The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2011-01-10 CPC PacketTHE BIRTHPLACE OF MINNESOTA CITY OF STILLWATER PLANNING COMMISSION NOTICE OF MEETING MONDAY, January 10, 2011 The City of Stillwater Planning Commission will meet on Monday, January 10, 2011 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. AGENDA 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. APPROVAL OF December 13, 2010 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 2011 -01. A special use permit request for a 15,480 square foot, single story office and professional building located at 2900 Curve Crest Blvd in the CRD, Campus Research and Development District. Daniel Regan, applicant. 5. OTHER BUSINESS 5.01 Discussion about tent and vendor sales draft ordinance. CITY HALL: 216 NORTH FOURTH STREET • STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 55082 PHONE: 651 -430 -8800 • WEBSITE: www.ci.stillwater.mn.us CITY OF STILLWATER PLANNING COMMISSION December 13, 2010 Present: Dave Middleton, Chair, Aron Buchanan, Mike Dahlquist, Eric Hansen, Mike Kocon, Anne Siess, Scott Spisak Absent: John Malsam and Charles Wolden Staff present: Community Development Director Bill Turnblad and Planner Mike Pogge CALL TO ORDER Mr. Middleton called the meeting to order at 7 p.m. APPROVAL OF October 11, 2010 MINUTES Minutes were approved by unanimous vote. OPEN FORUM No comments were received. PUBLIC HEARINGS. Case No. 2010 -45. A variance to the fence regulations for height in the side yard located at 603 Churchill Street West in the RB, Two Family Residential District. Judith Fugate, applicant. Mr. Turnblad reviewed the request, noting that the applicant has replaced a picket fence with a 6' tall privacy fence. He explained the definition of a side yard. The fence connects the home to the detached garage, he explained. He said the applicant did not know the regulations when the fence was replaced, including the requirement that all private improvements stay off City property and that improvements in a side yard are limited to 42" in height, unless set inward from the location of the house on the lot. In order to keep the new fence where it is located, he said two variances are required -- a setback variance to allow a portion of the fence to be on public property and height variance to allow a 6' fence, rather than 42" fence. Mr. Turnblad reviewed the three criteria for the issuance of a variance and staff's finding that all three of the criteria are not met, with the recommendation that the variance requests be denied Mr. Dahlquist asked about the setback variance, suggesting it is not so much a setback issue as an issue of a portion of the fence being on public property, to which Mr. Turnblad responded in the affirmative. Mr. Dahlquist asked whether the Commission even has the authority to grant what is essentially a license to place something on public property; Mr. Turnblad stated if the Commission grants the height variance, the City Council would have to allow, by license, the landowner to keep the fence in its current location. On a question by Mr. Kocon, Mr. Turnblad explained that, in this instance, right -of -way and public property are synonymous. Mr. Spisak asked when the picket fence was installed; the applicant stated she put that fence in, but wasn't sure of the exact date when that was done. 1 CITY OF STILLWATER PLANNING COMMISSION December 13, 2010 Ms. Fugate and Stephanie Hansen were present. Ms. Fugate said they were unaware of the right -of -way issue. She said if the fence has to be moved, they would lose 11.5' of the yard. She spoke of the traffic that goes by the house due to the proximity to the junior high school and lack of privacy due to a number of other issues. She said the 42" fence didn't provide the desired privacy, privacy she believes entitled to as a homeowner; she also stated that moving or removing the existing fence would be a financial hardship, explaining the work involved. She said had they been aware of the right -of -way issue, they would not have done this work and also said they didn't know a fence permit was required to replace an existing fence. Ms. Fugate said to move the fence off City right -of -way would require moving it only 18" but would thousands of dollars to do so; she noted the fence has been in place since July 2009 and there had been no complaints until a property dispute with a neighbor. She also stated there are many neighbors in support and complimentary of the fence and who do not understand why a complaint was made. Ms. Fugate also suggested there are many instances in the City of fences that are in violations of code, some of which are located right at the sidewalk. She cited two variances granted for fences due to privacy issues. She said they are willing to pay any fines and certainly will check into permit requirements before doing any more improvements to their home in the future. Mr. Middleton opened the public hearing. No comments were received, and the hearing was closed. Mr. Kocon asked whether both fences were professionally installed; Ms. Fugate responded in the affirmative. Mr. Kocon expressed frustration that a professional installer would be unaware of permitting and code requirements. Mr. Dahlquist noted that generally when the Commission deals with an existing element, it does so as if that element were not present — would it be approved if not already in place. Mr. Dahlquist said he would have trouble building something that is on City property and said he did not think it good policy for the City to be licensing public properly for private improvements. Mr. Spisak pointed out that he had installed a fence several years ago, and the installer put the burden on the property owner to apply for the permit; he said he, too, had concern with the right -of -way issue and said he didn't think it was the Commission's place to license use of City right -of -way, that's a Council decision. Mr. Kocon said he agreed with Mr. Dahlquist and Mr. Spisak's position regarding the use of public property, but also expressed understanding of the homeowners' situation. Mr. Kocon pointed out the applicant can still acquire the desired privacy by placing the fence farther back on the lot or placing a shorter fence closer to the road, but either way there is still the issue of 18" of public land, suggesting that doesn't make the homeowners a villain, but rather a victim. On a question by the applicant, Mr. Turnblad briefly explained the recent Supreme Court decision's affect on the issuance of variances; the applicants pointed out that the fence was in place prior to the Supreme Court decision. Mr. Kocon noted that any decision by the Planning Commission can be appealed to the City Council. CITY OF STILLWATER PLANNING COMMISSION December 13, 2010 Mr. Dahlquist moved to deny the requested variances. Mr. Buchanan seconded the motion. Motion passed unanimously. Case No. 2010 -46. A special use permit and parking variance for a micro - brewery (Stillwater Brewing) located at 402 Main Street North in the CBD, Central Business District. Zachary Morgan, applicant. Mr. Pogge reviewed the request and business proposal. He said there will be no on -site restaurant or consumption of alcohol. He reviewed the three criteria for evaluating special use permits and noted staff believes the criteria can be met with the recommended conditions. Regarding the parking variance, Mr. Pogge noted the proposal requires one additional parking space. He noted the building owner rents 20 spaces from the Desch building for use of tenants; also, he noted that about one -half of the building is currently vacant. Mr. Pogge also pointed out that there is a provision for property owners in the downtown parking district to purchase additional spaces in City lots to offset parking needs. He noted the City currently is in the process of going from a variance procedure to a permit -type procedure for the administration of the downtown parking district regulations and said the City Attorney has advised it would be acceptable to issue a variance in this instance. He concluded that staff recommends approval with the five conditions, amending condition 5 to indicate that the at full occupancy of the building, if determined by the Community Development Director that the site is in need of additional parking, then the property owner shall purchase 1 additional public monthly parking permit to compensate for the deficit of on -site parking or provide documentation that one additional parking permit has been purchased in a private lot to make up for the deficit. Mr. Spisak verified that the special use permit is being issued to Stillwater Brewing at this specific location and that if the operation moved, they would need a new special use permit; Mr. Pogge responded in the affirmative. Mr. Spisak asked if another business could use the special use permit at this location; Mr. Pogge stated if another business moved to this location within a year, the special use permit would be valid under the same conditions. Ms. Siess asked about the current parking accommodations; Mr. Pogge stated parking is in the Desch lot and also on- street parking is utilized. Ms. Siess asked if other occupants of the building had been asked for input; Mr. Pogge stated notices were sent to adjacent property owners within 350' of the property, with 3 comments received. Mr. Spisak asked if there had been any complaints regarding a similar operation downtown; Mr. Pogge stated he was unaware of any complaints related to odors, but said there had been some complaints regarding other aspects, such as cleanliness. Mr. Buchanan asked about process if the conditions of the permit are not met or the applicant wishes to change the operation; Mr. Pogge stated it would be brought back to the Commission for consideration of revoking the permit or changing the conditions. Mr. Middleton asked about deliveries; Mr. Pogge provided a 3 CITY OF STILLWATER PLANNING COMMISSION December 13, 2010 site plan. On a question by Ms. Siess, Mr. Pogge noted the building official inspects for issues related to accessibility and emergency egress. The applicant was present and briefly explained the brewing process that will be utilized. On a question by Ms. Siess, the applicant stated that tours will be given, and he stated they expect to have tastings on -site, which is a license obtained on a federal level. Mr. Middleton opened the public hearing. Martin Hansen, 402 N. Second St., expressed concerns about odor and noise. He asked if the requirement that mash not be made on site is part of the permit; Mr. Middleton said that is a condition of the permit. Mr. Hansen also asked about noise from machinery, air compressors, chillers, fans, etc. The applicant spoke to some of the equipment that will be used, noting that the chillers for the machines produce the same amount of noise as a household refrigerator; he said kegs are filled manually and there is no machinery other than the stationery tanks. Mr. Hansen said his concerns were answered. No other comments were received, and the hearing was closed. Mr. Kocon spoke in favor of the proposal. Mr. Buchanan moved to approve with the conditions listed. Mr. Kocon seconded the motion. Mr. Hansen asked if the motion included the recommended change to condition 5 as outlined by Mr. Pogge; Mr. Buchanan said that was his intent. Motion passed unanimously. OTHER BUSINESS Discussion of solar panel ordinance — Mr. Pogge reviewed the draft of a proposed ordinance amendment related to solar collectors. He said the proposal includes guidelines that would apply in the Neighborhood Conservation District (NCD) and residential areas outside of the NCD. He noted that in the NCD, staff would review requests, with an appeal process to the Heritage Preservation Commission should there be disagreement with the staff findings. Outside of the NCD, if installed apart from the principal structure, the free - standing collectors would need to follow height restrictions and setbacks for an accessory building — located in a rear yard or side yard, not an exterior side yard or front yard. He said the question is whether the Commission thinks there should be standards for installation of collectors on the principal structure or accessory building outside of the historic district. Mr. Pogge reviewed the guidelines for the Neighborhood Conservation District. Mr. Kocon noted that in some instances, the guidelines would make utilizing solar collectors impractical or impossible in the NCD depending on lot orientation; Mr. Pogge said that is an issue the Heritage Preservation Commission is aware of and discussed, and said the HPC was concerned that there not be regulations that totally prohibit the use of solar panels /collectors. Mr. Pogge pointed out that even in the NCD these are guidelines and an applicant can apply to the HPC for relief if the applicant believes staff is being too restrictive in the application of the guidelines. On a question by Mr. Spisak, Mr. Pogge explained the definition of an exterior side yard. Mr. Spisak asked if there are any regulations for commercial CITY OF STILLWATER PLANNING COMMISSION December 13, 2010 operations in the downtown area. Mr. Pogge stated there are design standards for the downtown and HPC would have to approve any building changes; he said staff feels comfortable the existing design standards are sufficient to address that issue. Ms. Siess asked if staff had looked at what other cities have done in this area; Mr. Pogge responded in the affirmative. In discussion, it was noted that some homeowner association design guidelines could prohibit the use of solar panels. Mr. Pogge said staff does not believe there should be restrictions related to solar panels on a principal structure or accessory structure outside of the NCD. He asked for input regarding that position. Mr. Hansen spoke in favor of that position. Mr. Kocon suggested that the bottom line is that the City wants to support the use of solar panels but wants to make them as unobtrusive as possible, noting that in the NCD the restrictions are a little tighter due to the desire to preserve historic aesthetics, while outside of the NCD the restrictions are less, but the bottom line there, too, is to be as unobtrusive is possible without affecting functionality. Mr. Dahlquist said he thought he understood the proposal was to have no restrictions outside of the NCD. Mr. Pogge said the proposal is that a free - standing system would have to be placed in the rear yard or side yard not along a street, with no regulations for applications on the primary or accessory structure outside of the NCD. Mr. Dahlquist suggested there could be some very unattractive systems that would be OK under that proposal; he said he thought there should be some guidelines. Mr. Buchanan said he thought the NCD guidelines should apply throughout the City. Mr. Spisak said he thought there should be some specificity, even though that might not be equitable in some instances. Mr. Kocon said he thought it OK to give a little more leeway to functionality in the newer areas. Mr. Spisak suggested the possibility of requiring panels on the front of a house, outside of the NCD, match the roof pitch, not regulating panels on structures not visible from the street. Mr. Pogge suggested that he bring back some photo examples for additional discussions at the January meeting. Mr. Dahlquist spoke of the rapidly changing technology in this area. Mr. Middleton welcomed Ms. Siess to her first meeting, and thanked everyone for his 10 years on the Commission. Mr. Kocon thanked Mr. Middleton for his 10 years of service to the City and moved to adjourn at 8:45 p.m. Mr. Dahlquist seconded the comments and motion. Motion passed unanimously. Respectfully submitted, Sharon Baker Recording Secretary 5 BACKGROUND � Illwater THE BIRTHPLACE OF MiNNESOTA. PLANNING REPORT DATE: January 6, 2011 CASE NO.: 2011 -01 APPLICANT: Daniel Regan REQUEST: 1) Determination of Similar Use 2) Special Use Permit for Office Building LOCATION: 2900 Curve Crest Boulevard ZONING: CRD, Campus Research & Development PUBLIC HEARING:January 10, 2011 REVIEWED BY: Mike Pogge, City Planner Torry Kraftson, Asst. City Engineer PREPARED BY: Bill Turnblad, Community Development Director '.gam Dan Regan of Airlake Development is proposing to construct a 15,800 square foot single story multiple tenant office building at 2900 Curve Crest Boulevard. It is designed to be a medical office building, to be known as The Curve Crest Health Center. The Airlake Development lot has two building sites. The medical office building will occupy one site and the second will remain vacant for now. The subject property is one of four lots in the Bradshaw Addition. The lot to the west is home to the Associated Eye Care facility. The lot immediately to the east has two building sites: one for an existing multiple tenant office building, the other is vacant. And, the fourth lot is the site of the Bradshaw Funeral Home. With professional office buildings on both sides of Airlake Development's lot, the proposed Curve Crest Health Center represents a compatible land use. Moreover, development of the four lot plat has already incorporated all of the infrastructure improvements necessary to accommodate the new building. Airlake Development SUP Page 2 of 8 SPECIFIC REQUEST In order to construct the office building and other site improvements, Airlake Development is requesting: 1. A determination by the Planning Commission that the proposed medical office facility is similar to uses allowed by Special Use Permit in the CRD Zoning District, and that the proposal will not impair the use of adjacent properties; and 2. Approval of a Special Use Permit for the medical office building. EVALUATION OF REQUEST Determination of "similar use" City Code Ch. 31, Sec. 31 -322 (b)(2) allows for uses in the CRD zoning district that are not specifically listed in the table of allowed uses for the district, as long as those uses are similar to other uses allowed in the district. Specifically, the code says that: Similar uses by special use permit. Any other use or service establishment determined by the planning commission to be of the same general character as the specially permitted uses in Section 31 -325 for the CRD district and which will not impair the present or potential use of adjacent properties. In 2005 the Planning Commission considered approval of the Associated Eye Care facility planned for construction on the Bradshaw Addition lot immediately west of Airlake Development's lot. Like Airlake's proposal the eye care facility is also a medical office building. The Planning Commission approved the eye care proposal. No ordinances or Comprehensive Plan amendments have been adopted since 2005 that would prohibit or discourage a finding by the Planning Commission that the Airlake Development medical office building would also be acceptable in the Bradshaw Addition. Like Associated Eye Care's facility, Airlake Development's facility would neither impair use of adjacent properties, nor would it be markedly dissimilar from an office building for consultants, which is allowed by Special Use Permit (SUP) in the CRD, Campus Research & Development Zoning District. Special Use Permit City Code Ch 31, Sec. 31- 207(d) states that a Special Use Permit can be approved if the Planning Commission finds that: (1) The proposed use conforms to the requirements and the intent of the Zoning Ordinance, the Comprehensive Plan, and any relevant area plans. Airlake Development SUP Page 3 of 8 Zoning Ordinance Massing As can be seen in the table, all massing standards are satisfied. Parking For clinics and medical offices, one parking space is required for each 200 square feet of gross floor area; but need not exceed an average of five spaces per practitioner. So, if the City requires the maximum parking of one space per 200 square feet, then the 15,480 gross square foot medical office building would require 78 spaces. 84 spaces are being proposed. Parking requirements are satisfied for this building. When the 10,508 square foot second building is constructed, parking might be 3 spaces short. When that building is reviewed by the City, the northern edge City Code Ch 31, Sec. 31- 322(c)(1) 2 Half of the height of the gable above the southeast entrance. 3 Res means that the property is either developed as residential or guided for residential development in Comprehensive Plan. 4 60.9% would be pervious surface even after development of the second building pad on the lot. Standard Airlake Dev. Minimum lot area 5 acres (unless part of a development plan) 3.06 acres (part of approved plat) Height of buildings and structures 3 stories, not over 40 feet 1 story, 17 feet Front setback From street forming perimeter of business park 50 feet 80 feet Internal street 30 feet NA Side setback 1. Abutting residential 75 feet NA 2. Abutting property line that forms perimeter of business park but is not abutting residential property 20 feet NA Rear setback 1. Abutting residential 75 feet 115 feet 2. Abutting property line that forms perimeter of business park but is not abutting residential property 20 feet 115 feet Landscaped and open area 30% of lot area 60.9 % Airlake Development SUP Page 3 of 8 Zoning Ordinance Massing As can be seen in the table, all massing standards are satisfied. Parking For clinics and medical offices, one parking space is required for each 200 square feet of gross floor area; but need not exceed an average of five spaces per practitioner. So, if the City requires the maximum parking of one space per 200 square feet, then the 15,480 gross square foot medical office building would require 78 spaces. 84 spaces are being proposed. Parking requirements are satisfied for this building. When the 10,508 square foot second building is constructed, parking might be 3 spaces short. When that building is reviewed by the City, the northern edge City Code Ch 31, Sec. 31- 322(c)(1) 2 Half of the height of the gable above the southeast entrance. 3 Res means that the property is either developed as residential or guided for residential development in Comprehensive Plan. 4 60.9% would be pervious surface even after development of the second building pad on the lot. Airlake Development SUP Page 4of8 of the parking area may have to be extended 3 spaces eastward. Or perhaps proof of parking for those 3 additional spaces may be sufficient. In any event, the developer is aware of the parking situation and is more than willing to meet the requirements. Traffic circulation Traffic circulation as proposed for both the first and second phases is satisfactory. The access points to Curve Crest Boulevard are shared with neighboring property owners, and they are already in place. The Airlake Development improvements would provide a frontage drive parallel with Curve Crest Boulevard that will increase traffic flexibility and improve emergency access to all three lots in Block 2 of Bradshaw Addition. Design Review Permit Per City Code Ch 31, Sec. 31- 322(d)(6) a design review permit is required for this project. Therefore, the Heritage Preservation Commission will need to review the case. Landscaping & Screening Utilities and RTUs - All utilities and ground or roof top mounted mechanical equipment will need to be screened from public view. Prior to issuance of a building permit, this will have to be verified by the Community Development Department. Outside trash containers - Per City Code, any outside trash receptacles must be completely screened with the same building materials as the main building. This standard will be met, as the same brick will be used for both. Landscaping - The landscaping plan is in keeping with the rest of Bradshaw Addition and the guidelines for the West Business Park. It includes foundation plantings, parking lot island plantings and trees at the perimeter of the lot and in a prominent location at the southeast corner of the office building. The trees are River Birch clumps and eight foot tall Austrian Pine. 5 15,480 sf phase I building divided by 200 square feet = 78 spaces. 10,508 sf phase II building divided by 200 sf = 53 spaces. 53 + 84 = 131 total required spaces. Cooperative parking facilities allow for a 5% reduction where there are two buildings. 5% of 131 is a 7 space reduction. 131 — 7 space reduction = 124 spaces. The total number of spaces that are shown on the site plan for both phases is 121 spaces. That is a 3 space deficit. However, since the requirement for one space per 200 sf of floor area can be capped at five spaces per practitioner, the second phase may or may not be 3 spaces short, since that cap was not applied in these calculations. That will have to be determined with the development of the second building pad. 6 Ch. 31, Sec. 31- 322(d)(1) Airlake Development SUP Page 5 of 8 Exterior Lighting Building - All building lights, including security lights, must be downlit. Light sources will need to be shielded from direct view of the public. Cut sheets of the fixtures shall be provided to the Community Development Department and found satisfactory prior to issuance of a building permit. Parking Lot - At the northern edge of the northerly trail, the calculated luminaire should be verified. It may not exceed 0.0. The luminaire at the southern property line should be adjusted so as not to exceed 0.0. Cut sheets of the fixtures shall be provided to the Community Development Department and found satisfactory prior to issuance of a building permit. Signage The location of the low profile monument sign and the building signs seem acceptable. But, a sign permit will need to be requested from the City and issued prior to installing any of these signs. Comprehensive Plan The future land use designation for Bradshaw Addition is RDP, Research & Development Park. The corresponding zoning district for this land use designation is CRD, Campus Research & Development. Given the size of the Bradshaw Addition and the existing uses there, a corporate campus setting will never occur. But, the Comprehensive Plan does say that property designated for this land use should bring well designed development and head -of- household caliber jobs to the community. The proposed medical office will fulfill both of these objectives. (2) Any additional conditions necessary for the public interest have been imposed. Architectural design - As mentioned above, the Heritage Preservation Commission will need to issue a Design Review Permit for this project. They will consider the architectural elements of the project. One of the comments that they have consistently made for the Bradshaw Addition buildings is that all gutters, downspouts, flashings, etc. have to match the color of the adjacent surface. Civil Engineering - The Assistant City Engineer has reviewed the project, including stormwater, utilities and driveways, and notes the following: 1. A total of 84 parking stalls are shown with 2 handicap stalls. ADA requirements dictate a minimum of 4 handicap stalls with at least 1 van accessible stall. Two additional handicap stalls are therefore required. Airlake Development SUP Page 6 of 8 ALTERNATIVES 2. The approval grading and drainage plan for the overall development shows approximately 75 % of the site drainage directed to the southerly infiltration basin and about 25 % of the site directed to the northerly infiltration basin (see attached drainage area sketch). The proposed grading plan shows more than 50% of the site directed to the northerly infiltration basin. The site drainage shall be revised to be consistent with the approved drainage plan. 3. There are two locations on the plan where roof gutters discharge across paved surfaces (Plan Sheet C3.1). This could result in icy conditions during freeze thaw cycles. Additional catch basins should be considered to avoid this pedestrian hazard. 4. Plan sheets C1.1 through L1.1 need signatures. 5. Construction note 1 (Plan Sheet C3.1) shall state that the rock construction entrance shall be installed prior to any construction activity. Construction notes 3 and 4 shall state that restoration shall be completed within 14 days of ceased construction activity. Construction note 8 shall state streets shall be swept within 24 hours as needed and as requested by the Engineer. The SWPPP plan identified in note 10 shall be submitted for review. 6. The numbering of the utility notes on Plan Sheet C4.1 is misaligned. 7. An NPDES permit shall be in effect prior to commencing construction. Miscellaneous - Any changes to the approved plans will need to be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director. Any major changes will also need to go to the Planning Commission or Heritage Preservation Commission for review and approval. (3) The use or structure will not constitute a nuisance or be detrimental to the public welfare of the community. • Staff finds this criterion to be satisfied. The Planning Commission has the following options: 1. Determine that the medical office building is similar to other uses by Special Use Permit in the CRD Zoning District, and approve the Special Use Permit and with the following conditions: a. A Design Review Permit is required for this project. The permit application will need to be submitted by the property owner, reviewed and approved by the Heritage Preservation Commission prior to issuance of a building permit. b. All changes to the approved plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director. Any major changes will also need to Airlake Development SUP Page 7 of 8 go to the Planning Commission or Heritage Preservation Commission for review and approval prior to issuance of any building permits. c. All utilities and ground or roof top mounted mechanical equipment must be screened from public view. d. A sign permit is required for any monument or building signage. e. Any outside trash receptacles must be completely screened with the same building materials as the main building. f. All building lights, including security lights, must be down lit. Light sources must be shielded from direct view of the public. Cut sheets of the fixtures must be provided to the Community Development Department and found satisfactory prior to issuance of a building permit. g. The parking lot light fixtures must be of a full cut off type. No lens or lamp shall extend below the bottom of the fixture housing. Cut sheets of the fixtures must be provided to the Community Development Department and found satisfactory prior to issuance of a building permit. The illumination strength at the northern edge of the northerly trail shall not exceed a calculated luminaire of 0.0. The calculated luminaire at the southern property line shall also not exceed 0.0. h. All gutters, downspouts, flashings, etc. must match the color of the adjacent surface. i. The street address of the building shall be displayed in a location conspicuous from the public street. j. Two additional handicap stalls shall be provided, for a total of four spaces. k. The site drainage shall be revised to be consistent with the approved drainage plan for Bradshaw Addition. 1. There are two locations on the plan where gutters discharge across paved surfaces (Plan Sheet C3.1). This could result in icy conditions during freeze thaw cycles. Additional catch basins should be considered to avoid this pedestrian hazard. m. Plan sheets C1.1 through L1.1 must be signed prior to issuance of a building permit. n. Construction note 1 (Plan Sheet C3.1) shall state that the rock construction entrance shall be installed prior to any construction activity. Construction notes 3 and 4 shall state that restoration shall be completed within 14 days of ceased construction activity. Construction note 8 shall state streets shall be swept within 24 hours as needed and as requested by the Engineer. The SWPPP plan identified in note 10 shall be submitted for review. o. An NPDES permit shall be in effect prior to commencing construction. 2. Determine that the medical office building is not similar to other uses by Special Use Permit in the CRD Zoning District and deny the Special Use Permit. If the Airlake Development SUP Page 8 of 8 Attachments: Location map Air Photo Applicant's materials Drainage Areas Planning Commission decides to deny the requests, findings of fact substantiating the findings must be provided. 3. Table the requests for additional information. RECOMMENDATION City staff recommends approval of the requests with the conditions identified in above. cc: Dan Regan t a - 2 E z r) Q CD a cn M ca .� CD al 05 CD W I .6wr`I`o " N 0) m 4 i) 0 0) 0 0 E 0 0 1 Ts if E U 0 0 0 11 1 • • • • 0 o H o a c • • • sA , 1 / 1 / 1 0 / 1 / 1 / 1 1 0 1 0 • • / 1 / • 4 w 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Planning n Nurr(,I►ve A h AIRLAKE DEVELOPMENT __._ Presenting The Curve Crest Health Center Stillwater, MN 1 Planning Application Narrative Section 1- Master Development Plan dd1h� , AIRLAKE — DEVELOPMENT The City of Stillwater's unique landscape of historical architecture surrounded by a spectacular natural environment occasionally presents opportunities for localized rebirths, developments that can create new and revitalized neighborhoods, projects that can spur additional development and create a new identity for a district. The Curve Crest property, originally conceived of and developed by Jim Bradshaw, of Bradshaw Funeral with his Celebration of Life Center, is one such opportunity. I am proud to present our vision for a proposed development that will truly effectuate completion and create the critical mass of commercial use necessary to achieve the original development vision. Our Master Development Plan will bring 26,000 square feet of new construction to the three -acre property in a balance of office and service uses that responds to the needs of the local trade area healthcare delivery needs. The unique nature of the site allows the masterplan to take advantage of prominent views to the Highway 36 corridor, to create a scale to the development that responds to and compliments neighboring properties, while still providing the intimate feel of an isolated area bordered by forest cover on the north side. Major programmatic components include a 15,000 square foot, single- story, multi- tenant office building and an 11,000 square foot phase II office building (planned to be constructed and approved at a later date), with a parking field that is conveniently laid out and that accommodates the requirements of today's customers. Our vision for the development extends beyond our on -site Master Development Plan. We have crafted our site design in a way that links our site and the amenities offered by the entire development. This integration responds to the needs of today's employees by offering access to a paved, pedestrian and bicycle - friendly trail that encircles the entire ten acre development and leads the walker though a densely wooded area on the north side of the development. Additional nearby proposed development presents opportunities for future linkages to the west. 2 Planning Application Narrative 111 N89°5754 343.91 PARKING SETBACK DRAINAGE & UTIUTY EASEMENT ULF AIRLAKE — DEVELOPMENT --- Site Plan BUILDING SETBACK BUILDING PHASE 2 10,508 GSF 10,080FLR. AREA 14' / 57'5-6 W . 0 , 57 or 421 A B 9,41 Psa. 3 MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING- 14,932 SF CLINIC A; 9,000 SF CLINIC 8: 5,932 SF BUILDING-2: 10,080 SF 9,000 SF 0 6 STALLS PER 1,000 SF= 54 STALLS 5,932 SF 0 5 STALLS PER 1,000 SF= 30 STALLS 10,080 SF CALCULATED 0 4 STALLS PER 1,000 SF= 41 STAL 71 SHARED PARKING STALLS 0 5% REDUCTION= 68 STALLS 5 + 68= 122 STALLS REQUIRED PHASE 1 PARKING 9,000 SF 0 6 STALLS PER 1,000 SF= 54 STALLS 5,932 SF 0 5 STALLS PER 1,000 SF- 30 STALLS 54 + 84 STALLS 84 PHASE 1 STALLS PROVIDED LOT 1 0 25' 50' 100' Planning Application Norr aUvy d r g AIRLAKE - DEVELOPMENT There are several significant design decisions informing the masterplan that help create the attractive architecture of the proposed development. These are reinforced by a focused consideration on the architecture of the individual buildings and site improvements. Understanding the need for critical attention to architectural design issues paves the way for a signature design that adds interest and identity to the architectural landscape. These architectural issues, outlined below, focus on the character of the buildings and public spaces. Above grade, exterior siding materiality and texture, shall be integrally colored block and brick, with prominent natural stone design features. The color of the exterior walls will be earth -tone and consistent and complimentary to the neighboring properties. Roofs will be a combination of hipped roofs of similar pitches, combined with flat roofs. All plantings of flowers, vegetation, and trees will be generally consistent with the natural environment and the landscaping plan that was executed on the Bradshaw Celebration of Life property. The opportunity to create a new development that uses the most up -to -date sustainable building practices cannot be missed. The proposed development of the site and building offers many chances to employ practices that achieve responsible usage of the land and provide efficiencies for the building occupants. State of the art stormwater management on the outside and HVAC and plumbing systems on the interiors, will result in an environment that is pleasing to customers, employees, and the finance department. I am confident that working in collaboratiori with Stillwater City Staff and our development team will result in completion of the building and occupancy in the short timeframe. Assuming successful City of Stillwater Planning Commission and Building Department approval, initial construction of site improvements will commence on or about March 1St, 2011. The development team is committed to pursuing the earliest possible start date, pending resolution to the relevant aspects of the project. Phasing of the two buildings will happen at separate and distinct times, with completion and occupancy of the Phase I building and its respective tenant improvements scheduled to occur on August 1St, 2011. 4 Planning Applica Narrative Section 2 - Ownership and Qualifications 1. Project Team Master developer Airlake Development, Inc. is a family -owned commercial real estate development and investment company, composed of five siblings, based in Maplewood, MN. Since its inception in 1994, Airlake has developed a portfolio of 500,000 square feet of office and industrial properties for its own account. Currently, the company has approximately 350,000 square feet of space and 200 acres of land planned or under development for 2011. Airlake properties can be found throughout the Twin Cities and points north and south from Duluth to Rochester. Sincerely, Dan's recently completed construction and development projects include: Kindersley Transport 37,000 square feet, RZ Financial 5,000 square feet, Hearth & Home Technologies, a subsidiary of HNI, Corp., a Fortune 700 company 29,000 square feet, Premier Banks 15,000 square feet, R &L Trucking 68,000 square feet, and Schoolhouse Square, a 50,000 square foot mixed use development consisting of retail and office elements. Project Architect Todd Mohagen and Mark Hansen of Mohagen /Hansen Architectural Group have provided planning and design services for numerous healthcare, general practice and specialty clinics, imaging and surgery centers, dental, financial, and office clients. They continue to work hard to maintain a reputation for executing high - quality design solutions that respond to clients' goals and objectives, while remaining sensitive to budgetary requirements. As a service - oriented firm providing programming, master planning, design and construction documentation, Mohagen /Hansen Architectural Group is committed to creating unique and cost effective design solutions. General Contractor Dew Corporation is a full service construction organization, which specializes in commercial construction utilizing all forms of project delivery. Founder, Robert Dew, is committed to providing services in the most cost - efficient and quality conscious manner, while conducting the company's business with the highest level of integrity and honesty. Satisfied clients include: JLT Group, Starbucks, Fresenius Medical Care, Meridian Behavioral Health, Shermann Associates, Cities of Stillwater, North St. Paul, St. Paul, and Orono, United States Postal Service, Metropolitan Airports Commission, and Century College. Daniel 0. Regan President Airlake Development, Inc. 2866 White Bear Ave Maplewood, MN 55109 (612) 987 -9966 ArA AIRLAKE — DEVELOPMENT - 5 Dan Regan - President Always seeking solutions, Dan excels at finding inventive ways of making a development project work. His responsibilities include: identifying land and potential acquisitions, developing project feasibility, concepts and strategies, negotiating sales and leasing deal terms, maintaining relationships with the brokerage & lending communities, and overseeing property management functions. Family owned and operated we SITE bradshawfuneral. corn EMAIL infoObradshawita al.culn SOUTH MINNEAPOLIS 3131 Minnehaha Ave S Minrreapolia, MN 55406 A 1 2.724.3621 NORTH SUBURBS 4611n Eirernhaven Drive White !Sear. MN 55I?!7 651.4(17,10 0 NORTH ENO 1078 Rice Street Saint Nail, MN 55117 651.4 K4.1,14 `t HIGHLAND E MENDOTA HEIGHTS 67K Snelling Ave S Saint NM, MN 55116 651.698.38711 WEST SIDE OR Humboldt Ave Saint NauI. MN 251117 1-151.222.$5')7 EAST SIDE 1 174 Payne Ave Saint P,lul. MN 5513n 651.776.1551 STILLWATER Celebration tat Life Canter and C:ohnnhariu i 31011 Curve Crest lilvd Stillwater, MN 551182 A51,439.5511 AFFILIATED CREMATORIES EAST METRO Forest l.mvn C:rrntatory St. Paul, MN WEST METRO Lakewood Crematory Minneapolis, MN Bradshaw craning Mearnr)Jol Events 71<rt C'elebrarr LIJe° Mr. 13i11 Turnlblad Community Development Director City of Stillwater 216 North Fourth Street Stillwater, MN 55082 Re: Airlake Development. Inc. proposed Curve Crest development Dear Bill: I am writing to notify you that I have met with Dan Regan, of Airlake Development. Inc., to discuss and review the site plan, building elevations, and phasing plans for his proposed office development that is to be located in the Bradshaw Property Development. Major programming components meet the design standards set forth in the architectural covenants and the building integrates well with surrounding properties. It is my opinion that the proposed development will truly effectuate completion and create the critical mass of commercial use necessary to achieve my original development vision. Please contact me if you have any questions. 1 look forward to seeing this project become a wonderful addition to the Bradshaw Property Development. Sincerely yours, James H. Bradshaw. President The Bradshaw Group, Inc. CC: Dan Regan 1 Funeral and Cremation Services Pre - Planeu" Services Continued Care co o ri N rr SS3800V 103f021d 7 . 9HIIQ'II[Ifl 3IddO'WDIUHY1 a JNMIILIS/1d7.IJNfl IS L.LD /mIv O'SSCOVINalAldorianaa axd72IId do 00 0 C c) v o N u n n 223 (6 's 2 N N 50:E v N N N U o ul N CD Y j N X O O I— LA- d 3 d 3 0 0 PEOCIM■■ H g$s N N r m co o ri N rr SS3800V 103f021d 7 . 9HIIQ'II[Ifl 3IddO'WDIUHY1 a JNMIILIS/1d7.IJNfl IS L.LD /mIv O'SSCOVINalAldorianaa axd72IId do 00 0 C c) v o N u n n 223 (6 's 2 N N 50:E v N N N U o ul N CD Y j N X O O I— LA- d 3 d 3 0 0 PEOCIM■■ g$s r m co o ri N rr SS3800V 103f021d 7 . 9HIIQ'II[Ifl 3IddO'WDIUHY1 a JNMIILIS/1d7.IJNfl IS L.LD /mIv O'SSCOVINalAldorianaa axd72IId do 00 0 C c) v o N u n n 223 (6 's 2 N N 50:E v N N N U o ul N CD Y j N X O O I— LA- d 3 d 3 0 0 PEOCIM■■ • • • • • • • • • • • co o ri N rr SS3800V 103f021d 7 . 9HIIQ'II[Ifl 3IddO'WDIUHY1 a JNMIILIS/1d7.IJNfl IS L.LD /mIv O'SSCOVINalAldorianaa axd72IId do 00 0 C c) v o N u n n 223 (6 's 2 N N 50:E v N N N U o ul N CD Y j N X O O I— LA- d 3 d 3 0 0 PEOCIM■■ . „s„,„ \t, 5 1-- P1 ,.. w_., v„ . ...,21 hte i'k W 5 GY W d d 2 9 L oet, Q co U Q Win - a h 6 g e .,._ °off N r , i _ , .„.. Wag - 3 ia Ds e'to K o ° , !III 3 m - V a z :S Oe O u_ 1 CITY SUBMITTAL OOZY =E __EWE ^-- 10 �_— ! U O i - 18 g o g aw WFA :E10 3 U i g g W 1 N z V W Z V N ,3 NO'S JO d01 01 30V10 MOW o d C Y mI� O g 8 f 1 5 M J z 0 W W nL O V z W Cie W tze 0 z 2 II 1 ,0-46 __EWE ^-- 10 �_— ! .- -. —, —J .OL —,9Z .9- A —,r9 1 II o 4_I Lt-,c' ,r -,s .6 -,r ' ,r -,s .e-,r I I II L. la I u_80 niB' FPI51� :1:! , '' 1LL - JI ;t .r - r r ,9 ,s ' .0 -,' .- ' .o ,r -, ' ,o- .r '.e -,?� o-,zc 1 I , I I I I II t � I I M I I I I 1 I A - ,Z , of —,a • a-.r ' .r -,s ' .8-t ' .t-.s ' .o-.a '.r- .c'.r -,c .r-,cc i m II 4 .L i I I Y ,0 -,OZ ,0 -4,' - AmZ£ U O i - 18 g o g aw WFA :E10 3 U i g g W 1 N z V W Z V N ,3 NO'S JO d01 01 30V10 MOW o d C Y mI� O g 8 f 1 5 M J z 0 W W nL O V z W Cie W tze 0 z 2 II 1 0 0 m z 00 0 3 V . N j ai � � g g 5 � 1, ° § i el. 8L4 3 5 d 6 soig ° a Y I CHECKED BY T. MOHAQN PRELIMINARY CLINIC PLAN 1 CITY SUBMITTAL Lozv -E d d V. L M . a g, z a V z J V me z w a II o W Z CO cc J W GC W W 3 3 N No . .V In =d !;I o e� L wg CC g O g2 $ HT a s. o� � 6,, - K. 3 =r o ox O g III CHECKED BY T. MOHAON EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 1 CITY SUBMITTAL ooEV =ED I g III . C C Q p p � ,@ t� 8 W = U S a z 0 e g z 0 oc Da w ono 5 z 0 N r g z 0 W 0 EXTERIOR MATERIALS CLEIR-1) BRICK-1: CLOUD CERAMICS, R BLOCK COMPANY, TEC lam wow aiva NOLLdI OS30 NOISVG8 ON � m i��wa F o F a a i ; w� J g w. y 'S � a a ` �` O o ti 1�1 * ^ + $ v "� o 4 m° " ° '"s�'' ° ""'�m I£fba£i (ts9)'"d LL9B6C�(IS91 m 9d Zi05SNW b3eII MI HLUON L�xiS IILSS MC NW `dOOM3ldt+W 3�N3nV 2lV38 311HM 998Z 3 NW `2131dM11115 �Nldlifl8 3JI��O 1lrJld3' 3FAFTAf69d _ _ JNMrIDDII'JN2 O`°AH"""s c `J NINNV Id aN VT " ONI `IN]Wd013/�3a 3)Ib1 IV INIMIZININAZ NVid1VI10W38 SNOWaNO) DN -3uI 'uos 'usuzaa=3 `z i ° 3 MiA 1175 ^y - ✓;LYiSd� .fV;+13rV vos�aug vamaad 0 1.d — 010Z 0 ' Jr. 4 1 ,„ 0 . , ' " , „. , . . , ' ' , , . . ! . s ., . , -* . °. ' " N EXISTI1VG .. C_O , NDITIO ". N . S & REMOVAL PLAN ) . , .- . , , .. , „ orAgkt,voit4,, i . ,. DRAINAGE ENO ,:p.,.-73, cw`' w j Or . ,., I. w cp E : 0 ‘-- 4... --* - ...' PEE ',1410,„11.: .‘" ' . . E. ,..- - 4 "VW* ' - .... ,„ , '." P , , , , 0 .., oo. , oN ''‘ , ' - S ,.., ., - I i 1 rs i ,'‘'"7" !",:,: , '. -, li ,, , - . ' : (...// t I ti.` '''.-. ;' .',- 4 .... , . _ ,,,--_,,,-- = NE? ..9°045 35'3,91 :. : 0 ' . . , St .1 .17 .5 16 ,ivc,../ /Ay,/ ... .89°57:54" 3.93.91 .. , :„.. ,, 3743 ,, ,f, .. JAMES ENO JAYNE r ' ' PIEL 12/171? PL.4.17C CAR . „ " ' , .,,_ . .., ,, , . :,,,, I: ' '''''' -- * ORIGINAL SCALE ' 1 ,- , - _ ,. 1 INCH -= 30 FEET ., ic w' . : -"„, 1 I --- - . al k * , , 1) 4 al - 4 ' . r . ,. , .-: . 4 ,,,,,,,, „- „. . ,, ,. .,.,.._ _ _. ,_ . , ,,,, 0 15 30 SCALE IN FEET 60 --- " 0 , 'I "'-'-. - 's, t t, , \ , _ , , , . . ‘ ' , , \ '., .... ,,...: LEGEND ', ., , _ ., ., ..' \ 1 1 1 1 I , , ... ............ k t '' .. , - _ . _ . — ,_ , ,, , - , . - .. . 0 END OTES PROPERTY BOUNDARY ,. ., i i A I - --ri ■ .,. i 1°1 ' ' ._ ... -"" ','''',' . LL''''' 3 . 1 I ' - - - - ,„ , . t , . ' ' ' ' ''' ' ' \ ■ ' N .... . to , . , ^ ,. ,,„. $ o DENOTES SET SURVEY MARK NAIL (3 Inch by 3/8 Inch) W111 DISC INSCRIBED "FREEMAN LS 16989' UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 4 ■ 4 4 ., .11111 . . 111 . . ) ' ., \ ,,, 5 , , .''',,_,‘'''' '-' ' ,, ,,, ,„ fill k 4. . . .., I t . . . e-- . - , — - . DENOTES FOUND 1/2 INCH IRON PIPE MONUMENT VATH A PLASTIC i 11 I i . , ' i t skr \ 0 , ,,,„ ..,. , ,,.. „ ,,,,,, D C EN AP oiE NSCR s w I A BE TER D 'I Metro'. UNLESS OTHERVASE NOTED. -'' \ ,, - An DENOTES FIRE HM)RANT ' 4,' ",c1) ,., 11 1 1 , Jr'' I 1 ( - ' I ' ,, .„ , <0 0 . , 1,1 '44 , , . . 1 '' ' \ 4 4° 0 ' , - " ' A ('` I $ DENOTES SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE , , li " " ',t '.,- ' ' ' " '''' ' 4 \ - .-., ,..,.....,„: - „. vo I i i . ,, f. . i \ .,.... , 2.: ' , :;.'" ..-.-', ,...'„--, 1' ,' ,..' s i-. ',..:: -- i 4 1,•• DENOTES UGHT POLE '.. ''.. : , , C3 \ gi.tocie 2 - - -- , -, fr. DENOTES TELEPHONE PEDESTAL --f ' "' - fil ' I i I DENOTES BITUMINOUS SURFACE . - ` . ' '-',,„`".--,- r., :;-'` . ''\ ' \ \ e ' ' " 110 1 PIO 31-030-20-9.3 ,I - - i - - ,''. ' ' ' IP : . . Zor 2 2, ,,,,,-... ,.,,,,,,.,., ,,,.,, , \\ i , , ,::.,..:',:: - ' ' , .: ,,,,■ ‘,. \\\ s , , D 31-630-20-93-001.5" DENOTES UNDERGROUND GAS UNE DENOTES UNDERGROUND COMMUNICATIONS UNE DENOTES UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC UNE - , - . s i. '- ,:?: ,•,' "''',. \ \ \\,, , 1. \ \ opal PROFESSIONAL 5.enzariva, LEC F,..". DENOTES RECORD VALUES FROM PLAT OF BRADSHAW ADDITION S LIVATREil'' tr. 0 4.5.,, C v. ,, ,..1 \„,.. T z4 , , , . ASSOCIATED fYE C4RE : ... 1 .. bl, I ., AM, i rK - . , , , . ' ' . ' k ' ,. '-, i , . ) .-' , 4,_. -..1„ : . ,,„ . L.4,,,,,, ,...„-,44-,- • , ''..s, i `t,,' ,. . ,-. : „ ; '1 ARE/1 = 133,120 Sa. F.'..4 ,...- „ 4 _ 4 2' 31 e re i ' * ' ,' * Dom.azo 5 ift .' ,,. ' „,,, .,,,, ',. ,.. . . ., ° '', I \\ of .' 4 °I . S" \ V I.- 1 1 . „, .. , \ I i •„ . . MSP a Ca 0041 56 Ctheve C,ec &we)! ile V Il l . - , *; DENOTES FLARED END SECTION 111111 ROCK RIP RAP — — —.•-■ '... DENOTES 10 FOOT CONTOUR INTERVAL 2,, DENOTES 2 FOOT CONTOUR INTERVAL '' k,e \ - ., \\\ NOTES ..;, - , . :' \\ : .11 ',-,, ..; A ipi ItRi.„. - ', ' .i ,. , , ,, , . , . '. I ' ., ' 4 ' \ \ 1 i) UTIUTY INFORMATION FROM CONSTRUCTION PLANS BY THE CITY an ;,....4.0wasrMie .'. ' ,',.* : ' "•• -. '''' ' . , . . , ' - " ' . ., “,• OF STILLWATER. FFE, INC. OFFERS NO GUARANTEE AS TO THE -.,.. , ACCURACY OF INFORMATION PROVIDED BY OTHERS. '' '''' ^ . ° ',' , -.,' ' O., ', ' ‘ ..,1111 > .., , . . . . . . ' ' ' + ' ' -, A : r , s ' . . , 'i , ,7 , '.1 ''',.. \ \ go. ..09t; ., ; ;:-, - 1' - ,-.., - , !. _ ...-, . , , \\, 4,, 2) 2009 WASHINGTON COUNTY AERIAL PHOTO UTIUZED FOR „ :. '', '( , 1 i:, " ., , ' , , , .., ,, e.7. i ,,,,firf , , ' , ', I\ ■ BACKGROUND. '''' • :.„,■"' ; ' ) :`, t t* • I ,'',', ', J , ,,,) , ' ' , ...- , . ,, ,.. ,,,, , ,,, OF ' " ' - cl • ',7; , ,.., _ ,, _...,,....... ■ , , , - • - .„. ,,'' 1 : i ;<'-' 7, :- '/ , , -:' '' , , , , . , ,,, \ ,.., ' „c 1, , , ' ," _, ,. FES "," \ „ " ',, ;: - " ,, ' If `' - _-..,„40 - . .s, ' i': ' , e6,31 , , \ , . , - f ', ' ' , , _,, 1 , y, , , ._,..._,„ ,, „4.-- r , ' '''.` , v) , \,...... ,, ..- 1 -------- ._,.., _ ___,.. 1 . NW Y4 NE K ...„ __. if; , 'I', . , , , ,,, , , , ., , , \IL,, , ' . . _ , , 11 /I? 9 Ill - i , ., , - 1, i V'''' , tIW „.., 0 " . . - , - j '1 ' ' ' S/CA: , • • ' ) "0.00rVisEkirm- ' . , _, _,4-...,,,, ,,Ip:,, ,...-, _ ..,.......-46, r i r y ' , . _ ..}..,<,-- , _ n 0 i% 3 7 ,,,,,),,, ,i ,--7, ,- - - , , , ''' - ( ---- ''''i ' '''- Le k. - _. ., , ....:4,7,— r.-- u _ /II ., 4, „.1 _ - ",- '.'"--. . . .. L ___, -------- 0/ - , 7 - -- ___-- , .-•-- . . SE K ' —., ' ' '- sg7°57'4"4 ,.. h.v " .7/) .. — , .____ ------:_.:_ _,..,- i? A l cisPu .-., - _ - ' s 4 ,,,. ...; 0,447) " ' - . .,*,**.'"*) ; . ' ' ' P ' ' -5147 ' ' '' ' - - ^— ' CR - ,, -- __ . EATI , --- ''-- - 4 i i i ,, . ',L.*...;--f-- -- , - . . , ...: . _ , ,,,,, /p. ce4.: 6 , ,,,L 0 ,44 :, .„; - .. 4 ,L DEP/10M%, 6 t " "" A - '. "grAitt3r , --,. 1 1111''' ' , P r , f ,4 1". " ' -- --- - ''' - -- - r . 9, - 47769 ' AS '''' ''''' * '''''''' NIVES ll OF "' ' , 1 , - ,". 1 Vidnity Map ,, I &il ' ' ' ' Section 31, T3ON - R2OW City of Stillwater ' 1 ''' 4, Washrngton County, Minnesota ' ' '' rki OF Y LINE OF MINNESOTA ,..,__, floor A , ,,,„ ,,,,, ,,,,,,,, a , ii„ ,, ,,,, , ; .. , ..,., ,,,. 770/1 RIONT OF IVY" , ' ' ',G o„€,,, ' PoRrA, , ' - ' , '''' : „ . ...., , , „dr ' ..../ ( s'' oie.s.'*-- r j re 1 i 41f / 0 /1 I .. . , , ,„ : ) / . . . .. • - i wilr / I . , i f i i ''' ' - ' ' 1,0 so - ,, ,,, ' .%.... — a , • • 4‘.• , __ , , 33p310 MIMI 3lva NO1168353(3 NO ISIA38 'ON I HEREBY CERTFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION OR REPORT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERNSION AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. 9b306 NOS)OIM7 V 0001 oroz /u /zr nN 3.24171 1 1 4 1 N O 11103,311ka ,W„,. :1n141M If£BOfi (IS9) HMO (159) 3.4 MSS' MK 'Ma 3)1 1'1LXON.1331118 RISSSOZI NW `ClOOM31dVW 3f1N3nV 21V39 311HM 9982 NW `1131VM11LLS DNICI1If18 301330 1VDICEIN 3941313101i : BIN ONIICMHNIONa O a III DNI `1N3Wd013A34 3)IM�Ib TIZgWEVIENGs NV1d 1f1OAV1 Wj1Sd � ui 'uos3131..rg 'uscuaa.xJ 'zlo3 i 0. im r(t N a W 1 x a 0 z ° in w o o m W p LN LL a6ci 0.00 Ozz J J V N N v w 0 Q 8 N 0 W l 1 J CO CO o 0 N ww • � 0. 0. 1 0. J J 1- J J H F • U (n In 0 00) N 03 O O 0, 0 F N c IL 1 L co 0 0 0 88 cc cc as 0 J 1 (A W O N LL LL II N 0 0 m + O> 0() 0 LL N LL 0 LL LL U3 . 0 „ , , 0 m 0 0 o Om) co 7N O NOS) cr) l N (n O O n . j NM cr MO m (V.- 0) N00 2 8 2 J 0 z z (� 0 2 2 U 0. a 0 cC O a Q J O 0 5 I Fr z Q q 0 J 0 J Fr g o? r 0 H 0C I- 0 a (00)0(00.0. I- 0 a- I- U 0) 00 o wz 0 0 m 0 w 00. < l— en LL) 0 W H Z 0 0 • . ° w a ' Z z = x1- LO I- I_ 0 (A 330 R y > J Q = w m NLLI 0 �zw (D 0. Z 12 O K y W co co —' a Z — z Q w ow >0Z d Q 0 LLI N) P 4H!a Iry - 'ml '49!(0 •'"'J'11a3 -01030 LAYOUT PLAN 2) ALL DIMENSIONS TO THE FACE OF CURB UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. 71 SHARED PARKING STALLS 5% REDUCTION= 68 STALLS 1) ALL RADII TO FACE OF CURB. BUILDING - PHASE 2: 10,080 SF PROPOSED LANDSCAPE (MULCH) AREA 84 PHASE ONE STALLS PROVIDED 54 + 68= 122 STALLS REQUIRED PROPOSED TURF/SOD OPEN AREA EXIS7ING ELT TRAIL PROPERTY BOUNDARY EXISTING PAVEMENT IMPERVIOUS ]3%331-C NBVaa Siva NO116210530 NOISIA38 'ON I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION OR REPORT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPER\SION AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. - .. 81;50,W IJ(KVIIMI V fMV11 OJOZ /a /7l 'ON 3Amfl aVO 7 , , . / G . 0 1 9 0 30il ,u rwnD 1 Olo7 /ol /oT i Milla 7.9I - 01 01101 ... miwa.M 1E010 (ISO 'a3 ifStab (1S9) 9d MS NW' OPna3NV'I'iLMONJ331I1S RISC S0{¢I NW `4OOM316'W 3f1N3AV 11Y39 31IHM 9992 NW `2131VM11LLS Dwaine 3JIi30ltrJlC 3WF aN I c ia+s S3aa v S. 4'O 9[411133N101,13 onaN a ,., a 1 j 'ONI `1N3Wd013MCI 3NV1bIV SUCEIROVEN6 NN1d 1011NOD NOIS083 V DNI()d�`J 'Jul 'uosxaug 'usuiaa.Lj 'zlo3 IWN 18NS 7 , , ,... Anil ,„.. 0 ,,,,,, I .......__ __ ..._...._ .. t . ORIGINAL SCALE I INCH = 30 FEET SCALE IN FEET 60 1 _______/ g,,,,,.,. ----- 4\----7-7/ , 711 1 0 , to,, , WTI/ WR7TLE IVREA/ .-. • ' \ —830 PROPOSED CONTOUR _ ___,------ 1 \ 1 \I \ : \ CONSTRUCTION NOTES , \ i> PRIOR TO ROUGH GRADING, INSTALL SILT STOP FENCE IN LOCATIONS SHOWN OR AS I 2 ) PROVIDE 4' OF NATIVE TOPSOIL IN GREEN AREAS )Cr- 1 PHASE 1 1 -- l■ 7 rrE - 9:,-0, 4) SLOPES 3 1 AND GREATER SHALL BE STABILIZED WITH FIBER BLANKET -, o p ar ----- — t -- --- 1 \ ,* 5) MAINTAIN AND REPAIR STRAW WATTLE (INCLUDING REMOVAL OF ACCUMULATED SILT) 15,500 SP aeass) '--- --- -- ,........,, ' \ \I _-- UPON DISCOVERY REMOVAL OF SILT FENCE REQUIRED AFTER s n E IS STABILIZED (AT DIRECTION OF ENGINEER) 1 i 1 C,.......,..... / , .---.., i \‘ 8) ALL EXISTING CITY STREETS SHALL BE SWEPT AS NEEDED AND AS REQUESTED BY k......---i .8 ..1"7/" .- . 9) AFTER GRADING OPERATIONS ARE COMPLETED, LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL r 9 495 ..., ' 4'' \ , / of............/ UNCOMPACT ALL GREEN AREAS PRIOR TO SODDING AND LANDSCAPING i \s.. WeST - -_____ ----- -------- OF rgA g A4 EA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION RIGNT OF WAY 73103113 NOW 3100 NOI1d1210S30 NOISIA38 'ON I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN. SPECIFICATION OR REPORT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. PT, Oki NOS)0I70 V 0001 oroz /u /zr TON 3SNDn uva t ®p B r 1 E v g 1 Na o 030 " 3 01 . F NN :auwa.M [ff6'0fb110 n3 Ef15B'6fb (ISO . 04d MSS NNI'ON I3 DM'MON MILLS HISS 514ZI NW `CIOOM31ddW 3(1N3nd W39 311HM 999Z 3 NW `UV /MIMS DNIa1Ifl 3D13IO 1VDIC b0 onaxa3Nlor a o, 3h. a •3 e „�" ' JAI � ONI `1N3Wd013A34 3)IV1 IlY SIEMITINYZ NV1d Jllli11f1 •auI 'uos) 1. 'uscuaa43 `zio3 3M/4 IDE PeimaN �9 lftl — — 010Z 0 UTILITY PLAN I L ■ ,,,' r ORIGINAL SCALE 1 INCH A 30 FEET i II , \\ SCALE IN FEET 1 \,' 111 . I ".._ I \ \ 11 - b 0.: , (. . , , ___ - \ LEGEND ' - \ \\\ - - - - - PROPERTY BOUNDARY rWl % \ . _ =- - --% 1 \\, c. , ,if , it 1 1 \ \ ' V\ -8 R I T A R Y S E WE R r io,soe 3.,-. oRos :1 ,,,,:_,_',. \, \\ \ 0 PROPOSED SHOE BOX FULL CUT OFF 30-FT POLE LIGHT STANDARD MI PHASE i C ...„„ _....) I , , ■ PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER PIPE: zczmy Dow, cw e_Fr .,., .,,,, .: _. l 1f,932 S.F. (FLOOR AfREA) \ -- - - \ - i 3) ': 1 PROVIDE EIRE CONNEL7ION \ ..- - - - 4) PROPOSED WATER PIPE: 6" DIP CLASS 52 PROPOSED STORM PIPE: 15" RCP CL. IV g o ..:::?............6.7..'.".'''05ASI:. j A ; f ,r: 14 . ,....A: 1 \' ' \\\\ \\ ---- ----- ---- ----- ---- ---- '. C" FIRE / 001AESTE ‘4 MINIMUM 8' OF COVER OVER NEW WATERMAIN. 7 6 : P OF STRUCTURE OR END OF FLARED END • iti e., .0 , \ '.7 . 99./.1 8) ALL UTILITY CONSTRUCTION PER CITY OF STILLWATER STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS. VERIFY ALL CONNECTIONS TO EXISTING UTILITIES PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. 1 0 . : „ s , 71,7:„ g 4w ,..? „, , ,,, %, \,,,,\__ \- A Av . ,90,6 ________ CL. .A/ • .1.39": NOTE IT AND FORWARD TO THE ENGINEER. Pa __ N 1 , ---- tX1 01146 P°N9 c--.---,sy) __ i Wal ____ ,,,t,/„.„ _ TOP NUT OF 16z:ow ' : 0 : r.1' ,.:' CRe57 _--- N rg o A . A f z„ 5 z Muvager RIOM OF Mr LNE of MINNESOTA PLAT AC 82-82 34M NMr IO 31Y0 NONA INOS30 NOISI\38 ON T 4 0 : °� ° ;geg5 �w;o _aai < o $ �' ti g '` a 1 § L'% g ^°+ 4 O g m��•m -aa• :,, r [Cf6 {b11591 ff88 zbOSSNW'ONI3�NI kILHON133tiLSHL555bbzi NW `400M31db'W 3(1N3/�Y 21V39 ILIHM 999Z MTRWalWa NW ` I31VM11115 �Nldllfl8 3�Ijj0 IVJIC ?ANN D301,1 ONUanuns ONINNv14ONrn all. 0NI 1N3Wd013�34 3Iblblb' S1 1Nv'�3 D •afI'uosnaug'usuiaaz3'zlo3 3d 6 NONE HS „-- „'"''''''' .,06 ° DETAILS Ia. ,,„lo Itanngt.:1-3(13: Ili. r 1/2-R 10 flO ' 1010 IIIIIF lEaglionni P2P BIT. MAT 3/8” sLasstit lir . ra 9 ' 31 u 10 ---' .11,1111'4' ......t.-...r .....,,,v.:4 1-1/2" BITUMINOUS WEAR COURSE v‘T'''''';°*9 0 4.••••4,, , SP r..."4"..la•-•:A.7•4*,... ? ' , 11, 4. ktat, MN DOT SPEC. 2350 LV4 1, . l/rR • • ..=:-.7':v 4, I " k SASE VJIT'''''':1 MN DOT #2357 BITUMINOUS TACK COAT I T • . H 00 1111 ' . :: :::: 1 :::•".f-lt . : ,,, : . 'It'gra.;VtAy . '1 2" BITUMINOUS BASE COURSE I I r I 11°11' ::: : ::: :::::::424:410.A.,".•....,„r 0 1. ,aw...74 ' : :.••••• : ::•• .....e.E.O".•:• .a.at S. ::: ,:•:::: ::: i'•::•":1F:II NS ....."44,zarssIVEV..•:1114+41 : . :::::::::::::::::::: ''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' '' ''''''' : St'aiS•ae"ItI";••• MN DOT SPEC. 2350 LV3 tz' Oliti -----"- •• ''' 4 '''''''' ' - 6" AGGREGATE BASE, CL.5, COMPACTED TO 100% •-• '''' .":4,....sr:E.,,,asa....s:44.• 2" BITUMINOUS STANDARD GUTTER STANDARD PROCTOR MN DOT SPEC. 2350 LV4 6^ MINIMUM 2^ • 2^ ''' ::"-4";'■`T/1.4.4:::: ' " " T:::4' , "::::: 3 " WASHED ROCK 6" AGGREGATE BASE, CL. V SUBGRADE CORRECTION AS REQUIRED BY ENGINEER & MECHANICALLY COMPACT SUBGRADE OVER UTILITY TRENCHES TO 95% B612 TYPE CURB COMPACTED SUBGRADE PROCTOR (MnDOT FABRIC TYPE 5, MAY BE PLACE ROCK OVER GEOTEXTITE 01 N 0 SCALE FABRIC TYPE w. REQUIRED AS DIRECTED BY ENGINEER). 2 BITUMINOUS TRAIL SECTION STANDARD PAVING SECTION C7.1 NO SCALE ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE 091 NO SCALE 4 NO SCALE Ak Ak :••••••••••••••.•••••.-.•......,•.,..,•..,•..,•..,•..,•..,•..,•......,•..,•..,•..,•..,•.-.•••. MEM En MEE en , oh. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ,,I - 9" STRAW WATTLE ',VW ,, -map 1 re:AY ,2. • • • • • • • • • . . 1 4 • • II • 1. • 4 1 • 1 • , II A 0 „s,...4,..„,...- ,,,,,, -,, _ Milir NIII. i, . ... ..• Granular Borrow li I, 4 . • • . s* ........... ii ( 3 M i n 4 D 9 O A T rn S d p d ec ri . d I, • • • i e ) ' ww....N SLOPE VANE, a. • . 'II II, • • • . a. 4 ..I ll . • • 1 1 1 **..11 '-\ - 7 : 1 -: \ . :::::\ \-------:"/___\ \ - it MISV1\ ' rX1" WOOD STAKE MIN. rift "Bc" Denotes outside I - . MAX S SPACING 4" CONCRETE WALK - 6"X6", #10 WWM 8" CONCRETE WALK - 6"X6", #10 WWM diameter of pipe 6" AGGREGATE BASE, CL.5, COMPACTED TO 100% 4" FINE AGGREGATE BASE - MNDOT 3149.828 STANDARD PROCTOR PIPE FOUNDATION & BEDDING COMPACTED SUBGRADE COMPACTED SUBGRADE STRAW WATTLE 010 NO SCALE CONCRETE WALK SECTION 6 HEAVY DUTY CONCRETE SECTION PVC PIPE BEDDING DETAIL 0111 NO SCALE C7.1 NO SCALE 190 NO SCALE / \ ill LOAD FACTOR 1.5 0 SEE PLAN FOR • '' •• a '.. u -_, VOLUME OF RIPRAP REQ.D. RIPRAP - CL. III ,or %, A'r- 6" min. \ Ji'llii. 8.0' Minimum cover required over top of water main. ALSO DEPTH AND VOLUME \ ._ W4 Ji. ,//// OF FILTER BLANKET. 1' --- al,- —I-- 111111111111 = \\, Ti=- % f ..-r- mihi r . It' Compacted F ,-:*,.;.g4.44.::411-5colof „II A u Al_AW_ .,,=.„.ep Backfill A •"\// A 121 8612 CONCRETE CURB 1 11 1 0 1 II MIff. 1 11 PLAN GEOTEXTILE FILTER MATERIAL SEC. A-A w \ i IL&INAJ CAN BE USED N LIEU OF PLAN & GUTTER \—Normal Bedding , ,,, _...._ FILTER BLANKET IF SPECIFIED. A CLASS C-1 Stainless Steel Tapping Sleeve w No block structures are allowed. ,./ ••••• ..„., Look Hand shaped from firm 4 -lefil4014, Catchbasin casting undisturbed soil i Provide copper conductivity 1 1 : - O P A talAr` Neenah R-3067 or equal. Grate to be 0.1' below gutter grade. 11 PIPE BEDDING DETAIL FOR RCP & DIP strap to bypass tapping sleeve. Minimum 1 /16 'x3/4" . wei-4.4.•'.4 • • * Nikirargato 3" radius curb box. mos wide flat copper strip. B -,•,-, - tb ,41, B „,\ : Ora* .e. VAS o il al NO SCALE ../ I Minimum of 2, SPA.AVIS Top of Curb kis ;•• maximum of 5 IPA-V- • Resilient Wedge Valve l'hill"411P.401.4111.4741X‘. concrete adjusment ". Varies .A..... to AWWA ••• asAir lar.tp. rings allowed with full 6 1 /2" ■= C-509-80 standards Is 4 41, • It1A..a. illipau'ASS■10,, Ve."•••:'• bed of mortor between each and MD-Shield 'L'..= Varies 2' 1 r... "NO liner between casting. 214'r'ecxes3t6n \ •,--- • ,••• & top ring. 5" 4 A Varies '\/\\ Ilit ') 1111111 Il SECTION A-A Doghouses shall be 4: 3" Grout V // V ° 5 X DIAMETER I grouted on both the N ail —imimo—. „.. ii.v ,..... inside and outside. 1 /2"r OR SPAN 6" ,-, in // ' \ . PLAN SLOPE VARIES Watertight gasketed joints shall be ..-.. jr i 4,,./,_",__-FT_L--LOPE I ,,,.. \ , —_ .\:.? \./. N ./.\/ /\,_ \ \ \ A A / .,/ IlM i ......,. utilized at all pipe connections. lo \\,,,, '',54,„,...„. NA s''' A NOTE. SECTION . • , .... . . - . • .. . - '...‘ /is / / / ' \ _ Compocted Granular Backfill wwww.wfwwwwm.■ Elevations shown Undisturbed Earth "9WOW-47$P4 on utility plan are already 1 2" 12" adjusted 0.1' below gutter. [- I I Thrust Block 8" Conc. block SEC. B-B 491 RIP RAP 0 PIPE OUTLET io CATCH BASIN 12 2-FT CONCRETE GUTTER 13 WATER MAIN WET TAP NO SCALE G.1 NO SCALE (7 NO SCALE C7.1 NO SCALE 711.031c WHO 3<r0 Noudiaosao NCISVJa ON _ _ <6Swa wr vow € = ws _drciu'�ad�m ei o 8 g ti t b MI t 0 Ni O g N O g mm•.•ag•.awx..a..PM 1EE6'0E4(I59I Yea ff88 11591 43 Z17055 KW'ONf1'i3XVI'H.LaoN.LEIILS HSSS WI NW `4OOM31dVW 311N3AV 11V3E1 311HM 999Z NW `1131VM1111S DNI411(18 3DIAA0 1VJ1 - _ - - `JNIILUNIOnd �°' E � S a OMNN 4 III DNI `IN3Wd013A34 3)(V1 W N`dld 9NIIHDII q -a LT" 'uosxaug eaeu:aai3 `z1 XWN lag • ; • , " m 5 0 U • • • - ? - al 0 Q 0 01 en pa1aaaaJ a9 010 —" 100.1003 •uaaaaa3•z1 —0102 0 LIGHTING PLAN SCHEDULE PROPERTY BOUNDARY BOX NSIV210 31 N01.1,11LIOS30 Noisn3a ON _ In a ��wi w� bi of = aopo =F o o NI ti Q W R* Ll O 0 Zs \ o ti • W o m :aqwam [f46.Of0 1159)Rd Ef88•6L4 (t 91a�4d 24055 MI '01113 91d1 'H.LHON MIS H7,55 Still NW `000M31dVW 3f1N3AV 11V39 31IHM 999Z NW `1131VM11LLS °manna 331340 1VDICBIN Q!ll OH W LL2—�Y�� Z O JNRIaaDII`IS III � ti a N d013A3V121It/ '3NI `1N3W 4 3I SEIRSHMMS NVld 3dVDSGNV1 Wain •■ui •uos3aug'uecuaax3 `zio3 Q!ll OH W LL2—�Y�� Z O c E g b b v41 p I 11 m 01 � W e s a pp � g � V 4 w S 0 2 _ y U .� - lii �� a �� al f • gftt B op 55 • �r 5 291 gg li A. 6 g. ill E 3 1 sE 2 3 0 � a 8& d§ 1 s � a 1 5 a S � s a ie .9 a 11 11 1 a 4 �� • i t ! :1 1 sl U big F � 55 _ • 3 g 1 !III g18 y� pp aa s " i s Pt Y s a s � s : : PI ' � ii Rag zy$ ! 5 i E 3 E g � a 9 � $ t � 6 �P£ 30a Jib 6 o °a II; Bn a c� a ec�i z� . z° �eF72 ; '°`� . N . J A W 3358 5 1,.5119' :r; Al • m , Fro+ !.: O� M uPj � Opca� Oro. Mx a \ N ¢ N hi — o • ~ By 3 M V t W '� M t \ W ' 11 V9 h iV � � °' 8 t� \ �> i1 I ,,o = 1 11 11 4 , ¢ ° 1 x ck cr , 6� y6 & N srha ALTS.LOSOY • ammo, w av es m.09 TeralV 41 4 17 A'oy wm✓T -w *1 Of (AOA' NJIL T NAWIT m ammo AI/N31711 Y �o m a v QQOW__, � 3.7FSS:OOS • �d cry N Z � ti \ 1 Zrt e�O L O o • 5, rt 5 5a s.� goo 0 i 0 z Memo To: City Planning Commission From: Bill Turnblad, Community Development Director Date: January 6, 2011 Subject: Tent and Vendor Ordinance Item 5.01 - Discussion about tent and vendor draft ordinance, will be presented at the City Planning Commission meeting on January 10, 2011.