Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009-10-12 CPC PacketI Iwater T HMV 10 P STILLWATER PLANNING COMMISSION NOTICE OF MEETING MONDAY, October 12, 2009 The City of Stillwater Planning Commission will meet on Monday, October 12, 2009, at 7 p.m. in the Council Chambers at Stillwater City Hall, 216 North Fourth Street. City of Stillwater Planning Commission regular meetings are held at 7 p.m on the second Monday of each month. All City Planning Commission meetings are open to the public. 1. CALL TO ORDER AGENDA 2. APPROVAL OF SEPTEMBER 12, 2009 MINUTES 3. OPEN FORUM The Open Forum is a portion of the Commission meeting to address subjects which are not a part of the meeting agenda. The Commission may reply at the time of the statement or may give direction to staff regarding investigation of the concerns expressed. Out of respect for others in attendance, please limit your comments to 5 minutes or less 4. PUBLIC HEARINGS. The Chairperson opens the hearing and will ask city staff to provide background on the proposed item. The Chairperson will ask for comments from the applicant, after which the Chairperson will then ask if there is anyone else who wishes to comment. Members of the public who wish to speak will be given 5 minutes and will be requested to step forward to the podium and must state their name and address. At the conclusion of all public testimony the Commission will close the public hearing and will deliberate and take action on the proposed item. 4.01 Case No. 09-38. A located at 12525 75th applicant. Continued 4.02 Case No. 09-39. A 437 Broadway Street Newman, applicant. special use permit amendment for an 88 unit senior care facility Street North in the RB, Two Family residential District. Greg Johnson, from September 14, 2009 Planning Commission Meeting. variance request for an addition on a nonconforming lot located at South in the RB, Two Family Residential District. David and Kathleen 4.03 Case No. 09-41. A variance request for an addition on a residence located at 422 Elm Street West in the RB, Two Family Residential District. Brian Larson, Larson Brenner Architects, representing Terence Acers, applicant. 4.04 Case No. 09-42. A variance request for an addition on a nonconforming lot located at 1306 5th Street South in the RB, Two Family Residential District. Oliver Vrambout, applicant. 5. OTHER BUSINESS CITY HALL: 216 NORTH FOURTH STREET • STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 55082 PHONE: 651-430-8800 • WEBSITE: www.ci.stillwater.mn.us City of Stillwater Planning Commission September 11, 2009 Present: Vice Chair Dahlquist, Suzanne Block, Robert Gag, Dan Kalmon and Mike Kocon Staff present: Planner Mike Pogge Absent: John Malsam, Dave Middleton, Scott Spisak and Charles Wolden Vice Chair Dahlquist called the meeting to order at 7 p.m. Approval of minutes: Ms. Block moved approval of the minutes of Aug. 10, 2009. Mr. Kocon seconded the motion; motion passed unanimously. OPEN FORUM No comments were received. PUBLIC HEARINGS Case No. 09-34 A special use permit request for a single -person salon in a residence at 1112 Myrtle St. W. in the RB, Two Family Residential District. Beau and Karen Leslie, applicants. Mr. Pogge reviewed the request and staff findings. He noted there are 12 conditions that must be met for the issuance of a type II home occupation special use permit. He stated the applicants have agreed to meet all of the conditions, and staff recommends approval. He noted there was one letter, from Linda Saveland, that expressed opposition to the issuance of the permit in the agenda packet. The applicants were present. Ms. Leslie responded to Ms. Saveland's letter, stating traffic will not be an issue as she only has one client at a time and they have a driveway for off-street parking, as well as one parking spot in front of their residence. Mr. Leslie said the intent is to run a low-key business. Mr. Dahlquist opened the public hearing. No comments were received, and the hearing was closed. Mr. Kocon said, based on his experience living on a cul-de-sac with two similar businesses, he did not believe there will be any adverse affect on the neighborhood and moved approval as conditioned. Ms. Block seconded the motion; motion passed unanimously. Case No. 09-35 A variance request to the front yard setback for construction of a porch at 506 Laurel St. W. in the RB, Two Family Residential District. Timothy and Julie Schmolke, applicants. Mr. Pogge reviewed the request, noting that an allowance should be given for the step off the porch. He reviewed the three criteria that must be met for issuance of a variance and staff findings in favor of the application. The applicants were present. Mr. Schmolke noted they are just the second owners of the home which was constructed in 1885. He stated they are currently renovating the house, including the addition of a porch which requires the setback variance, to accommodate their growing family of seven children and now two grandchildren. Mr. Dahlquist opened the public hearing. No comments were received, and the hearing was closed. Mr. Kocon moved approval as conditioned, including the additional condition suggested by Mr. Pogge that the step of the porch be allowed to encroach up to 4 feet into the required front yard setback. Mr. Kalmon seconded the motion; motion passed unanimously. Case No. 09-36 Final plat and final PUD approval for 13 single-family lots and 14 townhouse lots for Millbrook 4th Addition. US Home Corporation, Joe Jablonski, applicant. 1 City of Stillwater Planning Commission September 11, 2009 The applicant was not present. Mr. Pogge reviewed the site and the two conditions of approval that the trail access to relocated to the western edge of lot 13, a condition the applicant has agreed to, and that the applicant submit evidence the DNR has approved the PUD amendment. Mr. Pogge suggested that if the Commission wished to add language regarding the extension of the trail to Maureen Lane that condition be added at this time; Mr. Pogge noted that staff would not recommend requiring completion of the trail extension until after the townhome development has been finished due to the likelihood the trail would be damage during construction. Mr. Kalmon asked about the various conditions listed in the staff report, some of which have been met and some of which have not been met. Mr. Pogge noted those conditions relate to other portions of the Millbrook development, some of which cannot be met at this time. Ms. Block asked about status of the development of the major park, noting there is a condition that a soil stockpile at the park must be removed by March 31, 2010. Mr. Pogge stated the City is still negotiating with the developer regarding installation of irrigation for the park; if the developer agrees to do that, the City would then take over turf development and maintenance. Mr. Pogge stated the soil stockpile will still have to be removed by March 31 of next year, but suggested it might be several years before the park is developed. Mr. Gag asked if the aesthetics of the development would change from what was presented to the Commission most recently; Mr. Pogge said the aesthetics would not change, pointing out that the most recent change added several housing styles. Mr. Dahlquist opened the public hearing. No comments were received, and the hearing was closed. Ms. Block wondered whether the Commission should add language regarding the trail extension. Mr. Pogge suggested possible language -- the trail must be extended at the time of park improvements, if not sooner. Mr. Dahlquist pointed out that the trail will not lead to anything until Maureen Lane is extended/completed and suggested it does make sense not to require extension of the trail at this time. After additional discussion, Mr. Gag moved to approve the final plat and PUD for Millbrook 4th Addition with the two conditions of approval and the added condition that the trail for the 4th Addition must be extended to Maureen Lane upon development of the park, if not sooner. Ms. Block seconded the motion; motion passed unanimously. Case No. 09-37 A special use permit for an accessory dwelling unit at 315 Olive St. W. in the RB, Two Family Residential District. Mark Balay Architects, representing Jeff Anderson and Greg Stokes, applicant. Mark Balay and Greg Stokes were present. Mr. Pogge reviewed the 10 conditions for issuance of a special use permit for an accessory dwelling unit, noting that this application meets all 10 conditions. He stated the HPC had reviewed and approved the proposed design. Mr. Dahlquist asked about condition regarding roof styles and siding. Mr. Pogge stated the roof lines of the proposed accessory structure do a good job of mimicking the roof lines of the main structure. Mr. Pogge noted there is a condition that the siding of the accessory structure be a lap style similar to the main structure. Mr. Kalmon asked about overall impervious surface coverage; Mr. Pogge stated the total impervious surface coverage is well under the maximum allowable. Mr. Dahlquist opened the public hearing. Judy Lacy, 318 W. Olive St., stated a variance was granted in November 2005 for construction of a porch. She stated the original porch was torn down but a new porch never constructed and the front of the home has been left with wires hanging, etc. for four years. She provided photos of the house in its current condition for the record. She suggested that if the applicant wants to build another structure, it be made a condition of approval that the applicant complete the project approved by the previous variance. Ms. Lacy also stated she wants assurance that the new accessory structure can't be rented on a daily basis and become another building for the Rivertown Inn. 2 City of Stillwater Planning Commission September 11, 2009 Richard Kilty, 118 W. Oak St., asked whether the proposed structure was a garage or dwelling unit. Mr. Dahlquist pointed out the structure is a garage with a dwelling unit above. No other comments were received, and the hearing was closed. Mr. Balay responded to Ms Lacy's comments, stating he had been commissioned to do drawings for both the porch and the accessory unit; building permits will be obtained for both projects, and, he said, the intention is to build both structures at the same time. Mr. Balay pointed out that due to changes in the City's ordinance, a variance is no longer needed for construction of the porch; Mr. Pogge affirmed that is the case. Mr. Balay also stated the intention is to rent the accessory unit, a studio apartment, for no less than a month at a time; it was noted daily rental would not be allowable according to City ordinance. Ms. Block asked when work on the projects might begin and end. Mr. Balay said he expects footings to be poured before frost, with framing in early winter. Mr. Pogge asked when substantial completion might be expected; Mr. Balay responded likely by next spring. Mr. Gag moved approval of the accessory dwelling unit special use permit with the four conditions of approval and encouraging the applicant to have substantial completion of the porch simultaneous with the accessory dwelling unit. Mr. Kocon seconded the motion; motion passed unanimously. Case No. 09-38 A special use permit amendment for an 88-unit senior care facility at 12525 75th St. N. in the RB, Two Family Residential District. Greg Johnson, applicant. Mr. Pogge stated the applicant is working on some final project details and has requested that this case be tabled until the next Commission meeting. Because the tabling of the case was not announced at the beginning of the meeting, Mr. Dahlquist accepted comments from the public. Don McKenzie, 12625 72nd St. N., said he understood the project is now to be completed in two phases and wondered whether the previously agreed upon landscaping measures and installation of utilities at the south border of the project would be done in phase 1 or delayed to phase 2. Mr. Pogge said he would check into those questions and get back to Mr. McKenzie. No other comments were received. Mr. Kocon, seconded by Mr. Kalmon, moved to table Case No. 09-38; motion passed unanimously. Ms. Block, seconded by Mr. Kalmon, moved to adjourn at 8 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Sharon Baker Recording Secretary 3 Planning Report DATE: September 29, 2009 CASE NO.: 09-38 APPLICANT: Greg Johnson, Director, Select Companies LANDOWNER: Lenard and Betty Huebscher REQUEST: 1) SUP for an 88 unit assisted living and memory loss facility 2) Amend Development Agreement for SELECT SENIOR LIVING OF STILLWATER 3) Amend Resolution 2008-184 approving the Final Plat for SELECT SENIOR LIVING OF STILLWATER LOCATION: 12525 - 75th Street (Co. Rd. 12) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: SFSL, Single Family Small Lot Residential ZONING: Base Zoning - RB, Two -Family Residential Overlay Zoning - Lakeshore Management (Long Lake) REVIEWERS: City Engineer, City Planner PREPARED BY: Bill Turnblad, Community Development Director V BACKGROUND Greg Johnson of Select Companies is planning to develop an 88 unit assisted living and memory loss facility on Co. Rd. 12 just east of Rutherford Elementary School. The senior care facility is to be known as Select Sr. Living of Stillwater. The 88 units would include 36 for memory loss and 52 for assisted living. These would be built in two phases. Phase I would be a two-story structure with 20 memory loss units and 20 assisted living units. Phase II would be a three-story addition that will include 16 more memory loss units and 32 more assisted living units. Infrastructure improvements are proposed to be constructed in two phases as well. The improvements include: 1) a platted public street that would align with Minar Avenue and temporarily terminate at the southern property line of the site; 2) extension of sanitary sewer and municipal water; 3) stormwater improvements; 4) a public trail along the new public street; and 5) a public trail connecting to the trail along Minar Avenue with the trail along Co. Rd. 12. Select Sr. Living September 29, 2009 Page 2 of 10 The City has already approved a 101 unit senior living facility for this property. Specific approvals for the project included: 1. Special Use Permit (SUP) for a 101 unit senior living facility to be located within the Lakeshore Management District of Long Lake and within the RB, Two Family Residential and the LR, Lakeshore Residential Zoning Districts, per Resolution No. 2008-124 (adopted Sept 16, 2008); 2. Final Plat for SELECT SENIOR LIVING OF STILLWATER, per Resolution No. 2008-184 (adopted December 16, 2008); 3. Rezoning of the property from AP, Agricultural Preservation to RB, Two Family Residential, per Ordinance No. 1003 (adopted Jan 20, 2009)1; and 4. Development Agreement for SELECT SENIOR LIVING OF STILLWATER, per Resolution No. 2009-27 (adopted Feb 3, 2009). The 101 unit facility will not be constructed. In its place an 88 unit facility is proposed. To proceed with the 88 unit project: 1) a new SUP is required; 2) the Development Agreement needs to be amended; 3) the Resolution approving the final plat for SELECT SENIOR LIVING OF STILLWATER needs to be amended. The rezoning that was approved for the first facility is still valid and does not need to be revised. SPECIFIC REQUEST In order to develop the senior care project as revised, a number of approvals have been requested of the. City, including: 1) Approve a Special Use Permit for the 88 unit senior living facility in the Lakeshore Management Overlay District and the RB, Two -Family Residential zoning district; and 2) Amend the Development Agreement to allow phased improvements and a reduction of park and trail dedication fees; and 3) Amend Resolution 2008-184 by replacing the site plan and building plans for the previous 101 unit project with the plans for the current 88 unit project. EVALUATION OF REQUEST I. SPECIAL USE PERMIT A senior care facility is allowed by SUP in the lakeshore management overlay district, the RB zoning district and the LR zoning district. Sec. 31-207(d) of the City Code states that a Special Use Permit can be approved if the city finds (A) through (C) below to be satisfied: (A) The proposed use conforms to the requirements and the intent of the zoning ordinance, the comprehensive plan, and any relevant area plans. ZONING ORDINANCE A. Minimum Standards Lot standards Ord. 1003 specifies that the property shall be zoned RB, Two Family Residential until the new comprehensive plan is adopted, whereupon the zoning will automatically change to LR, Lakeshore Residential. Select Sr. Living September 29, 2009 Page 3 of 10 Minimum lot standards for the RB Zoning District are compared below with the lot dimensions proposed by the developer. As can be seen, all minimum standards are met. Lot Standards Area Width Frontage Depth Required 7,500 s.f. 50' 35' 100' Lot 1, Bl 1 ca. 5.3 acres 652' 425' 289' Lot 1, Bl 2 ca. 5.0 acres 471' 942' 380' Setbacks The minimum building setbacks required in the RB Zoning District are compared below with the proposed setbacks for the senior living facility. Setbacks From C.R. 12 From South From West From Minar Required 100' 25' 25' 20' Proposed 103' 35' 243' 93' Miscellaneous Zoning Standards Impervious surface 25% allowed2 24.2% proposed' Maximum building height 35' allowed +35'proposed The proposed facility runs into difficulties with both of the miscellaneous standards. The impervious surface coverage for the project exceeds 25% of the lot area. Consequently, the developer is requesting peinrission to construct the trails with pervious bituminous. Both of the project's trail segments would become public (the stretch along Minar Avenue from C.R. 12 to the southern property line, as well as the segment from Minar Avenue along the south of the facility to C.R. 12), therefore the core question here is whether the City is willing to accept the costs and unknowns associated with maintaining pervious bituminous trails. The City Engineer recommends against using pervious pavement for the trails. Instead he suggests that a portion of the parking lot be put into pervious pavement. The exact height of the building is difficult to determine from the plans that were submitted. It appears that the three-story phase of the building is slightly taller than 35 feet. Since 35 feet is the maximum allowed building height, either the building design must be altered slightly, or a height variance would have to be requested. Hopefully, this issue can be addressed by the building owner prior to the public hearing at the Planning Commission meeting. B. Parking The senior care industry evolves so rapidly that the City Zoning Ordinance does not have a specific requirement for the proposed facility. There are specific requirements for "boardinghomes for the aged", "institutions for the aged", and "nursing homes". The parking requirement for each of these is one space for each five residents plus a space for each employee on the largest shift. This parking standard recognizes that the residents 2 Maximum impervious coverage is limited to 25% in the Lakeshore Management District. This includes the 14 Phase II stalls, which are being referred to in this memo as "proof of parking" since they may not be necessary. Select Sr. Living September 29, 2009 Page 4 of 10 are not driving and do not need personal parking spaces. These facilities only need visitor and employee parking. The proposed senior living facility is not a nursing home per se. But, the residents will none the less not be driving. Memory loss residents will live in 36 of the units and assisted living residents will be in the other 52 units. So it makes sense to apply the nursing home standard of one parking space for each five units. This would require 18 spaces. The building owner believes that another 25 spaces would be needed for staff, deliveries and visitors. The total would therefore be 43 spaces. 46 spaces are proposed with an additional 14 parking spaces shown for Phase II construction. City staff would prefer to consider these 14 spaces to be "proof of parking" spaces. They should be constructed only if absolutely required. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The Comprehensive Plan's housing chapter encourages providing a range of housing opportunities for the aging and elderly. One tool identified for doing this is through the zoning ordinance, which allows higher density senior residential facilities by SUP in several of the City's single family zoning districts. The current Comprehensive Plan's future land use map guides the subject property for SFSL, Single Family Small Lot development. The 2030 Comprehensive Plan that is currently going through Metropolitan Council review guides the property for SFLL, Single Family Large Lot development. Zoning districts that are consistent with both of these development classifications allow the proposed senior living facility by SUP. (B) Any additional conditions necessary for the public interest have been imposed. Architectural design — The project site is not located within a historic residential neighborhood, downtown, or the West Business Park. Therefore, no architectural standards are mandated, nor is a review by the Heritage Preservation Commission required. None the less, architectural design is important to the City and its residents. So, the Planning Commission should review the exterior design. Compared with the 101 unit building, the current 88 unit proposal is less imposing as viewed from Co. Rd. 12, from the south or from the east. From these perspectives, much of the building has been reduced from three stories to two stories. Moreover, the view from the neighbors to the south is not only reduced from three stories to two, but the walk -out basement level has been eliminated. So, what previously looked like four floors would now only be two floors. Seen from the west, the building continues to be three stories high as previously. Visually, all four facades are made interesting with architectural elements such as gables, vertical projecting elements, shadow lines, and a mix of materials. Exterior materials include brick, vinyl lap siding, vinyl shake siding, and asphalt shingles. The colors of these materials have not been submitted yet. A color rendering of the elevations should be submitted before the Planning Commission passes the case on to the City Council with a recommendation. Lighting — A lighting plan has not yet been submitted. This should be required before the Planning Commission makes a recommendation to the City Council on the case. Select Sr. Living September 29, 2009 Page 5 of 10 (C) The use or structure will not constitute a nuisance or be detrimental to the public welfare or the community. This is a fairly subjective standard. It could include such items as parking, traffic, lighting, land use conflicts, impact upon surrounding properties, impact upon the environment, impact upon public and private infrastructure, etc. Staff is not aware of any issues that would constitute a nuisance or be detrimental to the public welfare or the community. However, a landscape plan has not been submitted yet. And, since landscaping is an important element of a site design, especially to surrounding property owners, a landscape plan should be submitted before the Planning Commission passes the case on to the City Council with a recommendation. MISCELLANEOUS The conditions of the original SUP have been fulfilled. However, the specific list of plans for the 88 unit building will have to be included in the new SUP. The original conditions are: The site shall be developed in substantial conformance with the following plans on the Community Development Department: • Proposed Layout Plan • Proposed Grading Plan • Proposed Utility Plan • Proposed Lighting Plan • Proposed Landscape Plan • Proposed First Floor Plan • Proposed Garage Floor Plan • Second Floor Plan • Proposed Third Floor Plan • Proposed Front Elevation Note: The plan set for the 88 unit building will need to be listed in place of the former plans. 2. The Special Use Peiiuit shall not become effective until the DNR approves a City Code amendment allowing senior care living facilities as a specially pettiiitted use in the Shoreland Management Overlay District. Note: This condition has been fulfilled. 3. The Special Use Permit shall not become effective until the City Council approves a code amendment allowing senior care living facilities as a specially permitted use in the LR district. Note: This condition has been fulfilled. 1 • file with II. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT dated 9/4/08 dated 9/12/08 dated 9/12/08 dated 9/12/08 dated 9/4/08 dated 7/18/08 dated 7/18/08 dated 7/18/08 dated 7/18/08 dated 7/18/08 The public and private improvements for the project are proposed for construction in two phases rather than all at once. Moreover, with fewer units, the trail and park dedication fees could be reduced. Therefore, the Development Agreement for the property will need to be amended. 1. Construction Phasing Select Sr. Living September 29, 2009 Page 6 of 10 The attached construction phasing plan identifies which of the site improvements are proposed by the owner to be completed during the first phase of development, and which are proposed for the second phase. Phase I items include: construction of a city road to the point where the church driveway accesses Minar Avenue; construction of all stormwater improvements; extension of sanitary sewer and municipal water improvements from their current location up to the senior facility; construction of 46 parking spaces; construction of the two story portion of the senior facility (40 units). Phase II items include: completion of city street to southern property line; extension of municipal water and sewer for the church, parsonage, and properties to the south; construction of the remaining 14 parking stalls, if necessary; construction of trails; and construction of the three story portion of the building (48 units). The Public Works Depailnient has reviewed the civil engineering plans and phasing request and offers the following comments: • Minar Avenue should be built to City standards (including curb and gutter) from County 12 all the way to the southern property line during Phase I. The bituminous section must be 12" granular borrow (or approved subgrade), 6" Class 5 aggregate base, 2" bituminous base, .and 2" bituminous wear. Concrete B618 curb and gutter must be installed. • The entire length of the bituminous pathway along Minar should be installed during Phase I. The east -west trail segment could be constructed in Phase II if found satisfactory to the Park Commission and the City Council. • The water main should be extended to the south property line during Phase I. Three gate valves will be required- one at the wet tap connection point, one at the 8-inch service into the Select Senior Property, and one on the main just south of the Select Senior service. • Sanitary sewer should extend to the south end of Minar Avenue during Phase I (at a minimum). If the relocated parsonage is to be occupied prior to completion of Phase II improvements, then the sanitary sewer should be extended all the way to the parsonage during Phase I construction. (If the septic system for the church can be sized to accommodate the addition of the relocated parsonage, then sanitary sewer extension would not be necessary during Phase I). • A signed sanitary sewer easement from the School District will be required prior to release of the Final Plat for recording at Washington County. The impact of the project on Co. Rd. 12 is reduced by eliminating the independent living units. Therefore, Washington County is reviewing the proposal again to determine if the improvements to the county road will still be required. 2. Park and Trail Dedication Park dedication fee. Since neither the assisted living, nor the memory loss residents will use parks frequently, the Park Commission and City Council agreed to waive the $1,500 fee for each of these unit types when the 101 unit facility was approved. For the independent living units a 50% park dedication fee was charged ($750 each). If the City uses the same formula for these revised plans, then there would be no park dedication fee, Select Sr. Living September 29, 2009 Page 7 of 10 since there are no independent living units in this version. The Park Commission and City Council will need to review this item. Trail Dedication Fee In addition to the park dedication fee, a trail dedication fee is also required if a trail is not to be built and dedicated to the public. In this project a public trail is proposed along Minar Avenue and across the senior living lot. The cost of public trail construction should be deducted from the required trail dedication fee. As with the park dedication fee, it is unlikely that the impact of the project's residents upon the trail system will be in the same order of magnitude as a standard apartment building. Therefore, the Park Commission and Council charged a trail fee based upon projected usage: memory loss = 0%; assisted living = 25%; and independent living = 100%. If the City uses the same percentages for this revised project, then there would be a $6,500 trail fee (0.25 X $500 X 52 assisted living units). The Park Commission and City Council will need to review this item. III. FINAL PLAT RESOLUTION 2008-184 All of the conditions of the Final Plat resolution of approval would still remain in effect except: 1) the plans for the 101 unit project will need to be replaced with the plans for the current 88 unit facility, and 2) the County may not require turn lanes for this version. The conditions of Final Plat approval are: 1. The site shall be developed in substantial conformance with the following plans on file with the Community Development Department, except as may be modified by the conditions herein: a. Layout Plan Revision date 12/9/08 b. Erosion Control Plan Revision date 12/9/08 c. Grading Plan Revision date 12/9/08 d. Utility Plan Revision date 12/9/08 e. Lighting Plan Revision date 12/9/08 f. Landscape Plan Revision date 12/22/08 g. Site Plan Dated 7/18/08 h. Garage Floor Plan Dated 10/17/08 i. First Floor Plan Dated 10/17/08 j. Second Floor Plan Dated 10/17/08 k. Third Floor Plan Dated 10/17/08 1. North Elevation Dated 7/18/08 m. Tree Removal Plan Dated 12/12/08 2. The final engineering plans shall be found satisfactory to the City Engineer prior to release of the Final Plat. 3. The five trees marked in the attachment entitled "Tree Exhibit" shall be transplanted to locations found acceptable to both the City Engineer and the property owners. In addition, the developer shall guarantee that these trees will be replaced by the developer with the same tree species at a size of at least 2.5" DBH if within two years they die for causes related to the transplanting. 4. A pei nianent utility easement shall be created for the sanitary sewer main that will run along the elementary school property to the west of the subject plat. It shall be in a form and with content found satisfactory to the City Attorney and the Public Works Director. Said easement shall be fully executed and submitted to the City prior to release of the Final Plat for recording with Washington County. The easement shall be located in such a way as to minimize the removal of existing mature trees. Select Sr. Living September 29, 2009 Page 8 of 10 5. Prior to release of the Final Plat for recording with Washington County, a park dedication fee and trail fee in amounts found satisfactory to the City Council shall be submitted to the City. 6. All electrical and communications utility lines shall be buried. 7. Trout Stream Mitigation fees, Transportation Mitigation fees, and sewer and water fees will be due and payable prior to release of the Final Plat for recording with Washington County, or prior to issuance of a building permit, whichever occurs first. 8. The developer shall construct turn lanes on County Road 12. The plans for these turn lanes shall be approved by the County Engineer and a copy of the approved plans shall be submitted to the City prior to release of the Final Plat for recording. The cost of these improvements, as estimated by the City Engineer, shall be credited against the City's Transportation Mitigation Fee. 9. Prior to release of the plat for recording with the County, the City shall receive a letter from the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources stating that the developer may proceed with the project. ALTERNATIVES A. Approval If the Planning Commission finds the proposed project to meet the City's review standards, it could recommend that the City Council approve the requests with the following conditions: 1. The site shall be developed in substantial conformance with the following plans on file with the Community Development Department, except as may be modified by the conditions herein: a) b) c) d) e) fl g) h) i) J) k) Layout Plan C2.1 Grading Plan C3.2 Utility Plan C4.1 Site Plan A1.1 First Floor Plan A2.1 Second Floor Plan A2.2 Third Floor Plan A2.3 North & South Elevations A3.1 East & West Elevations A3.2 Construction Phasing Plan Tree Removal Plan Revision date 9/20/09 Revision date 9/20/09 Revision date 9/20/09 Dated 8/21/09 Dated 8/21/09 Dated 8/21/09 Dated 8/21/09 Dated 8/21/09 Dated 8/21/09 Revision date 9/20/09 Dated 12/12/08 2. The trails must be constructed of impervious bituminous. In order to satisfy the 25% maximum impervious surface standard in the lakeshore management district, the appropriate portion of the parking lot must be constructed of a pervious material with a design found satisfactory to the City Engineer. 3. The height of the facility must not exceed 35 feet. Either the building design must be altered slightly to maintain that height limit, or a height variance would have to be requested by the property owner and approved by the Planning Commission. 4. The additional 14 parking spaces identified by the property owner for Phase II construction must be considered "proof of parking" spaces. They should only be constructed if operations of the facility routinely create a larger demand than the first phase of parking lot construction can support. 5. Color renderings of the elevations must be submitted to the City before the Planning Commission passes the case on to the City Council with a recommendation. 6. A lighting plan must be submitted to the City before the Planning Commission passes the case on to the City Council with a recommendation. 7. A landscape plan must be submitted to the City before the Planning Commission passes the case on to the City Council with a recommendation. Select Sr. Living September 29, 2009 Page 9 of 10 8. Minar Avenue must be built to City standards (including curb and gutter) from County 12 all the way to the southern property line during Phase I. Construction standards for the street shall be found satisfactory to the City Engineer. 9. The entire length of the bituminous pathway along Minar must be installed during Phase I. The east -west trail segment could be constructed in Phase II if found satisfactory to the Park Commission and the City Council. 10. The water main must be extended to the south property line during Phase I. Construction details shall be found satisfactory to the City Engineer. 11. The sanitary sewer must be extended to the south end of Minar Avenue during Phase I (at a minimum). If the relocated parsonage is to be occupied prior to completion of Phase II improvements, then the sanitary sewer must be extended to serve the parsonage during Phase I construction. (If the septic system for the church can be sized to accommodate the addition of the relocated parsonage, then sanitary sewer extension may not be necessary during Phase I). 12. The final engineering plans must be found satisfactory to the City Engineer prior to release of the Final Plat for recording with Washington County. 13. The five trees marked in the attachment entitled "Tree Exhibit" must be transplanted to locations found acceptable to both the City Engineer and the property owners. In addition, the developer must guarantee that these trees will be replaced by the developer with the same tree species at a size of at least 2.5" DBH if within two years they die for causes related to the transplanting. 14. A permanent utility easement must be created for the sanitary sewer main that will run along the elementary school property to the west of the subject plat. It must be in a form and with content found satisfactory to the City Attorney and the Public Works Director. Said easement must be fully executed and submitted to the City prior to release of the Final Plat for recording with Washington County. The easement must be located in such a way as to minimize the removal of existing mature trees. 15. A park dedication fee and trail fee in amounts found satisfactory to the City Council must be submitted to the City Prior to release of the Final Plat for recording with Washington County. 16. All electrical and communications utility lines must be buried. 17. Trout Stream Mitigation fees, Transportation Mitigation fees, and sewer and water fees will be due and payable prior to release of the Final Plat for recording with Washington County, or prior to issuance of a building permit, whichever occurs first. 18. If required by Washington County, the developer must construct turn lanes on County Road 12. The plans for these turn lanes must be approved by the County Engineer and a copy of the approved plans must be submitted to the City prior to release of the Final Plat for recording. The cost of these improvements, as estimated by the City Engineer, must be credited against the City's Transportation Mitigation Fee. 19. The City must receive a letter from the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources stating that the developer may proceed with the project prior to release of the Final Plat for recording with the County. B. Table If the Planning Commission finds that additional information is required to determine if the proposed project meets the City's review standards, it should table the case until November 9, 2009. C. Denial If the Planning Commission finds that the proposed project does not meet the City's review standards, it could recommend that the City Council deny the requests. If denial is recommended, findings to substantiate the recommendation must be given. Select Sr. Living September 29, 2009 Page l0 of 10 RECOMMENDATION If colored building elevations, a landscaping plan and a lighting plan are submitted prior to the Planning Commission meeting and found satisfactory to city staff and the Planning Commission, then staff would recommend approval with the nineteen conditions listed above. cc Greg Johnson Molly Shodeen, DNR Area Hydrologist Rich Munson, DBA Attachments: Location & Zoning Map Layout Plan Final plat Grading Plan Utility Plan Construction Phasing Plan Applicant's narrative Tree Exhibit Site Plan Floor Plans Building Elevations City of 4 ter Community Development Department Select Sr Living Zoning & Location Map ,4\44,k , ,pNE- NCR, \4,. R.MSTR. NG1TH- NN2TFf 14 \ -MIlYR se NUE- 411 . :IN' 11F16121511FillF !/STN- rkEET- ,,TH '� ./mil (° t, I te% . � � PINH �• �%Oa.".►iosv .� ryai-STBSET ,I oPv.� 4rB€T. 6 Zoning Districts A-P, Agricultural Preservation RA - Single Family Residential RB - Two Family TR, Traditional Residential LR, Lakeshore Residential CR, Cottage Residential CTR, Cove Traditional Residential CCR, Cove Cottage Residential 11111 CTHR, Cove Townhouse Residential TH, Townhouse RCM - Medium Density Residential owl RCH - High Density Residential VC, Village Commercial CA - General Commercial CBD - Central Business District BP-C, Business Park - Commercial BP-O, Business Park - Office BP -I, Business Park - Industrial IB - Heavy Industrial CRD - Campus Research Development MI PA - Public Administration � S 1 --INTERE4C 75TH VE - I l I1 1I 1 1 Township Public Works Facility ROAD MN Railroad WATER 1 I n lMO IMAM/In SELECT COMPANIES Folz, F comas., Erickson, Inc. L ° 1 11 1 n ,� LAYOUT PLAN + a SELECT SENOR WING OF STLLWATER 12415 55TH ST. N.rae IEN555TH mar scam, Loma° YN55DU e=7 I!��9$ ] IPEN UYOUT/9MI MM k x t TT& PEN., WY wennw ro STILLWATER MN LAKE ELMO, MN 55042 1.. 50 OMR -7� I REw3A on SWI OM wx m waw�...a s.w I no. RErsw DEsmana ME ar•um SHEET 2 OF 2 SHEETS LEGEND " PROPERTY BOUNDARY EXISTING CONTOUR PROPOSED CONTOUR PROPOSED RETAINING WALL —�-122—mow—C PROPOSED STORM SEWER W/M.H., IE W--•---a EXISTING STORM SEWER W/M.H., PROPOSED DRAINAGE ARROW GRADING PLAN NOTES 11 BACMGROUNO INFORMATION FRCS/ FIELD SURVEY PERFORMED BY PAUL 30HNSON. ADDITION. UTILITY IN -FORMAT. FROM ASEWILTS ST WASHINGTON COUNTY, FEE. INC OFFERS NO GUMFMNTEE AS TO THE AC/OuRAGY OF INFORMAGON PROVIDED BY OTHERS 2) SPOT ELEVATIONS ARE ALL GUTTER LINE ELEVATIONS UNLESS NOTED°THERVRSE. 31 ELEVARONSICONTOURS SHOWN AS FINISHED GRADE ELEVATIONS A) PROVIDER OF NATIVE TOPSOIL IN ORCEN AREAS. E1 SEE EROSION a SEDIMENT CONTROL PLAN FOR EROSION CONTROL INFORMATION. 6) REFER TO GEOTECHNIDAL REPORT FORAMMON.REQUIREMENTS. 0 4 4 8 loam v. BM M sea N/IF/IM o n 08-134 SELECT COMPANIES Z Z 0 smxi C3.2 n1 V ..l.. 7, kfftlthf UTILITY PLAN MUM= SELECT COMPANIES FoIr. Frecznan. Erickson. ,„.. ,,,c,?, ,— 4, : ii i 6 i i ,•• aiiin , . T A ,;,,g.i - loOrOPT,NO:INO 4. ,',,:;R,,'::',%",-,. =SUM SELECT SENIOR LIVING OF STILLWATER STILLWATER, MN 2.0140;1151 12415 55THST.N. LAEL KE MO, MN 55042 G,Rs .11 ,Illf cr MNNI, LW LI HO. MN 0,0 1 PE1SE0 1,,Oul/OtotOING tOOO. ,•+ . 1 NO PEASE° OTY SUBAOTTAL PENSION ocscapn on Mb v.rr K Dirt 011n11110001 CONSTRUCTION PHASING PLAN ROADWAY CONSTRUCTION 70 FULL CITY STANDARDS 70 CHURCH DRIVEWAY RURAL SECT70N DRIVEWAY CONS7RUC7ED 70 SENIOR FACILITY STORM SEWER CONSTRUCTION, INSTALLED COMPLETELY FOR FINAL CONFIGURATION CONSTRUCTION OF ALL PONDS IN FINAL CONFIGURATION CONNECTION 70 CITY SEWER SOUTH OF SCI,7OL PROPERLY AND INSTALLED 70 SPE AND CONNECTION 7D WATER SYSTEM 70 NORTH TO SERVICE SENIOR FACILITY ONLY. CONSTRUCTION OF SENIOR FACILITY PARKING LOT (4G STALLS) CONSTRUCTION OF 40 UNITS - Trl7 STORIES Cf5CIXAA. SCALE 1 Hal FEET SCALE 1•1 FEET CONSTRUCTION OF 48 UNITS - THREE STORIES CONSTRUCTION OF POROUS BIT POMMY AS PART OF PHASE II CONSTRUCTION. CONSTRUCTION OF REMAINING IP STALLS OF PARKING COMPLEI7ON OF FULL CITY ROADWAY SECTION WITH CURB AND GLMER AND UTILITIES. FINAL EXTENSION OF UTILITIES 70 CHURCH PROPERTY. 0 E mow TAZ omn T+E wiwuae 11/14/06 08-134 SELECT COMPANIES z z G O ser ra PHASE SELECT SENIOR LIVING STILLWATER Stillwater, Minnesota We come before you to ask for an amendment to our previous approval. Market conditions have required us to rethink and redesign our proposed project. We are asking for approval of a two phase development. The first phase would consist of 40 units and the second phase, to be completed when market conditions improve, would consist of 48 units. The buildings unique design features the "small house" concept where residents share a living room, dining room, kitchenette, and laundry facility, these amenities are surrounded by the living quarters. It has been shown through studies conducted by Drs. Terry Lum and Rosalie Kane of the University of Minnesota that these "small house" concepts promote a more intimate setting for the resident (as well as for staff) and create very positive care outcomes for the residents. The staff in our facility will be responsible for multiple chores throughout the day, keeping them involved with the residents. Residents and families will have greater choice and input into their daily care, e.g., made to order meals, escorts to the dining room, special services needing to be preformed on a daily basis, etc. There are five "small houses" in the building where the two story east wing has a 20 unit memory care house on the ground floor and a 20 unit assisted living house on the second floor, and the three story west wing has a 16 unit memory care house on the ground floor and 16 unit assisted living houses on the second and third floors. The east and west wings are connected by the link which contains the entrance porch and canopy, the main entrance, the grand lobby, the elevator, the central kitchen, administrative offices, a central bathing room, an activities center, and public toilets. There are a total of 74 studio units and 14 one bedroom units in the building. Each studio unit has a bathroom with a roll -in shower; a kitchenette with a refrigerator, microwave and a small refrigerator; a sleeping area; and a sitting area. In the one bedroom units the bedroom and bathroom are separated from the sitting area. The building and dwelling units feature 3'6" wide doors to easily accommodate wheel chairs and walkers. Each small house has at least two living rooms to provide a quite area as well as an area for games and television. The kitchenette in each small house provides the residents the opportunity to bake fresh pastries and breads as well as prepare snacks. The meals are prepared in the central kitchen and delivered to the small house so that the residents can dine in their intimate dining room. Visible from County Road 12, the building's inviting entrance porch and circle drive drop-off are designed to draw residents and guests into the building with its' comfortable homes and amenities. The porch is connected to a short canopy that extends from the circle drop-off to the main entrance. A pleasant sitting area and fireplace welcome the residences and guests in the grand two story lobby. The architecture of the building is designed to enhanced and make the building appear less large using brick veneer with intricate details, lap siding and trim details, floor overhangs, bay windows, the entrance porch, eave overhangs, and the sloped roof with multiple dormers. The 5 acre site provides large yards and green areas with new landscaping and many existing mature trees, ponds, exterior patio, and a paved walking trail. There are a tot4 of 60, parking spaces including the accessible spaces for a van and cars. We thank you for your consideration and look forward to discussing this project further. Folz, Freeman, Erickso nc. FFE [ AN[) PLANNING - SURVEYING - ENGIN Select Stillwater Civil Changes Grading of stormwater ponds remains the same as before, with some minor modifications, sizing is the same or larger. Roadway into site is proposed to be constructed to City Standards to the church entrance and then a 24-ft wide drive would be constructed to service the proposed senior facility. The driveway would be a rural section, paved 24-ft wide road with shoulders. The utilities for the site remain the same except for some minor modification to the storm sewer and watermain location. In phase II of the project the remainder of the sanitary sewer would be constructed to service the future cul de sac and church property. A pervious bituminous trail is proposed to keep the impervious percentage below that of 25% for the site. The pervious trail would be constructed in phase II of the project. 1244555th Street North, Lake Elmo, MN 55042 • Phone: (651) 439-8833 • Fax: (651) 430--9331 • Website: www.ffe-inc.com Bruce A. Pala, LS Timorhv ,n Fr� n, LS Todd Ate. EPat�, PR 1939 - 2001 Pil t. *- Pk •••••••••••• OWNWM/C., PROPOS4,0 — frits7 /JAE t2F rie NW .//9 rAtE 54E1/51 OF Swazi 30, riaN gem ZZO 6Z - Q NOlic.10 N'd7d 311S S1G'1S TJNI4d (31919S300G' £) ONO39 33 mu n n n n N P A W 0 0 0 0 N L � m- !OO GZi m0 o OL",n Ao ,1 m N BBB 0 ^ (A W 00NN m m OB 6 C mm00 O O N N 00 000 TT ➢nn➢ N 0 4 W 006(�0 m N Y N 0 N L m "mO O NE(1. O 0 rwD O w ' 0Ao OI ON➢ 0 O N IPA W 0(0� N T IP W IP A W 0 0 0 4 0 0 TN%YINN I SELECT SENIOR LIVING - STILLWATER z o STILLWATER, MN NOT TO BE USED FOR CONSTRUCTION architects 7300 HUDSON BLVO. N. , SUITE 230 OAKDALE, MN 55128 PH(651p4A115 FA%�651 �735 1228 mrx.dhaarchile0 co Said 1OO1J I: �SZZO'6Z- NORTH 1111E11111111il SELECT SENIOR LIVING - STILLWATER { STILLWATER, MN NOT TO BE USED FOR CONSTRUCTION architects 7300 HUDSON BLVD. N. , SUITE 230 OAKDALE, MN 55126 PH(651)719A115 FAX (651)735-122B www.dbaarchilecfs.com NV-T.i e1001 QNOS m ° L ,J11 NORTH 1 m ❑1 ❑emu 0 SELECT SENIOR LIVING - STILLWATER STILLWATER, MN NOT TO BE USED FOR CONSTRUCTION Dgarchitects 7300 HUDSON BLVD N. , SUITE 230 OA003ALE, MN 55128 PH(651)714-8115 780(651)735-1228 www.ebaarc0teds.com �S LLL I(- Nb'7=4CI?!li-hl N ) SELECT SENIOR LIVING - STILLWATER = a (.04 STILLWATER, MN NOT TO 5E USED FOR CONSTRUCTION DRarchitects 7300 HUDSON BLVD. N. , SUITE 230 OAKDALE, MN 55128 PH(651)714-8115 FAX (651)735.1228 www.dbaarchilecls.com i 4,1 I' ri Z 0 70 N011b'A-1� XK g 4.4 46 SELECT SENIOR LIVING - STILLWATER ECM STILLWATER, MN 2 NOT TO 5E USEP FOR CONSTRUCTION architects 7300 HUDSON BLVD. N., SUITE 230 OAKDALE, MN 55128 PH(651)714-8115 FAX (651)735.1228 www.dbaarcdilecls.com '77n -1A is m z 9NOI1VA 13 SELECT SENIOR LIVING - STILLWATER EOM STILLWATER, MN NOT TO EsE USED FOR CONSTRUCTION architects 7300 HUDSON BLVD. N., SUITE 230 OAKDALE, MN 55128 PH(651)714-0115 FAX (651)735.1228 www.dbaarchitects.com Planning Commission DATE: October 1, 2009 APPLICANT: David and Kathleen Newman CASE NO.: 09-39 REQUEST: The applicant is requesting a variance to the minimum lot size (7,500 square feet required/6,940 square feet existing) in order to construct a new 13'6" by 24" garage addition and second floor addition. LOCATION: 437 Broadway St S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DISTRICT: SFSL - Single Family Small Lot ZONING: RB - Two-family District PC DATE: October 12, 2009 REVIEWERS: Community Dev. Director PREPARED BY: Michel Pogge, City Planner BACKGROUND The applicants are seeking to demolish portions of the existing primary dwelling unit and replace it with a new 13'6" by 24" garage addition along with expanding the rear portion of the home by adding a second floor above the existing kitchen for a master bedroom. The Heritage Preservation Commission reviewed and approved the demolition request at their October 5th meeting. This property is zoned RB. The lot is 7,400 square feet in size with approximately 460 square feet of the lot encumbered with steep slopes, as such the property owners need a variance to expand a structure on a nonconforming lot. DISCUSSION Chapter 31-308 (b)(1) relates to minimum massing standards in the RB zoning district. The current lot's size is approximately 6,940 square feet, after subtracting steep slopes, and the RB zoning district requires 7,500 square feet for a single-family lot. The lot was platted in mid 1800's with The Original Town of Stillwater Plat. At some point the Minnesota DOT acquired the east portion of the lot for State Highway 36/95. The proposed additions meets all required setbacks, steep slope setbacks, impervious coverage limits and all other bulk regulations of the RB zoning district. 437 Broadway St S Page 2 SPECIFIC REQUEST In order to construct a new additions the applicant is requesting a variance to Section 31- 216 of the City Code states that a structure on a non -conforming lot cannot be expanded. Since the lot is nonconforming, a lot size variance in being request to remove the nonconforming status of the lot. EVALUATION OF REQUEST A variance may be granted only when all of the following conditions are found: 1. A hardship peculiar to the property, not created by any act of the owner, exists. Personal, family or financial difficulties, loss of prospective profits and neighboring violations are not hardships justifying a variance. The property is approximately 6,940 square foot after subtracting steep slopes. The lot was platted in mid 1800's with The Original Town of Stillwater Plat. At some point the Minnesota DOT acquired the east portion of the lot for State Highway 36/95. The current lot size is a situation that was not created by an act of the current property owner. 2. A variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights; and, if granted, would not constitute a special privilege not enjoyed by neighbors. This property is zoned as two-family residential, which allows single family and two-family uses. Without the variance to the lot size, the applicant would not be able to expand their home. The proposed additions meets all required setbacks, steep slope setbacks, impervious coverage limits and all other bulk regulations of the RB zoning district. Therefore, staff finds that a variance to the minimum lot size is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of rights possessed by other properties in the same district and in the same vicinity. 3. The authorizing of the variance will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property and will not materially impair the purpose and intent of this section or the public interest nor adversely affect the comprehensive plan. Since the property will continue to meet all other code requirements; the authorizing of the variances to the minimum lot size will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property, will not materially impair the purpose and intent of this title and would not necessary adversely affect the Comprehensive Plan. 437 Broadway St S Page 3 FINDINGS 1. The current lot size is a hardship that is peculiar to the property and is not created by acts of the owner. 2. The variances to the minimum lot size is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights possessed by other properties in the same district and in the same vicinity; and that a variance, if granted, would not constitute a special privilege of the recipient not enjoyed by his neighbors. 3. The authorizing of the variances to the minimum lot size will not be a substantial detriment to adjacent property, will not materially impair the purpose and intent of this title and would not necessary adversely affect the Comprehensive Plan. ALTERNATIVES The Planning Commission has the following options: 1. Approve the requested variance to the minimum lot size. Additionally, staff would suggest the following conditions for approval: a. All minor revisions to the approved plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director. All major revisions shall be revised and approve by the Planning Commission. Determination of the distinction between "major" and "minor" shall rest with the City Administrator. Deny the requested variance. Continue the public hearing until the November 9, 2009 Planning Commission meeting. The 60 day decision deadline for the request is November 16, 2009. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approving the requested variance to the minimum lot size as conditioned. Attachments: Location Map, Applicant's Form, Site Plan, and letter. PLANNING ADMINISTRATION APPLICATION FORM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY OF STILLWATER 216 NORTH FOURTH STREET S1JL WATER MN 55082 Case No: Date Filed: Fee Paid: % 413 09- Receipt No.: 33(/n ,73g8 _ICJ ACTION REQUESTED Special/Conditional Use Permit Variance Resubdivision Subdivision* Comprehensive Plan Amendment* Zoning Amendment* Planning Unit Development * Certificate of Compliance Lot Line Adjustment *An escrow fee is also required to offset the costs of attorney and engineering fees. The fees for requested action are attached to this application. The applicant is responsible for the completeness and accuracy of all forms and supporting material submitted in connection with any application. All supporting material (1 e., photos, sketches, etc) submitted with application becomes the property of the City of Stillwater. Sixteen (16) copies of supporting material are required. If application is submitted to the City Council, twelve (12) copies of supporting material are required. A site plan showing drainage and setbacks is required with applications. A complete legal description of subject property is required. Any incomplete application or supporting material will delay the application process. After Planning Commission approvals, there is a 10-day appeal period. Once the 10-day appeal period has ended, the applicant will receive a zoning use permit which must be signed and submitted to the City to obtain the required building permits. PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION Address of Project L1 39 sita►r<j;.wAut Assessor's Parcel No. 1663°2-6L l 006. (GEO Code) Zoning District Itm,Rmitt Description of Project liitsop ka AI-)fYcs�1. �,�,r, s„rf o A Dow�o,��rc � o� hereby state the foregoing statements and all data, information and evidence submitted herewith in all respects, to the best of my knowledge and belief, to be true and correct 1 further certify 1 will comply with the per it if it is granted and us p,krt ww..Au # K''// A .t fYa ju. A3ewa w�r- Property Owner i .. _ettill4-- Representative 5pr%t Mailing Address S-09 ttorAot,wG,` S;k41# S Mailing Address City - State - Zip Situ -a *- 1'10 SO S� Telephone No. L-GS(' s1-1c31 iwaLAt 61L-S44-1276 Telephone No. Signature City - State - Zip f � ` — M- Signature is : +.groan :..........:....+► PLANNING ADMINISTRATION APPLICATION FORM Lot Size (dimensions) I% x SD Land Area 14bo 444f- Height of Buildings: V Stories Principal 2- Accessory Feet NIA SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION Total Building floor area 128Z_ square feet Existing I got., square feet Proposed 112' square feet Paved ImperviousArea square feet No. of off-street parking spaces 1 Case No: Date Filed: Fee Paid: Receipt No.: The. Bg,ncor Group, Inc. 1521 41-i Lin_ r51.E 55449 phone 76$ 7 -89 4 September 18, 2009 Planning Commission City of Stillwater 216 Fourth Street North Stillwater, MN 55082 Re: 437 South Broadway Dear Members: Bancor 411) Enclosed is our application for a variance to construct an addition to an existing structure on a nonconforming lot. In summary this home does not have a garage. As part of an extensive remodeling plan we need to construct a one car attached garage in order to have any hope for our remodeling plan to be economically feasible. After talking to our neighbors, designers, builder and city staff it would appear the best way to place this garage to minimize its visual impact, is to demolish and rebuild the existing shed under the three season porch so that when it is finished the door is relocated from the east side to the north side and to move the south wall 10 feet further to the south which would place it 6.5 feet from the side lot line. A deck would be above this space. In essence the only exterior wall that would be moved is the south wall of the shed. The proposed plan conforms with all setbacks and would be compatible with existing adjacent uses. This plan does involve some limited demolition. We have made separate application to the Heritage Preservation Commission for approval of a demolition permit. Attached you will find: • A lot survey. • Demolition plan. • The remodeling plan containing two pages. • Elevations of the three effected sides of the home. • Photos of the four sides of the home. If you should need any additional information please do not hesitate to contact me. If any of the members wish to tour the home they should also contact me. Sincerely, David P and Kathleen M. Newman ``') '6 West Side of Horne — View from Street h of View from East South Side of Home 0 33 osol SCALE IN FEET 20 40 33 60 1 inch = 20 feet I /'' T L_ 'J 1 lb A es IB OHU 0v ' PtpEa — (D tROr1 �7 1') ,fOUN NO. �t3 MPRK _ __-23g8 1)1A° PIpE OA 7 LEGEND IRON SET IRON FOUND MAGNETIC NAIL FOUND POWER POLE GAS METER ELECTRIC METER CURB STOP ASPHALT SURFACE CONCRETE SURFACE OVERHEAD UTILITY LINE SANITARY SEWER WATER MAIN LEGAL DESCRIPTION PROVIDED BY CLIENT Westerly 148.00 feet of Lot 28, Block 42, CITY OF STILLWATER, according to the recorded plat thereof, Washington County, Minnesota. We hereby certify that this is a true and correct survey of the above described property and that it was performed by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly licensed Professional Land Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota. That this survey dues not purport to show all improvements, easements or encroachments to the property except as shown thereon. S By. Harold C. Peterson, Land Sury r, License No. 12294 day of May, 2008. James R. Hill, Inc. \ 2 NOTES ORIENTATION OF THIS BEARING SYSTEM IS BASED ON THE WESTERLY LINE OF LOT 28, BLOCK 42, STILLWATER TO HAVE AN ASSUMED BEARING OP S 15°59'08" E. THIS SURVEY HAS BEEN PREPARED WITHOUT BENEFIT OF A TITLE COMMITMENT OR TITLE OPINION. A TITLE SEARCH FOR RECORDED OR UNRECORDED EASEMENTS WHICH MAY BENEFIT OR ENCUMBER THIS PROPERTY HAS NOT BEEN COMPLETED BY THE SURVEYOR THE LOCATION AND INFORMATION SHOWN REGARDING UTILITIES, SERVING THIS PROPERTY OR EXISTING ON THIS PROPERTY AS SHOWN AS A PART OF THIS SURVEY, HAVE BEEN LOCATED BY ON -SITE OBSERVATION OR TAKEN FROM PLANS PROVIDED BY OTHERS. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONCERNING THESE UTILITIES PLEASE CONTACT THE CITY OF ST(LLWATER ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT AND/OR GOPHER STATE ONE CALL. (GOPHER STATE ONE CALL TICKET NO. 90115131) OVERALL GROSS AREA = 7,400 SQUARE FEET OR 0.170 ACRES ADDRESS OF THIS PROPERTY IS 437 BROADWAY STREET SOUTH, STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 55082 PID NUMBER = 2803020440069 James R. Hill, Inc. PLANNERS / ENGINEERS / SURVEYORS 2500 W. GTE 68 42, Saw 120, & 18814 184 55337 PHONE: (952)890-6044 FAX: (952)890-6244 `- NEW DECK WITH SINGLE fCAR GARAGE BELOW I I EXISTING FAMILY ROOM FOUNDATION FOOTPRINT TO DICTATE OVERALL WIDTH OF GARAGE #4" REMOVE NEW NEW DOOR DOOR WINDOW AND WINDOW REMOVE I I REMOVE RADIATOR I RADIATOR RAC IATOR W, REMOVE ORINOOW PIPE a r- T III REMOVE III WINDOW 111 III REMOVE II RAOIA OR IREMOV _EADIATO PIPE RA IATOR NAINTA CORNER CABINET CHANCE EXISTING OPENING TO A PAIR OF 3'-0" FRENCH DOORS MAINTAIN BOOKCASES AND MANTLE AT FIREPLACE WALL NEW m CLOSET AND DOOR RADIA MAINTAIN RADIATORS UNLESS NOTES. RADIATOR EXACT LOCATION OF STAIRS TBD DEMOLITION AND CONSTRUCTION PLAN LFGENO DMING WNLG 70 !SOWN N C C C EXISTING WALLS 10 REWtt+E NOV WALLS ALL DIMENSIONS TO BE SITE VERIFIED PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES. SHEET NAME: MAIN LEVEL DEMOLITION AND CONSTRUCTION PLAN CHECKED BY: LPJ DRAWN BY: JB SCALE: %w," = 1'-0 ESOTA 55082 SHEET #: D1 : 1'- //A fv/V/,11 T77777 .1 IV/� / i 1 .- - L a' ,_ ,////C 5 / 11 s { a�— / n REMOVE REMOVE WINDOW WINDOW ADD DOOR NOTE: PLAN ILLUSTRATES AREA OF DEMOLITION AND CONSTRUCTION ONLY. AREAS NOT IMPACTED BY THE REMODEL (I. E. - EXISTING BEDROOMS. HALL. CLOSETS. AND BATH) ARE NOT SHOWN. NEW WINDOWS TO LINE UP WITH MAIN LEVEL EXISTING WINDOWS. TFMDI ITION AND SONSTRIICTION PI AN I FGFNII EXISTING W41.5 TO REWM C = EXISTOIO TOLLS TO PEMO'ME NEVI WALLS ALL DIMENSIONS TO BE SITE VERIFIED PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES. ac in 0 -J JZXJ CL (4) — 1Wti Jg?ow ND CONSTRUCTION PLAN SHEET NAME: UPPER LEVEL DEMOLITION CHECKED BY: LPJ DRAWN BY: JB SCALE: 3%6" = 1.-0 SHEET #: D2 7 FAMILY ROOM RACIATOR R_- BUIL-IN CORN HUTCH FIREPUCE POWDE ANTLE HEA BU0/'-IN BEDROOM/ OFFICE LIVING ROOM RADIATOR DECK WITH ATTACHED SINGLE CAR GARAGE BELOW KITCHEN GC OETERYME IE FLOOR qWN 5 P0005EO- xwi�,�ioii vrrr�.rc. I'-10- PPE SITTING AREA FOYER CLOSET FOYER RADIAT EXACT LOCATION OF STAIRS TBD GC TO DETERMINE CELL1MO 0RN151t05 AT TRK 1000155. IRANSMON MU. OETERliE LEW.Osow 500 ♦T mICM• R0 F4111Er ROOM ALL DIMENSIONS TO BE SITE VERIFIED PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES. SHEET NAME: MAIN LEVEL ARCHITECTURAL PLAN CO CJ Y U 0 U m cc 437 BROADWAY STILLWATER, MI SHEET #: Al 1 MASTER BEDROOM O EN 6' BEDROOM 1 BEDROOM 2 / UP 'oiF/6n/rY9 s�/u 0 W// DOWN RACIATOR BATH • BALCONY 7 NOTE: NEW WINDOWS TO LINE UP WITH MAIN LEVEL WINDOWS ALL DIMENSIONS TO BE SITE VERIFIED PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES. cc W 0 J ar J CL co ==w2 ? w J ME: UPPER LEVEL ARCHITECTURAL PLAN W to J m 0 W 0 w x rn 4 wcb cz, 0r a a_o SHEET #: A2 ATTACHED SINGLE CAR GARAGE UNDER DECK THE 000E 10Gn0N OF THE DOOR FRO$ INE BASEMENT TO THE GARAGE 15 TO BE vuxTANED NOTE. GC TO PROVIDE AN ESTIMATE FOR GARAGE AS DRAWN AND ALTERNATIVE OPTION USING SOME OF THE EXISTING FOUNDATION STRUCTURE. GARAGE IS NEW. MAIN LEVEL DEMOLITION PLAN (01) SHOWS DEMOLITION OF OLD GARAGE. ALL DIMENSIONS TO BE SITE VERIFIED PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES. a NAME: GARAGE ARCHITECTU 0 W U S DRAWN BY: JB 9 Hob Wo O IW- K Q D o SCALE: 3/e" = 1-0" 00 00 0 XT V1 • < W O W 0) Z CO_Z < Q W m; J Z aal SHEET #: GA1 NM EN ■I� AIM NM I I lI Tfl I yj l�l 11 I I I. I IIII 1 ii P.UM & VE. 9100 BALTIMORE ST NE BLAINE, MN. 55449 SUITE 106 Peens 763-760-6004 Foe 763-760-6015 NEWMAN RESIDENCE REVISIONS O&K 11,017-09 ry1Or(N 9/ CO COMO NAACO 1O9i99 timer? NO. 3 1 I NM •. iII it 1 i Il II !1 ( li �ilI 11 � m I'I.MNING & GE51G J, I -LC 9100 6*LtIMORE 5T NE 6L•INE. MN. 55449 SUITE 106 Phone 763-760-6004 Pee 765-160.6015 NEWMAN RESIDENCE REN1510N5 R67[ }t7-0! 6RAS1(R AT 7MiiR WET 11D. 2 rn 11 Illlll111111111111j 11111111 l I 1 i'1 PLUM & 9a , uc 9100E OA BALTORE ST NE BLAINE« , MN. 369 P9010 763-760-6004 F. 763-760.6015 NEWMAN RESIDENCE REVISIONS an 9-57-09 09NILM 91f a) COW. *mdtl 209229 1 L AO L .L33HS 0 SCALE IN FEET 20 40 33 60 O m 0 Z p 0 to rj a1 A V 1 inch = 20 feet n "1- ,-1 I / 03„ A O OHU $tOct .5- 1 --1OO� NO.\i'. MPR r L GEND IRON SET IRON FOUND MAGNETIC NAIL FOUND POWER POLE GAS METER ELECTRIC METER CURB STOP ASPHALT SURFACE CONCRETE SURFACE OVERHEAD UTILITY LINE SANITARY SEWER WATER MAIN A rs T L_ L/ 1 LEGAL DESCRIPTION PROVIDED BY CLIENT Westerly 148.00 feet of Lot 28, Block 42, CITY OF STILLWATER, according to the recorded plat thereof, Washington County, Minnesota. We hereby certify that this is a true and correct survey of the above described property and that it was performed by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly licensed Professional Land Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota. That this survey does not purport to show all improvements, easements or encroachments to the property except as shown thereon. Si tlu Il day of May, 2008 CFO ' James R. Hill, Inc. 7 By: _ Harold C. Peterson, Land Sury •or, License No. 12294 NOTES ORIENTATION OF THIS BEARING SYSTEM IS BASED ON THE WESTERLY LINE. OF LOT 28, BLOCK 42. STILLWATER TO HAVE .AN ASSUMED BEARING OF S 15°59'08" E. THIS SURVEY HAS BEEN PREPARED WITHOUT BENEFIT OF A TITLE COMMITMENT OR TITLE OPINION. A TITLE SEARCH FOR RECORDED OR UNRECORDED EASEMENTS WHICH MAY BENEFIT OR ENCUMBER THIS PROPERTY HAS NOT BEEN COMPLETED BY THE SURVEYOR THE LOCATION AND INFORMATION SHOWN REGARDING UTILITIES, SERVING THIS PROPERTY OR EXISTING ON THIS PROPERTY AS SHOWN AS A PART OF THIS SURVEY, HAVE BEEN LOCATED BY ON -SITE OBSERVATION OR TAKEN FROM PLANS PROVIDED BY OTHERS. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONCERNING THESE UTILITIES PLEASE CONTACT THE CITY OF STILLWATER ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT AND/OR GOPHER. STATE ONE CALL (GOPHER STATE ONE CALL TICKET NO. 90115131) OVERALL GROSS AREA = 7,400 SQUARE FEET OR 0.170 ACRES ADDRESS OF THIS PROPERTY IS 437 BROADW AY STREET SOUTH. STU,LWATER, MINNESOTA 55082. ND NUMBER = 2803020440669 James R. Hill, Inc. PLANNERS / ENGINEERS / SURVEYORS 2500 W. C1r. Ro. 42, Suit 120, Buasuc. AM 55337 PHONE: (952)890-6044 FAX: (952)890-6244 Tree Inventory — 437 Broadway #1 Silver Maple — Diameter is approximately 25 inches #2 Silver Maple — Diameter is approximately 5 inches #3 Colorado Blue Spruce — Diameter is approximately 18 inches #4 Silver Maple — Diameter is approximately 29 inches #5 Colorado Blue Spruce — Diameter is approximately 12 inches #6 Sugar Maple — Diameter is approximately 14 inches Total Approximate Diameter Inches = 103 inches Planning Commission DATE: October 1, 2009 APPLICANT: Terry and Trisha Acres REPRESENTATIVE: Brian Larson REQUEST: CASE NO.: 09-41 A 2'8" variance to the required 20 foot exterior side yard setback for the construction of a porch and an additional 1'10" variance for the construction of a step off of the porch. LOCATION: 422 Elm St W COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DISTRICT: SFSL - Single Family Small Lot ZONING: RB - Two Family Residential PC DATE: October 12, 2009 REVIEWERS: Community Dev. Director PREPARED BY: Michel Pogge, City Planner DISCUSSION Property owners Terry and Trisha Acres are in the process of renovating and building an addition on the north side of the home at 506 Laurel St W. As part of the work, they are planning to add a front porch on the Everett Street side of the home. The porch as proposed will encroach 2'8" into the required exterior side yard setback and a step off of the porch will extend an additional 1'10" into the exterior side yard setback. SPECIFIC REQUEST In order to allow for the Acres' to proceed with this project, they need approval of a variance from City Code Section 31-308 (b)(1) which requires a 20 foot exterior side yard setback (17'4" feet requested for the porch and 16'5" for the step). In this case, the applicant is requesting approval to encroach 2'8" into the required exterior side yard setback in order to construct the porch and additional 1'10" for a step off of the porch. 422 Elm St W Page 2 EVALUATION OF REQUEST A variance may be granted only when all of the following conditions are found: 1. A hardship peculiar to the property, not created by any act of the owner, exists. Personal, family or financial difficulties, loss of prospective profits and neighboring violations are not hardships justifying a variance. The property at 422 Elm St W is a rectangular 70' by 150' lot. The original home was constructed in approximately 1907 and its location on the property was selected prior to the current property owner's purchase of the property. The location of the home is a condition that was not created by an act of the property owner. 2. A variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights; and, if granted, would not constitute a special privilege not enjoyed by neighbors. This property is zoned RB, two-family residential, which allows single family and two-family uses. With the new addition and porch the lot will meet the maximum lot coverage requirements as set out in the code. Therefore, staff believes the front and side setback requests and lot size variance are acceptable. 3. The authorizing of the variance will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property and will not materially impair the purpose and intent of this section or the public interest nor adversely affect the comprehensive plan. The proposed porch is substantially at the same setback as the existing home; therefore, the proposed changes do not appear to have any negative impact: on any of the surrounding properties. The authorizing of the variance will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property and not materially impair the purpose and intent of this title or the public interest nor adversely affect the Comprehensive Plan. FINDINGS 1. There is a hardship peculiar to the property not created by the property owner. 2. That the proposed variances are necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights possessed by other properties in the same district and in the same vicinity; and that a variance, if granted, would not constitute a special privilege of the recipient not enjoyed by his neighbors. 3. That the authorizing of the variance should not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property. 422 Elm St W Page 3 ALTERNATIVES The Planning Commission has the following options: 1. Approve the requested variance to encroach 2'8" into the required exterior side yard setback in order to construct the porch and additional 1'10" for a step off of the porch. 2. Deny the requested variances to the exterior side yard setback. 3. Continue the public hearing until the November 9, 2009 Planning Commission meeting. The 60-day decision deadline for the request is November 16, 2009. CONDITIONS FOR APPROVAL If the Commission chooses to approve the project, staff would recommend the following conditions of approval: 1. All revisions to the approved plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission. 2. The variances to encroach into the required front exterior side yard setback shall be limited to the porch and step as shown on the plans dated September 18, 2009 as on file in the Community Development Department. RECOMMENDATION Review and take an action Attachments: Location Map, Applicant's Form, Site Plan, and exterior elevations. PLANNING ADMINISTRATION APPLICATION FORM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTM ENT CITY OF STILLWATER 216 NORTH FOURTH STREET STILLWATER MN 55082 Case No: Date Filed: Fee Paid: Receipt No.: ACTION REQUESTED 3S1 Special/Conditional Use Permit ). Variance Resubdivision Subdivision* Comprehensive Plan Amendment* Zoning Amendment* Planning Unit Development* Certificate of Compliance Lot Line Adjustment *An escrow fee is also required to offset the costs of attorney and engineering fees. The fees for requested action are attached to this application. The applicant is responsible for the completeness and accuracy of all forms and supporting material submitted in connection with any application. All supporting material (i e., photos, sketches, etc.) submitted with application becomes the property of the City of Stillwater. Sixteen (16) copies of supporting material are required. If application is submitted to the City Council, twelve (12) copies of supporting material are required. A site plan showing drainage and setbacks is required with applications. A complete legal description of subject property is required. Any incomplete application or supporting material will delay the application process. After Planning Commission approvals, there is a 10-day appeal period. Once the 10-day appeal period has ended, the applicant will receive a zoning use permit which must be signed and submitted to the City to obtain the required building permits. PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION �j Address of Project 922 •ELMGiT • Assessor's Parcel No.,�l 09& 4?/O/3 7 (GEO Code) Zoning District ro)2 Description of Project kV(TL •-4IUt ©F "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, to be true and correct. I further certify I will comply with the permit if it is granted and used." �ERENCE GER•S Mailing Address 1 �2" ( S Property Owner City - State - Zip ST(LLWRTEY& ItAN 55O8Z Telephone No. 65 I 30s - 2 583 Signature �a(Sig ture is re uired) �- (Signaturis required) Representative &Y't0.V\ 1-A.moV1 _[,, Mailing AddressV40V\T71ii.°IAI dr' gal N•4114)1. IU.O City - State -Zip Tf be2 Telephone No. (06‘.477b+Co5- �p Signature PLANNING ADMINISTRATION APPLICATION FORM Case No: Date Filed: Fee Paid: Receipt No.: SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION Lot Size (dimensions) liO x 10 Total Building floor area square feet Land Area 10 <<joO SF Existing (4'b 17 square feet rl-ki) Height of Buildings: Stories Feet Proposed 2645 square feet(foe'I+?► tAi Principal Mkt. 2.41 Paved Impervious Area4/--NV square feet Accessory No. of off-street parking spaces KIN H:\mcnamara\sheila\PLANAPP.FRM April 9, 2008 LARSON BRENNER Stillwater Planning Commission Members City of Stillwater 216 North Fourth Street Stillwater, MN 55082 09.18.09 Dear Commission Members This letter is in reference to the variance request by Terry and Trisha Acers for an addition to and remodeling of their residence at 422 West Elm Street in Stillwater, a corner lot. The Acers wish to add onto their existing house to provide more living space for their family. They want the addition to be compatible and harmonious with the design of the existing house, and for aesthetic reasons, the addition's west facade to align with the west fagade of the existing house. The addition's west -facing entrance porch has two columns and a roof edge that also align with a window bay of the existing house. The end result is the main massing of the addition aligns with the existing house massing, and the new minor projecting elements (porch and columns) align with the existing house's window bay. The West facade of the existing house is about 20'-8" east of the west property line, complying with the corner lot sideyard setback requirement of 20'-0". However, a window bay of the existing house extends an additional 2'-8", projecting into the setback by about 2'-0". By aligning the addition's porch with the existing window bay, the new porch columns would also project into the setback by 2'-0". The new west entrance steps are allowed to project 3-0 into the setback; as designed, these would project 1'-10" further than that. On a typical RB-2 zoned lot, sideyard setbacks are 5'-0" or 10'-0" (15' total). But because this is a corner lot, the exterior sideyard setback is increased to 20'-0" - which presents a unique hardship compared to a typical lot. This 20'-0" sideyard setback narrows the buildable area of the lot, and in this case, makes it difficult to align elements of the addition with the existing house. It also makes it nearly impossible to create an entrance on the west side of the house, due to space needed for steps and a landing. The proposed design has the new addition and its entrance porch aligning with the existing house and its west window bay — not projecting into the setback any further than the existing house currently does. We request a variance to allow the new addition's porch columns to project approximately 2'-0" into the 20'-0" sideyard setback, and the new entrance steps to project approximately 4'-10" (1'- 10" more than allowed) into the 20'-0" sideyard setback. Thank you for your consideration. Brian Larson, AIA (representing Terry and Trisha Acers) Attached: • Zoning Summary 09.12.09 • Existing house west elevation photo • Site Plan • Floor Plan • West Elevation drawing Acer Residence 422 West Elm Street, Stillwater, MN ■ Zoning RB2 9.12.09 Praposed Lot Area 10,500 sf no change Lot width 70' no change Lot depth 150' no change Front yd setback: house 20' OK no change Front yd setback: garage 30' & 10' from front setback of house OK no change Side yd setback: house Corner side yd: 20' 15' total / min. 5' 20'exterior /interior side yd 5' Roof edges, elements without foundations, and steps are allowed to infringe on setback 3' West face of house approx. 20-8 setback — OK; existing window bay at west face (2-8 deep) infringes on W. sideyard by 2-0 more than allowed West face of addition aligns with existing house. West entrance columns and roof edge align with existing projecting bay and roof edge. New entrance steps infringes on W. sideyard by 4-10 (1-10 more than allowed) Side yd setback: garage (det. rear yd) Corner side yd: 3' 30' /set back 10' min from front setback OK no change Rear yd: house 25' +/- 65-6 OK +/- 39-6 OK Rear yd: garage (det. rear yd) 3' +/- 5-0 OK no change Max. lot coverage: buildings (10500 lot x 25% = 2625 sf max. allowed) 25% (2625 sf max) : 694 house +165 porch + 624 gar =1483 sf OK 694 house + 165 porch + 1142 addition + 624 gar= 2625 sf OK Max. lot coverage: non -building impervious surfaces 25% (2625 sf) allowed +/-1250 sf OK +/-1300 sf OK Height house 35' max +/- 29-0 OK +/- 26-0 OK EXISTING DRIVEWAY APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF NEW SIDEWALK EXISTING WALK L.LJ LJ LL Ld n/ LtJ W z f1 70' EXISTING GARAGE 004.4 IWtNW • 20'-0" PROP y�' TION r EXISTING HOUSE .s: here Pvc 0 2 SITE PLAN I ELV STREET 0 ARROWS INDICATE GRADE SURFACE WATER DRAINAGE PROPERTY LINE SETBACK LINE NOTE: LOCATION OF EXISTING HOUSE & GARAGE IS APPROXIMATE; FIELD VERIFY EXACT LOCATION IF REQUIRED NOTE: REMOVE SMALL EXISTING PORCH AT NORTH FACE OF EXISTING HOUSE & EXISTING SIDEWALKS AS REQUIRED — VERIFY W/ OWNER EXISTING SIDEWALK & STEPS 5'-0" 1/20„_1,_0„ APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF EXISTING PUBLIC WALK & CURI EXTERIOR EIEVA➢OM *NEE - nOOMO M EC nRTFLASS 35g407 ¢M US - EIROAL MC. WOOD MC re MAT. EnSrvTO oT. �. P„o� Mnt,TEET-UNLESS AROUNO WRITTOTT AND 0001 COMES AS MOWS I) FE EAL. M x ° T 01445 50 xla. 330P3.SD0) O0 TIASn NS MWOIMTEG MEOW 45 / MOISTURE 5/4 x0NOOW ANO 00. OS AS CALMS: mar fi 6 0 NFAL 004 5/4 11 TOM - 01.00.030 JAMB MN OE i - MCA. CONTINUO. METAL FLAW. AT ALL wNOnWDOOR ANO AT AC OTHER EXPOSED NORUONTAL ANp ;ono. 0 A WHERE .00 DECKING On WPM TREADS 01£ THOKATED WOW STOLL OE Ir... MOE8' 0010.1E0 EVERTOR MOOD 81&00 w,1E0ML5 TO P ACM'G CIO mar MACHU. To DE SMOOTH - f01000n 00WW6 ar on TRu.. f0 OE Et6ARM.NOL.S COLUMN AnARM.wL waiO n On MARS TO OE WORM wm. MR PLC INC - nV£n TO 040011165 EOn 10000.50 Non-rn10A1 Wrr `--00118 000ARD i / 4 RASH,NMATCH EMT. EXC.. nNSN SMELT DER-3.4� E0NTA1 SONS - rL 1r_ L OWEST ELEVATION i' r(h up0'"w. ruLO"E"ve 1/4"-1,-U.. OEAST ELEVATION 1/4"=1.-0" L J NSW fokkk ccuit -, *� vteqr pits EC IcI)¢nsT47. E-4,teltit4k, vaN060,3 P,AtA l.lJ EL -• tit ()11.4 I/O WF6,07.erre conclet n...ee-a 10H ¢L CO LARSON BRENNER ARCHITECTS Mat 1,0011 MATH STITT *Nw CmatIlmtc 0331501.0.01, 00 L.00 HE 01311 Fe. 631.01.410 XRITIom n, bac o.Nw.M.. 0x 00/10/00 umeM.." &0.M 0unT IX( SW"b RMb 00 liar We awm L1 y"ewe tin. m.w0. rw0.. me. ACERS RESIDENCE 30100111. .11502 OW. ram ELEVATIONS 13ID/PERMIT SET ��A°{ 10J2E� A4 VIA'KIPko.Iot Ile*' 1WI-0" NTU 4tcEHPtitO 4;e,CW-.K LIpI.AuWANS PPI.IC,N WITh 1`4•��1�c�'.�T.lt4CD WAr' ACT + t.eiti►la VPrR{hNCE ITEM N.C-1.�.0 PAID t1lW t' -1 O" two evtl*tjiQ a* - LE' 1)-6 P tbk4eO ftV.eftSec PLAN NOTES ALL WOOD FRAMING TO COMPLY WITH APPLICABLE STATE ANC LCCµ BUILDING C00E5 AND ORDINANCES µL WOOD I -JOIST FRAMING. HEADERS, W000 LK 0R STEEI. BEAMS, FLOOR TRUSSES AND ROOF TRUSSES INDICATED ON THESE PLANS AN CONCEPTUAL ONLY AND ARE 10 8E DESIGNED BY THE MANUFACTURER - VERIFY ALL POINT TOAD AND BEARING CONDITIONS AND COORDINATE POSTS AND REAPING PEG/LINEMEN IS WITH THE BUILDER FOLLOW MANUFACTLRERS RECOMMENDATIONS AND REQUIREMENTS FOR AND FURNISH ALL BLOCKING. STFFENERS, BRACING, FASTENERS. HARDWARE. ETC. NECESSARY FOR INSTALLATION. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE EXTERIOR WALLS TTPICAJ.Y TO BE 2X6 CONSTRICTION, INTERIOR WALLS TYPICALLY TO BE 2x4. 010080R WALLS WITH POCKET DOORS TO BE 2.6 CONSTRUCTION. CABINET WALLS Nib BALLOON FRAMED WALLS SHALL BE FRAMED WITH 'TW4BERSTRAf4D' ENGINEERED FRAMING PLAN DIMENSIONS NE TYPICALLY TAKEN TO OUTSIDE OF WALL SHEATHING AT EXTERIOR WALLS AND TO CENTER IINES 0R FACE or STUD AT INTERIOR WALLS AT TILED FLOOR AREAS USE 41105ET ME17100 AND DEPRESS FLOOR SHEATHING 50 IT IS FLUSH WITH TOP OF FLOOR FRAMING (SHEATHING N BETWEEN FRAMING MEMBERS). WINDOW DESIGNATIONS ON PLANS ARE MARVIN WINDOWS AND DOORS MODEL NUMBERS. VERIFY ROUGH OPENING SIZES WRN WINDOW MANUFACTURER. NDOWS TONCALL0 WITH FACTORY FLAT PRIMED CASING MNDOW AND DOOR HEADERS ARE TYPICALLY NO1 SHOWN ON THE PLANS FOR DRAWING CLMNY. DESIGN AND FURNISH HEADERS AS REQUIRED AT ALL BEARING WµL AND NON BEARING WALL CONDITIONS. 512E AS REQUIRED TO CARRY ANY RONT LOAD CONDITIONS FROM ABOVE. µL HEADERS OVER 5"-0 WIDE SHNJ. BE OF ENGINEERED LUMBER (LVL OR SIMILAR). COLUMN SITES SHALL NOT ExCEED CRUSHMG STRENGTH OF THE PLATES THEY BEM ON- SIZE AS REQUIRED, UR1ZE SOUASH BLOCKING OR BEAR DIRECTLY ON FOUN04TCN. USE PRESERVATIVE TREATED COLUMNS. BEAMS. PLATES. RISC. FRINMG MEMBERS AS REQUIRED BY CODE AND AS CM.LEO Our )N PANS WHERE WOOD FRAMING SIZES ME INDICATED. MANUFAGTLRIER TO VERITY GRADE AND SPACING REQUIRED TO MAN1NN MINIMUM L/480 DEFLECTION. ALL FLOOR BEAMS TO BE SET RUSH WITH FLOOR FRAMING UNLESS INDICATED OTHERWISE. M. ROOF BEAMS TO BE DROPPED UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. DROPPED FLOOR BEAMS OR ROOF BEAMS SHALT BE !2' MAXIMUM DEPTH UNLESS INDICATED OTHERWISE ALL CONCRETE WORK SHALL COMPLY WITH STATE AND LOCAL BUILDING CODES AND ORDINANCES CONCRETE CONTRACTOR SHALL . VERIFY REQUIREMENTS. FOUN0AT0N WALLS TYPICALLY 6 THICK CAST CONCRETE WITH 7 TEXTURED RIGID INSULATOR AND REINFORCING AS REQUIRED TO MEET COOS. SEE SPECIAL UNLIERPNWNG DETAILS. F00TRG AND PIER SCHEDULE (CONCRETE CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY FOOTING SIZES Af40 REINFORCING REQUIREMENTS PER CODE)' FD CONTINUOUS 20' X 10' POURED CONCRETE FOOTING WITH 2 84'S BOTTOM F1 30' X 30' % 7 W/ 4 #4'S EACH WAY BOTTOM (12.500 LB MAX.) F2 36 X 36 X 17 W/ 5 /4'S EACH WAY BOTTOM F3 �B 42'X MAX ) x 17 W/ 5 •4'S EACH WAY BOTTOM (24,500 L8 MAX.) F4 46 X 48' X I7 W/ 6 ,4'S EACH WAY BOTTOM (32000 LB MAX.) F5 30" X 54" X 17 W/ 4 #4'S EACH WAY BOTTOM (22.500 LB MAX.) F6 30' X 77 x I7 W/ 4 114'S EACH WAY BOTTOM (30.000 LB MAX.) SUBN0IE: MAINTAIN S CLEAR COVER TO REINFORCING N.I, FOOTING SIZES ABOVE BASED ON AN ALLOWABLE SOIL BEARNC PRESSURE OF 2,000 PSF, THIS VALUE TO BE VERIFIED BY CONTRACTOR. NOTIFY ARCHITECT IF GUE5110NA0EE SOILS ENCOUNTERED. P1 16 SQUARE PORED CONCRETE PIER WITH 4 %5'S VERTICAL (AT CORNERS) P2 16 X 36 POURED CONCRETE NEP WITH 4 /5'S VERTICAL (AT CORNERS) P3 16 X 87 POKED CONCRETE PER WITH 4 6S'S VERTICAL (AT CORNERS) P4 DRILLED CONCRETE PIER WITH FLARED BOTTOM KEYED RAN NOTES O7 EXISTING SEWER. WATER 14 ELECTRICAL SERVICE TO REMAIN PROVDE NEW SUB -PARE) AT MOTION FROM FACING ELECTRICAL PANEL 03 CONNECT NEW FURNACE TO EXISTING DUCTWORK AT EXISTING BASEMENT D4 X, 4' MINIMUM LAUNDRY CHUTE VERIFY LOCATION 14 DIMENSION W/ WRIER p© ALTERNATE LAUNDRY CHUTE: VERIFY LOCATION AND DIMENSIONS W/ OWNER ® EDGE OF CONCRETE FOOTING STEP- EXACT LOCATOR MAY VARY ® WINDOW WEI. L. DRNNTLE ! GRAVEL MINIMUM 17 BELOW SILL (2) DETAIL SECTION EXISTING LOWER LEVEL T 0. 5I0,8 EL .92.-6 EXISTING BASEMENT WALL -- EXISTING CONC SLAG EXISTING FOOTING CONCETE LEDGE REINFORCING NEW CONCRETE SLAB LOWER LEVEL T.O. SLAB EL .90'-. 3/4"=it- 0' 43' -8" 23'-8 1 /7 19'-ll +/7 VERIFY LOCATION W/�I EXISTING GRADE)I rt-1 iP r 2X12 TREATED STRINGERS • 16 0.C. 17 NAMETER CONC. - PIER W/ TREATED 2.8 AS FIRST MSER L- J \\ t iTeln411i8f -. E lt11+ ` PROMl( BELOW SLAM PLUMING N ROURK-N ONLY 1 '.n GIRDER iP . "l I I 1 : COST [Liltu$[01OICt5 0P STORAGE SHFIVFS rf THICKENED, 10 6 */`2 C0N1N0005 ��(-- -L ORDER 1. K[ ...j �GIRLIFR 6'-8 3/4' KT I I L L_7' (4 IMC41114"' LVL STRINGERS T7 PRE-ENG. TRUSSES "'• —" i /9.1'O.c. flop}---.—_� FImWK CONC. 51A8 16'-11 3/4 6 CONC. WALL W/ /4 O 24" O.0 VERTICAL (115' COVER I.S.F.) 8 3-/4 NORIZONTAI.. PROVIDE /4424' DOWEL O 46 O.C. FROM WALL TO FOOTING (TYR) B'-1 I /O' Fp / (1YP.) lw 7 C00 WALL .••••.• �.� .PRlla-tom POCKET PAL 4' 8/ TREATED 2x r + Tj 1. EGRESS MNOOW SILL MAXIMUM 44' A.F.F. )FIN „Lit I - I 1= I II I II IA: _L b 111446 r L Els FDA=11 L-„ L.. L FI grar \l-�O 2X12 LEDGER W/ 2)3" DIAMETER LAG SCREWS • 16 0.0 TO EXISTING RIM 3'-I' 0 J 5' CONC. SLAB W/ f 4 • 12' 0.C. EACH WAY; DOWEL TO FOUNDATION WALL O 46 0.C. PROVIDE 4' v00 FORM 5'-2 l4'-6 7/B' 23'-8' K2" 6'-4 1/2" 3' -5" — M000LM LANDSCAPE BLOCK WINNING WALL DIMENSIONS 14 EGRESS LADDER 10 MEET CODE NEW 3'-O' DOOR: CUT 4/- 3'-4' M.O. .N EXISTING STONE FOUf10AT1011 WALL IN APPROX. LOCATION OF EXISTING BASEMENT WINDOW NEW CONC. STEPS FROM NEW BASEMENT TO EXISTING BASEMENT-5 E0. RISERS <740" 4 TREADS MN IT 14 HANDRAIL PER CODE °RANDLE SUMP. OSCHAROE 10 DAYLIGHT 8 PRINCE SPLASH BLOCK DRAIN TOILET h LAUNDRY TO NEW SUMP -VERIFY LOCATIOI. PROVIDE GRINDER PUMP W/ µARM SYSTEM OR ENcKUP PUMP TO EXISTING WASTE LINE DOWEL 2-/4 FOOTING REINFORCING 4' INTO EXISTING Vire wwww,36 i CONC EDGE ON L�...W SLGGi1Nr `••" -• SLAB BEARING BEAMARING LOWER FLOOR PLAN 4-14 Ac'OIDtTION 6 CONC. WALL W/ FOOTING of SIV)TING: t,oISe 1\ a tQJ .O0) LARSON BRENNER ARCHITECTS 807 RORI 10U6TI filer STIILXATQ, YNp9UT4 5761E TAgka.e: 0S1 424 2066 PINIARBONIII RRQ.WI P.m/Awl. S:m3u6LOW5v I1ke Wank! . PE 101E 111S ONO 4w. hoer G.WH. LION. ION 04401 671'118 41L1 INAKTNA 9neryu... kb- 09/15/09 uWm1WINK 11rTsa: I MrN7 AMIN OM. O1. ph'. or rovata woo 1A1 M .9 r oli Bah AIWlNa4 NAIRN NMr The hn .f MA Nolo N 1110W.al4 1lrpaa4F11 Repel MN ACERS RESIDENCE 422 T. RUT /T. 6W11NT•I, IN 55822 RNA TNW LOWER LEVEL PLAN DID/PERMIT SET creel R.Mr Al Planning Commission DATE: September 30, 2009 APPLICANT: Oliver Vrambout CASE NO.: 09-42 REQUEST: A variance to allow for an addition on a non -conforming structure. LOCATION: 1306 5th St S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DISTRICT: SFSL - Single Family Small Lot ZONING: RB - Two-family District PC DATE: October 12, 2009 REVIEWERS: Community Dev. Director PREPARED BY: Michel Pogge, City Planner P BACKGROUND The applicant, Oliver Vrambout, is seeking a variance to allow for a second floor addition on a non -conforming structure. The home's footprint will remain unchanged. Currently the home sits 4.44 feet from the north property line (5 feet required) and 16.04 feet from the east property line (20 feet required). Since the home is a non -conforming structure, a variance is required in order to add living space. The property meets all other setback, area and lot coverage requirements. SPECIFIC REQUEST In order to construct the second floor addition, the applicant is requesting a variance to Section 31-216 of the City Code states that a non -conforming structure cannot be expanded. Since the structure is non -conforming, variances to both front and side yard setbacks is being request to remove the nonconforming status of the structure. 1306 5th St S Page 2 EVALUATION OF REQUEST A variance may be granted only when all of the following conditions are found: 1. A hardship peculiar to the property, not created by any act of the owner, exists. Personal, family or financial difficulties, loss of prospective profits and neighboring violations are not hardships justifying a variance. The property is a 10,000 square foot lot with the home situated on the north side of the property. The home was originally constructed in approximately 1888. The location of the home was not created by an act of the current property owner. 2. A variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights; and, if granted, would not constitute a special privilege not enjoyed by neighbors. This property is zoned as two-family residential, which allows single family and two-family uses. Without the variance to side and front yard setbacks, the applicant would not be able to expand their home. The proposed addition meets all required setbacks (front and rear), impervious coverage limits and all other bulk regulations of the RB zoning district. Since this is a second floor addition the current footprint of the home will remain unchanged. Therefore, staff finds that a variance to the minimum lot size is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of rights possessed by other properties in the same district and in the same vicinity. 3. The authorizing of the variance will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property and will not materially impair the purpose and intent of this section or the public interest nor adversely affect the comprehensive plan. Since the property will continue to meet all other code requirements; the authorizing of the variances to the minimum lot size will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property, will not materially impair the purpose and intent of this title and would not necessary adversely affect the Comprehensive Plan. FINDINGS 1. The current lot size is a hardship that is peculiar to the property and is not created by acts of the owner. 2. The variances to the minimum lot size is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights possessed by other properties in the same district and in the same vicinity; and that a variance, if granted, would not constitute a special privilege of the recipient not enjoyed by his neighbors. 3. The authorizing of the variances to the minimum lot size will not be a substantial detriment to adjacent property, will not materially impair the purpose and intent of this title and would not necessary adversely affect the Comprehensive Plan. 1306 5th St S Page 3 ALTERNATIVES The Planning Commission has the following options: 1. Approve the requested variance to the minimum lot size. Additionally, staff would suggest the following conditions for approval: a. All minor revisions to the approved plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director. All major revisions shall be revised and approve by the Planning Commission. Determination of the distinction between "major" and "minor" shall rest with the City Administrator. 2. Deny the requested variance. 3. Continue the public hearing until the November 9, 2009 Planning Commission meeting. The 60 day decision deadline for the request is November 20, 2009. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approving the requested variance to the front and side setback as conditioned. Attachments: Location Map, Applicant's Form, Site Plan, and letter. Mailing Address City - State - Zip Telephone No. PLANNING ADMINISTRATION APPLICATION FORM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY OF STILLWATER 216 NORTH FOURTH STREET STILLWATER MN 55082 Case No: ate Filed: Fee Paid: Receipt No.: ACTION REQUESTED Special/Conditional Use Permit Variance Resubdivision Subdivision* Comprehensive Plan Amendment* Zoning Amendment* Planning Unit Development * Certificate of Compliance Lot Line Adjustment *An escrow fee is also required to offset the costs of attorney and engineering fees. The fees for requested action are attached to this application. The applicant is responsible for the completeness and accuracy of all forms and supporting material submitted in connection with any application. All supporting material (i e., photos, sketches, etc.) submitted with application becomes the property of the City of Stillwater. Sixteen (16) copies of supporting material are required. If application is submitted to the City Council, twelve (12) copies of supporting material are required. A site plan showing drainage and setbacks is required with applications. A complete legal description of subject property is required. Any incomplete application or supporting material will delay the application process. After Planning Commission approvals, there is a 10-day appeal period. Once the 10-day appeal period has ended, the applicant will receive a zoning use permit which must be signed and submitted to the City to obtain the required building permits. PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION Address of Project I S Zoning District , 1(4 0 0-- Description of Project U64 �{_F.. ,-1 0 Assessor's Parcel No. 850( o70/� e47V Ira kk�_�. (GEO Code) "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, to be true and correct. I further certify I will comply with the permit if it is granted and used." Property Owner 0 f i&2 /, il.3 p r Representative /3 6' $ $7 5.2442 5 7f /( ,,fo, 7-6¢', {(, Signature__ __�� (Signature is required) Lot Size (dimensions) x Land Area Mailing Address City - State - Zip Telephone No. Signature (Signature is required) SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION Total Building floor area Existing Height of Buildings: Stories Feet Principal Accessory square feet square feet Proposed square feet Paved Impervious Area square feet No. of off-street parking spaces H:\mcnamara\sheila\PLANAPP.FRM April 9, 2008 Dear planning committee, my name is olivier vrambout, and my family and i are in need for more space with the addition of our son. We currently have a 2 bedroom house and there is 5 of us now. We are looking to add a bedroom and a bath above our kitchen, it is the most logical spot, and our foundation is well suited for that. We hope that you will consider the variance for our plans. We look forward on working with the city during this remodel and difficult financial time. Sincerely Olivier Vrarnhout 1306 5th street south st liiwater,nn 55082 G12.578.3944 SET SURVEY MONUMENT MARKED i '4 19.97 "KEMPER 18407" cx a. N 89'31'27" W 133.87' 0a Z z 0 oa) rn 921:29 -4 x scr aV1iti jN ti0 r „5 �.� Q0 R. 0 W o Q N - (11 x 924.70 _4 PP w w *925,?1 921 921 29 x921-74 x922.77 r,'923.23 ? o 6 p " 32 `59 -1 CiAC1/4 (� s y V -x► x923.72 N R. E-T"----` EE. �-�.� 0 x x 920.39 49?1.39 x 9_1 69 x 9 22. 2'? 92_. 3.3 x 921.23 x 921 86 . _ NORTH LINE OF .922, -1 THE SOUTH 1/2 OF LOT 2 X 922.93 NORTH UNE OF LOT 3 x 922.60 .922.43 .921 _ x 923.50 0�6 S 89'31'2r E 133.87' (M) x924.34 134.20 (R) x92q,.55 x922,4j�1 POINT / n ON LINE Kei9t x923.13 x922.54 q`I'5 LA x923.41 x 922.6)(5 t 9:3 52 SOUTH LINE OF LOT 2 }� x922.77 () 4cEN6/ x 924.07 x 9_4.44 x:9_4 59 N 424,02 x •924.' , X 923.79 40 x 923.90 X 923.53 924. 924 29 x924.'_1 AC 924.93 Y BASEMENT ACCESS DOORS • - 62 ►1 925, r W 1.6 x24.12 x924.66 Y 22.50' THRESHOLD ELEVATION 928.50 X925.64 25.69 5.25.86 x92487 GM 14.16' 1306 FIFTH STREET SOUTH 2-STORY FRAME DWELLING BUILDING FOOTPRINT AREA = 1,458 SQUARE FEET PID 30-030-20-13-0021 22.06' 67.01' 924.96 `. 923 'r4 `.12 3. ; CHILDREN'S PLAY SET SOUTH LINE OF LOT 3 x024 44 X 924.20 E x 924.28 x 924.5_ 925.59 CONCRETE STEPS ' 925.97 / • :o rye. x 924.64 X 925.86 x 925.28 x 925.4 7 POINT ON LINE 1n x 925 79 926 52 927.08 921- 49 927.18 N 3.91' 6' 40 926.52 926. 9 x 926.09 926.14 X926.17 N POINT ON LINE x927.20 64 E ro ▪ • 3.44' co 6.66' 927.09 x 925.33 926 - x 926 60 926.65 927.11 N T 14.13' x925.45� FOUND PINCHED IRON PIPE x 925.86 926 97 x . x 92707 7-"-- CONCRETE PORCH 927. 49r 927 58 16.04' THRESHOLD ELEVATION 928.71 14.73' '42? 154 x'927,40 9'2 7.24 x928.15. x 928.33 y6 0 N x926.56 x 926.82 926.2_ w w CONCRETE WALK 6.3 yam, 3, 727.47 x 927.59 9n7 ?.. 41 M W 16.07' 928..118 BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY 9'28-21 x927.76 .66 928.23 - x 4928.2692?' 23 44 X 928.53 134.20 (R) X9'8.3" x 928.76 x 928.60 x 928.49 - X926,81 928.89 ?:8 79 x 928.86 FOUND PINCHED 'RON PIPE rn 927.12 LIMESTONE RETAINING WALL 8942'14" W 133.90' (M) X 928.81 S`\#'Y -\ 20o 9C\ '4 co 978.22 > o() x 926.47 x 928.98 'FOUND PINCHED IRON PIPE PP w rn m 926..34 -925.94 • _7 29 57 ;r. 27.78 8'-4" DORMER 1111111111►1► 1 CP 1 16'$" 4'•IO" 3'-10" 4'4" 3'-t0" 6 6 e CD42026 CAWN36244W x 5'-0't6" x 1'-IPIS" CDW2026 2'-196" x 5'-0%„ 6 6 • FLUSW LVL 34" 03 3 cP --t A 03 A 0 3 5'.0" 2,4 PLUMBING WALL 16'-6" N m A 0 0 3 20'40" Date: October 8, 2009 To: Bill Turnblad, Stillwater Development Director Subject: SENIOR CARE FACILITY PROPOSAL From: Don and Rosemary McKenzie 12620 72nd Street N. City of Stillwater Unfortunately we are unable to attend the upcoming Planning Commission meeting, the Joint Board meeting and the City Council meeting. Please include our concerns related to the Senior Care Facility proposal (Case No.09-38). We are requesting that the following agreements be included in any potential approvals of the project. These were agreed to at previous session meetings and need to continue to be upheld. At their previous meetings it was agreed that the project approvals include the following: 1) Since there is no buffer between the proposed project and our home, it was agreed to shield the view by creating a berm, and also, to install a continuation of our coniferous tree line along the North edge of our property line. 2) Minar Road will be completed and terminate at the North border of our property line. 3) Water, Sewer, and all utilities will be brought to the North border of our property line. If the proposed project is to proceed in more than one phase, the agreements above would apply to the first phase. We appreciate your assistance in dealing with this in our absence. Sincerely,