the house. We are using a reputable decking company and have attached their credentials along with building material to this application. We are open and fully willing to accommodate any suggestions we can add to the deck to preserve the surrounding area, whether that be a gutter system, board spacing, etc. Thank you for taking the time to review our application. Sincerely, David and Kristal Richards 1830 White Pine Court Stillwater, MN 55082 r- Kristal Richards 1830 White Pine Court Stillwater, Mn 55082 0 cV • Scale 1/4" = 1'0" New install- 10' x 12' x 6' x 16' (no stairs). House Existing 2x10 Flashed Ledger w/lag screws .10'0"► 0 Rr •6' 0"► Deckorators Decking RR-0100 r x 0 16" O.C. 3-2x10 flush beam New Deck 2x10 joists 12", 16' O.C. Install NEW Decking, Railing, and Fascia 3-2x10 Helical Pier flush beam 48'0°► Helical Pier Helical Pier 12O.C. Helical Pier .a'0"► 0 , ✓ 0 4116'0"► / • 11' High • 36" High Railing • 6 x 6 treated support posts L FINAL GRADE ASBUILT FOS TOU—SERO HOMES ADDRESS 1830 WHITE PINE COURT, STILLWATER MN 893.4 893 4 it, 905 3 GF / 905 9 TOB •6:9 896.9 32 0 0 30 ( IN FEET ) 1 inch = 30 ft. 0 /z‘ -3), h6N n,f1°/0() 905.1 pc 905.8 TC 990 FIT' 803 897 6 897.8 905.2 iv NORTH r 0e DENOTES EXISTING CATCH BASIN crO-23" DENOTES PROPOSED ELEVATION 1O11.2 DENOTES EXISTING ELEVATION DENOTES DIRECTION OF DRAINAGE NOTES ta DENOTES METAL OFFSET SPIKE - BEARING'S SHOW ARE ON ASSUMED DATUM. 0 DENOTES STORM SEWER MANHOLE PROPOSED ELEVATIONS GARAGE FLOOR = 907.2 TOP OF BLOCK = 907.6 LOWEST FLOOR = 899.6 ASBUILT ELEV. LEGAL DESCRIPTION Lot 6, Block 1, BROWNS CREEK COVE. Washington County. Minnesota. I hereby certify thot this plan, survey or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Land Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota. SHUA P. SCHNEIDER 6-9-20 Reg. No. 44655 Dote: JOB#18281 CRE LAND SURVEYING Bebe, MN 5544fi 763-238-6270 jaacrelandeurvemgmaitcom .01 tbxllixiVK 12,1 E51 Du tinr: pels e c i74,is titSe: ugIyDeCK.ConY EXPERT HELP • SUPPLIER DIRECT • INSTALL OR DIY CUS1 L.. NAPA:: INVOICE TO Kristal Richards 1830 White Pine Court Stillwater, MN Kristal Richards CRW ION UglyDeck.com 12277 Nicollet Ave S, Burnsville, MN 55337 952-736-3308 MN License #BC570015 :tP I() 2022-6709 Kristal Richards DATE 05/06/2022 CJB 1830 White Pine EXPUR 06/01/2022 Court Stillwater, MN New Install - 10'x125:6'x16' (NO Stairs) according to plan provided Permit - Building permit from City includes Drawing and Submitting LEDGER - 2 x 10 Flashed ledger with lag screws 16" o.c. x 2 with joist hangers HELICAL PIERS - For first 7 feet based on soil condition. Additional extensions may be needed. FRAMING - Pressure treated framing (Joists, beams, stringers, support posts) 12" O.C. FRAMING - Pressure treated framing (Joists, beams, stringers, support posts) 16" O.C. DECKING - Deckorators Trailhead composite decking with dips - (Horizontal Direction) DECKING - One board border to lip over fascia FASCIA - White PVC fascia around perimeter of deck RAILING - AFCO Series 100 Aluminum railing - w/ 3" posts and caps SELECTIONS DECKING COLOR - Pathway BORDER COLOR - Pathway FASCIA COLOR - White PVC STAIR RISER COLOR - N/A RAILING POST COLOR - White Texture RAILING / SPINDLE COLOR - White Texture Top/Bottom Rail with Black Texture Round Spindles LIGHTS - NONE POST WRAPS - NONE PAYMENT TERMS: 10% due with signed contract, 55% due at time of ordering material, balance due at time of completion CA -,,,re 04- bc_t bo?tx cl and skkain9 91-aSS 600r, Ben Gutknecht From: Ryan Fleming <rfleming@eorinc.com> Sent: Tuesday, June 7, 2022 2:26 PM To: Karen Kill Cc: Ben Gutknecht Subject: RE: Browns Creek Cove Impervious Surface Question [CAUTION] *** This email originated from outside the organization. *** Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Karen, The hydrologic model that BCWD reviewed for the Brown's Creek Cove subdivision included a range of 25% to 38% impervious for the developed portion (includes roofs, driveways, trails, roadways). That particular lot is in an area of the model where 38% was assumed (includes the trail but does not include the road). The modeling of the development overall is just below 25% impervious which includes the vegetated buffer but does not include the wetland area. Let me know if you have any questions. Ryan Fleming, PE, CFM, LEED AP BD+C EOR: water 1 ecology 1 community d: 651.203.6034 0: 651.770.8448 WE ARE PROUD TO ANNOUNCE OUR MADISON OFFICE HAS MOVED From: Karen Kill <KKill@mnwcd.org> Sent: Tuesday, June 7, 2022 12:52 PM To: Ryan Fleming <rfleming@eorinc.com> Cc: Ben Gutknecht <bgutknecht@ci.stillwater.mn.us> Subject: Fwd: Browns Creek Cove Impervious Surface Question Ryan, Can you do a similar review of impervious assumption for the approval of the stormwater system at Browns Creek Cove as you did for Rutherford and Nottingham? Thanks, Karen Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: From: Ben Gutknecht <bgutknecht@ci.stillwater.mn.us> Date: June 7, 2022 at 11:46:37 AM CDT To: Karen Kill <KKill@mnwcd.org> Subject: Browns Creek Cove Impervious Surface Question Good morning Karen, 1 I was hoping you assist me in a review I'm conducting for a property in the Brown's Creek Cove Subdivision in Stillwater. I'm specifically looking at 1830 White Pine Ct. The property appears to be in the shoreland overlay district which guides the allowable impervious surface, but I was wondering if you all had any information regarding the allowable impervious surface for this subdivision that I may not have on file? Any info helps and thank you for your time! ill` -„------ THE RIPTHPLACF OF ]d IN NE 5OTA Ben Gutknecht City of Stillwater Assistant City Planner bgutknecht@ci.stillwater.mn.us https://www.ci.stillwater.mn.us P: 651-430-8818 2 i11war. THE BIRTHPLACE OF MINNESOTA DATE: July 27, 2022 TO: Honorable Chair and Planning Commissioners FROM: Ben Gutknecht, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: Variance Request in the TR: Traditional Residential District; Variance to Rear Yard (Interior) Setback for the construction of a deck at 3493 87th St N, CD 2022-46. BACKGROUND Brian and Jessica Gunter, the applicants and property owners of 3493 87th St S are requesting consideration of a Variance to reduce the 25-foot required rear yard setback as regulated in the TR (Traditional Residential) District. The applicant is requesting a Variance to reduce the rear yard setback to approximately 16.5 feet for the construction of a deck. The Property is not in excess of the impervious surface requirement for the subdivision, which requires 35%. A proposed deck of 120 s.f. would bring the total impervious surface to approximately 34.8%. While conducting the impervious surface review, staff noted that the as -built survey appears to have labeling inconsistencies, including referencing the incorrect lot number and size. This should be correct. As part of the review for this variance, staff reviewed the original building permit for the Property, dated 02/03/2021. Staff determined that at the time of initial permit review, the deck was reviewed and approved as part of the single-family dwelling permit at a rear yard setback of 16.57-foot, but was not constructed at that time. Because the applicant has to submit a new permit specifically for the deck, the request is being treated on its own merits and staff believe a variance is the appropriate path forward. The applicants specific request is for a Variance to Section 31-306 (b) to reduce the required 25-foot rear yard setback to 16.57 feet. ANALYSIS State Statute Chapter 462.357 requires that cities consider the following standards when considering a Variance. This is also known as the `practical difficulty' test. • The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the zoning ordinance. • The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner. • The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. • Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. FINDINGS: Variance to the Required Rear Yard Setback: • The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the zoning ordinance. o The proposed construction of a deck within the TR district is a reasonable use and consistent with development within the TR district. Further, the proposed deck will not be exceeding the allowed impervious surface. • The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner. o The existing owner did not create the current lot, nor placement of the dwelling on said lot. Additionally, the originally planned dwelling was the model home for the subdivision and permitted and designed with an assumed future deck. The applicant did not install the doors to the assumed future deck. • The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. o Granting the variance to approve the construction of the proposed deck will not alter the essential character of the locality. While the lot is a corner lot, the proposed deck will not be in violation or incorrectly placed in regards to the ROW setback and rhythm of the structure and neighborhood. Multiple homes within the applicant's cul-de-sac contain decks. • Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. o The request to decrease the rear yard setback for the construction of a deck is not based on economic considerations alone, as it would likely be less of an economic impact to construct a deck and follow strict compliance of the zoning ordinance. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that Planning Commission approve the requested increase to the impervious surface for the construction of a deck with the following conditions: 1. Plans shall be substantially similar to those found on file with CD Case No. 2022- 46. 2. The As -Built Survey for Lot 6, Block 1 Nottingham Village must be corrected to convey correct labeling and impervious surface information for 3493 87th St N (Lot 6, Block 1). 3. All changes to the approved plans will need to be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director. Any major changes will need to go to the Planning Commission for review and approval. ACTION REQUESTED Motion to approve the Variance to Section 31-306 (b) to reduce the required 25-foot rear yard setback to 16.57 feet for the construction of a 12' X 11' deck for property located at 3493 87th St S, based on the above findings and conditions within this report. The plans given to us by the builder for our house show a deck on all blueprints. A ledger board and patio door were installed at the time of construction by the builder. The patio door serves no purpose, without a deck and we will not have a second exit without it. A deck was a selling point to us when we purchased our home and told it was possible. The majority of our neighbors have a deck or plan to add one. We planned on this being our forever home and intended on having a deck. V O 0 e 87TH STREET NORTH S 89°19'52" E 65.11' 10' Drainage and lily EN ry1- a a — �ti O W N An (LOT CORNER FALLS IN SIDEWALK) SET IRON PIN IN SW 113' ' SEDEWALK ryco'? 1200 ossn 0 v 9' by 0 I I 8,0 EXISTING ONE STORY ct FULL BSM'T LOOKOUT 50 00 Ary�P �,.P A rye 24 50' GARAGE LOT 7 8263 SqFt N 89°59'55" W 1' q�•L 5, Drainage and Mil OTY + (FILE NAME NottinghamVi Eage_L6B1.try SCALE DATE 30 Ft/In 1-11-2021 S 87°54'19" E LC=4.49' R=90.00' A=4.49' 56 ti 70 (92 D.0) 22 00' GARAGE 5 00 00' 1 F2.90'_?_ 10'X12' Deck Iwo 'tall ALL erosion control prior to any soil disturbance. Protec b and sidewalk 0 Install erosio .+ntTol measures as directed by the city's c L 1, protect an. intain all required silt fence. roc e1frn�ce_ 9 Porch (926.0) 26. 00 PROPOSED ONE STORY FULL BSM'T LOOKOUT oMfnrn L nsm 5ilf or bt rah y co , E J I w 20 u0' 1..60• a,pp .0 1922.5) LOT 6 C. (922.5)LO 36 1004 0� 8166 SqFt S 0 01Mryo .1110 Oliply o 70 00' 3, S 89°59'55" E cog'a 81.34 £n Lot S hh5 drwnek. at fen "- LOT 5 We5 r 10325 SqFt (V�;CANT) 01 • �rL N 90°00'00" E 143.67 e s. DRAWN BY P A JOHNSON JOB 1\,19-789 REVISION 1/1 SHEET 1/1 This marl drawn with TRAVERSE PC. Software co yti a re 0 z W LU rr� c♦ LLz 1. co 0 30' N SCALE IN FEET 1 INCH=30FEET r' et4l tPtail Mck atrislfloil-wi facto IVJede mud- exit P0nep rl I'PA drowoutlIfti 926.50 = 926.10 = 917.50 = 917.83 = 922.50 = Traverse PC: CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY LOT 6, BLOCK 1, NOTTINGHAM VILLAGE ADDRESS: 349 3 87TH STREET NORTH STILLWATER, MN 55082 (932.0) DENOTES PROPOSED ELEVATION x930.5 DENOTES EXISTING ELEVATION O DENOTES IRON MONUMENT AT BDRY CpR. DENOTES WOOD HUB AT BLDG OFFSET, DENOTES DIRECTION OF SURFACE DR?),INAGE IMPERVIOUS LOT COVERAGE HOUSE DRIVEWAY PORCH SIDEWALK DECK TOTAL LOT 7 2017 SF 700 SF 60 SF 100 SF 120 SF 2777 SF 8263 SF PERCENTAGE OF COVERAGE = 33.6% PROPOSED TOP OF FOUNDATION ELEVATION PROPOSED GARAGE FLOOR ELEVATION PROPOSED TOP OF FOOTINGS PROPOSED LOWEST FLOOR ELEVATION PROPOSED TOP FND. AT MODIFIED LOOKOUT TOB GTB BFE LO SS CS ELEC. = TOP OF BLOCK GARAGE TOP OF BLOCK BASEMENT FLOOR ELEVATION LOOK OUT SAN. SEWER SERVICE CURB STOP ELECTRIC SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AND CORRECT REPRESENTATION OF A SURVEY OF THE BOUNDARIES OF: OT 6, BLOCK 1, NOTTINGHAM VILLAGE, ACCORDING TO THE RECORDED LAT, WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA AND THE LOCATION OF ALL BUILDINGS, IF ANY, THEREON, AND ALL VISIBLE ENCROACHMENTS, IF ANY, FROM OR ON SAID LAND, IT ALSO SHOWS THE LOCATION OF THE STAKES AS SET FOR A PROPOSED BUILDING AS SURVEYED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIREST SUPERVISION THIS 8TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2021. P J LAND SURVEYING, LLC BY: ace, ps-rre1 PAUL A. JOH tN LAND SURVEYOR, MINN. LIC. NO. 10938 PREPARED BY: P J LAND SURVEYING, LLC 12510 MCKUSICK ROAD N. STILLWATER, MN 55082 651-303-0025 PREPARED FOR: NOTTINGHAN CONSTRUCTION, LLC 3300 RICE STREET LITTLE CANADA, MN 55126 651-383-4850 87TH STREET NORTH (LOT CORNER FALLS IN SIDEWALK) SET IRON PIN IN SW b bb o3 6 SIDEWALK cbl, S 87°54'19" E LC=4.49' R=90.00' A=4.49' o +Otitib t `" 10' Drainage and Utility Es II I°ryy5 0titi^ + I d :]' 2.00 q 5.50' A 9 0 0�O ✓_ ty 0.00 EXISTING ONE STORY FULL BSM'T LOOKOUT 0. y 3 �' 24.50' 50.00' GARAGE A XB WW 14v. titib 91 22.00' F" e 9 GARAGE 5.00' b a`v °y9 \ icbrIS \ \ otio Porch 26.00' ONE STORY FULL BSM'T LOOKOUT b (0' 20\ 5.00' a_ 20.00' ti'5' n, 16.00' 4 +9 ti'I L 2.00' 4 1 O Oti�ww 0 'I LOT 7 tN=�ti oti. 1 w* tiLOT6 o- 4395 SqFt I o y z _ r. Lti^q I g+, yN +ctitio } 9titi� +�titi �j^ A �ti • °� 5' 5' Drainage and Utility Esm't + — — Drainage and .^! ryo`� W rrl n0' �O6 C5V+°ti I9ti Utility Esm't I y`1- N 89°59'55" W 81.34' oti°1 T ti co 0 N 0ti (921.0) +n 5' N 89°59'55" W oti 70.00' cb95'A LOT 5 10325 SqFt N 90°00'00" E 5' ^°5 143.674-o" (FILE NAME NottinghamVillage_L6B1_AS-BUILT.try SCALE 30 Ft/In DATE 10-13-2021 DRAWN BY PAJOHNSON JOB REVISION SHEET \_19-789 1/1 1/1 J This map drawn with TRAVERSE PC, Software 7^ Ln E0 ti 318 O do ati 9 II 0 30' SCALE IN FEET 1 INCH = 30 FEET 926.50 = 926.10 = 917.50 = 917.83 = 922.50 = AS -BUILT 926.50 = 926.10 = 917.83 = AS —BUILT SURVEY LOT 6, BLOCK 1, NOTTINGHAM VILLAGE ADDRESS: 3493 87TH STREET NORTH STILLWATER, MN 55082 (932.0) DENOTES PROPOSED ELEVATION x930.5 DENOTES EXISTING ELEVATION O DENOTES IRON MONUMENT AT BDRY COR. DENOTES DIRECTION OF SURFACE DRAINAGE IMPERVIOUS LOT COVERAGE HOUSE 2017 SF DRIVEWAY 562 SF PORCH 60 SF SIDEWALK 82 SF TOTAL 2721 SF LOT 7 8263 SF PERCENTAGE OF COVERAGE = 32.9% PROPOSED TOP OF FOUNDATION ELEVATION PROPOSED GARAGE FLOOR ELEVATION PROPOSED TOP OF FOOTINGS PROPOSED LOWEST FLOOR ELEVATION PROPOSED TOP FND. AT MODIFIED LOOKOUT TOP OF FOUNDATION ELEVATION GARAGE FLOOR ELEVATION LOWEST FLOOR ELEVATION I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AND CORRECT REPRESENTATION OF A SURVEY OF THE BOUNDARIES OF: LOT 6, BLOCK 1, NOTTINGHAM VILLAGE, ACCORDING TO THE RECORDED PLAT, WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA AND THE LOCATION OF ALL BUILDINGS, IF ANY, THEREON, AND ALL VISIBLE ENCROACHMENTS, IF ANY, FROM OR ON SAID LAND, SURVEYED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIREST SUPERVISION THIS 13TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2021. P J LAND SURVEYING, LLC PAULA. JOHN LAND SURVEYOR, MINN. LIC. NO. 10938 PREPARED BY: P J LAND SURVEYING, LLC 12510 MCKUSICK ROAD N. STILLWATER, MN 55082 651-303-0025 PREPARED FOR: NOTTINGHAN CONSTRUCTION, LLC 3300 RICE STREET LITTLE CANADA, MN 55126 651-383-4850 Traverse PC r T"r! M "11 T 1.1j 4 4.1M1 Cr?, niMr4 rf19147 L4U4L3,41iP4 '4434 12 12 VINYL SIDIN VINY CORN D,,' NOUN FALL PROTECTION MUST BE, El' IBIZOVIDEO IN ACCORDANCE MTH THE MN ii RE3IDENI1AL CODE, WINDOW OPENING CONTROL 1 1 DEVICES MST COMPLY wrrH ASTM F 2090, 12 20" REAR ELEVATION Vs" 11 K!CKOUT i-E„Az,,,HEis4u REQUIRED \A/HERE THE ENVE OF A SLOPED Dnr:Imrcr,=g---Tc.. • A VERTICAL LEFT ELEVATION 1/E3, VINYL 51-1AKE FRONT ONLY VINYL SIDING ALL SIDES 4" MIN. HOUSE NUMBERS STONE AS 81-10LUN FONT ONLY ALUM. SOFFIT 4 FASCIA ALL SIDES TI-IERMOTEC1-4 WINDOWS Copyright for these drawings is owned by Planco MN, Inc. Upon payment of all fees due to Planco MN, a limited license is granted to use these plans to build one structure. Planco MN reserves all rights. These plans may not be re -used for any additional structures, may not be assigned or copied, and may not be modified or used in any redesign without the prior wrltten consent of Planco MN, Inc. Planco MN, Inc. 2020 4" VINYL SI I 1.-0" 11, UJDUJ. WELL _J 12 12 VINY SIDIN Permanently fixed ladder reqc 2'-0" VINYL SIDING VINYL CORN Permaneatly fixed !adder req'd if x/let:low veJ1 cleeder teal 44" Irl J 1.,.---EGRESS UJDUJ. WELL I LJ RIGHT ELEVATION 1/8 11-0II 4" TRIM 1111.!`- I2x12 BOXED COL. 6---cim "VINTh SIDING ON 18x18x42 STONE BASE NMI *ALL DOOR 4 WINDOW HEADERS TO IBE S.P.F. 02 OR BETTER CO 12 CH FRONT ELEVATION 1/4" = 1,510 Q. FT. el CEILING fa FIRST FLOOR el POURED FOUNDATION 12 4" FRIF7F !BOARD 16x8 OVH. DR. REVISIONS TO APPROVED MEI MUST BE SUBMITTED FOR 1 APPROVAL BY BLDG. DEPT. „BEE — SEPARATE PLUMBING, IMECHNHCAL & ELECTRICALI ERMITS REQUIRED (2) BRACKETS WALLS LESS. THAN 5' FROM A PROPERTY LINE MUST PC . Up hps,O„DaisipmrrRATED FOR EXPOSURE ER011,1 801H SIDES. THE UNDERSIDE OF PROJECTiONS/EAVES SHALL ALSO LiE 1 -HR RATH), En MG MN IMP wane — NM PM! Mlle MI. " ' • 4" VINYL SIDINIG STONE CAP STONE _AA PEABEIBAEL, BE KEE ET:7 AT SITE OF WORK AND "AVAILABLE_ PCP, INSPECTIONI (BULDNG DEPARTMENT *20-201 _t 1-6-21 z 1z 0 - • RESIDENCE nB 9 ebtr +CRL Silica cf. Sift eyorg • I iFo+ Sl.k* ttwie4 ffrwisk 1• 4. q_ 4 �►�c�e.s �� T6.4k aAt a Ea6Se/e evsk l I VIR 4 less L . + *2. Zklo Tfotte42 6eotive - 4 M t pt tot." GAA4.ti*+c `x(o' T "t4'esits 5 I t,o- ousse illwater THE BIRTHPLACE OF MINNESOTA DATE: July 27, 2022 TO: Honorable Chair and Planning Commissioners FROM: Ben Gutknecht, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: Interim Use Permit Application in the Central Business District (CBD): to permit outdoor events and outdoor seating at 601 Main St N. CD 2022-50 BACKGROUND In June of 2022, the City Council reviewed and approved a request for up to three special outdoor events located at Zephyr Theatre (601 Main St N.). At that time, staff had also been directed by the City Council to utilize an upcoming ordinance amendment introducing Interim Use Permits (IUP) to the City Code. At the time of discussion, the IUP was being considered primarily for outdoor seating and dining. However, the City Council provided direction to use an the IUP as a means to permit the proposed outdoor events and seating for the Zephyr Theatre. At their July 19th, 2022 meeting, the City Council approved Ordinance 1187, introducing Interim Use Permits to the City Code. Calyssa Hall, the applicant/representative, and Executive Director of The Zephyr Theatre is applying for an Interim Use Permit to conduct outside performances in their parking lot this summer. The request appears to be similar to requests in 2020 and 2021. The Theatre is requesting a maximum of 12 events every 30 days for the months May — October. The Theatre is proposing seating for 250 attendees. Seating would occupy the northern portion of the parking lot. The Theatre continues to work with Olson Sound for designing sound system. They have also been working with Alchemy Sound and Vision to reduce sound impact and noise bleed, the goal is to minimize the amount of noise bleed and effect on neighboring residential units. The specific request is for an interim use permit to allow outdoor events at an interval of 12 events per 30 days for the months of May through October and to allow up to 250 outdoor seats at the time of the events. ANALYSIS Generally speaking, the purpose of an IUP is to provide flexibility to the district use regulations. IUP's are temporary in nature and due to these temporary characteristics IUPs require special consideration so they may be located properly with respect to the objectives of the Comprehensive Plan and respect to their effects on surrounding properties. In order to achieve these purposes, the Planning Commission is empowered to grant and to deny applications for IUPs and to impose reasonable conditions upon the granting of these permits. The Planning Commission may grant an interim use permit for the interim use of a property if: 1. The use conforms to the zoning regulations; 2. The date or event that will terminate the use can be identified with certainty; 3. Permission of the use will not impose additional costs on the city if it is necessary for the city to take the property in the future; and 4. The user agrees in writing to any conditions that the Planning Commission deems appropriate for permission of the use When considering the conformity of a temporary use, specifically an outdoor event and seating the two most significant impacts that have been identified are noise and parking. Parking Concerns The Theatre is proposing to utilize approximately half of the parking lot for onsite parking. However, there will likely still be spill -over parking for events larger than 100 attendees. With the high likelihood that spillover will occur, this will create deficits in areas where public parking is utilized for trails, private, and public areas. Previously, mitigation strategies included reviewing the proposal with the Downtown Parking Commission (DTPC). The DTPC determined the outdoor events would impact the public parking system and that a mitigation fee of $480 per month for the months with events where more than half of the performances would be held in the parking lot. Another alternative is utilization of the northern parking lot on the Property as an "overflow" parking area. The use of the of half of the parking lot will push most of the patron parking into available spaces within close proximity. These impacts are harder to directly mitigate and will burden the neighborhood, if only temporarily. Noise Concerns In the past, it appears that the City had fielded complaints from residential users regarding outdoor events on this property. Specifically, reverberation and sound spilling/projection to the south and west of the Property. The Theatre continues to work with Olson sound and has been working with Alchemy Sound and Vision to create sound mitigation strategies during performances. These include • Apply a "More is Less" approach, minimizing the use of a single large high -output speaker array, and utilize more smaller speakers at specific points around the audience. • Use speakers that have a specific "throw pattern", minimizing the sound the spills out of the audience area and bounces around. • Place speakers above the audience, pointing down, minimizing the sound being directed across the flat of the parking lot. • After installation, test frequencies at specific residences using calibrated microphones and SMAART sound analyzing rig, adjusting the sound system settings accordingly, and allowing us to trouble shoot and fix any specific concerns. The Theatre also hosts a community advisory group that meets bi-monthly, with invitations to their residential neighbors to offer feedback and suggestions directly to staff. The bulk of these strategies have been in place since June of 2021 and to the best of staff's knowledge, they appear to have effectively reduced the concerns surrounding noise. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that Planning Commission approve the interim use permit request for outdoor events and outdoor seating with the following conditions: 1. The Theatre shall submit to the city an engineered sound plan showing the size, location and direction of all speakers with relationship to the seating chart on file. 2. No other activities may occur onsite at the time of the outdoor performances. 3. The maximum capacity of the outdoor venue shall not exceed 250 people. 4. All outdoor events and amplified noise shall terminate at 10:00 p.m. 5. Number of events shall not exceed 12 per month for the months of May through October. 6. The sound system utilized on site shall be as effective as what is proposed as part of this permit or more so, at mitigating noise spilling. 7. Out of organization renters must utilize the sound system and design approved as part of this permit. 8. All changes to the approved plans will need to be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director. Any major changes will need to go to the Planning Commission for review and approval. 9. An outdoor event permit must be applied for and approved by staff prior to the event to ensure compliance with the Interim Use Permit. 10.Any lighting proposed as part of event shall be temporary in nature and removed after each performance. 11.AII plans shall be reviewed and approved by applicable fire and building inspection personal prior to production occurring. 12.The Interim Use Permit shall terminate or be brought before the Planning Commission should there be a change in ownership of facility and/or expansion of facility and use. ACTION REQUESTED Motion to approve the Interim Use Permit request to allow outdoor events and associated outdoor seating from May through October for property located at 601 Main St N, based on the above conditions within this report. THE ZEPHYRTHEATRE Dream. Perform. Inspire. July 12, 2022 Dear City of Stillwater, It is our mission to provide professional, high quality entertainment to The St. Croix Valley. In 2020, The Zephyr Theatre was one of the only production companies in the state to continue performance in a safe way during the pandemic. Our outdoor shows brought thousands of people to downtown Stillwater to share in (albeit distant!) community, shop downtown, and purchase food for takeout. These outdoor concerts also provided much needed work and income for local artists who had lost hundreds of event bookings. In 2021, The Zephyr Theatre continued to produce outdoor concerts and events to growing audiences with a broad range of artists. Now, our audience and performer base looks forward to this open- air concert series every year. We believe it brings vitality to the north side of the city and enriches the city's visibility as a cultural destination year-round. As a non-profit performing arts organization, we rely on live performance as our primary business practice. The ability to have outdoor music on our property in the summer and fall months has become a core piece of our business model and is key to our long-term sustainability. Outdoor concerts and performances allow us to expand our audience size and demographic, as well as bring in higher levels of talent while driving business, tourism, and community to downtown Stillwater. Several north end businesses have communicated to us that our outdoor performances have provided a positive economic impact on their revenue. We are requesting to augment our business practices to provide live performances outdoors on a regular basis. We have hundreds of supporters, donors, and friends that live to the west and south of us that attend as many outdoor shows as they possibly can, even watching from their balconies and front lawn. That being said, we understand the importance of being good neighbors and minimizing any impact to those that have raised concern over noise. We have been working with acoustician, Bruce Olson, from Olson Sound with 30 years of experience in the industry designing sound systems. We are also working with sound engineer Paul Larson, from Alchemy Sound and Vision, who specializes in creating outdoor amplified entertainment systems that specifically reduce sound impact and noise bleed to residences and businesses. We have made significant upgrades to our sound system over the last two years and will continue to implement the following: Apply a "More is Less" approach, minimizing the use of a single large high -output speaker array, and utilize more smaller speakers at specific points around the audience. - Use speakers that have a specific "throw pattern", minimizing the sound the spills out of the audience area and bounces around. Place speakers above the audience, pointing down, minimizing the sound being directed across the flat of the parking lot. After installation, test frequencies at specific residences using calibrated microphones and SMAART sound analyzing rig, adjusting the sound system settings accordingly, and allowing us to trouble shoot and fix any specific concerns. 601 NORTH MAIN STREET STILLWATER MN 55082 I 651-342-1542 We lay forth the following conditions for consideration in this permit: - All amplified sound will cease by 10:OOpm and will follow all City of Stillwater noise ordinances and volume specifications. Number of outdoor events will not exceed 12 in any given 30-day period for the months May -October. Outside renters will be required to use our sound system and design. Every effort will be made to make modifications if noise complaints should arise. Our community advisory group meetings will continue bi-monthly, in which all of our Terra Springs, The Lofts, and Stillwater Mills neighbors will be invited to share any feedback or suggestions directly with staff. All participants will also have direct contact points with executive staff at The Zephyr Theatre. Thank you for your consideration and we look forward to continuing our mission in bringing art to this City! Sincerely, Calyssa Hall, Executive Director, The Zephyr Theatre SEATING FOR 250 BARRICADES ENTER, FROM SOUTH EINIK 4 4 4 n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u UUUUUUUUU u u u u u u u u u u UUUUU Tanya Holmgren From: Jodi Lewis <jodilewis_1 @hotmail.com> Sent: Saturday, July 16, 2022 8:10 PM To: Planning Dept Subject: Case # CD 2022-50 [CAUTION] *** This email originated from outside the organization. *** Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hello My husband Don and I live across the street from the Zephyr Theatre in one of the brownstones in 650 Main Street North directly facing the theatre. We will not be at the Zoom public hearing for Case # CD 2022-50 on 7/27/22. However we wanted to express full support of Calyssa Hall's request for an IUP to allow outdoor events and seasonal outdoor seating. We hope you approve her request. Let me know if you have any questions Jodi i To: City of Stillwater Re: Case No. CD2022-50 650 North Main St. To the Planning Commission We have been owners in Riverview of Terra Springs since 2008. We, along with many Terra Springs residents, attended and participated in meetings with the City and Zephyr management from the start of the Zephyr project. We were concerned at the start with what may transpire with outdoor events proposed by the Zephyr management, i.e., what constituted a "small" venue, what the sound level may be and what kind of activities would actually be allowed. We were assured it would have minimal impact on Terra Springs. We are not anti -Zephyr by any means. We have attended and have had family members participate in Zephyr events. What we are asking for is the City to do proper due diligence on this and think about unintended consequences that may occur in the future if this permit is not properly defined up front. For the most part, last years "summer" outdoor performances were not obtrusive, especially with regard to the type of entertainment, sound and time of day activities. Then came the Ice Maze. According to the Zephyr Facebook page, over 31,000 tickets were sold to the event. That's 31,000 people attending an event over the course of months, directly across the street from us. That's daily parking, lights and sound negatively affecting us. That doesn't take into consideration the intrusive construction noise of the Ice Maze that begins weeks before the actual event! The persistent buzz of chain saws and large equipment with loud back-up warning signals -etc., emanating into our living space throughout the day starting as early as 7 am and continuing into the evening, past 10 PM in some instances. Then this past year, the addition of a "fire cannon" which boomed and shook the ground at regular intervals was alarming at first, and then persistently annoying the rest of the time. We don't recall being notified of any project of this size or having an opportunity to provide comments in advance of such a huge event. We understand that this particular permit request does not pertain to winter activities as it covers just May -October. But given what was allowed to transpire with the Ice Maze, we have little confidence that there will be enough control over what actually occurs under this permit despite what has been outlined by Zephyr management. We do appreciate the documented efforts to contain the sound as outlined in this permit request, but will it actually be effective and not turn into another Ice Maze situation? We would suggest that the types of activities allowed be identified more specifically in any application and in the approved IUP. We would also request that all activity of any kind cease by 10:00 pm (and not begin any earlier than 8 am, i.e., Ice Maze), not just "amplified sound" as stated in the IUP request. We would also like to learn more about the permitting process and what may or may not be allowed for what we anticipate will be another winter of an Ice Maze. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Tom & Monica Pustovar illwater THE BIRTHPLACE OF MINNESOTA DATE: July 22, 2022 TO: Honorable Chair and Planning Commissioners FROM: Tim Gladhill, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Ordinance — Amend City Code Section 31-325 (Non -Residential Allowable Uses) Establishing Allowable Areas for Massage Establishments BACKGROUND The City Council recently established a license requirement for Massage Establishments and Massage Therapists operating in establishments in the City of Stillwater. In establishing said license, it was discovered that Massage Establishments were not clearly articulated as an allowable use in the City of Stillwater. Staff had been relying on an administrative policy interpretation that classified Massage Establishments the same as beauty/barber shops. Given the different State and now City licensing requirements, Staff recommends that the City amend City Code to more clearly articulate the allowable use status of Massage Establishments. The attached Ordinance is offered for review. Highlights are as follows. Proposed Massage Establishment Use Table CA CBD VC BP-C BP-0 BP -I CRD HMU NC Massage Establishment P P P P P NP P P P Zoning District Key CA General Commercial CBD Central Business District (Downtown) VC Village Commercial BP-C West Stillwater Business Park -Commercial BP-0 West Stillwater Business Park -Office BP -I West Stillwater Business Park -Industrial CRD Campus Research District HMU Highway Mixed Use NC Neighborhood Commercial (Newly formed district — Historic Retail) Allowable Use Key P Permitted Use (administrative approval) CUP Conditional Use Permit (Planning Commission Approval) IUP Interim Use Permit (Temporary — Planning Commission Approval) NP Not Permitted RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the Ordinance. ACTION REQUESTED Motion to recommend that the City Council adopt the ordinance amending the Non - Residential Use Table pertaining to Massage Establishments. City of Stillwater Washington County, Minnesota ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CITY CODE CHAPTER 31, SECTION 31-325 REGARDING MASSAGE ESTABLISHMENT LOCATIONS The City Council of the City of Stillwater does ordain: SECTION 1 AMENDMENT. Chapter 31, Article III, Division 3, Section 31-325 of the City Code, Allowable Uses in Non -Residential Districts - Retail, is hereby amended as follows: ALLOWABLE USES ZONING DISTRICTS CA CBD VC BP-C BP-0 BP -I CRD PA PWFD PROS HMU NC ' Massage Establishments P P P P P NP P P P SECTION 2 SUMMARY PUBLICATION. Pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 412.191, in the case of a lengthy ordinance, a summary may be published. While a copy of the entire ordinance is available without cost at the office of the City Clerk, the following summary is approved by the City Council and shall be published in lieu of publishing the entire ordinance: The ordinance establishes areas of the City that will allow Massage Establishments to operate. Massage Establishments will be limited to the properties within the General Commercial District, Central Business District, Village Commercial District, Business Park — Commercial District, Business Park — Industrial District, Campus Research District, Highway Mixed Use District and Neighborhood Commercial District. SECTION 3 EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and publication according to law. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Stillwater this day of , 2022. CITY OF STILLWATER Ted Kozlowski, Mayor ATTEST: Beth Wolf, City Clerk Google Maps na.a1-1a1, nn1,,C 4 4 Logger's Trail Golf Course KWIK TRIP *415 • Saint Croix Vineyards}, Apelewood Hills Public Golf V. a • nth& n Stillwater Area Hi¢h School Oak Glen Golf.Coarse {� ancl: Event- enter \Y EVisionworks 9Massage Envy Walmart Supercentery 9 Lowe's Home Improvement sett,5 N 2? moo. �o5 w 2 vRenew and • Recover Mathle . The Healing Hand ruliet • Massage`: Massage and Reiki v $ Bodywork 9 Stillwaters Heating 9 v}„ ce Just For Me r "The Spa Vie c5 Fuss Over Me 19 Teddy Bear Park 9 Lasting Touch Therapeutic as . ip Stillwater Middle School 9 titnsear16 S E Fairview Cenietery9- gal Massage9 Forges Me ' Washington COL3. I�Fy • 9Knots Massage Washington County 9Sheriffs office_ 4' Island Time Spc9. L Government Center 1` 7 ` ��y - - Therapeutic--- Hands Massage Google 0 Houlton Oak Park Heights 9 0 Q, Xcel Energy Are, Pie,: S, King Power 9 7 Map data 02022 Google 1000 ft illwater THE BIRTHPLACE OF MINNESOTA DATE: July 27, 2022 TO: Honorable Chair and Planning Commissioners FROM: Tim Gladhill, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Ordinance — Amend City Code Section 31-315 (Residential Allowable Uses) and Section 31-325 (Non -Residential Allowable Uses) Establishing Allowable Areas for Short Term Home Rentals BACKGROUND The City Council recently revised the Short Term Home Rental License requirement. Generally speaking, the City Council consolidated the four (4) separate license types into a single license type without removing any of the other performance standards. The amendment to the license also streamlines the administrative process for approving license applications that comply with all applicable regulations. All applicable Building Code and Fire Code requirements, providing ample protection for the health, safety and welfare of residents and guests and ensures that neighborhoods are free of nuisance. Finally, the changes enhance enforcement tools for Short Term Home Rentals that violate provisions of City Code. With the change to license types, the City must now amend its Use Table(s) as the current tables are specific to the previous license types. Of key difference to the Planning Commission, previous Type B (with written opposition from neighbors) and Type C licenses will no longer be reviewed by the Planning Commission. As is standard with all other licenses within the City, these licenses will be reviewed and approved by the City Council. General/Broad Goals of License Changes (approved by City Council) • Retain the pertinent standards and protections to allow Short Term Home Rentals without creating a nuisance to neighboring properties • Analyze the effectiveness of the current regulations (5 Year Review of Original Ordinance) o Address density maximum in the CBD: Central Business District • Streamline the approval process for those Applications that fully comply with applicable regulations (without losing protection for neighboring properties) • Reduce confusion for Staff and Applicants due to complexity of existing License Types Below is a summary of proposed changes to the existing program. • No more classes of Licenses; just a single Short Term Home Rental License • Maximum number of licenses outside of the Central Business District is limited to 50 (approximately 25 currently issued) • No limit on number of licenses available in the Central Business District o However, requirement to account for all required parking on site will naturally limit the number of eligible properties, until the City can approve a new parking mitigation strategy • First/Initial Application requires City Council Approval; Renewal Applications with no violations and no changes can be approved administratively • All proposals must comply with parking requirements for the Zoning District and Use • A majority of other applicable existing regulations in the current ordinance remain Proposed Short Term Home Rental Use Table (Residential Districts) AP LR CTR RA TR CCR RB CR TH CTHR RCL RCM RR HMU Short Term Home Rental P P P P P P PP PP P P P P Zoning District Key AP Agricultural Preserve LR Lakeshore Residential CTR Cove Transitional Residential RA One Family District TR Transitional Residential CCR Cove Cottage Residential District RB Two Family District CR Cottage Residential District TH Townhouse CTHR Cove Townhouse Residential RCL Low Density Multiple -Family Residential RCM Medium Density Multiple -Family Residential RCH High Density Multiple -Family Residential RR Rural Residential HMU Highway Mixed Use Proposed Short Term Home Rental Use Table (Non-residential districts) CA CBD VC BP-C BP-0 BP -I CRD HMU NC Short Term Home Rental P P P Zoning District Key CA General Commercial CBD Central Business District (Downtown) VC Village Commercial BP-C West Stillwater Business Park -Commercial BP-0 West Stillwater Business Park -Office BP -I West Stillwater Business Park -Industrial CRD Campus Research District HMU Highway Mixed Use NC Neighborhood Commercial (Newly formed district — Historic Retail) Allowable Use Key P Permitted Use (administrative approval) CUP Conditional Use Permit (Planning Commission Approval) IUP Interim Use Permit (Temporary — Planning Commission Approval) NP Not Permitted RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the Ordinance. ACTION REQUESTED Motion to recommend that the City Council adopt the ordinance amending the Use Tables pertaining to Short Term Home Rentals. City of Stillwater Washington County, Minnesota ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CITY CODE CHAPTER 31, SECTION 31-325 REGARDING MASSAGE ESTABLISHMENT LOCATIONS The City Council of the City of Stillwater does ordain: SECTION 1 AMENDMENT. Chapter 31, Article III, Division 2, Section 31-315 of the City Code, Allowable Uses in Residential Districts, is hereby amended as follows: ALLOWABLE USES ZONING DISTRICTS AP LR CTR RA TR CCR RB CR TH CTH R RCL RCM RCH RR HMU Short Term Home Rentals P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P SECTION 2 AMENDMENT. Chapter 31, Article III, Division 3, Section 31-325 of the City Code, Allowable Uses in Non -Residential Districts - Retail, is hereby amended as follows: ALLOWABLE USES ZONING DISTRICTS CA CBD VC BP-C BP-0 BP -I CRD PA PWFD PROS HMU NC wHome Short Term Rentals P P P SECTION 3 SUMMARY PUBLICATION. Pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 412.191, in the case of a lengthy ordinance, a summary may be published. While a copy of the entire ordinance is available without cost at the office of the City Clerk, the following summary is approved by the City Council and shall be published in lieu of publishing the entire ordinance: The ordinance establishes areas of the City that will allow Short Term Home Rentals to operate. Short Term Home Rentals will be allowed in all residential districts and will be limited to the commercial properties within the Central Business District, Highway Mixed Use District and Neighborhood Commercial Districts. Short Term Home Rentals require issuance of a Short Term Home Rental License from the City Council. SECTION 4 EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and publication according to law. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Stillwater this day of , 2022. CITY OF STILLWATER Ted Kozlowski, Mayor ATTEST: Beth Wolf, City Clerk Eagle Ridge Tr/ Glen Ln 0 Oo r Pa 0 De7Ayood Rd N I'i61 Johnso^ O s90, n C McKusiek � Lake Mc Kusick C G e\ Hazel St W z N t Poplar StWu`- Moore St W z St Ctoix Ave in E R Stillwater Ave W • 3 z f Wilkins Sit tn. Wilkins 5t E 0 2 o Staples s H Z FeH o = in' N m Elm St W.Z. It tr, Hickory St W' v+ oodR hoe" dti 9_as Hazel St Willow 5 z Ridge' z Maple St W St Croix Ave E Stillwater Ave E Foneer Pa '2 Jaycee BaliLaurel St W S` 1X Ball Meadowlark Dr •r Fields y Linden St W N z z tit utbe S' a m Church St n th w Lookr Mulbe St W in Stlll r it?'' S N s v °' x tttestf. . o Rice St W E StYJ 9 0 a 3 tt• i fi�msey. Myrtle St W v� P-0 Glove to% s Park tip! N Ramsey Ot'veS in m y in Olive St rn m Oax st tmead°WS Rd . m ▪ to o — • c n Noak St W Pi^e Sti £ t32^d P' Fa` *� o 'o 3 StW S'41/ ' /� m `E. P�^° Watn^t N dge Rd = O ie Pine St W • y N i'' Willard St i u in Willard StW- 00 0 = N in Willard Sc., �S 3 Abbott St E in in2. 0� is N J • u n • in Jl • YL n a Llly Lake Churchill St W ° Churhill St W Churchill St Ea a * = N tii to N 3's a — Anderson St W e o rn Dubuque St E 1. cey Hancock St W Hancock S- t E o cn S4 rn in `n >a z r5 Driving?ar* Lit. Lake i in Burlington St E Q Q' `u di b T'a s 1' Res reaton in 15 ,,, t a' F o O N A �c �SurreY t'n Area ti° y Marsh St W Mash Si L a ,�j m ' 6 ; - St Louis St E o = Benson m Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin,:US,GS, Intermap, INCREMENT P, NRCan, Esri U Orleans St W Park w Japan, METI, Esri China (HongrKong), Esri Korea, Esri,(Thailand), NGCC, (c) Orleans St W ope'nStreet'Ma�p'Tcont'r ' lrO js,Ea�nd■thewG'IIS�Us'igomkrrilty O �. Hilltop pry oQ in Hilltop Ln or -, _ •ZO� Houlton Hou No i11watr THE BIRTHPLACE OF MINNESOTA Short Term Home Rentals DDowntown District License Status o Approved * Pending