Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011-03-14 CPC PacketCITY OF STILLWATER PLANNING COMMISSION NOTICE OF MEETING MONDAY, March 14, 2011 The City of Stillwater Planning Commission will meet on Monday, March 14, 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 February 14, 2011 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 Tess 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. 2011-05. A variance to the parking regulations (17 parking spaces required, 12 spaces requested) for the Chilikoot Cafe located at 826 4th Street South in the CA, General Commerical District. Lee Stylos, applicant. 4.02 Case No. 2011-06. A variance to the side yard setback (5 feet required, and 2.5 feet requested) for the construction of a deck landing and stairs located at 702 Churchill Street West in the RB, Two Family Residential District. Brendon Stryhn, representing David Handley, applicant. 4.03 Case No. 2011-07. A special use permit request for a Minus 5 Ice Box located at 305 Water Street South in the CBD, Central Business District. John Daly, applicant. 4.04. Case No. 2011-08. A final plat and final PUD approval for Millbrook 5th Addition for 37 single family homes located at Outlot H Millbrook Addition. US Home Corp, applicant. 5. OTHER BUSINESS 5.01 Letter from Lee Sather, owner of James Mulvey Inn, 622 Churchill Street West, request to terminate Bed and Breakfast special use permit. 5.02 Discussion of vendor sales draft ordinance CITY OF STILLWATER PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, FEBRUARY 14, 2011 Present: Mike Dahlquist, Chair, Aron Buchanan, Eric Hansen, Mike Kocon, John Malsam, Councilmember Menikheim, Ann Seiss, Scott Spisak, and Charles Wolden Staff present: Community Development Director Turnblad and Planner Mike Pogge Absent: Matt Gallick CALL TO ORDER Chair Dahlquist called the meeting to order at 7 p.m. APPROVAL OF January 10, 2011 MINUTES Mr. Kocon moved to approve the minutes of Jan. 10, 2011. Mr. Buchanan seconded the motion. Mr. Wolden noted that Councilmember Menikheim's presence was not recorded in the minutes. Mr. Kocon amended his motion to include that correction, as did the seconder. Motion passed unanimously. OPEN FORUM No comments were received. PUBLIC HEARINGS Case No. 2011-02. A resubdivision of one lot into two lots located at 1801 Market Drive in the BP-C, Business Park Commercial District. Craig Johnson, applicant. The applicant was present. Mr. Pogge reviewed the request and staff findings. He reviewed the criteria for subdivisions, including area and bulk regulations. He noted since there are no structural changes involved, there are no setbacks to review. He said there is one area — lot coverage -- where this request does not meet code requirements. He said in the BPC zoning, the maximum impervious coverage allowed is 60%; however, he noted this site was developed as part of a PUD, so it would be allowed to remain. Mr. Malsam asked about the reason for the proposal. Mr. Spisak asked if the subdivision affects any of the parking requirements; Mr. Pogge said the proposal does meet parking requirements. On a question by Mr. Spisak, Mr. Pogge said there have been no issues with traffic or parking that staff has noticed since the gas station went into operation. Mr. Spisak asked about easements; Mr. Pogge explained there is a cross access easement on the parcel to the south. Mr. Dahlquist asked if separate parcels with the potential for separate ownership impacts the City's ability to control what goes on in the PUD or the conditions that were part of the overall PUD or PUD amendment for the gas station. Mr. Pogge said he did not believe the resubdivision would have that effect, noting there are still conditions in the PUD that are recorded and still apply to any new owner. Mr. Pogge also noted in response to a question by Mr. Dahlquist that any future changes in operation or structure swould require an amendment to the PUD. Mr. Wolden pointed out that the egress easement to the north goes through the location generally used by Cub for its seasonal plant sales; Mr. Pogge said staff had noticed that and the intent is to move the easement one bay to the south to alleviate the issue, and he said that correction would be made before the documents are recorded. Craig Johnson, representing Super Valu, explained the reason for the request — Cub wants to standardize their various stores in regard to having the gas operations on separate parcels. He said he thought the store might be doing some business restructuring and would like the gas operations on separate parcels. Mr. Spisak asked the applicant if he thought the easement to the north provides adequate turning radius for tanker trucks; Mr. Johnson noted that the tankers 1 CITY OF STILLWATER PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, FEBRUARY 14, 2011 are coming through there now with no problems, but that easement will be moved slightly to the south as indicated by Mr. Pogge. Mr. Dahlquist opened the public hearing. No comments were received, and the hearing was closed. There was additional discussion about the adequacy of the easement for the tanker trucks; Mr. Johnson said they could do another calculation to make sure there is adequate space. Mr. Spisak also asked about the cross easement, whether that was recorded. Mr. Kocon noted this is not a new use but has been in operation for two years, so if the easements reflect reality, they should be adequate. Mr. Turnblad suggested adding a condition that staff verify turning radii and the cross easements. Mr. Spisak moved to approve as conditioned, with the added conditions regarding the verification of the turning radii and cross easements. Mr. Kocon seconded the motion. Motion passed unanimously. Case No. 2011-03. A Comprehensive Plan Amendment, and Zoning Map Amendment and a Special Use Permit for the properties located at 1754 and 1650 Washington Avenue in the BP -I, Business Park Industrial District. Robert Kaufman and Roger Nelson, applicants, Mr. Turnblad reviewed the request. He explained that Mr. Kaufman is proposing to purchase a parcel of property and convert the existing building to a hockey training facility; he reviewed the facility plans, including retail space, office area, lounge, active training area. He said the proposal is to completely rework the existing building. Mr. Turnblad reviewed the zoning map and said rezoning is necessary to accommodate the proposed use, which is considered a recreational establishment, as that use is not permitted in the Business Park Industrial district. He noted that this property, the property to the south and the City's Rec Center are all zoned BP -I. He pointed out that the City will be updating the zoning maps so as to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan land use map; he said there are about 400 properties that need to be rezoned, including two City properties immediately to the west of this parcel that will become part of a new zoning district — Parks and Recreation. Mr. Turnblad pointed out that within the entire block that includes this property, none of the properties will remain zoned Industrial. Mr. Turnblad explained that the proposal also is to amend the Comprehensive Plan land use map to change the use from industrial to commercial; he noted that change would make these parcels consistent with surrounding uses and the actual use. Mr. Turnblad reviewed the special use permit and performance standards, including parking, landscaping, and sound insulation. He noted there are several conditions of approval related to parking and sound/noise insulation. He concluded that staff finds the proposal is consistent with surrounds and performance standards, and recommends approval with the nine conditions listed in the report. Mr. Dahlquist asked about lighting of the parking area; Mr. Turnblad stated that if it is found additional lighting is needed for the extra parking bay, lighting performance standards must be met before any permit is issued. Mr. Dahlquist asked about traffic circulations in the parking lot, specifically the two-way traffic on the south side aisle; Mr. Turnblad said staff has reviewed that and believes the proposal will work, noting that all the aisles are 24' wide which allows for two-way traffic throughout. The applicant explained that the drop-off area will be one-way. Mr. Spisak asked about the condition related to outdoor trash enclosures, noting that the proposal shows two different finishes for the trash enclosures; Mr. Turnblad said if there are outdoor trash enclosures, the enclosure should match whatever exterior surface it is adjacent to. Ms. Seiss asked if there should be a condition related to having the drop-off area one-way traffic; Mr. Turnblad said it would be more flexible to leave as written, noting that since there is a site plan showing one-way traffic in that area, any change would require an amendment to the special use permit. Mr. Wolden asked whether an existing storage to the north side would remain as it; Mr. Turnblad said he has suggested that remain for the 2 CITY OF STILLWATER PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, FEBRUARY 14, 2011 short-term as it may serve as a sound barrier. Ms. Seiss suggested adding a condition that the shelves in the storage area be removed as a safety measure. Mr. Kaufman briefly introduced himself and his proposal. Mr. Menikheim asked about the applicant's research into the feasibility of the business plan; Mr. Kaufman spoke of the success of similar facilities. Mr. Dahlquist opened the public hearing. No comments were received, and the hearing was closed. Mr. Kocon said he liked the proposal. Mr. Buchanan said he thought the proposed rezoning makes sense; Mr. Kocon agreed, referring to the adjacent uses and staff's recommendation. Mr. Spisak asked about hours of operation; Mr. Kaufman said he anticipates hours similar to the adjacent Recreation Center. Ms. Seiss asked if neighbors had been notified; Mr. Turnblad said notices were sent out, with the only response received from the management of the Recreation Center expressing concern about the potential impact on business. Mr. Kocon moved to approve as conditioned, amending condition I to indicate that mechanicals will be located inside of the building and condition C that outside trash receptacles be screened with the same building material as the adjacent main building surface, with the additional condition that staff determine whether the shelving should be removed from the existing storage structure due to safety concerns. Mr. Buchanan seconded the motion; motion carried unanimously. OTHER BUSINESS Annual review of Special Use Permit for Linder's Flower Mart and CUB Foods — Mr. Pogge reviewed the two proposals, noting that the requests are the same as in previous years. He said no complaints regarding the uses were received last year, and approval is recommended with the five conditions listed in the staff report; he also noted that staff is working on changing the process for reviewing these temporary uses. Mr. Wolden asked about signage; Mr. Pogge stated there have been some issues with signage in the past, and there is a condition related to that use. Mr. Spisak asked whether an opening date should be specified; it was agreed to indicate that date is April 10. Mr. Spisak moved approval with the change to condition 1, specifying the date as April 10. Mr. Malsam seconded the motion; motion passed unanimously. Update on various projects — Mr. Turnblad spoke of three ongoing projects, the Comprehensive Plan rezoning project, armory/fire department project, and public boat launch. He reviewed the information that has been posted on the City's web site. Related to the armory project, Mr. Spisak asked whether the City owns the site; Mr. Turnblad responded in the affirmative, noting the City was unable to obtain an option to purchase. Mr. Spisak asked about the noticing for the rezoning project; Mr. Turnblad said four different types of notices, about 6,000 in all, will be mailed. Mr. Spisak asked if the proposed boat launch is compatible with current thinking about a new bridge; Mr. Turnblad responded in the affirmative. Ms. Seiss noted that parking is a real problem at the boat launch north of the City. Ms. Seiss asked about the educational programs listed in the agenda; Mr. Turnblad asked Commissioners to let him know if they are interested in attending any of the programs, and he will check on possible funding. Meeting was adjourned at 8:15 p.m. on a motion by Mr. Spisak, second by Mr. Buchanan. 3 Planning Commission DATE: March 10, 2011 APPLICANT: Lee Stylos REQUEST: A variance to the parking requirements LOCATION: 826 4th St S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DISTRICT: C - Commercial ZONING: CA - General Commercial PC DATE: March 14, 2011 REVIEWERS: Community Dev. Director PREPARED BY: Michel Pogge, City Planner CASE NO.: 11-05 BACKGROUND The applicant, Lee Stylos, is requesting a parking variance for a new cafe and bike shop in an existing commercial building located at 826 4th St S. The site today provides six parking spaces (three in a garage and three in a lot adjacent to the garage). With its previous mix of office/retail uses the site required 17 parking spaces. This left the site deficient 11 parking spaces. In planning case 1996-32, a variance was granted for these 11 parking spaces. The proposed mix of office/retail/restaurant uses requires 22 parking spaces. This would leave a total deficit of 16 parking spaces or 5 spaces over the previously granted variance. Historically, this site was used as a grocery store. After closing it has had a number of uses including a water care business, offices, a restaurant, retail and others. In planning case 1990-15 a variance was granted to allow a pizza shop to exist on the site. If that variance was still in place, no variance would be required for the proposed cafe use; however, since the use had been discontinued for more than one year, a variance is now required to reintroduce a restaurant use on this site. 826 4th 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 existing building was constructed in 1921. Obviously, the existing set of circumstances prevents the business from creating the required number of on - site parking spaces without demolishing a portion of the existing building or taking down an adjoining building. Over the years, it has been common for the City to issue parking variances for these types of commercial sites that are surrounded by residential properties in part due to their unique and historic development patterns. Finally, the City has historically only aggressively required the construction of new parking spaces with new construction. For these reasons, a variance does seem to be supported. 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. Since the Krummenacher v City of Minnetonka ruling earlier in the year, this review criterion has become virtually impossible to satisfy. The Supreme Court ruled that even if a lot were vacant and a structure could not be built without a variance, open space would be a reasonable use for that vacant lot. And even as a vacant lot, substantial property rights are preserved. So in this variance request, the fact that the property owner cannot convert the use from retail to cafe, the owner would certainly be seen as preserving substantial property rights in the current uses possible without a variance. Therefore, a variance does not seem to be supported. 826 4"' St S Page 3 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. Off street parking generated by a neighboring property can and does impact on adjoining property owners. The question is will the deficit of five additional parking spaces rise to the level of being a substantial detriment. On one hand, the City does not necessarily want to create a situation where homes and business are torn down to make way for parking lots while on the other the City needs to balance the needs and impacts on adjoining property owners. This is an issue the Commission should discuss; however, staff believes it is unlikely that the five spaces themselves will create a substantial detriment. It maybe that the combined effect of the other commercial business in the area may cause the impact to rise to the level of a substantial detriment; however, the City generally does not consider neighboring deficiencies when granting or denying a variance. The authorizing of the variance will not materially impair the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan. ALTERNATIVES The Planning Commission has the following options: 1. Approve the requests in whole or in part. 2. Deny the requests. 3. Continue the request for more information. The 60 day decision deadline for the request is April 16, 2011 and the next Planning Commission meeting is scheduled for April 11, 2011. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Review and discuss the request. attachments: Applicant's letter, form, and building plan LEE STYLOS, PH.D. (651) 343-5181 • 809 W. Olive St. — Stillwater, MN 55082 • Istylos@msn.com February 22, 2011 To Members of the Planning Committee: In December I purchased the commercial building at 826 S. 4th street. Originally built in 1912, the building is approved for a mix of uses including office, retail and restaurant. Our plan is to restore the structure as close to the original design when it was Kerney Groceries, which at the time was the Grocery for the south hill and a center of the neighborhood. The front section of the building is in the process of being remodeled as a cafe that will focus on locally sourced food and primarily serve breakfast and lunch. We currently have 12 parking spaces but according to Mike Pogge, for our use, we need 17 spaces. There does not appear any way to add spaces short of buying adjacent homes and removing them to create a parking lot, which we feel is not in the best interest of the local community. We therefore propose that the planning committee allow us to operate with the 12 available spaces and wave the remaining 5 required parking spaces. Although 4th and Churchill are extremely busy streets we. as a local cafe, will do everything on our end to lessen the impact of cars parking in adjacent spaces along the street. Our plan is to encourage walking and bicycling to the cafe such as offering discounts on our menu if you walk or bike. Therefore we feel that the 12 spaces we currently have will be sufficient for the current planned use. Sincerely, Lee Stylos PLANKING ADMINISTRATION APPLICATION FORM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY OF STILLWATER 216 NORTH FOURTH STREET STILLWATER MN 55082 Special/Conditional Use Permit X Variance Resubdivision Subdivision* Comprehensive Plan Amendment* ACTION REQUESTED Case No: Date Filed: Fee Paid: Receipt No.: 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 requires City Council review then a total of twenty-eight (28) copies are required to be submitted. Review the Checklist to the Planning Administration Application Form for the complete list of required items that must be submitted. Any incomplete application or supporting material will cause your application to be rejected by the City. Required — Applications will be rejected without a legal description. A legal description is found on the deed to the property. Attach as an exhibit if necessary. 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 S 4 S a.�,1r. Assessor's Parcel No. 33.b"a,a.Zn.12 .cc.)13 (GEO Code) Complete Property Legal Description* G 1S 4, of lo(.- (4\ \- 1S S1 I, r Asz t4,4- 14 $1�}=5- (*Required — Applications will be rejected without a legal description) Tax desciiiptions and property descriptions from the county are not acceptable. Zoning District Description of Project -T "1 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." Pali-;,.` sPc. Required Property Owner Lee_ Mailing Address % l e. Si • City - State — Zip SV, ll � MN 550�7 Telephone No. (_D5) - -bA3- S1 `31 Email \ \oS C0 MSo . C cM Signature (Signature is (f quired) If other than property owner Representative Mailing Address City - State — Zip Telephone No. Email Signature (Signature is required) C:\DOCUMENTS AND SETTINGS\SWIEGAND\LOCAL SETTINGS\TEMPORARY INTERNET FILES\CONTENT.OUTLOOK\K6SUFJRY\PLANAPP.DOCX July 22, 2010 J (y(1. Jflatei THE BIRTHPLACE OF MINNESOTA City of Stillwater Notice of Public Hearing Case No. 2011-05 Property Location: 826 4th Street South ( see map on back) Lee Stylos Request: Appli 'ant: Lee Stylos _Variance to the parking regulations RECEIVED MAR - 8 2011 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT The Planning Commission of the City of Stillwater will be considering this case at a public hearing on Monday, March 14, 2011, at 7 p.m. in the Council Chambers of Stillwater City Hall, 216 North Fourth Street. Notification of public hearings are given to property owner located within 350 feet of 826 4th Street South. Anyone interested is encouraged to attend and will be given an opportunity to be heard. The Planning Commission is an advisory board appointed by the City Council. The members are residents of the City who volunteer to serve on the Commission. One of the duties of the Commission is to review planning applications for conformance with adopted plans, policies and ordinances of the City. Any questions or comments on the above application can be directed to: Bill Turnblad, Community Development Director 216 4th St N Stillwater MN 55082 Phone: 651-430-8821 Fax: 651-430-8810 email: bturnblad@ci.stillwater.mn.us Mike Pogge, City Planner 216 4th St N Stillwater MN 55082 651-430-8822 651-430-8810 email: mpogge@ci.stillwater.rnn.us Please include the property address and the name of the applicant with all correspondence. All application materials are available for review Monday -Friday (except holidays) 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. at Stillwater City Hall, 3rd floor, 216 4th St N. 1 Q. v\ )() Ca S+. ae_e.y)__P-Sdc' Guu*-2 \ Michel Pogge From: Zman424@comcast.net Sent: Wednesday, March 09, 2011 12:44 PM To: Michel Pogge Cc: Doug Menikheim Subject: 826 4th St. S. (Lee Stylos) Parking Variance I am opposed to granting this variance. I've lived in Stillwater my entire life, and this neighborhood for 35 yrs. Some things to consider: This application is extremely untimely. Does the applicant believe his app. will be automatically approved because of the time & money he has already invested in the project? This neighborhood is already over capacity for parking. A duplex @ 810 S 4th, a fourplex @ 817, 3 or 4 apts. above the Bikery, as well as the Bikery, architect offices, Meisters, 2 chair barber shop, Charlsen bldg with second tenant, Be Bumble with tenant upstairs, and single family residences. And now I understand the applicant can rent out or lease the former Servicemaster facility at he rear. That alone was 6 parking spaces for employees. I'd also guess he can rent out the former hair salon & and atty office at the rear of 826 under the "grandfather" clause. If this variance is granted it will affect the neighborhood adversely. Parking in the neighborhood already causes problems with plowing, trash pickup, sweeping, etc. We don't need any more vehicles parked on S 4th St. Let the applicant find "Plan B". won't be able to attend the hearing, but thanks for your consideration. Mark Zimmerman 806 South Street Stillwater 439-9081 RECEIVED MAR - 9 2011 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 1 Planning Commission DATE: March 9, 2011 CASE NO.: 11-06 APPLICANT: Brendon M Stryhn PROPERTY OWNER: David M and Sarah E Handley REQUEST: The applicant is requesting an after the fact variance to the minimum side yard setback (5 feet required/2.5 feet requested) for an attached deck and stairway. LOCATION: 702 Churchill St W COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DISTRICT: LMDR - Low/Medium Density Residential ZONING: RB - Two-family District PC DATE: March 14, 2011 PREPARED BY: Michel Pogge, City Planner ikf BACKGROUND The applicant, Brendon Stryhn, has applied for an after the fact variance on behalf of the current property owners, David M and Sarah E Handley, to allow an attached deck and stairway to encroach into the required side yard setback along the west property line. This property is zoned RB and currently has an existing single-family home on the site. The required side yard setback in the RB district is a minimum of 5 feet. The deck and stairway are setback only 2.5 feet from the side property line. DISCUSSION The property at 702 Churchill St W underwent a major rehabilitation starting in 2008. In November of 2009, City Staff was contacted by the neighbor with concerns that the deck and stairway encroached into the required setback. Staff wrote a letter to the property owner of the time and advised them of the issue and also advised them that a final certificate of occupancy would not be issued until such time the issue was resolved. On December 16, 2010 (over one year later), the City received notice from a neighbor that the property was being occupied and wanted to know why the setback issue was not resolved. This was the first time the City was made aware that the property was sold and being occupied. At that time, no certificate of occupancy was issued by the City and the encroachment continued. 702 Churchill St W Page 2 The City made contact with the old property owner, original builder, and current property owner about the matter and advised them that the issue needed to be resolved. This request seeks to remedy the issue without modifying the deck and stairway. Other Outstanding Issues The survey provided by the applicant also shows the front porch encroaching in to the right-of- way for Churchill Street W. The porch has been in this location for a number of years and appears to be in place in a 1945 aerial photo of the site. Even so, the issue needs to be resolved and there are three possible ways this can be accomplished. 1) the porch could be removed, which staff would recommend against; 2) a license could be issued to allow the porch to remain in the right-of-way, which is staff's preferred option; or 3) the owner could request that a portion of Churchill Street be vacated. This issue will need to be addressed before the City can release the final certificate of occupancy for this property. 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 702 Churchill St W is a rectangular 50' by 137.95 lot with street frontage on two sides. The high point on the lot is along Churchill and it slowly slopes toward the rear of the property. There is approximately 9.8 feet between the garage and the back of the home. As with all after the fact variance requests, the request reviewed as if the improvement was not in place and is just being installed. In this case, it appears that the deck could have been shortened and if the stairway turned counter clockwise, everything could have remained within the required setback without the needed variance. Enclosed is a drawing that shows this alternative. The situation on the property was created by the actions of the builder; thus, the request does not satisfy the review criteria for a variance. 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. Since the Krummenacher v City of Minnetonka ruling earlier in the year, this review criterion has become virtually impossible to satisfy. The Supreme Court ruled that even if a lot were vacant and a home could not be built without a variance, open space would be a reasonable use for that vacant lot. And even as a vacant lot, substantial property rights are preserved. So in this variance request, the fact that the property owner cannot access the rear door of the garage from the home (even though the request is small) would certainly be seen as preserving substantial property rights. Therefore a variance does not seem to be supported. 702 Churchill St W Page 3 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. Generally, staff believes that the request as presented will not adversely affect adjoining property owners. The property owner to the west has raised concerns that it may be impossible to mow around the stairway and deck without encroaching on to their property. Certainly, some lawn mowers maybe wider than 2.5 feet; however, staff believes that with the small nature of the lawn on this property, a push mower with a width smaller than 2.5 feet wide is likely going to be used. 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 title or the public interest nor adversely affect the Comprehensive Plan. ALTERNATIVES The Planning Commission has the following options: 1. Deny the requested since the required findings for a variance were not meet. 2. Approve the request with the following conditions of 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. 3. Continue the public hearing until the April 11, 2011 Planning Commission meeting. The 60-day decision deadline for the request is April 17, 2011. RECOMMENDATION City staff does not find the three variance criteria to be satisfied, and therefore recommends denial of both variances. Attachments: Applicant's Form, Site Plan, and letter. 7 EXISTING GARAGE; SET SPIKE ON LOT LINE EXISTING HOUSE EDGE OF BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY T BITUMINOUS/DRIVEWAY I- SET P.K. NAIL IN BITUMINOUS AT PARCEL CONRER. EXISTING GARAGE ---SOUTH LINE OF BLOCK 7, HOLCOMBE'S The drawing to the left shows how the deck could have had a side yard setback five-foot setback. Additionally, by rotating and placing the steps as shown they both would have been conforming. March 7, 2011 To Whom It May Concern: I am writing to respectfully request a variance be approved for our property located at 702 Churchill St. W in Stillwater. We purchased this recently restored house on December 3, 2010. On December 21, 2010 we received a letter from the City of Stillwater explaining that our deck is not in compliance with setback requirements outlined in zoning requirements. We believe our request for variance should be approved based on meeting or exceeding the conditions outlined in City Code, Chapter 31: • A hardship peculiar to the property, not created by any act of the owner, exists. Personal, family or financial difficulties, loss of prospective profits or neighboring violations are not hardships justifying a variance. A hardship peculiar to our property exists in that deck modification to meet setback requirements would result in a loss of safe access to our primary house entrance. Without the existing stairs the only remaining access to the house entrances will be via the street. In other words, if the deck is modified and stairway eliminated we will be required to walk in the street to gain access to our house. The property was designed and built with the intent of providing access via stairs from the rear of the garage to the rear of the house. To be clear, we have been unable to determine a method for deck modification that will satisfy the 5-foot setback requirement and not simultaneously require removal of the stairs. • 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. If approved, this variance will preserve the enjoyment, function, and appeal of a significant and visible portion of our property. Fulfilling the setback requirement will require a significant modification to the deck and elimination of stairway house access, resulting in inhibited normal and safe foot traffic. • 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. If approved, the variance will result in the deck stairs reaching 2.5 feet into the 5 foot setback requirement. The Churchill property located to our immediate West is the only other property in this immediate area. There are no structures, access, or usages present in this area of the neighboring property; therefore, there is no detriment. Approval of this variance will result in no material impact or impairment and the purpose or intent of this section of property will be unaffected. The comprehensive plan is affected only in that approval of this variance will result in maintaining safe access to our house entrance. Your consideration in this matter is greatly appreciated. We welcome any questions or clarifications we can provide, including a personal showing of the affected property. Best regards, Dave and Sarah Handley 612-584-8508 Brendon M. Stryhn — Representing David Handley 702 W. Churchill St. Stillwater, MN 55082 February 1, 2011 Planning Commission Attention: Mike Pogge City of Stillwater, MN Dear Planning Commission: We are asking that you please grant a variance in reference to a deck landing and stairs that provides necessary access to the home from the garage. As you will see from the photos and plans this deck is not something that is excessive or meant to provide any purpose other than connecting the home to the garage. I will explain why the decision was made to install these stairs. During construction it was brought to my attention that the neighbor to the rear of the property has struggled with water runoff from this property for years costing her significant stress not to mention thousands of dollars trying to come up with solutions. As a solution we raised the elevation on the house portion to force all water from that section of the yard to drain to the street instead of down the length of the yard and into the neighbor's property. Due to the elevation of the street and the fact that we were restricted to use the existing garage this raise in elevation to the house left the garage elevation several feet below that of the house. Our only option was to build a large retaining wall that spans from the house to the street to make up this difference in elevation. This also meant that we needed to create a drain tile system between the garage and the home due to the fact that the water between the two structures had nowhere to go. The stairs were bumped out from the corner of the garage because of this drain tile system running between the deck stairs and the garage corner. Otherwise we could have pushed the stairs closer to the garage to avoid this issue. Without the approval of this variance and the subsequent removal of the stairs the homeowners will be forced to walk out into the street to get access to the back door of the home from the garage. We ask that you please approve this application. Thank -you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, �4 Brendon M. Stryhn Owner Representative '?Jg?JN00 NsTANcc 6ErwEEN hz9r.)6s • SET SPIKE ON LOT LINE EXISTING HOUSE , 8.6 r -SET P.K. NAIL IN BITUMINOUS AT PARCEL. CONPEQ /,> EXISTING CA(2ACE 2.5" --+-} „f / i / t ©aCK �vx 'N /: LINE OF BLOCK 7, HOLCOMBE'S ADDITION PORCH CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR: S & K HOLDINGS LLC NOTES: UNDERGROUND UTILITIES NOT LOCATED OR SHOWN EASEMENTS, IF ANY, MAY EXIST. THERE WAS NO EFFORT MADE TO RESEARCH RECORDED OR UNRECORDED EASEMENTS. BEARINGS SHOWN ARE ASSUMED. THE EXISTING LEGAL DESCRIPTION WAS PROVIDED BY THE OWNER. THERE WAS NO EFFORT MADE TO RESEARCH OR SURVEY THE ADJOINING PROPERTIES FOR GAPS AND OVERLAPS. G SURVEY PURPOSE THE PURPOSE OF THIS SURVEY WAS LOCATE THE EXISTING DECK AND IMPROVEMENTS ALONG THE WEST LOT LINE THAT WERE RECENTLY CONSTRUCTED. THIS SURVEY LOCATES AND SHOWS THE WEST LINE OF LOT 12 ONLY. THIS IS NOT A BOUNDARY SURVEY. C EXISTING LEGAL DESCRIPTION (as provided by the owner) LOT 12, BLOCK 7, HOLCOMBE'S ADDITION, WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA, EXCEPT THE NORTH 12.00 FEET THEREOF. CERTIFICATION: I hereby certify that this survey, plan or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly licensed Land Surveyor under the laws of the Stare of Minnesota. DANIEL L.FAES License. No. 25718 12-17-09 EXISTING i GARAGE; SPIKE ON LOT LINE EXISTING HOUSE j BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY --� BITUMINOUS/DRIVEWAY SOUTH HARRIET STREET -TEL ' *Total Lot Area Lot Depth Lot Width 6,902.4 SQ FT■ 137.8 FT• 50.0 FT -T - POSSIBLE STREET VACATION FOUND I/2" IRONPIPE MARKED "STACK" WEST CHURCHHILL STREET (BITUMINOUS SURFACE) 0 PROJECT LOCATION: 702 CHURCHILL ST. W. STILLWATER, MINNESOTA • NORTH 20 NNE 40 SCALE: 1 INCH = 20 FEET WATER VALVE UTILITY POLE LIGHT POLE OVERHEAD WIRES GAS METER FENCE CONCRETE • DENOTES FOUND 1/2" IRON PIPE o DENOTES SET 1 /2" IRON PIPE MARKED RLS 25718 Suite 148100 200 East Chestnut Street Stillwater, MN 55082 Phone 651.275.8969 Fax 651.275.8976 dan@ cssurvey .net CORNERSTONE LAND SURVEYING, INC c S i i CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR: S & K HOLDINGS LLC C, NOTES: UNDERGROUND UTILITIES NOT LOCATED OR SHOWN EASEMENTS, IF ANY, MAY EXIST. THERE WAS NO EFFORT MADE TO RESEARCH RECORDED OR UNRECORDED EASEMENTS. BEARINGS SHOWN ARE ASSUMED. THE EXISTING LEGAL DESCRIPTION WAS PROVIDED BY THE OWNER. THERE WAS NO EFFORT MADE TO RESEARCH OR SURVEY THE ADJOINING PROPERTIES FOR GAPS AND OVERLAPS. .0 SURVEY PURPOSE THE PURPOSE OF THIS SURVEY WAS LOCATE THE EXISTING DECK AND IMPROVEMENTS ALONG THE WEST LOT LINE THAT WERE RECENTLY CONSTRUCTED. THIS SURVEY LOCATES AND SHOWS THE WEST LINE OF LOT 12 ONLY. THIS IS NOT A BOUNDARY SURVEY. EXISTING LEGAL DESCRIPTION (as provided by the owner) LOT 12, BLOCK 7, HOLCOMBE'S ADDITION, WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA, EXCEPT THE NORTH 12.00 FEET THEREOF. CERTIFICATION: I hereby certify that this survey, plan or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly licensed Land Surveyor under the laws of the a of Minnesota. DANIEL L.4191:1tvIES License. No. 25718 ate 12-17-09 ////r1 EXISTING i GARAGE/ 2.1' -///4.0 /4- i rr 2.5'— / SET --- SPIKE ON LOT LINE EXISTING HOUSE EDGE OF - BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY I BITUMINOUS/ DRIVEWAY SET P.K. NAIL IN BITUMINOUS AT PARCEL CONKER. EXISTING GARAGE DECK a FOUND 1/2" IRON PIPE MARKED "STACK" 0 SOUTH HARRIET ,---- SOUTH LINE OP BLOCK 7, HOLCOMBE'S ADDITION � � I ===_i POSSIBLE STREET VACATION WEST CHURCHHILL STREET (BITUMINOUS SURFACE) PROJECT LOCATION: 702 CHURCHILL ST. W. STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 0 20 40 SCALE: 1 INCH = 20 FEET WATER VALVE UTILITY POLE LT LIGHT POLE — ELEC— OVERHEAD WIRES — TEL GAS METER FENCE CONCRETE • DENOTES FOUND 1/2" IRON PIPE o DENOTES SET 1 /2" IRON PIPE MARKED RLS 25718 Suite #B100 200 East Chestnut Street Stillwater, MN 55082 Phone 651.275.8969 Fax 651.275.8976 dan@ cssurvey .net CORNERSTONE LAND SURVEYING, INC Memo Community Development Department To: Planning Commission From: Michel Pogge, City Planner 14 Date: Wednesday, March 09, 2011 Re: Case 2011-07 - Minus 5° Ice Bar Message: The City received an application for a Special Use Permit to install a temporary structure for Minus 5 degree ice bar on a portion on the outdoor patio at the Fright Houses. Upon review of the request by staff, it was determined that the SUP was not required since the proposed use (ice bar) is substantially similar to the existing patio bar use that is in place. Due to this, the application is now withdrawn. Since a public hearing was published by the City for this request, the Commission needs to open and close the public hearing at your meeting on March 14th. From the desk of... Michel Pogge, AICP • City Planner • City of Stillwater • 216 N. 4th Street • Stillwater, MN 55082 651.430-8822 Fax: 651.430-8810 email: mpogge@ci.stillwater.mn.us Planning Commission DATE: March 10, 2011 REQUEST: Millbrook 5th Addition Final Plat and Final PUD Site Plan APPLICANT: Joe Jabonski, U.S. Home Corporation LOCATION: State Highway 96 west of South Twin Lake MEETING DATE: March 14, 2011 REVIEWED BY: Community Development Director PREPARED BY: Michel Pogge, City Planner CASE NO.: 11-08 BACKGROUND The Preliminary Plat and Concept Planned Unit Development for Millbrook was approved by the City in the Summer of 2006 and subsequently amended in July of 2010. The 170 acre preliminary plat includes 172 single family homes and 98 townhomes. Development of the property is planned to occur in three overall phases. The application at hand is the second plat of Phase II. This plat is known as Millbrook 5th Addition and includes a total of 37 single family homes of which 19 are zoned Cottage Residential and the remaining 18 are zoned Traditional Residential. The roads Lowell Court and White Pine Way (currently White Pine Way is incorrectly labeled on the plans as Millbrook Circle) along with all of public utilities will be installed by the developer to support this plat as part of the site improvements. Millbrook 5th Addition — Final Plat and Final PUD Site Plan March 10, 2011 Page 2 REQUEST AND ANALYSIS The specific request before the City is to approve the Final Plat for MILLBROOK 5th ADDITION and the Final PUD Site Plan. The City Council adopted a resolution approving the preliminary plat and concept PUD permit for MILLBROOK on August 15, 2006. On July 28, 2009, the Council adopted a resolution approving an amendment to the preliminary plat and concept PUD permit as they apply to the single-family homes in MILLBROOK. The July 2009 revised PUD permit added additional house plans to the mix and also reduced the number of homes in the Cottage Residential areas by four units. This plat represents an area where three of the four units were going to be reduced from. The developer is now requesting that they revert to the original lot layout for the area west of Lowell Court and use the revised lot layout for the lots east of Lowell Court. This will result in the lost of only one lot versus the three that was proposed under the July 2009 plan. The lots in this layout will still be well above the required minimum lot size and meets the minimum lot widths for lots in the Cottage Residential zoning district. Staff sees no issue in allowing this change. Since the plans are substantially similar to the preliminary plat and concept PUD permit approved, the final plat and final PUD permit for Millbrook 5th Addition are subject to the pertinent conditions of both resolutions of approval. They are detailed below. 1. August 15, 2006 Resolution Conditions. 1. The Final Plat and Final Planned Unit Development application shall be substantially similar to the following plans prepared by Sathre-Bergquist, Inc., and on file in the Community Development Department, except as modified herein: Site Plan dated 7/21/06 Phasing Plan dated 7/24/06 Buffer Averaging Plan (including trails) - 8 sheets dated 6/26/06 Preliminary Site Map* (Sheets SM2 - SM6) dated 1/17/06 Preliminary Plat (Sheets PP1-7) dated 3/30/06 Final Grading Plan (Sheets GP2, 3, 4, 4A, 5, 6) dated 4/12/06 Final Utility Plan (Sheets 2-5) dated 4/12/06 Preliminary Landscape Plan (Sheets 1-4) dated 2/1/06 *Except trails to be as shown in Site Plan dated 7/21/06 The final plan submittals for MILLBROOK 5TH ADDITION are substantially similar to the approved preliminary plans. 2. The developer shall complete a Lakeshore PUD worksheet and submit it to the Minnesota Department of Natural Resource's (DNR) Area Hydrologist prior to submitting an application for a final plat for Phase One. If the DNR review results in substantial changes to the Preliminary Plat or Concept PUD plans, then the developer shall resubmit the Concept PUD and Preliminary Plat for review by the City and Joint Planning Board. This condition has been satisfied. Millbrook 5th Addition — Final Plat and Final PUD Site Plan March 10, 2011 Page 3 3. The trail and sidewalk system shall be constructed substantially the same as represented in the following plan sets on file with the Community Development Department: a. Carnelian Marine Trails - Revised (Sheets CM-1, 2, 3) dated 6-21-06 b. Brown's Creek Trail - Revision 3 (Sheet BC 2b-1) dated 6-26-06 c. Brown's Creek Trail - Revision 2 (Sheet BC 2-2 + 2-3) dated 6-22-06 d. Revised Sidewalk Plan (Sheets SP-1, 2,3) dated 6-21-06 Park and trail plans for MILLBROOK 5TH ADDITION are consistent with the approved preliminary plans. 4. All trails shall be paved. This condition has been satisfied. 5. Prior to release of the final plat for Phase One, a blanket easement shall be provided over the open space outlot on the south side of South Twin Lake for trail purposes. Should the Carnelian -Marine Watershed District rules ever change and allow a trail closer to the lake, the easement will give the City the right to construct that trail. This condition has been satisfied. 6. Prior to release of the final plat for Phase One, the developer shall provide a 20 foot wide general easement allowing for future use for trails and utilities on the property along the south side of State Highway 96 right of way. The easement shall be reviewed by the City Engineer and City Attorney and found satisfactory to them in both form and content. This condition has been satisfied. 7. The trail connection to State Highway 96 along Outlot F shall be allowed as shown only if the wetland in the ditch is determined by a State licensed delineator to be an incidental wetland. If it is not an incidental wetland, then the trail shall be realigned westward along the rear of Lots 17 through 19. Documentation from the delineator shall be submitted together with final plat application materials for the Phase One final plat. This trail connection was originally important when the regional trail connecting Stillwater to St. Paul was identified to run along the south side of State Highway 96. Now with the prospect that the regional trail will fall along the Minnesota Zephyr alignment and no regional trail will be constructed along State High 96, this trail connection is likely no longer needed. Additionally, staff would recommend against installing this trail connection now since there is currently no safe pedestrian path along State Highway 96. In the off chance that a trail is not constructed along the Minnesota Zephyr alignment, staff recommends we obtain a trail easement now for a future connect -ion if it would be needed in the future. 8. Lots 129 and 149 adjacent to the trail access off of the roundabout will be restricted by covenant to have open rail fencing and non -continuous shrubbery not exceeding four feet in height along their side and rear lot lines abutting the trail corridor. This is to provide for a more inviting entrance to the trail system. This condition applies to a different phase of the project. 9. The Developer shall provide water service stubs at each park with three stubs to be included at the large active park. A sanitary sewer stub will be provided at the large active park at a place yet to be determined by the City of Stillwater. This condition has been satisfied. Millbrook 5th Addition — Final Plat and Final PUD Site Plan March 10, 2011 Page 4 10. The two active parks will be graded by the developer as part of the first phase of development and the developer shall establish turf to the satisfaction of the city prior to the City's assuming maintenance of same. This shall at a minimum include mowing, fertilizing, rock picking, leveling, trimming, weed management and over seeding as necessary. Target date for the first transfer of park land will be fall of 2007. The park sites were transferred to the City in the Fall of 2010 and the requirements for the final turf establishment is covered in the Millbrook Plat 4 development agreement. 11. The Brown's Creek trail link on the Millbrook property that connects to the Carlson property to the south shall be installed by the developer at the same time that the Carlson property trail is constructed, if prior to construction of the final phase in Millbrook. OK. 12. An as built easement map showing 30 foot easements where possible (minimum of 15 foot) for trails shall be completed and recorded as each section of trail is completed. OK. 13. Final civil engineering plans shall be found satisfactory to the Stillwater Public Works Director or they shall either be: a) revised to his satisfaction; or b) reviewed by the City Council and approved. The civil engineering plans have been reviewed by the Public Works Director and were found substantially satisfactory. There are a few minor changes that need to be made and staff expects will be addressed by the applicant's civil engineer shortly. 14. Prior to commencement of any grading on the subject property, the developer shall enter into a Development Agreement that is approved by the City Council. An addendum to the master development agreement for MILLBROOK was signed already for the first phase. A development agreement for this plat will be presented to the City Council with the final plat. r Millbrook 5th Addition — Final Plat and Final PUD Site Plan March 10, 2011 Page 5 2. April 17, 2007 Resolution Conditions 1. The Final Plat and Final Planned Unit Development Permit applications for the townhomes shall be substantially similar to the following plans on file in the Community Development Department, except as modified herein: Preliminary Plat Amendment (Sheet PP) dated 1/8/07 Preliminary Grading Plan (Sheet GP1) dated 1/12/07 Preliminary Utility Plan (Sheet UP1) dated 1/12/07 Preliminary Landscape Plan (Sheet LP1) dated 1/12/07 Colonial Foundation Planting Plan (Sheet L1) dated 6/8/061 Architectural elevations submitted with materials for 4/17/07 Council Meeting This condition is satisfied. 2. Any conditions applicable to the townhome development that are found in Resolution No. 2006-179 (Resolution Approving Preliminary Plat and Concept PUD Permit) shall continue to be applicable. This condition is satisfied. 3. Evergreen trees shall be added to screen the driveways from the public streets and shall be added along the north side of White Pine Way between the street and the townhome pond. The landscape plan has been revised to include these plantings. 4. Three to four architectural elevations shall be developed for the ends of the units that face the public street and the pond. This condition is satisfied. 5. In order to reduce the mass of the units a variety of materials and colors shall be introduced into each building with variations amongst the buildings. This condition is satisfied. 6. Depending on the orientation of the building, sidewalks shall be extended from the ends of the units to either the sidewalk along the public street or to the sidewalk surrounding the pond. This has been included in the revised plans. 7. Material samples shall be submitted with the Final Plat and Final PUD Permit applications to be reviewed by the Heritage Preservation Commission. This condition is satisfied. 8. All minor modifications to the Design Review Permit shall be approved in advance by the Community Development Director. All major modifications shall be approved in advance by the HPC. Determination of the distinction between "major" and "minor" shall rest with the City Administrator. Augmented by foundation planting plan submitted together with materials for 4/17/07 City Council meeting Millbrook 5th Addition — Final Plat and Final PUD Site Plan March 10, 2011 Page 6 July 28, 2009 Resolution Conditions 1. The Final Plat and Final Planned Unit Development application shall be substantially similar to the plans prepared by Sathre-Bergquist, Inc., and on file in the Community Development Department as listed in Stillwater City Council Resolution Number 2006-179 except as amended by the revised concept sketch dated May 8, 2009. This condition is satisfied. 2. The developer shall complete a Lakeshore PUD worksheet and submit it to the Minnesota Department of Natural Resource's (DNR) Area Hydrologist prior to submitting an application for a final plat approval for the lots being revised with this amendment. If the DNR review results in substantial changes to the PUD Amendment, then the developer shall resubmit the PUD amendment or review by the City and Joint Planning Board. This condition is satisfied. 3. The proposed traffic calming median in White Pine Way shall align with the proposed trail between Lots 7 and 8 on the north side of White Pine Way as shown on Area B. Additionally, the trail north of lots 7 and 8 on the north side of White Pine Way as shown on Area B shall be adjusted to remove the multiple 90-degree turns. This condition applies to an area not included in this plat. 4. Conditions 3 through 14 in Stillwater City Council Resolution Number 2006-179 shall remain in effect with this PUD Amendment. This condition is satisfied as noted above. 5. Changes to the lots sizes are approved for Area A and C. The lot sizes for Area B shall remain unchanged. This condition applies to an area not included in this plat. 6. The new house plans shall only be used on the CR lots. This condition is satisfied. RECOMMENDATION Recommend City Council approve Millbrook 5th Addition Final Plat and Final PUD Site Plan subject to the following conditions: 1. A trail easement be provided that starts at the trail that runs between Block 1, Lots 4 and 5 to State Highway 96. 2. The street name shown as Millbrook Circle shall be changed to White Pine Way. 3. The comments in the memo date March 3, 2011 from Assistant City Engineer Torry Kraftson to Dan Schmidt of Sathre-Berquist shall be addressed. cc: Joe Jablonski MILLBROOK 5TH ADDITION KNOW ALL BY THESE PRESENTS: That U.S. Home Corporation, a Delaware corporation, fee owners of the following described property situated in the County of Washington, State of Minnesota to wit: Outlots H, MILLBROOK, according to the recorded plat thereof, Washington County, Minnesota. Has caused the same to be surveyed and platted as MILLBROOK 5TH ADDITION and does hereby dedicate the drainage and utility easements as shown on this plat. In witness whereof said U.S. Home Corporation, a Delaware corporation has caused these presents to be signed by its proper officer this day of , 2011. Signed: U.S. Home Corporation Jon Aune, Division Vice President STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 2011 by Jon Aune, Division Vice President of U.S. Home Corporation, a Delaware corporation on behalf of the corporation. Notary Public, County, Minnesota My Commission Expires 1 hereby certify that I have surveyed and platted or directly supervised the survey and plat preparation of the property described on this plat as MILLBROOK 5TH ADDITION; that this plat is a correct representation of the boundary survey; that all mathematical data and labels are correctly designated on the plat; that all monuments depicted on the plat have been or will be correctly set within one year as indicated on the plat; that all water boundaries and wet lands as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 505.01, Subdivision 3 existing as of the date of this certification are shown and labeled on the plat; and that all public ways are shown and labeled on the plat. Daniel L. Schmidt Licensed Land Surveyor Minnesota License No. 26147 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF The foregoing Surveyor's Certificate was acknowledged before me this day of , 2011, by Daniel L. Schmidt, Licensed Land Surveyor, Minnesota License No. 26147. Notary Public, County, Minnesota My Commission Expires: $t: '% % SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. STILLWATER, MINNESOTA This plat of MILLBROOK 5TH ADDITION was approved by the City Council of the City of Stillwater, Minnesota this 2011, and hereby certifies compliance with all requirements as set forth in Minnesota Statutes, Section 505.03, Subd. 2. Signed: CITY OF STILLWATER By: Mayor Approved by the Planning Commission of the City of Stillwater, Minnesota, this By: Planning Commission Chairman COUNTY SURVEYOR Washington County, Minnesota day of By: Clerk Pursuant to Chapter 820, Laws of Minnesota, 1971, this plat has been approved this day of ,20 By: Planning Commission Secretary By: By: Washington County Surveyor Assistant County Surveyor COUNTY AUDITOR/TREASURER Washington County, Minnesota day of , 2011. There are no delinquent taxes, the current taxes due and payable for the year 200_ have been paid, and transfer has been entered this , 2011. By: By: Washington County Auditor/Treasurer Deputy COUNTY RECORDER Washington County, Minnesota Document Number 1 hereby certify that this instrument was recorded in this Office of the County Recorder for record on this o'clock . M. and was duly recorded in Washington County Records. Washington County Recorder By: , Deputy PRELIMINARY 02-14-11 day of day of , 2011, at SHEET 1 OF 3 SHEETS NORTHl HIGHWAY ,ACCESS _� ---.____ ° _ Y — e ° 7 r ..,,..BROOK 45 MILLBROOK 5TH ADDITION ------------------------ ______ _-_ Lam_____----- D95 rl . ROAD t:ORT'ri) wv f1�•itl�ini v✓. N84°13' E BOb.7 �� _ — SOUTH LINE OF THE SE 1/4 iCOHTROLLEO HIGHWAY ACCESS �• �NOI°03'24"W /' OF SEC. 18 TWP. 30, RGE. �-- _ t1 t / 122.47 20, WASHINGTON COUNTY --i N -- — — / 1 \� -- —' ' -- — _ ktut L71t.BROOK 1 1 - — --14ipe 9' 1 1 r-\ \ fox 1C`Iib7e'J'47 \ 64°D ' - 1 \ 4s.g6 J8e 1 \ 585 58'4 TI^vtt 1II/�, \, "9,`p�y \ J�48j �4°,''1'b' tWET I 7c A N„J7,9µ . t LANCp12.17�8'-R=2.8 0201%:, - /:'4'i9'gA •`\C'�% sos.o2'03"E �So BO.00 ,. S84o57539 7c= j3654 Jgtasyy i� •4♦ 1) EASEMENT 1 \ atILaROOK L \.'--,,;;Rg.. ,A;IE i'. • �`T \ ..` - oR..z2• . `, \ DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS ARE SHOWN THUS: NOT TO SCALE Being 5 feet in width and adjoining lot lines, unless otherwise indicated, and 10 feet in width and adjoining right of way lines, unless otherwise indicated, as shown on the plat. •�` SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. — Job \\ l� \ 1,4 4,444s R \^Ti R-280.00 20.11 c C-20.10 G=4°08.53" C.13.-N42°08'40"E - _ 1 • y - 414 r4, 1 RANDOM hnir✓✓Iv' CREEK ,44 MOKU:JlCK [ROAE NORTH CR-r-,. ,.1, r. cr, L./11.i C.r1 L In If 34.13 R-520.00 • .6-3°45'39"C-34.13 04'S'21"E C.B.-549°40'19"E N71 ...A./VIM OAL A�!• a. U U'v I %U�✓ U. r _ S89°44'35"W 664.93 / — MINESOTA ' � `DRAINAGE & UTILITY v)* OUTLOT A EDGE OF WATER AS LOCATED ON AUGUST, 2003 - 888.3 FEET NATIONAL GEODETIC VERTICAL DATUM 1929 (N.G.V.D.-1929) ORDINARY HIGH WATER (0.H.W.) - 888.3 FEET (N.G.V.D.-1829) HIGHEST RECORDED WATER ELEVATION - 891.5 FEET (N.G.V.D.-1929) ACCORDING TO RECORDS OF THE DEPT. OF NATURAL RESOURCES, STATE OF MINNESOTA. OUTLOT B N89°49'31"E 1001.71 L 44*0 9 48''4 E 1 N74 0 •-J.94•+ 7,1 471*Z0J� gI 1/ h 10 to �c.59 �3 N N89°44.351 664.93 S89°47'52"W 667.32 N89°47'54"E 1s J_ PRELIMINARY 02-14-11 667.81 / E1/4 COR. OF SEC. 19, ALSO SE COR. OF THE NE1/4 OF SEC. 19, TWP. 30, RGE. 20, WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA WASH. CO. CAST IRON MON. NORTH 200 100 0 100 200I 1 INCH EQUALS 200 FEET SCALE IN FEET The basis for the bearing system is the most easterly line of Oulot H, MILLBROOK; Washington County, Minnesota, which is assumed to bearN 01°04'42"W. 400 BENCHMARK: N1/4 COR. OF SEC. 19,TWP. 30, RGE. 20, WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA WASH. CO. MON. BENCHMARK: ELEV.= 919.44 FT. NATIONAL GEODETIC VERTICAL DATUM 1929 (N.G.V.D: 1929) O Denotes a 1/2 inch by 14 inch iron pipe set in the ground or will be placed in the ground within one year after the recording date of the plat, and marked by License No. 24764. • Denotes a Found Iron Monument O Denotes a Found Cast -Iron -Monument A — 8 Denotes Controlled Highway Arress VICINITY MAP SECTIONS 18 & 19, TOWNSHIP 30, RANGE 20, WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA not t0 scale SHEET 2 OF 3 SHEETS o O S84°57'97"Wci g 39.17 G. 4• 60 m 8.05 N78°08'32"E 0 orn O O N85°58'40'E 110.30 C 0 66.69 0�25%6'48 \� ni I S Or- 66.69 N85°58.40' r+i 0 L 60.331 (INSETA) S84°13'39"W 136.64 1 8R . 250.00 \ 112.94 R.280.0° 4=43°06 37 C=1122.17 »E C.8.=574 25 21 SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. a• w MILLBROOK 5TH ADDITION ( INSET B ) N m 0 cn ID to v NORTH 80 30 0 30 80 1 INCH EQUALS 60 FEET SCALE IN FEET The basis for the bearing system is the most easterly line ofOulat H, MILLBROOK; Washington County, Minnesota, which is assumed to bear N 01'04'42"W. 120 BENCHMARK: N1/4 COR. OF SEC. 19,TWP. 30, RGE. 20, WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA WASH. CO. MON. BENCHMARK: ELEV.= 919.44 FT. NATIONAL GEODETIC VERTICAL DATUM 1929 (N.G.V.D: 1929) oN0 171.48 Rm120.00 C 81372 27" C.a.,g32°29 59"E O Denotes a I/2 inch by 14 inch iron pipe set in the ground or will be placed in the ground within one year after the recording date of the plat, and marked by License No. 24764. ▪ Denotes a Found Iron Monument O Denotes a Found Cast -Iron -Monument DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS ARE SHOWN THUS: NOT TO SCALE Being 5 feet in width and adjoining lot lines, unless otherwise indicated, and I 0 feel in width and adjoining right of way lines, unless otherwise indicated, as shown on the plat. / / J 6,>3o283? 4S`—; hry ro /'• / / / / • T , S`3o 97 8 • O.ta O, S85506j2 PRELIMINARY 02-14-11 Np�13 S24o' 02.4. 2. T'l "'O E j JT,�\ N08'OS9� pi / 2 / / 613 y^o aM SHEET 3 OF 3 SHEETS a THE B E R TH P L A C E OFMINNESOTA PLANNING REPORT DATE: March 9, 2011 APPLICANT: City of Stillwater Planning Commission REQUEST: Ordinance Amendment Regarding Seasonal Outdoor Food Vending REVIEWED BY: Mike Pogge, City Planner John Gannaway, Police Chief Stu Glaser, Fire Chief PREPARED BY: Bill Turnblad, Community Development Director's BACKGROUND Planning Commissioners have over the years been dissatisfied with the City Zoning Ordinance requirement that vendors and seasonal outdoor sales are required to have a Special Use Permit (SUP). By the very nature of the use, the operators are not tied to the property for which the SUP is issued. They are in ways more like transient merchants than they are like commercials uses for which Special Use Permits are issued. In response, the Planning Commission asked City staff to research a more fitting way to permit these uses. At the August 9, 2010 Planning Commission meeting, staff presented several options. The Commission discussed the options and the consensus was that seasonal outdoor sales and vending should not be reviewed as Special Use Permits, but as annual permits. Permits run with a specific business, not with the land. The permit for the business would be approved by the Planning Commission for its first year. That initial permit would expire on December 31st. For each subsequent year without substantial changes, the permit would be reviewed and issued by City staff. At the January 10, 2011 meeting the Planning Commission considered the first draft of regulations specific to Seasonal Outdoor Sales (i.e. tents) but, left the discussion on Seasonal Food Vending for a future meeting. The regulations specific to vending are the subject of this report. Seasonal Food Vending Page 2 of 4 SEASONAL FOOD VENDING REGULATIONS Based upon Planning Commission discussions, staff has developed a first draft of the regulations that could apply to food vending operations. This first draft takes into account the three existing vendor SUPs in the city. All of them are located downtown. One is a vehicle serving Asian food at "Let There Be Light". One is a cart vending hot dogs on Water Street. The third one is the popcorn vending cart at the farm store on Main and Nelson. Consideration was also given to how other cities regulate similar uses. But, the draft has not yet been shared with representatives of the industry. After the Commission considers this draft, but before a public hearing is scheduled, it would be shared with the industry for comments. Suggested regulations for Seasonal Food Vendors: Seasonal Food Vending is allowed by annual permit on private property as an accessory use within the CBD Zoning District, subject to the requirements of this section. For purposes of this section, "Seasonal Food Vending" does not include food vending for events. Event food vending requires an event permit pursuant to City Resolution No. 2010-204 and any subsequent revisions to that resolution. The annual permit for a Seasonal Food Vending cart or vehicle may be approved by the City subject to the following. (1) A completed permit application form must be submitted annually, including permit fee, to the Community Development Department. The completed application must be submitted at least 60 days prior to the first seasonal usage of the cart or vehicle. To be considered complete, the application must include the completed application form, permit fee, and the following additional information. (a) Address of the private property upon which the cart or vehicle will operate. (c) Site and operations plans detailing at least the following: 1. Size and location of the area being occupied by the Seasonal Food Vending operation. 2. Picture and dimensions of vehicle or cart. 3. Location of exits from principal building on the property. The vending equipment and operation must not block the exits. 4. Storage location for vehicle or cart when not open for business. 5. Method of containing trash. 6. Pedestrian and traffic control safety measures. The sales area may not impede pedestrian or vehicular circulation patterns on or around the site. Seasonal Food Vending Page 3 of 4 7. Parking stalls. If parking stalls are being used by the vending operation, this must be indicated on the site plan. The total number of parking spaces required of the principal use of the private property shall not be reduced below the minimum number required by ordinance. 8. Miscellaneous operation details including: a) dates and hours of operation, b) merchandise or service being offered for sale, and c) contact information for the landowner, the applicant, and the manager of the Seasonal Vending operation. (d) Utility plan. Indicate how utilities will be provided to the operation. (e) Signage Plan. The annual permit application must include details of all proposed signage. A drawing for each proposed sign shall be submitted. The drawing shall show dimensions and describe materials, lettering, colors, illumination and support systems. The proposed signage shall be reviewed against the following standards. 1. The total number of signs associated with a Seasonal Vending operation is limited to two. 2. All signage for the Seasonal Vending operation must be contained on the subject private property. 3. One sandwich board type sign may be permitted if it satisfies the standards found in Resolution No. 2009- xxx and any subsequent revisions to that resolution. 4. One sign may be painted or affixed directly to the vehicle or cart. 5. No sign associated with the Seasonal Vending operation is allowed to be on the subject property when the cart or vehicle is not present. (f) Signed agreement from the property owner allowing the proposed Seasonal Vending operation. (2) Submittal of a satisfactory inspection report of the proposed cart or vehicle from the Stillwater Fire Department. (3) Submittal of a permit issued for the cart or vehicle by Washington County health officials. (4) The annual permit for the first year of operation shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission. The first year permit shall be valid through December 31 of the year. (5) The annual permit for subsequent years of operation shall be reviewed by Planning Department staff, unless there are substantial changes to the site plan or operations plan, or unless there are substantiated complaints of a Public Safety or Public Health nature. If there are such substantial changes or complaints, the Planning Commission must review the annual permit application for that year. Seasonal Food Vending Page 4 of 4 (6) Seasonal Food Vending is only allowed on private property. No Seasonal Food Vending permits will be issued for operation on public property or public right-of-ways. (7) For public safety reasons, all Seasonal Food Vending operations must close by 2:30 am each day. Also, if during large events it is determined by the Chief of Police that downtown crowd control is necessary, Seasonal Food Vending businesses may be required to close earlier than 2:30 am during that event. COMMENTS One unresolved issue is whether or not the existing Special Use Permits for seasonal vendors will be grandfathered. Since they are operated by Special Use Permits now, they run with the land and can only be revoked for a cause, or expire because the use went dormant for a year. So, without violations of the Special Use Permit conditions, finding the justification for terminating them is very difficult. Consequently, the existing SUPs would continue to be valid. Since the SUPs for the existing food vendors would continue to be valid, their SUPs would negate their need to apply for annual permits. But, it would be advantageous to them to apply for an annual permit even though they would have to pay a small fee. The reason is that they would then not be required to attend an annual hearing before the Planning Commission. Their time spent in an evening meeting would be more valuable than the small fee. None the less, it would be left up to the operators of the seasonal businesses to decide whether they want to continue to use their SUPs or switch to an annual permit. If they switch to an annual permit, staff would suggest that the hearings that they have already had before the Planning Commission would count as the initial annual permit review. So that their first annual permit could be issued by staff. This would offer more incentive for them to switch to the annual permit. RECOMMENDATION City staff recommends discussing the proposed Seasonal Vending regulations. Make whatever changes the Commission finds would be an improvement. The next step would be to contact vendors for comments and then hold public hearings on the proposed regulations. bt Exhibit A 2-24-2011 Michel Pogge City Planner Stillwater, MN Re: Special Use Permit 2009-47 Michel, Thank you for assisting in documenting my request to terminate the operating permit for the James Mulvey Inn, 622 Churchill Street West, Stillwater. We discontinued operations as a Bed and Breakfast December 315Y, 2010. In order to assist with financing for the property to be purchase as a single family home and to provide documentation that it will no longer be permitted to operate as a Bed and Breakfast we need the follow statement sent to Carl Baglio at Keller Williams (fax 651 439-4026): "The City of Stillwater, MN by the owner's request, has terminated the James Mulvey Inn, 622 Churchill St. W Bed and Breakfast Special Permit Case No. 2009-47 effective December 31, 2010." This statement is to assure the mortgage underwriter for the buyers of the property that it will not in the future be operated as a B and B. Thank you very much for your attention to this matter. It would do me a great favor if this information could reach Carl Baglio by February 25th at fax number 651439-4026. We have much enjoyed operating the James Mulvey Inn for the past few years. Stillwater has been very good to us. Sincerely, Lee Sather, owner, James Mulvey Inn 6351 St. Croix Trl N Stillwater, MN 55082 651247-9303