HomeMy WebLinkAbout1995-09-26 CC Packet Special Meeting
.'
.
-
SPECIAL MEETING
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
AGENDA
CITY OF STILLWATER
CITY COUNCIL MEETING NO. 95-31
September 26, 1995
1. Workshop on City processes
2. Other business
ADJOURNMENT
\agenda\ws926
7:00 p.m.
Council Chambers
-
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Mayor and Council
FROM:
City Coordinator
SUBJECT:
Process workshop
DATE:
September 22, 1995
The City Council will be conducting a workshop on Tuesday regarding the processes that are
followed for a number of City related services and lor functions. The format for the workshop will
involve an explanation of the various ordinances that regulate land use and the issuance of permits
related to land use and the process that is followed for r~viewing and issuing permits. Although
there are a number of permits that are issued by the City such as burning permits, permits to
consume, park use permits, parking permits, etc., this particular workshop's focus will be on the
process related to the issuance of Special Use permits, Conditional Use permits, and other permits
which are issued by the Planning Department. A workshop can be held on the other types of permits
in the future if Council so desires. At least it is my understanding that the issues related to the
Lumber Baron's Hotel and the questions that were raised regarding the hotel project is what created
the need to have the Council review processes related to permits related to land use at this time.
Although the workshop will be used to help the Council (and the staff) to better understand the
process, including the charge, responsibility, and authority each Commission has, the charge,
responsibility, and authority of staff, and other matters related to the issuance of permits for
developments/projects such as the hotel project it is not necessarily intended to dissect and analyze
any specific Planning case such as the hotel project. However, the Council will have the opportwrity
to ask any questions about the hotel project or any other project if desired.
The following is the format staff will be following:
1) City Attorney Magnuson will give an overview and history of the zoning ordinance and
hotel project.
2) Community Development Director Russell will give an overview of the plan review
process and the relationship between the Planning Commission and Heritage
Preservation Commission.
3) I will discuss the process that is followed after the Planning Commission (or Council in
some cases) has approved the application for the permit.
-
As I mentioned beforc;;,.the Council will be able to ask any questions related to the subject of the
workshop.
~~
e
"USE DISTRICTS"
The following will attempt to describe, in summary form, the various Use Districts and the
regulations related to each District.
There are 13 Use Districts in the City of Stillwater. They are:
1) RA- One Family District
2) RB- two family District
3) RCL-Iow Density Multiple family Residence District
4) RCM- Medium Density Multiple Family Residence District
5) RCH-High Density Multiple Family Residence District
6) CA- General Business District
7) CBD- Central Business District (Downtown area)
8) P A- Public Administrative Office District
9) BP-C- Business Park- Office District
10) BP-O Business Park Office District
11) BP-I Business Park Industrial
12) FP- Flood Plain Overlay District
13) BS- Bluffland/Shoreland Overlay District
Each Use District contains provisions that regulate how each parcel of land can be developed.
The general categories of these provisions are:
1) Permitted uses of the District (without any further process except for a building
permit).
2) Uses permitted with Special Use permit (in all cases Planning Commission
review and approval is required)
3) Accessory uses (usually only requires a building permit unless area, setback, size,
exceeds district requirements).
4) Development requirements.
A) Specifies area, setback, and height limitations.
5) Exceptions (allows some exceptions to development requirements).
6) Landscaping and screening (usually does not apply to RA and RB Districts).
7) Recreational facilities (usually does not apply to RA and RB Districts)
The zoning ordinance also contains supplementary regulations. These regulations cover a wide
variety of exceptions, additions, and modifications to the requirements of the Use District. Most
notable are the regulations pertaining to Bed and Breakfast operations, swimming pools, and
fences. To be more concise the supplementary regulations address items that are not included in
the specific regulations for each District but in most cases apply to each District.
e
Any deviation from these regulations (including specific regulations or requirements of the Use
Districts) require Planning Commission approval and in some cases City Council approval Ity
should also be noted that in many cases other Commissions (Le., Park and Redcreation, Port
,
Authority, WMO's, Heritage preservation and even the Charter Commission) have some review
authority or resposibility. Most of the review authority is only advisory in nature. However, in
some cases (Le., in the use or development of City property -especially City owned park or
riverfront property) final authoruty may lie with a commission or with the voters of the City.
e
In addition to the regulations discussed above the zoning ordinance also regulates the following:
1) Off-street parking and loading;.
2) Signage;
3) Grading;
4) Forest protection;
5) Sorm water management practic es;
6) Restrlcivr soils;
7) Shoreland management practices;
8) Non conforming uses and substandard structures
9) Use and development of swamps, marshes, wetklands and lands abutting meandered
lake and water courses;
10) Solid waste disposal sites;
11) Building moving; and
12) Radio and television towers.
Each of the sections regulating the above include the procedures that need to be followed to
comply with the regulations. Therefore, the procedures will not be restated here. However, it
should be noted tht in all of these cases it is the Planning Department's responsibility to
deternmine whether or not an application meets all of the requirements of the zoning regulations.
It should ber further noted that it is the responsibility of all of the other departments (especially
the Building Inspection Department) to know that the regulations exisr and that there is a process
to be followed in the administration of the land use regulations. It is especially important that the
planning Department be given the opportunity to review all land use applications (be it an
application for a building permit, building moving permit, or other use of the land) for consisteny
with the land use regulations.
I would like to point out that, given the volume and complexity of the regulations, that I
believe the Planning Department has done a very proficient job of administering the regulations
over the past few years. . In most cases where thJre has been a problem it is because the process
has not been completely followed by oth~<Yor the Planning Department has not been given an
opportunity to review land use applications and/or plans. This aspect of "the process" will be
addressed elsewhere in this presentation..
-
e
SUMMARY OF DEPARTMENTAL REVIEW PROCESS
In July of 1987, city staff met to discuss the review process that was needed for private
development. As a result of that meeting a review process process was developed. The review is
a two step process and includes both planning review and building permit review. The following
is a brief description of the process:
Plan Review (.pre Planning Commission/Council approval).
Plans are to be reviewed by the Community Development Director and selectively referred to
departments that may need to review the plans. The agenda for the Planning Commission (and
the City Council meeting if the case is to be heard by the Council) will also be distributed to the
appropriate departments. This provides all departments an opportunity to be aware of any
proposed development plans and to communicate any comments or questions regarding the plans
to the Community Development Director.
Building Permit Review.
Development plans submitted for building permits are to be reviewed and "signed off' by the
Planning Department, Fire Department, Engineering department, Water Board and Building
Inspection Department before a building permit is issued. The Building Official is responsible
for coordinating the review and the departments are responsible for a timely review.
Development plans are defmed as:
New construction
Additions to existing structures
Alterations ( especially exterior work)
Building
Building demolition (whole or partial)
Garages and accessory buildings
Conversions (from single family to multiple family, etc,)
Major building repairs (exceeding 50% of the value)
Other (any other work which according to good judgement and common sense would
require departmental review)
-
-
Other review.
Subdivision, annexation, street vacation, and other projects may require city department review.
The plans or requests shall be referred to the Community Development Director who will refer
the plans to the departments in the same manner as for development plans., Meetings between the
departments will be called as necessary.
I.
Departmental checklist.
Each department is to maintain a checklist to ensure that the review process covers the important
areas related to the departments review. The checklist should include provisions for identifying
when plans are received (or distributed to other departments), and when the plans are approved.
. .
e
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and Council
FROM: City Coordinator
SUBJECT: Lumber Barons Hotel project (processes)
DATE:
September 1'7 M
· r~
q\-z.h\q') u.l
Mr. James Huntsman has asked to be placed on the agenda to discuss certain issues related to the
construction of the Lumber Barons Hotel, Mr. Huntsmans letter to the Council dated July 25, 1995
details the issues Mr, Huntsman wants to address. I thought that this matter was somewhat resolved
between the Council, Heritage Preservation Commission (HPC), the Planning Commission (PC),
developers and staff I refer to the attached memorandum submitted by the City Attorney and
discussed at the meeting of August 15, 1995. I also refer to the meeting that was held between the
HPC, PC, COlIDcilmember Zoller and City Attorney whereat the aforementioned resolution was
made.
At the meeting of August 15, 1995 the Council determined, after considering the report submitted by
the City Attorney, that a workshop should be held with the various Commissions, The workshop
would be used to examine the process, related policies, ordinances, authorities, etc., related to issues
_ like this to better understand the process and to "clean up" any problems related to the process.
Therefore, I believe Mr, Huntsman's concerns, questions, etc" have or will be addressed thru this
further process.
4Jt
,e
MAGNUSON LAW FIRM
LICENSED IN MINNESOTA AND WISCONSIN
...-.
'e
THE DESCH OFFICE BUILDING
333 NOImi MAIN STREET. SUITE #202 . P,O. Box 438 . STILLWATER, MN 55082
TELEPHONE: (612) 439-9464. TELECOPIER: (612) 439.5641
DAVID T. MAGNUSON
MATTHEW A. STAEHLlNG
LEGAL ASSISTANTS:
MELODlE AR\'OLD
JODI JA.''TZ
TO:
Mayor, City Council and Staff
216 North 4th Street
Stillwater, MN 55082
FROM:
David T. Magnuson
RE:
Downtown Hotel Issues
DATE:
August 11, 1995
THE PROBLEM
When construction of the Lumber Barrons Hotel began in the spring of 1995, members of the
public and members of the Design Review Committee raised concerns that the hotel being built was
different from the one that had been approved for building by the City. The Council asked for a report
from me with regard to the adequacy of the existing ordinances and the adequacy of the enforcement in
place of contracts and permits. ' .
BACKGROUND
In the first week of July 1994 both the Design Review Committee and the Stillwater Planning
Commission gave approval of a Special Use Permit for a forty-eight room hotel that would have been
built north to Myrtle Street and provided for the renovation of the Lumberman's building. This action
took place by the Heritage Preservation Committee on July 6, 1994 an\! by the Planning Commission on
)uly 11, 1994.
..e
r
Shortly after these permits were given however, the City received a letter from Public Resource
Group, Inc. a copy of which is attached setting forth that the Developers had reviewed the plans with an
architect as the project related to costs and the forty-eight room motel was too expensive. They suggested
they could only build thirty-six hotel suites immediately, and fill out the balance of the property when
cash flow permitted. Thereafter, on July 24, 1994, the Developers furnished a pre-application form for
tax increment financing assistance and this document contained a scaled down version of the hotel.
Thereafter, the City Council reviewed the entire project on August 9, 1994. This meeting was scheduled
specifically for the purpose of reviewing the financial requests that the Developers had made but it
became a general review at a workshop setting, and the City Council reviewed not only the thirty-six
room hotel, but also the scaled down version shown on the plans submitted by the Developers with their
Tax Increment application. Although the plans that the City Council were different from those approved
by the Design Review Committee and the Planning Commission, the plans were not referred back to these
commissions for consideration.
When the City Council took final action on the sale of the property on January 17, 1995, the City
Council certified by resolution that the plans had been approved however, no specific reference was made
to which plans were being considered as approved. The Developers considered that the plan submitted
and approved by the City Council on August 9, 1994 at their workshop were the approved plan and
designs. The Planning Commission and the Design Review Committee, the official bodies charged with
review of the design, had taken no action with regard to the design since their meetings of early July of
1994.
e
The process could have perhaps been squared up during the spring of 1995 when the building
plans were presented for the necessary building permit. The building plans however, were not compared
with the approved design and a building permit issued. The Design Review Committee however, took
action on June 5, 1995 and again on July 11 and again in August at the recent meeting to approve the
design changes, but they did so reluctantly feeling somewhat pressured to approve the changes in view
of the construction being nearly complete.
PROBLEMS WITH THE PROCESS
1. On August 9, 1994 when the City Cou'ricil considered and took action on a set of plans
showing a change design, the Special Use Permit and Design Review Permit should have been referred
back to the Planning Commission and Design Review Committee for action.
2. When the City Council construed that the plans were complete and approved on January 19, .
1995, a clear indication should have been made to the Council with regard to the specific plans. The staff
reports only assured the Council that the designs and plans had been approved and that all conditions
precedent to the sale had been satisfied. ,.
3. The plans presented in the application for a Building Permit should have been reviewed
against the approved design before a Building Permit was issued.
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CHANGE
1. The authority of both the Planning Commission and the Design Review Committee should be
made more clear and the procedures for dealing with both of these coinmittees should be better refined.
2. Whenever a development contract is envisioned that relates to a project such as this, specific
approvals by the various committees should be required as conditions of the contract and failures of these
conditions should be grounds for default.
3. A precise definition both for ordinance purposes and development contract purposes should
be developed for "plans". A sketch plan is much different than a construction plan and the word should
not be used without being defined.
4. The ordinances and the development contracts should be clear with regard to an agent of the
City that is authorized to accept plans. The documents in place now are referred to plans filed with the
City but this could mean the Building Inspector. the Community Development Director or the City Clerk.
5. A check off procedure should be developed so that all required departments check off on
buildings plans before a building permit is issued.
ei
/.
, "
July 28, 1995
e
Mayor and City Council
City of Stillwater, Minnesota
216 North 4th St.
Stillwater, MN 55082
Mayor and City Council:
Re: SUP/94-39 to St. Croix Preservation Ca., Inc.
Introduction
Since I decided at the last minute to appear at the City Council's July 18, 1995 meeting
under the open forum part with my concerns and issues regarding the process leading
to the significant changes to the originally approved design of the proposed hotel,
restaurant, and meeting center ("center") at 127 S. Water Street to be developed and
operated by the St. Croix Preservation Co., Inc. ("SCPC"), and since the Council was
not prepared to address and respond to those concerns and issues, this letter sets forth
those concerns and issues so that the Council can respond. The expression of my
concerns must not be construed that I disapprove of the project per se. On the
contrary, I favor it, but I would like to see. such a dominant downtown building have a
high quality, historic-appearing, exterior architecture, The fundamental issue I raise to
the Council is whether due process, especially Ch.31, Subd. 29,30, was complied with
for this project to-date. Though I might not like the outcomes of the due process, I am
concerned only that due process was followed. Therefore, I would like to reiterate the
process that has taken place thus far from my perspective so that a due process
determination can be made. The validity of the information herein is subject to the
validity, completeness, and currency of the public documents used, which might be
superseded by other documents unknown to me.
The Development Approval Process
On or about July 6, 1994, the SCPC submitted preliminary plans to the City's Heritage ,
Preservation Commission ("HPC"), case # DR/94-7 for a design review permit for its
proposed 48-room center under City Code Ch.31, Subd. 29,30. The exterior
architectural design of the new addition was approved essentially as submitted. There
were nine (9) conditions of approval (Ex. 1). In particular, condition 4 requires that the
project accommodate 48 hotel rooms and that any changes affecting the hotel's design
- will require design review. Condition 7 requires that "The building line on the Myrtle
Street face shall be the same as presently exists (in Hooley's grocery store) and there
shall be no canopy as presently exists." (emphasis added).
On or about July 11,1994, the SCPC submitted the same preliminary plans to the City
Planning Commission ("CPC"), case # SUP/94-39, for a special use permit under City
Code Ch.31, Subd. 29,30 for construction of a 48-room hotel, bar/restaurant, and
conference center. The CPC approved SUP/94-39, subject to eight (8) conditions (Ex. 2).
In particular, condition 4 requires that "All design review conditions of approval shall
be met."
e
During fall 1994, a development contract between the City and the SCPC was
negotiated and entered into. In January 1995, SUP/94-39 was issued to SCPC, with
the conditions of approval of both the CPC and HPC expressly included. SCPC
President Duane Hubbs accepted SUP/94-39 on January 4, 1995, expressly accepting
all the conditions of the SUP set forth therein (Ex. 3).
During March and April 1995, construction plans were submitted to the City's staff for
a building permit. To the best of my knowledge, these construction plans did not
comply with the SUP/94-39's conditions of approval in that (1) only 42 hotel rooms _
hotel were to be built instead of 48; and (2) the building line on the Myrtle Street face _
was not the same as existing, when the SUP was issued and accepted. Based on
measurement from the new plans, the new addition's north building line was to be
about 50 feet short (i.e., south) of that required. This length reduction presumably
accounts for the fewer number of rooms. A building permit was apparently issued
because cement foundation and footing work took place during May 1995, according to
the City's inspection sheets.
The SCPC presented its changed plans to the HPC for review on June 5, 1995. I did
not attend this meeting to comment on the proposed changes because I did not know it
was on the agenda. I comment further on this point later. The plans had significant
architectural changes from the plans submitted in July 1994, in addition to the
reduction in number of rooms and building length.
Comparing the original, approved design of the west elevation of July 1994 to the
changed west elevation of June 1995, the following architectural design features had
apparently been deleted: the pediment at the center of the east and west parapets;
brick dentils just below the roof line and above the first level; two limestone capitals in
each 3-story pilaster; recessed porcheslbalconies with solid brick "railing"; corbel
bricking under the third story, recessed balconies; transom windows above each suite's
patio doors; limestone columns on each side of 16 suites' patio doors; large glass "wall
panels" along the street level, with divided-pane light transoms above each and
limestone sill below; and an interior fire escape in the northwest corner.
Approximately fourteen-foot (14') wide, projected, cantilevered wood decks, wrapped in
cedar wood, and with wrought iron railings have replaced the recessed brick balconies.
The addition's width has been reduced by about seven (7) feet. The six windows in the
west elevation of the "transition building" (short section between the Lumberman's
Exhange and new addition) originally with historic capital and ledge-sill design have
been changed to four without any apparent historic architectural top and bottom design
treatments. A comparison of the north elevations shows a similar elimination of the
brick dentils, limestone pilaster capitals, several ground-level panel windows, and
_ second and third floor window capital & sill detailing. The added exterior fire escape
likely accounts for the removal of the ground bay windows. The HPC imposed several
conditions of approval on these new plans.
I am disappointed that such considerable changes were reviewed without there being
better notice for input from Stillwater's citizenry at large. Even if I had seen the June
5 agenda before the meeting, it indicated the. review was only informational, not for
formal modification approval. It is my understanding that on July 24, the HPC
submitted to the City Council an explanation of their June 5, 1995 meeting regarding
these changes.
In early July, a member of the HPC approached me, expressed concern about the
significant changes and the process that was occurring, and asked for my opinion on
the architectural changes in the plans as a citizen interested in and concerned about
historic building architecture in Stillwater. In my layman's opinion, the historic a
architectural design had gone from very positive to ordinary, with little historic ..
architectural detailing.
2
e
,. , At the City Council meeting of July 11, 1995, when Councilman Bealka inquired about
the number of rooms being constructed, Mr. Duane Hubbs stated that a ~-room hotel
was being built. To me, that suggests noncompliance with SUP/94-39's condition of
approval of 48 rooms, However, under Section 4.3 of the contract, the SCPC has until
October 1996 to complete construction. While the SCPC is not required to develop all
48 rooms at once, I ask now whether approved constructions plans must comply with
the condition of approval to at least potentially accommodate 48 rooms when completed
before a building permit is issued. I don't know the answer because a clear answer is
not apparent to me from the City's zoning code. I also feel the City should have some
definitive and binding assurance that the existing 50' "gap" on the north will be
developed as agreed to.
On July 18, I decided to appear before the Council to present these circumstances in
hope that the City would take action to provide better oversight and to better solicit
public opinion when such drastic changes in a project are proposed. During my
presentation, I believe Steve Russell, the Community Development Director, stated
that the changes submitted at the June 5 HPC meeting were required by Charles
Nelson, Historic Architect of the Minnesota HPO, and that the HPC and CPC were the
decision authorities for the project.
To ensure the accuracy of Charles Nelson's comments on the changes, I discussed the
necessity of all the architectural detailing changes with him on July 26, 1995. He
stated the only absolutely required changes were lowering the height of the transition
building and avoiding duplication/replication of the architectural detailing of the
Lumberman's Exchange building in the new addition. Aside from those, the original
design of the new addition submitted in July 1994 would be acceptable and would not
jeopardize the Lumberman's Exchange tax credit eligibility. However, he strongly
suggested not to use brick dentils because they represented inappropriate architectural
detailing for the addition's style. Instead, he recommended brick or masonry corbeling.
Also, the east and west roofs' curved pediments should be replaced with a rectangular
or stepped-rectangular design because they were too similar to that on the Lumber-
man's Exchange. They were not required to be deleted, Also, the window treatments of
the addition's north face and transition building's faces in the original design should
not duplicate the historic window detailing in the Lumberman's Exchange. Again,
however, the use of different, but still historic-appearing, capital and sill window
detailing is quite permissible.
Due Process Involved
,e
I will now explain why I believe proper due process of law was not totally followed for
this project. Under City Code Ch.31.29(8) both the HPC and CPC have authority to
impose conditions of approval. Under Ch.31.29(9) a public hearing is not expressly
required for a design review permit, but Ch.31.29(9)(g) gives discretion to the City's
Community Development Director ("CDD") to require a public hearing for a design
review permit. Not requiring a public hearing on the design of this project requires a
judgment that the block-long, 3-story center was not of even potential overall communi-
ty concern. I seriously doubt that is true. Because the exterior design of large,
downtown buildings is generally at least as impacting to the general public as
variances in setbacks are to immediate neighbors, and variances require a public
hearing, I strongly urge the City Council to amend Ch.31.29(9) to expressly require a
public hearing for design review permits. This mechanism will at least publicly notify
the citizenry when the design of projectS of concern will be addressed by the HPC so
3
that they can decide whether to attend. Alternatively, the City should publish the
agenda of the HPC meetings in the local newspapers. Otherwise, people have to visit
City Hall every month to see the agenda, which is inconvenient. In any case, a public
hearing was not required and not held for the July 1994 HPC design review meeting _
when the original plan was submitted. .
However, a public hearing of the HPC's June 1995 review of the major modifications in
the plans should have been required under Ch.31.29(17)(b). The requirement therein
of a public hearing has no qualification as to type of permit as in Subd. 29(9). Because
the proposed changes would violate two conditions of SUP/94-39, it cannot be seriously
contended that Ch.31.29(17)(a) applies. More important is whether, because the
SCPC's proposed plan changes submitted to the HPC's June 1995 review would
potentially violate two conditions of approval of SUP/94-39, due process requires the
SCPC also to submit an application for Use Permit Modification under Ch.31.29(17)(c),
or are approved design changes automatically incorporated into a SUP without review
again by the CPC? Again, I don't know the answer, but I think this procedural
question should be addressed, resolved, and incorporated as a code amendment so that
it will be clear for future applications.
As to the CPC having final decision authority on SUPs as Mr. Russell claimed, the CPC
nearly always has final decision authority for a CUP or SUP under Ch.31.29(13)(chart),
However, there is an exception as provided in footnote (1) whereby the City Council
should have had final decision authority on SUP/94-39 because the center is in the
City's flood plain district, Le., Zone A10. If true, then the City Council should have had
to approve 8UP/94-39 after approval by the CPC.
Finally, if the City has knowledge that a permit is not met or complied with, then
under Ch.31.29(16), the City must give formal notice to the applicant. A request to do
so by a concerned citizen should not be necessary because the language implies it is
self-executing.
If, after deliberating all the above, the Council feels something is awry about the
construction of the project, I hope it will act to meet and resolve any differences with
the SCPC as soon as possible to avoid delaying the project. Personally, I am not
insistent that all the original detailing as proposed be retained, but retention of the
visually significant detailing would be highly desirable. Any added costs would be
-offset by an increase in the value of the property. In any case, I hope the City Council
will modify the permit approval process to ensure better communication among all
parties, especially citizens, in the future.
Sincerely,
~"J
~. I!Wvv~'K
James R. Huntsman
416 S. 4th 8t.
Stillwater, !\tIN 55082
e
4
" .
PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW
Case No. DR/94-7
e
HPC Date: '. July 6, 1994
Project Location:
127 South \Vater Street
Zoning District:
CBD
Comprehensive Plan District: Central Business District
Environmental Review: Exempt
Applicant's Name: St. Croix Preservation Company
Type of Application: Design Review Permit
Proiect Description
Design Review for a hotel, conference center and restaurantllounge.
Discussion
The request is to restore the Lumberman's Exchange Building and add a conference centerlhotel
to the structure. The Lumberman's Exchange Building, constructed in 1890, was directly
associated with Stillwater's lumbering industry and is the main visual focus of this project. The
building will be restored according to the Secretary of Interior Standards for Rehabilitation. The
addition will be a clear separate element and a product of its own time.
The plan, as shown on the elevation drawings, were reviewed by Charles Nelson, historic
architect of the State Historic Preservation Office along with the developer and City staff.
Modifications will be made to the drawings as required. They will be described in review of
eaCh elevation. The overall concept of the addition will be to use similar brick material and
recall the scale and proportion of the Lumberman's Exchange Building.
\Vest!\Vater Street Elevation
The west elevation shows a restored Lumber Exchange Building. The window openings on the
second and third floors have been returned to their original configuration along with the 2 over
2 windows. The storefront will also be returned back to its original state. After review by Mr.
Nelson, it was indicated that all the door openings would not be needed since the facade was
removed from its state. Modifications to this elevation will be to omit three of the five door
openings.
e
EX41 '
e
The new structure shows a series of bays and colwnns extending the three stories. Eac.h suite
will have a balcony. The first flcor facade will combine or remove some of the series of two
small bays \'!ithin the large bays of the first floor levels because of the interior uses.
North Elevation: The north elevation recreates the Lumberman's Exchange Building. This will
be modified so it Vtill be product of its own time to include a series of small, more modem
windo\"'ls within the same rhythm.
East Elevation: The east elevatioD. will replicate the Water Street elevation with the suggested
modifications.
South Elevation: The south elevation will be~ again, the restored Lumberman's Exchange
Building.
No landscape plan for the hotel or the parking lot have been submitted and will need to be
completed.
Conditions of Approval
1. Arty signage will be submitted for design review.
'2. A landscape plan for the parking lot shall be submitted for design review and be consistent
v,ith the Lowell Park Plan.
3. A landscape plan for the building site shall be submitted for design review.
4. The design of the project accommodates 48 hotel units, and changes which will affect the
design of the hotel will require design review.
5. The HV/AC units shall not be visible from the street.
6. No large antennas shall be viewed from the street.
7. The building line on the Myrde Street face shall be the same as presently exists and there
shall be no canopy as presently exists.
8. All clear glass shall be used.
9. The ,vindow frames shall be wood or a material which, visually, resembles wood.
Heritage Preservation Commission Recommendation
Approval as conditioned.
Findings
The proposal meets the intent of the Secretary of Interior's standards for rehabilitation, the
Preservation Ordinance and the Downtown Design Guidelines.
_I
2
PLANNING APPI...ICA nON REVIEW
Case No. SUP/94-39
'1nniI1!Z Commissilm Date: Julv 11. 1994
- . .
. .'
Project Location: 127 S, \Valcr Street
Zoning District: Central Business District
Applicant's Name: Sl. Croix PreseIyation Company
Type of Application: Special Use Permit
Project Description
A special use permit for the construction of a 48 - room hotel, bar/restaurant and conference
center.
Discussion
The proposal is to construct a 48 unit hotel/conference center/restaurant. The Lumberman's
Exchange building will be restored, the grocery store building will be demolished and a new
structure will be constructed to compliment the Lumbermanis Exchange building. The Heritag.e
Prescryation COnmllssion reviewed the design elements of the project and reconunends approval.
The design re'\iew staff report and conditions of approval are attached.
The parking demand for the project is 163 parking spaces. This demand is based on the total
number of guest rooms plus 1/2 the demand for the conference center and hotel since they are
shared facilities, The old grocery store parking lot can accommodate 64 spaces which lea\'es an
unmet need of 90 parking spaces. The river lot between Chestnut and Mulberry can accomm0date
approximately 90 parking. spaces and the Mulberry Street lot can accommodate between 80 - 100
spaces and the Brine's, River, and Main Street public lots can accommodate approximately 200
parkers. The main parking demand for this area will be for the conference center during. the week.
'Ibe Parking Commission will re"iew the proposal and their comments incorporated into the
"conditions of approval",
The entrance to the hotel facility is on the corner of Chestnut Street and Water. This location is
the most prominent "isuallocation, but traffic circulation may be a problem. \Vater Street can
acconunodate three lanes of traffic north of the Lwnberman's Exchange building. The applicant
has indicated that valet parking will be available for hotel guests.
The City Enginc~r is re\ iewing the traffic situation.
e
t: X, C1:..'
^t
. .
Findings
The proposal meets the intent of the Zoning District.
e
Recommend.Hion
Approval as conditioned.
Conditions of Approval
1. All trash receptacles shall be located inside the building.
., All habitable spaces and mechanical equipment shall be located one foot above the 100
yenr flood plain.
3. On Water Street. the drop-off area shall be d~igned to accommodate three lanes of traffic.
4. All design review conditions of approval shall be met Any major changes to the design
shall be reviewed by City staff and possibly the Design Re"iew Committee.
5. The parking lot to the north shall be improved. (paved, marked, landscaped, and new
lights)
6. The City Engineer shall re'\'iew and comment on traffic circulation. They \yill be
incorporated into the "conditions of approval".
7. The Parking Commission shall review and comment on the parking program. They \\-ill
be incorporated into the "conditions of approval" .
8. Hotel, restaurant, and conference center employees shall participate in the City parking
permit program and park in the designated City long-term parking lots.
Attachments
Packet
el
CiTY OF STILLWATER
j~I..A d~)'L~---~
Case No.: -SUP/94-39
Permit Fee:
Date Fee Paid: 5-27-94
e
ZONING USE PER1YllT
Certificate of Compliance
Rezoning
Sign
_X_ Special Use Permit
Variance
Conditional Use Amended
Planned Unit Development
Grading
Other
Applicant: St. Crobe: Preservation
Address: 306 West Olive Street
City/State/Zip Code: Stillwater, MN 55082
Property Description: 127 South Water Street
11999-2100, NP R Y CO LEASE #211866 STILLWATER CITY CHG CODE 8 4-6-84 EXC 11999-2105
CHG CODE 5 6/15/84 & 99908-0500
Zone District: Central Business District
Permitted Use: Consnuction of a 48 - room hotel, bar/restaurant and conference center at 127 South Water
Street.
Conditions of Approval:
1. All trash receptacles shall be located inside the building.
2. All habitable spaces and mechanical equipment shall be located one foot above the 100 year flood
plain.
3. On \Vater Street, the drop-off area shall be designed to accommodate three lanes of traffic.
4. All design review conditions of approval shall be met. Any major changes to the design shall be
reviewed by City staff and possibly the Design Review Con:unittee.
5. The parking lot to the north shall be improved. (paved, marked, landscaped, and new lights)
6. The City Engineer shall review and comment on traffic circulation. They will be incorporated into the
"conditions of approval".
7. The Parking Commission shall review and comment on the parking program. They will be
incorporated into the "conditions of approval".
8. Hotel. restaurant, and conference center employees shall participate in the City parking permit program
and park in the designated City long-term parking lots.
e
Ex.3
Conditions of Approval
1. Any signage will be submitted for design review.
2. A landscape plan for the parking lot shall be submitted for design review and be consistent \~ith the e
Lowell Park Plan. .
3. A landscape plan for the building site shall be submitted for design review.
4. The design of the project accommodates 48 hotel units, and, changes which will affect the design of
the hotel will require design review.
5. The HV/AC units shall not be visible from the street.
6. No large antennas shall be viewed from the street.
7. The building line on the ~lyrtle Street face shall be the same as presently exists and there shall be no
canopy as presently exists.
8. All clear glass shall be used.
9. The window frames shall be wood or a material which, visually, resembles wood.
We accept the conditions of this permit. We understand that any changes from these plans must be
resubmitted for approval.
((l~ tJ~
O:~ ~:p;s;;;-
ate
~4~
Community Development Director
/- "7-9t7
Date
e
..
-
ie
-
AUTHORITY TO GRANT PERMIT
Chapter 31 - Pages 109 and 110
~31.29 Sub. 13 - "The following table indicates the decision making body which can approve an
application, etc."
"Conditional or Special Use Permits - Planning Commission, appeal to City Council."
"Design Review Permits - Heritage Preservation, appeal to City Council."
"For Conditional or Special Use Permits in the flood plain district or shorelandlbluftland
the council shall be the final decision authority. "1
AUTHORITY TO MODIFY PERMIT
Chapter 31 - Page 108
Chapter 31.29 Sub. 9 - "A public hearing shall be required for the following:
"(d) Project Modification (major)"2
"(g) Other projects as determined by the Community Development Director to have potential
over all community concerns."
Chapter 31 - Page 111
Chapter 31.29 Sub. 17 - Modifications (of permits)
a) Minor Modifications - Community Development Director may modify conditions imposed
on any permit at the request of the permit holder where evidence has been submitted that the requested
modification:
1. Will not significantly alter the approved permit; and,
2. Is made on the basis of a change of circumstances.
lThe Planning Commission, not the City Council issued a Special Use Permit for the Hotel even
though the Hotel project is in the flood plain.
2'fhe term "project" is not defined in the Zoning Ordinance.
b) Major Modifications - The Community Development Director shall refer to the board or
official body with final review authority for review and action on any requested modification which
involves a significant increase in size or value of an approved project. A public hearing shall be held
by the board.
c) Except as (a) above, major modifications shall be treated as an application for a new use.
RELATIONSIDP BETWEEN COMMITIEES
Chapter 31 - Pages 117 and 118
~31. 30(3)b - Design Review Committee is the Heritage Preservation Committee.
~31.30(3)(g) - "HPC shall make final decision on Design Permits regulated by 22.10" may
impose conditions.
Those design permits "as regulated by Chapter 22.10."
1) Chapter 22.10 regulates Heritage Preservation sites, and ~31.30 Sub. 3 regulates in
Downtown and West Business Park.
2) In the Hotel process, a "Design Review Permit" was not issued. Instead, design
conditions were made part of Special Use Permit issued by the Planning Commission.
3) It appears that even if the city Council were to issue the Special Use Permit, because of
the flood plain, HPC would be responsible for issuing the Design Permit with appeal to the City Council.
4) Design Review Committee is not listed in Sub. 29 (page 107) as a "Decision Board" .
However, ~31.30 Sub. 3 (page 117) creates the Design Review Committee.
5) ~31.30 Sub. 3(i) - The Community Development Director shall perform site supervision
of Building Permits for which Design Permits have been granted to insure compliance with all conditions
of design approval.
,
-
el
-
-
."
DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT ISSUES
~4.2.1 - The Final Contract "deems" that construction plans were approved, since Developers
were obligated to commence construction 7 days after closing (~4.3). The contract is drafted to be signed
at the beginning of the process so that construction plans can be considered and carefully reviewed by
the governmental authority. When sale was withheld until all contingencies were completed, the contract
became an impediment to the process and not in tune with ordinances that spread responsibility among
various committees and people.
~4.2.2 - Allows for changes in plans but does not define whether approval must be given or
withheld by the Design Review Committee, Planning Commission, City Council, Community
Development Director or the Building Inspector. Since ~4.3 obligates Developer to complete minimum
improvements by December 31, 1996, processes must be reconciled to either recognize changes now
authorized by the Design Review Committee, or hold the Developer to the original full design,
f-
e
ie
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
~
.
FR: Steve Russell, Community Development Director
DA: September 21, 1995
RE: WORKSHOP ON PLAN REVIEW PROCESS AND PROCEDURES
The memos, letters and discussion regarding the Lumber Baron's Hotel has raised issues and
concerns regarding the plan permit review process and the coordination of approved plans with
building permit review and issuance.
A separate matter that is specific to the Lumber Baron's case is the relationship of development
agreements to approved or modified plans.
The purpose of this memo and attachments is to (1) explain the existing planning permit review
process, (2) to identify areas that need to be clarified or changed and (3) to discuss rules and
procedures for the city planning bodies. A copy of the rules and procedures for the planning
commission is enclosed.
Plan Permit Review Process
There are fifteen (15) planning permits that require some type of official city planning review. In
addition to those listed in the following table, fence and kennel permits have been added. Eighty
to ninety percent of the planning permits issued by the planning commission or historic
preservation commission in a typical year are special use permits, variances or design permits.
The standard planning administration application form is required for most planning
applications. For certain types of applications, special use permits, variance permits or design
permits, certain special information is required. Enclosed with this memo is the public hand outs
given to prospective permit applicants. The handouts describe the required submittal information
and provide space to indicate the schedule for submittal and review.
Once an application is received it is scheduled for the next available planning commission or
design review committee meeting. A staff report is prepared based on applicant's plans. Where
other department comments are relevant to the project, the plans are referred for comment to
responsible city departments (public works, water, fire). The comments from the departments
are included as recommended conditions of approval in the staff report.
For design permits in the downtown planning area or West Stillwater Business Park planning
area the heritage preservation commission acts as the design review board. They consider the
application at their regularly scheduled meeting the first Monday of the month. The meeting is a
1
public meeting where the applicant is notified of the review but it is llQ1 a public hearing. The
review is more of a design or technical nature using the design review standards and criteria in
the Downtown Plan and West Business Park Plan. Downtown design standards are more
architectural in nature while the West Business Park standards are more oriented to good site
planning.
e
The heritage preservation commission is comprised of Stillwater residents with expertise in
design, engineering, construction, landscaping and historic resources. The HPC is certified by
the state in part based on the expertise of the committee members. Because of their general
design expertise, the HPC is used to review design in the West Business Park Area.
After receiving the proposed plan, HPC typically adds conditions of approval to modify, clarify
or include design requirements to the proposal plans. These changes are implemented when the
plans are reviewed for building permit issuance.
Currently, the decision regarding the design elements of a project are passed on to the planning
commission when they review the project. The planning commission reviews special use
permits and variances. Many times in the downtown a design permit is also required. The
results of the HPC design review, conditions of approval, are a part of the staff report to the
planning commission. Because special use permits and variances are officially recorded on the
property, the design permit conditions are incorporated into the conditions of approval for the
special use permit or variance.
The planning commission meets after the HPC, the second Monday of the month. They receive
the plans, a staff report including design conditions. The planning commission ~ a public
hearing on special use permits and variances. The finding for decisions for variances and special
use permits requires compatibility of the proposal with area land use. Area property owners
input is one factor for the commission to weigh in making that determination. After reviewing
the staff report, receiving applicants, presentation of the plans and hearing public testimony, the
planning commission approved or denies the plans. There are usually conditions of approval that
are a part of that approval.
All decisions of the planning commission and HPC can be appealed within 10 calendar days to
the City Council. If a decision is appealed, the Council holds a public hearing on the planning
permit. After the 10 day appeal period has run, the zoning permit form including the conditions
of approval is signed by the owner/representative and the community development director and
recorded on the deed to the property.
To make sure the plans as approved and conditioned are met according to plans, they are
reviewed before building permits are issued. This is W to the development review and approval
process. Without this review, planning approval mayor may not be implemented.
After the construction plans are reviewed and approved with the plan review plans and
conditions of approval, the building permits can be issued.
e
1
e
e
If there are modifications to the plans, they may need to go back to the planning commission or
HPC (major revisions) or be approved by the community development director (minor revisions).
Once the project is constructed, the project is reviewed to make sure what was approve is what is
constructed.
Areas that need consideration at this meeting include:
the relationship between actions of the Heritage Preservation Commission (design) and
the Planning Commission (uses/variances)
plan modification review process
final compliance with approved plans
Rules and procedures for the HPC (similar to Planning Commission Rules and
Procedures)
"
Ie
e
Public Hearing Requirements and Decision-Making Board of Official for Application
Permits/Action Recommendation Action Recommendation Action Appeals
Board
Building Moving Permit CPC CC
Conditional or Special Use
(1) Permit CPC CC
Certificate of Compliance CDD CC
Design Review Permit HPC CC
Grading Permit (2) CPC CDD
Planned Unit Development CPC CC
Project Modification (minor) CDD CC
Project Modification (major) CC
Sign Permit HPC/
CDD CC
Variance CPC CC
Site Alteration Permit HPC CC
Vegetation Cutting Permit CDD CC
Zoning Ordinance TextfMap CPC CC
(1) For conditional and special use permits in the flood plain district or bluffland/shoreland, the
council shall be final decision authority.
(2) Grading project - over 40 cu. yds. requires a special use permit review.
CC = City Council
CDD = Community Development Director
CPC = City Planning Commission
HPC = Heritage Preservation Commission
Chapter 31 - 11 0
l'
14.
Life of Permits.
a. Explanation.
e
1. Each approved permit shall expire and become null and void 24 months
after the date on which it is approved unless exercised; a lesser time may
be specified as a condition of project approval.
2. An approval permit applies to the subject property and runs with the land
except, when because of the nature of the use, a condition of approval
specifies that ownership or management is critical to the allowed use.
3. An approved permit is transferable to any future owner of the property
subject to conditions of approval.
4. Any conditional or special use permit shall expire and become void where
the use has ceased for six (6) consecutive months whether or not it is the
intent to abandon the use.
15. Extension of permits. Any permit may be extended for an additional period not to exceed
one year by the board or official that approved the permit.
16. Revocation of Permit. Where the conditions of approval of a permit have not been met or
are not complied with, the City Council shall give notice to the permittee, which notice
shall specify a reasonable period of time within which to perform the conditions and
correct the violation. If the permittee fails to comply with the conditions or correct the
violation within the time allowed, notice shall be given to the permittee of intention to
revoke the permit at a hearing to be held not less then ten (10) calendar days after the date
of the notice. Following the hearing and if good cause exists, the Council may revoke the
permit.
- f) Modifications.
a. Minor Modifications. The Community Development Director may modify
conditions imposed on any permit at the request of the permit holder where
evidence has been submitted that the requested modifications:
1. will not significantly alter the approved permit; and
2. is made on the basis of changed circumstances.
b.
Major Modifications. The Community Development Director shall refer to the
board or official body with final authority for review and action any requested
e
Chapter 31 - 111
,e
modifications which involve a significant increase in size or nature of an approved
project. A public hearing shall be held by the board.
c.
Use Permit Modifications. Except as set forth in 17. a. above, application for
modification of a use permit for property upon which a use permit has been
previously issued shall be treated as an application for a new use permit. Use
permit modifications include application for a new use, for a different intensity of
existing use or for a change of conditions of existing use. A use permit
supersedes or revokes all prior use permits for the same parcel or part thereof.
18. Application Withdrawal Procedures, An application may be withdrawn by the applicant
prior to final action on the matter. The withdrawal must be submitted by the applicant in
writing. Withdrawal of an application shall terminate all further action on the
application.
19. Resubmittal of Denied or Withdrawn Applications. Whenever a permit is denied or
withdrawn, no new application for the same or substantially the same project may be filed
for a period of one (1) year from the date of the denial or withdrawal. Where an
application has been denied without prejudice, an application for the same or
substantially the same project may be filed within the period of one (1) year.
20. Appeal Procedure. An applicant or any other interested person, dissatisfied with any
action taken under the provisions of this title may appeal the action and decision.
1. Where to File Appeal.
a. Appeals from a decision of the Community Development Director or any
other administrative official, in taking any of the actions authorized by this
title, shall be made to the Planning Commission or to the Heritage
Preservation Commission, as appropriate, at the office of the Community
Development Director.
b. The Community Development Director shall place the appeal on the
agenda of the appropriate commission at its next regular meeting.
c. Appeals from the decision of the Planning Commission or Heritage
Preservation Commission in taking any actions authorized by this title
shall be made to the City Council at the office of the city clerk.
d.
The city clerk shall set the appeal for hearing on the agenda for a regular
meeting of the City Council not less than fifteen (15) days or more than
forty-five (45) days after the date of filing such appeal, consistent with
agenda preparation procedures and City Council meeting schedule.
e
Chapter 31 - 112
r '"
Case No:
Date Filed:
Fee Paid:
Receipt No. :
e
PLANNING ADMINISTRATION FORM
ACTION REQUESTED:
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT _ Certificate of Compliance
CITY OF STILLWATER _ Conditional or Special Use Permit
216 NORTH FOURTH STREET _ Design Review
STILLWATER, MN 55082 _ Planned Unit Development
Variance
_ Comprehensive Plan Amendment
_ Zoning Amendment
_ Subdivision
_ Resubdivision
Total Fee
FEE(l)
$70
$70/170
-0-
$270
$70
$300
$300
$ I 00 + $50/1ot
$50
The applicant is responsible for the completeness and accuracy of all forms and supporting material
submitted in connection with any application.
PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION
Address of Project '
Zoning District
Assessor's Parcel No.
Description of Project
"I hereby state the foregoing statements and all data, information and evidence submitted herewith in all respects, to the
best of my knowledge and belief, true and correct. I further certify I will complY with the permit if it is granted and used."
Property Owner
Mailing Address
Representative
Mailing Address
-
--
Telephone No.
Telephone No.
Signature
Signature
SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Lot Size (dimensions) x
Land Area
Height of Buildings: Stories
Principal
Accessory
Total building floor Area sq. ft.
Existing sq. ft.
Proposed sq. ft.
Paved Impervious Area sq. ft.
Number of off street parking spaces provided
Feet
emDITIONAL ENGINEERING COSTS MAY BE REQUIRED AS PART OF APPLICATION
REVIEW
Revised 9/19195
;.. ,
Record of Action
-
Date
Application Filed
Decision Authority
Date of Action by Decision Authority
Appeal Period Ended
Appeal Files
Appeal Decision
Zoning Permit Issues
Zoning Permit Signed by Owner
Zoning Permit recorded with Washington County
Development Certified as Completed Meeting all Conditions
of Approval
Comments
--
e
e
REQUEST FOR SPECIAL USE PERMIT
Purpose:
In each zoning district permitted uses and conditional permitted uses are listed.
Conditional uses require a Special Use Permit.
The purpose of the special use permit is to allow special consideration of uses which
are not specifically permitted in the zoning classification. Since the zoning ordinance
cannot be drafted to deal with every circumstance, the special use permit process is
designed to provide the city sufficient flexibility to determine whether a specific land
use on a certain site will be compatible with its surroundings, the comprehensive plan
and the zoning on adjacent parcels. In approving the special use permit, the city
council must find that the proposed use will not be injurious to the neighborhood or
otherwise detrimental to the public welfare and will be in harmony with the general
purpose of the zoning ordinance.
Process
Step 1 - Project Consideration. Early in the consideration of a potential project, a
determination shall be made whether a special use is needed. If you have questions
pertaining to a possible special use permit, contact the Stillwater Community
Development Department at 439-6121.
Step 2 - Preapplication Conference. It is recommended the applicant make an
appoint with a community development staff member prior to submitting an
application to discuss the feasibility of the request as well as any possible alternatives
which will improve the chance of the special use permit being granted The applicant
_- should be prepared to discuss the proposed use, including number of employees, type
of activity, hours of operation and special transportation needs when they meet with
city staff.
e
Step 3 - Filing the Application. A completed application should be submitted to the
community development department. Regular planning commission hearings are
held on the second Monday of each month. Completed applications must be submitted
not later than 17 days prior to the meeting. The applicant will be required to pay a
$50 (residential) or $150 (commercial) filing fee plus $20 for public hearing
notification and county recording fees. This fee is to cover staff time to process the
application and cost of mailing notices of hearings to property owners within 350
feet. Additional costs may be required if engineering or legal assistance is required to
review the request.
Step 4 - Planning Commission Review. The planning commission and applicant will
receive a staff report evaluating the project conformance to zoning requirements
including, in most cases, a recommendation for approval or denial. At that hearing,
the chairman of the planning commission or staff member will explain the nature of
the request. The applicant or representative must be present to present testimony
giving reasons or need for the special use permit. The meeting is open to the public,
neighbors or interested parties are invited to testify in support or against the request.
These meetings are normally operated on an informal basis and take place in the city
council chambers.
e
The planning commission will approve the request once the hearing has been closed
and an,informal discussion has been made. They may, at their discretion, continue
the hearing to a later planning commission meeting. This happens when insufficient
information has been submitted or additional information is needed to make a
decision on the special use permit.
Step 5 - Appeals Period. There is a ten day period in which the applicant or any other
individual aggrieved by the decision of the planning commission may submit an
appeal to the city council. The cost is $25.
','
The city council will then consider the proposal at their next regular meeting.
Step 6 - Once the ten day appeals period has ended or the city council makes a final
decision on an appeal, the applicant will receive a special use permit form indicating
the approval and listing any conditions of approval that must be incorporated into
the project design or use. The conditions of approval must be shown on the plans
submitted for a building permit or included in a statement of compliance when the
building permit is issued. The special use permit is not issued until the permit form
_ is signed and returned to the city.
Step 7 - Mer the singed permit form is received and all charges are paid, the permit is
recorded on the property with the Washington County Recorder. B\1ilding permits as
required can then be issued.
e
APPLICATION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS
e
1. Application form - completed and signed.
2. $ fee (fee is based on staff time processing application and cost of mailing notices to property
owners within 350 feet). Make check payable to the City of Stillwater.
3. Letter to planning commission/city council describing the use in detail and giving reasons why this
application should be granted. Information should include the nature of the use, type of
operation(business), potential traffic generation, parking locations, why the project will benefitor not
adversely affect the surrounding neighborhood and any other pertinent data.
4. Site photographs showing topography, vegetation and landscaping, existing and adjacent structures
(12 copies).
5. Site plan and diagrams, Plans must be clear, fully dimensbnal and scaled as necessary but combine
data when possible ( 12 copies).
a. Exterior boundary lines of the property indicating easements, dimensions and lot size (a survey
may be required).
b. Label all adjacent streets or right of ways.
c. Location, elevation, size, height, dimensions, materials and proposed use of all buildings and
structures (including walls, fences, signs, lighting and hooding devices) existing and intended to
be on the site.
d, Distances between all structures and between all property lines or easements and structures.
e. Any nearby buildings which are relevant to this application.
f. All existing trees on the site, giving type and location and any other significant plant material.
g. Any existing significant natural features such as rock outcroppings or water courses.
h. Location, number of spaces and dimensions of off-street parking spaces, loading docks and
maneuvering areas.
i. Pedestrian, vehicular and service points of ingress and egress; driveway widths and distances
between driveways.
- j. Proposed landscaping include quantity, location, varieties and container sizes.
k. Proposed grading plan (for sizes having over 5-foot grade differential) showingdirection and path
of drainage on, through and off the site; indicate any proposed drainage channels or facilities.
1. Required and existing street dedications and improvements such as sidewalks, curbing and
pavement.
m. Other such data as may be required to permit the planning commission to make the required
findings for approval of the specific type of application.
n. Note scale (scale = 1 inch = 20 feet) and north arrow on plan (depending on site).
o. Vicinity map indicating nearby cross streets in relation to site (need not be to scale).
p. Submission date
6. Planning commission meeting will be held
e
e
REQUEST FOR VARIANCE
Purpose:
Each zoning classification indicates specific development standards such as setback
and height restrictions. There are occasions, however, when the strict application of
such standards may be inappropriate because of special characteristics of the
property. The variance procedure is designed to permit minor adjustment to the
zoning regulations where there are special or extraordinary circumstances applying to
a parcel of land or building that prevent the property from being used to the extent
intended by the zoning. Special circumstances may include factors such as the size,
shape, topography, vegetation, wetlands or other unique characteristics of the land.
Variances should not be granted to residential density standards or type of use.
In order to provide a variance request, the planning commission must find based on
the application submitted:
There are special circumstances or conditions, fully described in the findings,
applying to the land or building for which the variance is sought, which
circumstances or conditions are peculiar to such land or buildings and do not apply
generally to land or buildings in the neighborhood and that said circumstances or
conditions are such that the strict application of the provisions of this ordinance
would deprive the applicant of the reasonable use of such land or buildings.
For reasons set forth fully in the findings, the granting of the variance is necessary for
the reasonable use of the land or buildings and that the same is the minimum,
variance that will accomplish such purpose.
The granting of the variance will be in harmony with the general purpose and intent
__ of this ordinance and will not be injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise
detrimental to the public welfare. In addition to considering the character and use of
adjoining land and buildings and those in the vicinity in making such finding, the
planning commission shall take into account the number of persons residing or
working in such buildings or upon such land and traffic conditions in the area among
other considerations.
Process
Step 1 - Project Consideration. Early in the consideration of a potential project, a
determination shall be made whether a variance is needed. If you have questions
pertaining to a possible variance, contact the Stillwater Community Development
Department at 439-6121.
e
Step 2 - Preapplication Conference. It is recommended the applicant make an
appointment with a community development staff member prior to submitting an
application to discuss the feasibility of the request as well as any possible alternatives
that may eliminate the need for a variance or improve the chance of the variance
being granted. It is recommended that a preliminary site plan be prepared to review
project design as it relates to the zoning requirements.
e
Step 3 - Filing the Application. A completed application should be submitted to the
community development department. Regular planning commission hearings are
held on the second Monday of each month. Completed applications must be submitted
not later than 17 days prior to the meeting. The applicant will be required to pay a
$70 fee for filing, notices of public hearing and recording at Washington County.
This also includes processing application and cost of mailing notices of hearings to
property owners within 350 feet. Additional costs may be required if engineering or
legal assistance is required to review the request.
Step 4 - Planning Commission Review. The planning commission and applicant will
receive a staff report evaluating the project conformance to zoning requirements
including, in most cases, a recommendation for approval or denial. At that hearing,
the chairman of the planning commission or staff member will explain the nature of
the request. The applicant or representative must be present to present testimony
giving reasons or need for the variance. The meeting is open to the public, neighbors
or interested parties are invited to testify in support or against the request. These
meetings are normally operated on an informal basis and take place in the city
council chambers.
The planning commission will approve or deny the request once the hearing has been
closed and an informal discussion has been made. They may, at their discretion,
continue the hearing to a later planning commission meeting. This happens when
- - insufficient information has been submitted or additional information is needed to
make a decision on the variance.
Step 5 - Appeals Period. There is a ten calendar day period in which the applicant or
any other individual aggrieved by the decision of the planning commission may
submit an appeal to the city council. The cost is $25.
Step 6 - Once the ten day appeals period has ended or the city council makes a final
decision on an appeal, the applicant will receive a variance form indicating the
approval and listing any conditions of approval that must be incorporated into the
project design or use. The conditions of approval must be shown on the plans
submitted for a building permit or included in a statement of compliance when the
building permit is issued. The variance is not issued until the permit form is signed
e
e
and returned to the city.
Step 7 - Mter the signed permit form is received and all charges are paid, the permit is
recorded on the property with the Washington County Recorder. Building permits as
required can then be issued.
e
APPLICATION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS
1. Application form - completed and signed.
e
2. $70 fee (fee is based on staff time processing application and cost of mailing notices to property
owners within 350 feet). Make check. payable to the City of Stillwater.
3. Letter to planning commission/city council describing the use in detail and giving reasons why this
application should be granted, Information should include the nature of the use, type of
operation(business), potential traffic generation, parking locations, why the project will benefitDr not
adversely affect the surrounding neighborhood and any other pertinent data.
4. Site photographs showing topography, vegetation and landscaping, existing and adjacent structures
(12 copies).
5. Site plan and diagrams. Plans must be clear, fully dimensbnal and scaled as necessary but combine
data when possible (12 copies).
a. Exterior boundary lines of the property indicating easements, dimensions and lot size (a survey
may be required).
b. Label all adjacent streets or right of ways.
c. Location, elevation, size, height, dimensions, materials and proposed use of all buildings and
structures (including walls, fences, signs, lighting and hooding devices) existing and intended to
be on the site.
d. Distances between all structures and between all property lines or easements and structures.
e. Any nearby buildings which are relevant to this application.
f. All existing trees on the site, giving type and location and any other significant plant material.
g. Any existing significant natural features such as rock outcroppings or water courses.
h. Location, number of spaces and dimensions of off-street parking spaces, loading docks and
maneuvering areas.
i. Pedestrian, vehicular and service points of ingress and egress; driveway widths and distances
between driveways.
_ _ j. Proposed landscaping include quantity, location, varieties and container sizes.
k. Proposed grading plan (for sizes having over 5-foot grade differential) showingdirection and path
of drainage on, through and off the site; indicate any proposed drainage channels or facilities.
I. Required and existing street dedications and improvements such as sidewalks, curbing and
pavement.
m. Other such data as may be required to permit the planning commission to make the required
findings for approval of the specific type of application.
n. Note scale (scale = 1 inch = 20 feet) and north arrow on plan (depending on site).
o. Vicinity map indicating nearby cross streets in relation to site (need not be to scale).
p. Submission date
6. Planning commission meeting will be held
e
e
DESIGN REVIEW PROCESS
DOWNTOWN STILLWATER
Purpose:
Design review is the process which provided for the review and approval for the
design of developments and improvements in downtown Stillwater. The goal of this
review is to promote functional, safe, innovative and attractive development which
enhances and retains the historic rivertown image of Stillwater and is consistent with
the natural environment of the St. Croix Valley.
Elements of Design Review Guidelines:
The elements of a design review are: the layout and design of all existing and
proposed improvements, including but not limited to, buildings, structures, parking
and circulation areas, outdoor storage areas, landscape areas, service and delivery
areas, outdoor recreation areas and open space, trash areas, signs, pedestrian
walkways, buffering and screening measures, building materials, windows, lighting,
detailing, facade openings, roofs, awnings and plazas.
Design Review Committee:
The Design Review Committee consists of the Heritage Preservation Commission.
Procedure:
All additions or alterations to existing structures and new infill development will
require design review following the design review guidelines of the Downtown Plan
(refer to design review area). New development in the North Main Street area
requires additional design review guidelines to each specific site as stated in the
Downtown Plan (see specific site).
1. The application shall be reviewed on a case basis by the design review committee.
The design review committee, in reviewing the application, shall consider among
other things, the purpose of the downtown plan policies and the historic and
architectural value and significance of downtown Stillwater.
2. In reviewing the application, the design review committee shall take into
consideration the elements of the existing guidelines in the downtown plan,
features of the historic buildings and the natural setting of the St. Croix Valley.
e
Application Deadlines:
Applications for a sign permit or design review permit shall be submitted tens (10)
days prior to the meeting.
Design Review Plan Contents: '
A. Preliminary architectural drawings including:
e
1. Building elevations
2. Picture or drawing showing adjacent building(s) as appropriate.
B. Landscape Plan
C. Preliminary Site Development Plan including:
1. Parking and circulation areas
2. Location of buildings
3. Location and description of signs
4. Orientation of windows and doors
5. Entrances and exits
6. Open spaces
7. Pedestrian circulation
8. Adjacent buildings
9. Drainage plan
10. Lighting plan
11. Sign Plan
Action of Design Review Plan
The design review committee will take action on the design review plans submitted
by summarizing their findings and conclusions. These will indicate the relationship
between the design review process and the criteria and standards listed in the design
guidelines.
Meeting - First Monday of the month.
The design review committee will make final decision on design permits.
Finding Required:
1. Prior to recommending approval, modified approval or denial, the design review
committee shall consider the development as it relates to:
a. The action proposed is consistent with the goals of the Stillwater Downtown
Plan.
b. The action proposed will not b,e detrimental to a structure or feature of
e
oJoM-
e
e
c.
d.
e.
Appeals
significant aesthetic, cultural, architectural or engineering interest or value of
an historical nature.
Design of the project conforms to the Downtown Design Guidelines and
streets cape and pedestrian pathway plans.
That any additional conditions stipulated as necessary in the public interests,
have been imposed and
That such design will not constitute a visual nuisance or be detrimental to
the unique design qualities of Downtown.
All final decisions of the design review committee can be appealed within 10 days of
decision to the city council.
e
DESIGN REVIEW PROCESS
STILL WATER WEST BUSINESS PARK
Purpose:
Design Review is the process which provides for the review and approval for the design
of new development in the Stillwater West Business Park. The goal of this review is to
promote functional, safe, innovative, compatible and attractive development which
enhances and retains the quality and character ~f Stillwater on existing business park
development.
Elements of Design Review Guidelines:
The elements of a design review are: the layout and design of all existing and proposed
improvements, including but not limited to, buildings, structures, parking and
circulation areas, outdoor storage areas, landscape areas, service and delivery areas,
outdoor recreation areas and open space, trash areas, signs, pedestrian walkways,
buffering and screening measures, building materials, windows, lighting, detailing, facade
openings, roofs, awnings and plazas.
Procedure:
All additions or alterations to existing structures and new development will require
design review following the design review guidelines of the West Business Park Plan.
(Refer to Design Review area.)
1. The application shall be reviewed at the regularly scheduled meeting of the design
review committee ( the design review committee meets the first Monday of the
month).
__ 2. In reviewing the application, the design review committee shall take into
consideration the elements of the West Business Park Plan Design Guidelines.
Application Deadline:
Applications for a sign permit or design review permit shall be submitted ten (10) days
prior to the meeting.
e
Design Review Plan Contents:
A. Preliminary architectural drawings including:
1. building elevations all four
2. building materials, colors
3. signage plan
B. Landscape Plan
c. Preliminary site development plan including:
e
1. Parking and circulation areas
2. Location of buildings
3. Orientation of windows and doors
4. Entrances and exits
5. Open spaces
6. Pedestrian circulation
7. Drainage plan
8. Lighting plan (fixture type and height)
9. Sign plan (location)
Action on Design Review Plan:
The design review committee will take action on the design review permit by
summarizing their finding and conclusions. These will indicate the relationship between
the design review process and the criteria and standards.
- All design review committee will make final decisions regarding design review
permits.
- All design review permits are appealable to the city council.
Findings Required:
1. Prior to recommending approval, modified approval or denial, the design review
committee shall consider the development as it relates to:
a. The action proposed is consistent with the goals of the West Business Park Plan.
b. The action proposed will not be detrimental to a structure or feature of significant
aesthetic, cultural, architectural or engineering interest or value of a historical
nature.
c. Design of the project conforms to the design guidelines and streetscape and
pedestrian pathway plans.
d. That any additional conditions stipulated as necessary in the public interests,
have been imposed and,
e. That such design will not constitute a visual nuisance or be detrimental to the
unique design qualities of the area.
Appeals:
All final decisions of the design review committee can be appealed within 10 calendar
days of decision to the city council for .review and decision.
e
e
e
APPEALS
The decision of the Planning Commission or Design Review Committee is appealable
to the City Council.. Any application or other interested party who considers an
action taken by the decision authority in error or in bad judgement may appeal the
decision to the City Council.
Appeals from Planing Commission or Design Review Committee actions should be
made to the Community Development Director at Sitllwater City Hall, 216 North
Fourth Street, 439-6121. All appeals must be in writing, be accompanied by the $25
appeal fee, state the application number, the nature of the application and the
reasons for the appeal. The appeal must be received by the Community
Development Director within ten (10) calendar days of the action of the Planning
Commission. The written appeal suspends plan permit approval until a decision of
the Planning Commission shall be considered by the City Council at a public hearing.
The applicant and affected property owners will be notified of the City Council
appeal hearing.
--
PlANNING COMMISSION RULES AND PROCEDURES
e
ADOPTED UNDER AUTHORITY OF STILLWATER MUNICIPAL CODE
AND STATUTES OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA
FOR THE PURPOSE OF ESTABLISHING RULES AND PROCEDURES
GOVERNING THE ORGANIZATION AND PROCEDURES OF
THE PlANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF STILLWATER
ARTICLE I
NAME
1. The name of this organization shall be the Planning Commission of the City of Stillwater
hereinafter referred to as the Planning Commission.
ARTICLE II
POWERS AND DUTIES
1. The Planning Commission has the following duties and powers:
a. Hear and decide matters relating to the application of the zoning ordinance and as assigned
to the Commission.
b. Hear and decide matters relating to the application of the subdivision ordinance and as
assigned to the Commission.
c. Hear and decide appeals from decisions of the Community Development Director or City
Planner.
d. Develop and maintain the Comprehensive Plan and specific or area plans and policies.
e. Undertake studies in the area of zoning and planning and make recommendations to the City
Council and other city organizations.
f. Review the Capital Improvements Program.
g. Develop and maintain the zoning and subdivision ordinances.
h. Perform such other functions as the City Council may assign.
ARTICLE III
-
-
MEMBERSHIP AND TERM OF OFFICE
1. Membership, term of office and procedures for removal of members and the filling of vacancies
shall be as established by Stillwater Municipal Code and by City Council directions.
2. The Chair shall notify the Mayor when any Commission member has three (3) consecutive
absences without notification and/or been absent with notification for more than six (6) regular
meetings per year.
3. Commission members shall notify the Chair or the Secretary to the Planning Commission in
advance of any planned absence.
'e
1
ARTICLE IV
OFFICERS
e
1. As soon as is practicable following the first (1st) day of January of every year, there shall be elected
from among the membership of the Commission, a Chair and a Vice Chair.
2. The Community Development Director is designated to act as Secretary to the Planning
Commission.
3. Should a vacancy occur in the office of the Chair or Vice Chair prior to the next annual election
of officers, a special election shall be held to fill that office for the duration of the unexpired term.
ARTICLE V
ELECTION OF OFFICERS
1. Any member may nominate a candidate from the membership for the position of Chair or Vice
Chair; nominations need not be seconded.
2. Each member may vote for any eligible person whether nominated or not.
3. A member may withdraw his/her name, if placed in nomination and announce that, if elected,
he/she would not be able to serve; but he/she may not "withdraw in favor of another member".
4. Once the nomination are completed, any member may move that the nominations be closed; a
second is required.
5. Unless a majority opposes, the Chair then declares that the nominations are closed; and the
members proceed to the election.
6. The voting may be by ballot or by voice vote.
7. The candidate who received a majority of the votes cast than holds the office of the Chair.
8. The same procedure is followed for the election of Vice Chair.
9. New officers shall assume office at the next meeting.
ARTICLE VI
DUTIES OF OFFICERS
1. The Chair shall preside at all regular meetings and hearings and shall call special meetings of the
Planning Commission.
2. Except those matters controlled by statute, ordinance and these rules and procedures the Chair
shall decide on all points of order and procedure during the meetings; and his/her decision shall
be final unless overruled by a majority of the members present.
2
e
e
3. The Chair shall sign all official minutes of meetings upon Planning Commission approval.
4. The Chair shall represent the Planning Commission before the City Council whenever the Chair
or the Commission considers it necessary or desirable.
5. The Vice Chair shall assume all Commission duties of the Chair in his/her absence or disability.
6. In case of the absence of both the Chair and the Vice Chair from any meeting, an Acting Chair
shall be elected from among the members present.
7. The Secretary shall receive and file all exhibits, petitions, documents or other materials presented
to the Commission in support of, or in opposition to, any question before the Commission.
8. The Secretary shall sign all notices prepared in connection with Planning Commission business
and shall attest to such records of actions, transmittals and referrals as may be necessary or
required by law.
ARTICLE VII
COMMITTEES
1. All committees of the Planning Commission which may be deemed necessary to carry out the
functions and purposes of the Commission shall be established by the Chair or by a majority vote
of the Commission.
2. The Chair shall serve as an ex-officio member of all committees.
3. The Chair shall make all committee assignments and shall appoint the Chair of each committee.
4. Committee meetings shall be held upon call of the Chair of the committee.
5. A verbal or written report may be made at any meeting of the Commission by the Chair or a
member of a committee on any subject under consideration by a committee; or a report may be
requested by the Chair of the Commission.
ARTICLE VIII
MEETINGS - GENERAL
1. All regular, work session, special and adjourned meetings of the Commission shall be open
meetings to which the public and the press shall be admitted.
2. Notice of meetings shall be given as required by law; and the purpose of, or the business to be
transacted during, such meetings shall be stated in the notice.
Regular Meetings
e
1. Regular meetings of the Commission shall be held on the second (2nd) Monday of each month
and shall be evening meetings beginning at 7 p.m., in the Council Chambers of City Hall of the
3
City of Stillwater. Meetings shall be adjourned by 10:30 p.m., unless the Chair, with concurrence
of the Commission, extends the time of the adjournment.
e
2. In the event that the scheduled date for a regular meeting falls on a holiday, such meeting may be
rescheduled; the exact date and time of such rescheduled meeting shall be determined at the
preceding regular meeting.
3. If a majority of the membership deems it necessary or desirable, a scheduled regular meeting may
be cancelled or rescheduled at the preceding regular meeting, unless a public hearing has been
noticed previously.
Work Session Meeting:;
1. Work session meetings of the Planning Commission may be held from time to time. The exact
date and time of such meetings shall be determined at the preceding regular meeting.
2. In the event that the date scheduled for a work session meeting falls on a holiday, such meeting
may be rescheduled or may be cancelled; such action shall be taken at the preceding regular
meeting.
3. If a majority of the membership deems it necessary or desirable, a scheduled work session meeting
may be cancelled or rescheduled at the preceding regular meeting.
4. No final action shall be taken at a work session on any matter which is required by law to be the
subject of a public hearing or which is the subject of any application or appeal pending before the
Commission.
Special Meetings
1. A special meeting may be called by the Chair or a majority of the membership.
Site Tour
1. Planning Commission members may convene to inspect sites of applications before the
Commission in order to familiarize themselves with the existing conditions of the site.
--
ARTICLE IX
OUORUM
1. A quorum shall consist of five (5) members of the Planning Commission for all matters.
2. In the absence of a quorum at any meeting, such meeting shall be adjourned to the next regular
meeting date by any member present; or, if no member is present, by the Secretary of the Planning
Commission; or if the Secretary is absent, by the Recording Secretary.
3. No meeting may be declared adjourned for lack of a quorum until a IS-minute period, after the
scheduled time of the meeting, has elapsed.
4
,
ei
I
e
I.
ARTICLE X
CONDUCT OF MEETINGS
1. At the time and place established for a meeting and with a quorum present, the Chair shall call
the meeting to order.
2. The normal order of business shall be as follows:
a. Roll call.
b. Approval of minutes of previous meetings.
c. Oral Communications - The Planning Commission will hear brief (3-minute maximum per
topic) oral communications on items not listed on the agenda.
d. Consent calendar - These are regular items scheduled on the Commission agenda which are
recommended for approval or continuance by staff.
e. Public hearings - These are items that require public hearings.
f. Unfinished business - Review of recommendation on old or unfinished business and action on
same.
g. New business - Including, but not limited to planning items that do not require a public
hearing.
h. Motions and voting.
ARTICLE XI
MOTIONS
--
1. Upon conclusion of discussion on a matter or at such time as any member may feel that all points
have been sufficiently reviewed, the Chair may call for a motion or one may be offered by a
member. In the event no motion is offered, the Chair may offer a motion.
2. The Chair shall receive all motions and shall call for a second to the motion if none has been
made.
3. If, after a reasonable time, no second has been offered, the motion shall be declared dead for lack
of second, and this shall be so stated by the Chair.
4. After a motion has been made and seconded, the Chair shall call for discussion on the question.
All discussion shall be limited to that of the motion only. At the close of discussion, the Chair
shall put the matter to a vote.
5. The Chair may, at his/her discretion, limit debate on any motion; except that each member shall
have the opportunity to speak at least twice on each motion for a period of not more that five (5)
5
minutes at a time. If a member has already spoken on a motion, the Chair may restrict that
member to five (5) minutes.
e
6. Should a motion fail to pass, the Chair shall so state and call for a new motion on the matter.
ARTICLE XXI
VOTING
1. All questions shall be resolved be roll call vote; except that the Chair may, at his/her discretion,
call for a voice vote. Should any member request a roll call vote, either before or immediately after
a voice vote, a roll call shall be taken without further discussion.
2. Upon acceptance of a motion and completion of discussion thereon, the Chair may instruct the
Secretary to read the motion and to poll the membership for a vote.
3. All votes shall be verbally stated by each member at "Aye" or "No" and shall be so entered into the
minutes of the meeting. Should he/she so desire, a member shall be given an opportunity to state
the reasons his/her vote, which reasons shall also be entered into the minutes.
4. A member may be permitted to abstain from voting only when he/she has a disqualifying conflict
of interest or bias in the matter; and, where he/she is aware of such disqualifying interest or bias,
he/she shall state his/her disqualification upon call of the matter on the agenda. If a member
becomes aware of a disqualifying interest or bias during the hearing of the matter, he/she shall
immediately so indicate. A disqualified member shall not participate in discussion or voting in the
matter.
5.
6.
7.
-- 8.
9.
Adoption of a motion shall be by a simple majority of the members present, except as otherwise
provided herein.
The Chair shall vote on all matters, except where he/she has a disqualifying interest or bias.
A tie vote, taken during the absence of one or more members or a vacancy on the Commission
shall automatically continue any item to the next meeting.
A tie vote, resulting from the abstention of one or more members, with no members absent and
no vacancies on the Commission, shall automatically result in the defeat of the motion.
All questions, except those failing as a result of a tie vote pursuant to Section 8 of this Article, shall
be resolved by the affirmative passage of a motion. Should a motion fail to pass by a majority
vote, the Chair shall declare that the motion has failed to carry; and he/she shall call for a new
motion on the matter.
ARTICLE XIII
ORAL AND WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
1. All oral communications between members of the Commission and those seeking to convey any
information relevant to any matter of Commission business shall take place at a public meeting
6
e
e
e
of the Commission.
2. Written communications with members of the Commission must be submitted to the Staff of the
Community Development Department prior to the agenda deadline, in order that it may be
included in the agenda packet.
3. Letters or other forms of written communication received by Staff after the deadline shall,
whenever possible, be duplicated for the individual Commission members and distributed at the
meeting. If this is not possible, the original correspondence shall be voted by the Staff or the
Chair during consideration of the matter.
ARTICLE XIV
POINTS OF ORDER
1. All points not covered by these bylaws shall be determined by Robert's Rules of Orders.
ARTICLE XV
AMENDMENTS
1. These bylaws may be amended from time to time as the need may arise, by resolution adopted by
the favorable vote of a four-fifths (4/5) majority of the full membership of the Planning
Commission.
ARTICLE XVI
ADOPTION OF RULES AND PROCEDURES
1. Immediately upon favorable vote of not less than four-fifths (4/5) of the full membership of the
Planning Commission, these rules and procedures shall become in full force and effect; thereby
invalidating any and all provisions of previously adopted rules or procedures which may be, totally
or in part, in conflict herewith.
2. These rules shall not be considered or construed as superseding any ordinance or directive of the
City Council, nor shall they preclude and preparation and adoption of further procedural manuals
and policies by which the Planning Commission may direct its activities.
7
,
'm
Minnesota Department of Health
121 East Seventh Place
P.O. Box 64975
St. Paul, MN 55164-0975
FYI
e
September 19. 1995
Stillwater City Council
c/o Ms. Morli Weldon
Stillwater City Hall
216 North Fourth Street
Stillwater. Minnesota 55082
Dear Council Members:
On Thursday. September 14. 1995. I reviewed preliminary plans for the city's
proposed fire station expansion with Mr. Dennis J. Vonasek of BWBR Architects.
Mr. Vonasek inquired as to this department's requirements regarding
construction in the vicinity of a municipal water supply source. namely the
city of Stillwater Well NO.1 (McKusick Spring). I stressed the fact that. in
accordance with Minnesota Rules. Chapter 4725. Wells and Borings. no sources
of contamination may be constructed within 50 feet of a municipal water supply
well. Sources of contamination include. but are not limited to. items such as
a buried sanitary or storm sewer line or a buried fuel storage tank. Since
Well NO.1 is a shallow well that is more susceptible to contamination.
adherence to the rule is very important.
If the final plans meet the requirements of Minnesota Rules. Chapter 4725.
this department has no other option but to approve the plans. However.
because the well in question is vulnerable and very susceptible to
contamination. the city should consider requiring even greater isolation
distances around this well.
If you have any questions. please contact me at 612/215-0766.
~~/
Robert H. Smude. P.E.
Public Health Engineer
Section of Drinking Water Protection
r
RHS. jam
cc: Mr. Dennis McKean. Water Superintendent
Mr. Dennis Vonasek. BWBR Architects
e
TOO: (612) 623.5522 (Twin Cities) 1-800-627-3529 (Greater Minnesota)
An Equal Opportunity Employer
10.
..
11-
12.
1. 9:00
2.
3. 9:00
4. 9:20
5.
9:30
6.
9:40
7.
9:50
8.
10:00
9.
10:15
10:30
TO
11:20
W ASIllNGTON COUNTY
Dennie C. Hegberg
D1atrlct 1
Mery Heueer
Dlstrlct 2
Welly Abrahemson
Dlstrlct 3/Chelnnen
COUNTY BOARD AGENDA
SEPTEMBER 26, 1995, 9:00 A.M.
Myre Petereon
Dletrlct 4
Deve Engetrom
Dlatrlct 6
ROLL CALL
CONSENT CALENDAR
PUBLIC HEARING - H.E.L.M. DEPARTMENT - M. MCGLOTHLIN, DIRECTOR
AMENDMENT TO ZONING ORDINANCE, SECTION 508.01
H.E.L.M. DEPARTMENT - M. MCGLOTHLIN, DIRECTOR
A. ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION AMENDING SECTION 508.01 OF THE
COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE, AUTHORIZE PUBLICATION
B. SET PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AMENDMENT TO SECTION
602.02(5) OF THE COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE
WASHINGTON COUNTY STAR TRAIL ASSOC. - NORA GALLMEYER
USE OF RAILROAD BED THAT RUNS BETWEEN HUGO AND FOREST LAKE
MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES - STEVEN JOHNSON
BOATING RULES ON THE ST. CROIX
GENERAL ADMINISTRATION - J. SCHUG, COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
HACA RESOLUTION
DISCUSSION FROM THE AUDIENCE
VlSlTORS M.4f SHARE 1HEIR CONCERNS W11H THE COUNTY B<MRD OF COMMISSIONERS ON ANY TlF:M NOT ON THE AGENDA. THE CHAIR W11L DIRECT 7HE
COUNTY ADMINlS11lATOR TO PREPIIRE RESPONSES TO fOUR CONCD1NS. YOU lIRE ENCOURAGED NOT TO BE REPEImOUS OF PREVIOUS SPEAKERS AND TO
L1M1T fOUR ADDRESS TO FIVE MINUIF:i
COMMISSIONER REPORTS - COMMENTS - QUESTIONS
71I1S PDUOD OF 71ME SHAU. BE USED Bf THE COMMISSIONERS TO REPOIrT TO THE FUlL B<MRD ON COMMlI7EE AC71VT11ES, MAKE COMMENTS ON M.417'ERS
OF INTEREST AND INFORMA710N. OR JWSE QUES170NS TO THE STAFF. 71I1S ACIlON IS NOT INTENDED TO RESULT IN SU1JSTANl1VE B<MRD ACIlON DlJRING
71I1S 71ME. ANY ACIlON NECESSARf BEctUSE OF DISCUSSJON W11L BE SCHEDULED FOR A I'V1VRE B<MRD MEE71NG.
BOARD CORRESPONDENCE
ADJOURN
BOARD WORKSHOP WITH PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT - ROOM B
A. LEVEL OF SERVICE CRITERIA AND ACCESS SPACING CRITERIA
PROPOSED IN THE TRANSPORTATION CHAPTER OF THE COMP PLAN
B. TURNBACK OF THE FOREST LAKE OUTLET DAM TO LOCAL UNITS
11:30 BOARD WORKSHOP WITH COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT - ROOM B
TO
12:15 CHANGES TO THE VULNERABLE ADULT MALTREATMENT REPORTING LAW
4:30 BOARD WORKSHOP WITH LEGISLATIVE DELEGATION - ROOM B
TO
6:30 1996 LEGISLATIVE ISSUES
***MEETING NOTICES LISTED ON BACK**
"you fIH{/ ...,.nc. dwto dl.tJiHty or ~ btmIer, pIN.. ".g 4>>6003 fTDD 43S-3220}
EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY I AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER
WASHINGTON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
CONSENT CALENDAR **
SEPTEMBER 26, 1995
~
,
DEPARTMENT/AGENCY
The following items are presented for Board approval/adoption:
ADMINISTRATION
AUDITOR-TREASURER
COMMUNITY SERVICES
HEALTH, ENVIRONMENT AND
AND LAND MANAGEMENT
HUHAN RESOURCES
INFORMATION SERVICES
PUBLIC WORKS
ITEM
e
A. APPROVAL OF THE SEPTEMBER 5 AND 12, 1995 BOARD MEETING MINUTES.
B. APPROVAL TO ADVERTISE FOR 1996 NEWSPAPER PUBLICATION OF COUNTY LEGAL NOTICES.
C. APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION AWARDING THE OFFICE SUPPLIES CONTRACT TO ST. PAUL BOOK
AND STATIONERY COMPANY FOR THE TIME PERIOD OF OCTOBER 1, 1995 THROUGH SEPTEMBER
30, 1996 WITH THE OPTION TO RENEW TWO CONSECUTIVE TWELVE MONTH TIME PERIODS.
D. APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION PER DNR REQUIREMENT FOR THE APPROVAL ON TAX-FORFEITED
LAND SALES.
E. APPROVAL OF APPLICATION BY GOVERNMENTAL SUBDIVISION FOR CONVEYANCE OF TAX-
FORFEITED LANDS FOR PARCELS 9270-7630, 9850-2005, 11221-6260 & 11221-6270, BY
CITY OF STILLWATER.
F. APPROVAL TO ISSUE AND RECEIVE REQUESTS FOR PROPOSALS FOR HOME CARE AND RELATED
SERVICES FOR CALENDAR 1996.
G. APPROVAL OF CONTRACT WITH STIVLAND, INC., DBA HARBOR SHELTER AND COUNSELING
CENTER FOR PERIOD OCTOBER 16, 1995 TO DECEMBER 31, 1996.
H. APPROVAL TO APPOINT RON E. DOCKERY TO FILL VACANCY ON THE PRIVATE INDUSTRY
COUNCIL FOR A TERM BEGINNING SEPTEMBER 26, 1995 THROUGH JUNE 30, 1996.
I. APPROVAL FOR COUNTY BOARD CHAIRMAN TO SIGN COVER LETTER FOR WASHINGTON COUNTY
WORKFORCE CENTER LOCAL INTEGRATION PLAN.
J. APPROVAL OF UPDATE TO PROGRAM YEAR 1995 (7/1/95 - 6/30/96) JOB TRAINING
PARTNERSHIP ACT (JTPA) LOCAL PLAN FOR EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING (LPET).
K. APPROVAL OF ADMINISTRATIVE AGREEMENT WITH RAMSEY COUNTY FOR ECONOMIC DISLOCATION
WORKERS ADJUSTMENT ASSISTANCE ACT.
L. APPROVAL OF MINNESOTA YOUTH WORKS/AHERICORPS PROGRAM GRANT IN THE AMOUNT OF
$71,225 TO OPERATE FROM 9/1/95 TO 8/31/96.
M. APPROVAL TO EXECUTE AGREEMENTS WITH THE CITIES OF BIRCHWooD AND OAKDALE AND
FOREST LAKE TOWNSHIP AND AUTHORIZE PAYMENTS FOR DISTRIBUTION OF CURBSIDE
RECYCLING FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $170,010.
N. APPROVAL OF CONTRACT RENEWAL FOR CONSULTING SERVICES WITH FRANK MADDEN &
ASSOCIATIONS; CONTRACT PERIOD FROM OCTOBER 1, 1995 THROUGH SEPTEMBER 30, 1996.
O. APPROVAL OF BANDING AND GRADING OF THE NEW JOB DESCRIPTION OF JAIL ADMINISTRATOR
IN THE SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT AT 061-1; APPROVAL OF JOB DESCRIPTION.
P. APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION AWARDING CONTRACT TO ENHANCED COMMUNICATIONS, INC. AS THE
LOW BIDDER FOR THE PURCHASE OF NEC SERIES III EQUIPMENT AND TRADE-IN OLD NEC
SERIES ONE EQUIPMENT.
Q. APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION, ACQUIRE RIGHT OF WAY AND EASEMENTS FOR THE IMPROVEMENT
OF CSAH 16 BETWEEN INTERLACHEN PARKWAY AND 800 FEET EAST OF ST. JOHN'S DRIVE IN
WOODBURY.
R. APPROVAL AND EXECUTION OF LEASE OF SPACE FOR OFFICE USE IN THE -OLD LUNCHROOM-
OF THE GOVERNMENT CENTER WITH UNIVERSAL TITLE AND EQUITY TITLE.
S. APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION, ENTER INTO A SIGNAL CONSTRUCTION AGREEMENT NO. 73999 AND
MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT NO. 74l30-R WITH HN/DOT AND EXECUTION OF SAID AGREEMENT.
T. APPROVAL OF AGREEMENT WITH NORTHERN STATES POWER FOR REMOVAL OF SLAG FILL FROM
COUNTY PROPERTY IN OAK PARK HEIGHTS.
.COllIOIll C_r itana ore ._11y der.....s .. itana of ........ bus...... not requirinc disculIIiaa. ond Ipprovcd in one vole. Conmiuioncn IDlY dcct to puB 0 ~ CoIcndor ilcm(s) for diocuoion ondIor ocporolC octioa.
* * * * . * * * * * * * * * * . * . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . * * . . . * * . * * .
Date
MEETING NOTICES
eo_itte.
Ti..
Location
sept. 26 Planning Advisory Commission 7 00 p.m.
Sept. 27 Met. Mosquito Control, Executive Committee 9 00 a.m.
Sept. 27 Solid Waste Management Coordinating Board 10 30 a.m.
Sept. 28 Resource Recovery Project Board Workshop 8 30 a.m.
Sept. 28 Resource Recovery Project Board Meeting 9 30 a.m.
Washington County Government Center
2099 University Ave. W - St. Paul
2099 university Ave. W. - St. Paul
6989 55th St. N., Suite C - Oakdale
6989 55th st. N., Suite C - Oakdale
e
\t
lI'l.
e
METRO MEETINGS
A weekly calendar of~ and agenda items roc the Metropolitan Council, its advisoty and standing committees, and three
regional commissioos: ~1itan Airports Commissioo, Metropolitan Paries and Open Space Commission, and Metropolitan
Sports Facilities Commission. Meeting times and agendas are occasiooally changed. Questions about meetings should be
directed to the apprqxiate organization Meeting information is also available on the Metro Information Line at 229-3780 and
by computer modem, through the Twin Cities Computer Network at 337-5400.
DATE:Sep~~15,1995
WEEK OF: Sep~~ 18 - Septem~ 22, 1995
METROPOLITAN COUNCIL
Transportation Committee - Monday, September 18, 4 p.m., Chambers. The committee will consider:
annual right-of-way acquisition loan fund program plan; Metro Mobility service agreements; dual track
airport briefing; change to five-year Transportation Improvement Program; solicitation package for ISTEA
funds; and other business.
Olair's Informal Breakfast Meeting with Council Members - Wednesday, September 20, 8 a.m.,
Sheraton-Midway, Bigelow's Restaurant, 1-94 at Hamline, St Paul.
Transportation Advisory Board - Wednesday, September 20, 2 p.m., Chambers. The board will consider:
development of five-year Transportation Improvement Program for 1997-2001; alternative regional growth
concepts; and other business. .
Ymanu Committee - Thursday, September 21, 4 p.m., Room 2A. The committee will consider: acceptance
of Metropolitan Council Comprehensive Annual Financial Report; acceptance of the 1994 management letter
to the state auditor; adoption of the goal for public/private partnerships; consideration of the Metropolitan
Sports Facilities Commission 1996 budget; The next portion of the meeting will be closed to the public
pursuant to MN Statutes Section 471.705 for discussion of labor negotiation issues. The meeting will be
reopened to the public following the discussion of labor negotiation issues. The committee will consider the
midyear 1995. budget report and other business.
Tour of RedevelopmentJReinvestment Sites-Downtown St. Paul and Arden Hills (for Council
members and local officials) - Friday, September 22, 8 a.m. - 1 p.m.
TENTATIVE MEETINGS THE WEEK OF SEPTEMBER 25 THROUGH SEPTEMBER 29, 1995
Blueprint Blue Ribbon Task Force - Monday, September 25, 2 p.m., Room lA.
Community Development Committee -Tuesday, September 26, 3 p.m., Room lA.
e
Joint Meeting/Community Development Committee & Environment Committee - Tuesday, September
26, 4 p.m., Room lA. The committees will discuss the Elm Creek cluster project progress report.
Executive Committee - Wednesday, September 27,8 am., Nicollet Island Inn, 95 Merriam St, Minneapolis.
Metropolitan Council- Thursday, September 28,4 p.m., Chambers.
Committee of the Whole - Thursday, September 28, immediately following the Council meeting, Room lA.
The Metropolitan Council is located at Mears Park Centre, 230 E. Fifth St, St Paul. Meeting times and
agenda are subject to change. For more information or confirmation of meetings, call 291-6447 , (TDD 291-
0904). Call the Metro Information Line at 229-3780 for news of Council actions and coming meetings.
e
METROPOLITAN SPORTS FAcn.ITIES COMMISSION
Capital Improvements Committee - Tuesday, September 19, 12:30 p.m., Commission conference room.
The committee will consider: contract award for 1995 sound system replacement project; Plaza Project
update; other 1996 projects; and other business.
Ymance Committee - Tuesday, September 19,2 p.m., Commission conference room. The committee will
consider: 1996 tax requirement; insurance review; Bloomington land sale; and other business.
Commission Meeting -Wednesday, September 20,9:30 am., Commission conference room. The committee
will consider: 1996 tax requirement; insurance review; Bloomington land sale update; Advisory Task. Force
on Professional Sports in Minnesota update; report on the legislative session; legislative representative
contracts; marketing plan; advertising update; sound system replacement project; Plaza Project update; other
1996 projects; and other discussion items.
The Metropolitan Sports Facilities Commission office is located at 900 South 5th St., Minneapolis, MN
55415. All meetings are held in the Commission office conference room, unless noted otherwise. Meeting
times and agendas occasionally may be changed. To verify meeting information, please call Judy Somers,
335-3310.
METROPOLITAN SPORTS FAcn.ITIES COMMISSION FOUNDATION
Foundation Meeting - Wednesday, September 20, 11 am., Commission cOnference room. The foundations
will consider: Astroturf project; budget; staffing; and other business.
The Metropolitan Sports Facilities Commission Foundation office is located at 900 South 5th St.,
Minneapolis, MN 55415.
METROPOLITAN AIRPORTS COMMISSION
Special Commission Meeting - Monday, September 18, 10 am., Room 303, West Me7.7anine, Lindbergh
Terminal Building, MinneapolislSt. Paul International Airport. The commission will discuss the development
of existing airports; Chicago O'Hare International, Pittsburgh International, and Sky Harbor Intemational in
Phoenix.
Special MeetingIPlanning and Environment Committee - Monday, September 18, 12:30 p.m., Room 303,
Lindbergh Terminal Building. The committee will consider: FIS lease funding update; contract bids received-
Runway 4/22 extension, upper level roadway canopy (general, curtainwall, mechanical and electrical), FIS
(caissons, structur~ steel and insulation removal); and acceptance of a grant offer. e
~
f
/
~
e
e
Commission Meeting - Monday, September 18, 1 p.m., Room 303, West Mezl.anine, Lindbergh Terminal
Building. The commission will consider: recommendation on airport leases; Dual Track Airport Planning
Process (ground access, supplemental airport study update, and remote runway study); briefing on .
congressional issues; St Paul Downtown Airport marketing plan; September ADNE levels; final contract
payments for Lindbergh Terminal 1995 mechanical modifications, Lindbergh Terminal miscellaneous
modifications, 1995 parking structure rehabilitation, and 1993-95 Part 150 Sound Insulation Program;
contract change orders; contract bids received for salt storage building modifications, 1995-96 Glycol
Recovery Program, New Ford TownlRich Acres asbestos abatement/demolition, and Part 150 Sound
Insulation Program August bid cycle; ratification of acceptance on grant offer; 1996-2002 Capital
Improvement Program; review of upcoming construction project bids; Budget Task Force update; Finance
Subcommittee update; discussion on request to revise public parking rates effective Oct. 1, 1995; bids
received for regional tenninal shuttle service; Flying Scotchman variance agreement; airport maintenance and
operations state aid agreements; bids received for gasoline and diesel fuel; bids received for ice control
materials (sand ,salt, urea and sodiwn formate); arbtritation award - fire fighters/fire drive operators; July
budget variance; initiation of Air Canada service; Heads Up; and other business.
Special Commission Meeting - Monday, September 18, 4 p.m., Ramsey Room, Minnesota Club, 317 North
Washington Ave., St Paul. The commission will hold a workshop on role/job of commissioners, cast study
example of MSP auto rental shuttle, and monthly meeting issues -location and facilities.
Metropolitan Airports Commission offices are located at 6040 28th Av. S., Minneapolis, MN 55450. For
more information, call Lynn Sorensen at 726-8186.
METROPOLITAN PARKS AND OPEN SPACE COMMISSION
Commission Meeting - Tuesday, September 19, 4 p.m., Chambers. The commission will consider the status
report on recreation research efforts and other business.
The Metropolitan Parks and Open Space Commission offices are located at Mears Park Centre, 230 E. Fifth
St, St. Paul, MN 55101. Meeting times and agendas occasionally may be changed. To verify meeting
information, please ca1l291-6363.
139/22/95
."
e
139:12
CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS ~ 61243913456
NO. 774
[;1131
~ l'r"
, AGENDA
CITt OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS
MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 25, 1995 -- 7:00 P.M.
7:00 AGENDA
I. Call To O~der
II. Visitor CommenteJ Oueeti~ns. or Con9~~n~
1. Ken Kaise~ - Approve Bids for Tree Removal
Enclosure 1 & lA
III.
2. Pam Hamre - 13887 56th St - River Hills Addition
Stormwa~er Holding Pond
O~partment RAports
1. Police i 3. Building
2. Utilities : 4. Parks
Enclosure 2, 2~, << 2B
IV. Unfinished Bu~:1.ness
1. Joint Ele~entary School/Park Proposal
v.
VI.
VII.
I
'e
5. Administration
6, Cable
I
2. City Logol
Enclosure 3 '
3. Newsletter Update
Enclosure 4 ;
4. update ~n: Design Review Committee
Review Mil'\ut'.es, - September 11. 1995
Enclosure 5
Public. Hearings
1. Request fpr Conditional Use Permit to Conduct
Outdoor Sales ~ Storage - 13481 North 60th Street - Ray
Bellargeon, J~ Rental
Enclosure 6 , 6A
New Eusiness I
1. Proposed Fire Station Report
Enclosure 7
2. Met Council - 1996 Sewer Estimates
Enclosure 8
3. Street Reconstruction Assessment - Establish a
Public Hearing:Oate
4. Deferred Assessment Policy
09/22/95
09: 12
CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS ~ 6124390456
NO. 774
~02
'"
5. ADA Cost Estimates
Enclosure 9
e
6. Resolution 95-09~41 - A Resolution Providing for
Payment of $230,000 by MNDOT to the City for it's Share
of Construction Costs on 58th Street
Enclosure 10
7. GOose Removal Proposal
Enclosure 11
VIII.
Carrespondence
1. Letter from MNDOT
Enolosure 12
2. State Board of Innovation - Public Forum
Enclosure 13
Adjournment:
e
.
e
e
Chair:
AQenda:
Minutes:
Treasurer:
Attornev:
Planner:
EnQineer:
Public Works:
Cleric
Committees:
People - 8:30 PM:
Old Business:
New Business:
Note:
Stillwater Township
September 28, 1995
Bergeron
7:30 p.m.
Regular Meeting
FYI
9/23/95
adopt
approve minutes - September 14, 1995
1. Report
2. Checks/claims
1. Update Rivard
1. Update DNR Application re: Twin Lakes
1. Update Overlay
1. Miscellaneous
1. Peace Officer
2. Oie Minor Subdivision
Pat Bantli
e
METRO MEETINGS
A weekly c:a1endar of meetings and agenda items for the Metropolitan Council, its advisory and standing committees, and three
regional commissioos: Metropolitan Airports Commission. Metropolitan Parks and Open Space Commission, and Metropolitan
Spxts Facilities ()wnmiBinn Meeting times and agendas are occ:asionally changed. Questions about meetings should be directed
to the appcpiatc UI~.i~ Meeting information is also available on the Metro Information Line at 229-3780 and by computer
modem. through the Twin Cities Computer Network at 337-5400.
DATE: September 22.1995
WEEK OF: September 25 - September 29.1995
METROPOLITAN COUNCIL
Blueprint Blue Ribbon Task Force - Monday, September 25, 2 p.m., Room lA The committee will
consider: review and discussion of work program for Blueprint Handbook; discussion and
recommendations to staff on draft of "Metropolitan COlmcil Guidelines for Reviewing Local
Comprehensive Plan Amendments"; and other business.
e
Community Development Committee -Tuesday, September 26, Noon, Room lA The committee
will consider: request to transfer $130,000 from Burlington Northern Regional Trail acquisition grant to
Burlington Northern Regional Trail development grant, city ofSt Paul; City of West St Paul land use
designation change on 7.6 acres from industrial to townhouse; city of Fridley land use designation
change on 14.5 acres from industrial to commercial; city of Eagan plan amendment, interchange access
modification request-central area; city of Eagan Yankee Doodle Corridor/central area transportation
improvements; 1995/1996 Section 8 utility allowance schedule; and other business.
Environment Committee - Tuesday, September 26, 3 p.m., Room lA The committee will consider:
city ofLakeland comprehensive plan amendment; city of Oak dale comprehensive plan amendment
(including the city of Landfall); Twin Cities Water Quality Initiative special project grant amendment;
and other business. Part n of the MissionlVision Workshop will also be held.
Executive Committee - Wednesday, September 27,8 a.m., Nicollet Island Inn, 95 Merriam St.,
Minneapolis.
Regional Issues Community Forom - Thursday, September 28, 8:30 - noon, New Brighton Family
Service Center, 400 10th St. NW, New Brighton.
Metropolitan Council - Thursday, September 28, 4 p.m., Chambers. The coWlcil will consider:
Metropolitan Radio Board 1996 budget; region-wide public safety radio communication system plan;
city ofLoretto comprehensive plan amendment on water supply plan; city of Forest Lake
comprehensive plan amendment on water supply plan; acceptance of Metropolitan COWlcil
comprehensive Annual Financial Report; acceptance of the 1994 management letter of the state
auditor, consideration of Metropolitan Sports Facilities Commission 1996 budget; declaration of
emergency and authorization to the regional administrator and general counsel to take certain actions in
order to ensure continued operation of the COWlcil because of the imminent likelihood of a strike by
Transit Operations employees; authorization to execute Amendment Number 1 to Professional Services
MCES contract number C-2645 with CH2M Hill Inc.; authorization for sole source procurement of
variable frequency drives for Hastings wastewater treatment plant; annual right-of-way Acquisition
Loan FWld Program plan; Metro Mobility service agreements; amendments to COWlcil Bylaws;
affinnation of COWlcil member committee assignments; and other business.
SPECIAL MEETING: Metropolitan Council - Thursday, September 28, 4:30 p.m or immediately
following the regular Council meeting, Room 2A, to discuss labor negotiations issues (this meeting may .
be closed to the public pursuant to MN Statutes Section 471. 705, subdivision la (1994).
*SpedaI Meeting: MetropoUtan Council'- Thursday, September 28,5:00 p.m (or immediately .-
following both the regular Metropolitan COWlcil meeting and a previously scheduled special meeting), ..
Room 2A, to discuss attomey-client privileged matters related to an investigation of allegations in an
employee complaint (this meeting may be closed to the public pursuant to MN Statutes Section
471.705, subdivision Id(e) abd Id(c)).
TENTATIVE MEETINGS THE WEEK OF OCTOBER 21HR.OUGH OCTOBER 6, 1995
Transportation Committee - Monday, Oct. 2, 4 p.m, Chambers.
Public HearingITo receive pubUe comment on the Proposed Regular Route Bus Fare Inerease
etTective Nov. 1, 1995 - Monday, Oct. 2, 5 p.m, Chambers.
Transportation Technical Advisory Committee to the Transportation Advisory Board -
Wednesday, Oct. 4, 9 am, Chambers.
Regional Issues Community Fonun - Thursday, Oct. 5, 8 am - noon, Eden Prairie City Center, 8080
Mitchell Rd., Eden Prairie.
Public HearingITo receive pubUe comment on the Proposed Regular Route Bus Fare Increase on
Nov. 1, 1995 - Thursday, Oct. 5, noon, Metropolitan Council Transit Operations Heywood Office
Building, 560 6th Av. N., Minneapolis.
F"mance Committee - Thursday, Oct. 5, 4 p.m, Room 2A
Metropolitan Radio Board - Friday, Oct. 6, 9 am, Metropolitan Mosquito Control District Office,
2099 University Ave., St Paul.
PubUc HearinglMetropolitan Radio Board 1996 Budget (as part of the Board meeting) - Friday,
Oct. 6,9 am, Metropolitan Mosquito Control District Office, 2099 University Ave., S1. Paul.
The Metropolitan Council is located at Mears Park Centre, 230 E. Fifth St, S1. Paul. Meeting times and
agenda are subject to change. For more information or confirmation of meetings, call 291-6447, (TDD
291-0904). Call the Metro Information Line at 229-3780 for news of Council actions and coming
meetings.
METROPOLITAN SPORTS FACILITIES COMMISSION
Commission Meeting - Monday, Sept. 25, 12:30 p.m., Room 400, State Offi~ Building, 100
Constitution Ave., St. Paul. This meeting is a continuation of the Sept. 20, 1995 meeting. The
commission will consider contract approval for sound-system replacement bids and an executive
session on the Piper Jaffray litigation.
Advisory Task Foree on Professional Sports in Minnesota - Monday, Sept. 25, 2 p.m., Room
5, State Office Building, 100 Constitution Ave., St. Paul. There will be a presentation by the
Minnesota Vikings Football Club.
The Metropolitan Sports Facilities Commission office is located at 900 South 5th St.,
Minneapolis, MN 55415. All meetings are held in the Commission office conference room, unless
noted otherwise. Meeting times and agendas occasionally may be changed. To verify meeting
information, please call Judy Somers, 335-3310.
e
.' ..
e
September 14, 1995
STILLWATER To.WN Bo.ARD MEETING
Town Hall
7:30. P.M.
PRESENT: Chairperson Louise Bergeron; Supervisors Jack Takemoto,
David Johnson, Jerry Hicks and David Francis. Also,
Planner Mike Gair, Treasurer Warren Erickson and Engineer
Paul Pearson.
1. AGENDA - M/S/P Francis/Takemoto moved to adopt the agenda as amended.
(5 ayes)
2. MINUTES - M/S/P Hicks/Takemoto moved to approve the 8/24/95 Stillwater
Town Board Meeting Minutes as written. (5 ayes)'
3. TREASURER-
1. Claims #552 - #574 were approved for payment.
2. The Budget Meetin~ will be held on o.ctober 9,
1995 at 7:30 p.m. in the Town Hall.
4. ATTo.RNEY-
1. M!S/P Hicks/Francis moved to direct the
Attorney. to appeal the judgment of the
B. Rivard ligation of 9/12/95. (5 ayes)
2. The Attorney is in receipt of the Jacobsen
Grading Permit.
3. M/S/P Hicks/Francis moved to approve the
1995-96 Recycling Contract with Washington
County. (5 ayes)
5. PLANNER-
1. M/S/P Johnson/Francis moved that the
Planning Commission consider an ordinance
that brings the Township 10. acre district
into compliance with the County (A-l Zoning
with mini~um lot size of 10. acre inclusive
of road right-of-way.) (5 ayes)
2. Mike Gair will talk to Mr. Leete of DNR about
plans to lower the levels of Twin Lakes.
6. MNDo.T REPo.RT - Representatives from MNDo.T present to talk about the
'revision of the County 5 and 36 interchange.
Township problems with 62nd Street when roads reworked was discussed.
Asked for support from MNDOT for clo.s'ing 62nd Street at that time.
7. RALEIGH MINING PERMIT RENEWAL - M/S/P Takemoto/Hicks Approved the
renewal of the R~leigh Mining Permit. (3 ayes)
.~ M/S/P Hicks/Takemoto Permit to be good until January 31, 1997. (3 ayes)
Stillwater Town Board Meeting - 9/14/95
P age ,.\'(0''>.
8. PUBLIC WORKS -
1. M/S/P Johnson/Takemoto moved to extend
Schifsky's overlay completion date from
September 17 to September 22, 1995.
(5 ayes)
2. A letter to be sent to Jane Harper such
t hat the Tow n s hip d i sag r e e s wi' t h the
County's Proposed Comprehensive Plan
where it is inconsistent with Township
Zoning.
3. S. Schwartz (Mendelmead Subdivision)
asked for no parking signs. Steve
Nelson will be asked to write tickets
for offending cars instead.
e
9. HOLIDAY MEETINGS CANCELLED -,M/S/P Johnson/Hicks moved that the 2nd
Board Meetings of November and December be cancelled due to the holidays.
(5 ayes)
10. HUNTERS RIDGE - The Planning Commission was not happy with the incomplete
information received for consideration. Asked for a professional to be
present at their meetings.
11. COST PARTICIPATION PLAN - Reported'that the County declined to consider
input that they requested from communities. Passed the plan as originally
presented.
12. WATER PROBLEMS - Reported that the solution to the Hugo flooding may
take several years to resolve. Comments made the effect that Browns Creek
WAMO needs some strengthening.
13. ADJOURNMENT - Meeting adjourned at 10:35 p.m.
Clerk
Chairperson
Approved
e