Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013-10-14 CPC Packetivvater THE BIRTHPLACE OF M I N N E S O T A CITY OF STILLWATER PLANNING COMMISSION NOTICE OF REGULAR MEETING PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 7:00 P.M. City of Stillwater Planning Commission will meet on Monday, October 14, 2013 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 August 12, 2013 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. 2013-20. A variance request for the installation of a golf netting system located at 1320 Amundson Place in the RA, Single Family Residential District. Kim Gipple, applicant. Continued from the August 12, 2013 CPC Meeting. 4.02 Case No. 2013-24. A special use permit request for a restaurant (Bar Lolo American Kitchen) located at 233 Main Street South in the CBD, Central Business District. Joe Ehlenz, applicant. 4.03 Case No. 2013-25. Variances to the required massing (front, side and rear yard setbacks and maximum height) and slope regulations for the construction of a single family dwelling on a legal, non -conforming, undeveloped lot located at Lot 6 and a part of Lot 1, Block 44, Carli & Schulenberg's Addition to the City of Stillwater (otherwise known as 115 Willow Street East) in the RA, One -Family Residential District. Amaris Custom Homes, Raymond Pruban, applicant. 4.04 Case No. 2013-26. An amendment to an existing special use permit by installing a fluid cooler on the roof at Lakeview Hospital located at 927 Churchill Street West in the RB, Two Family Residential District. Tyler Strachota, Metro Mechanical, applicant. 5. NEW BUSINESS 5.01 Application for an Seasonal Food Vending Permit located at 225 Main Street North in the CBD, Central Business District. Frank Fabio, applicant. 6. OTHER BUSINESS 7. ADJOURNMENT TOF JIOTNPLACE OF MIOOEIITO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES August 12, 2013 REGULAR MEETING 7:00 P.M. Chairman Kocon called the meeting to order at 7:01 p.m. Present: Chairman Kocon, Commissioners Collins, Fletcher, Hansen, Kelly, Lauer, Middleton, Siess, Council Representative Weidner Absent: Commissioner Hade Staff: City Planner Wittman APPROVAL OF MINUTES Commissioner Siess noted a correction of her name on page 2. Motion by Commissioner Middleton, seconded by Commissioner Fletcher, to approve the June 10, 2013 meeting minutes as corrected. Motion passed 8-0. OPEN FORUM There were no public comments. PUBLIC HEARINGS Case No. 2013-20. A variance request for the installation of a golf netting system located at 1320 Amundson Place in the RA, Single Family Residential District. Kim Gipple, applicant. City Planner Wittman explained the request. The applicant is requesting consideration of a fence variance for a golf netting system supported by two steel poles that would be 35 feet in height. The netting would be 50 feet in length. Dan Martin, 1220 Amundson Place, submitted written comments in opposition. Staff recommends approval of the 29 foot variance to the fence regulations for the structure based on three conditions: the final design shall be approved by a structural engineer; the steel poles shall not be made of a reflective material; and staff shall review the final design for compliance with the variance request. Commissioner Siess mentioned that the poles for a similar structure at 920 Amundson Drive are very large. She would like this proposal to be consistent since it is in the same neighborhood. Gloria Gipple, the property owner, provided additional documentation indicating where the netting is proposed to be located. She responded to the written letter of opposition, stating that a few golf balls coming into her yard would be acceptable but 10 to 20 are found per day, raising significant safety Planning Commission August 12, 2013 concerns. She does not wish to diminish property values and does not wish to build a wall. She believes the netting will be screened by the nearby trees. Dr. Don Brandt, 1240 Amundson Court, spoke in opposition. He expressed concern about the size of the poles used at 920 Amundson Drive which he said have diminished property values. He believes the poles will be visible in the winter when vegetation is gone. Keri Stroemer, 1200 Amundson Court, echoed the comments of Dan Martin and Don Brandt. She expressed concerns about the visual impacts and implications for home value. Commissioner Middleton asked why steel was recommended for the poles. He felt aluminum would be less visible to neighbors. Chairman Kocon pointed out that the netting will be removed during months when trees are bare. He asked if coniferous trees might be planted to eliminate some of the visual impacts. Commissioner Siess suggested looking at what other cities do in similar circumstances. Commissioner Fletcher agreed that if this problem appears to be a pattern among golf course properties, maybe there should be an ordinance developed. Commissioner Kelly indicated he would like to see the proposal come back with more information on the specifics of the structure, though he generally favors the location and the screening. With more information he would support the variance, but would include specific dimensions and materials as a condition of approval. Commissioner Lauer pointed out that the request is fairly specific already; the only thing that he would add would be to prohibit having a logo on the netting. Motion by Hansen, seconded by Siess, to table the request to the September 10 meeting, for more information about materials proposed for the pole, netting, site location and relationship to the tree line. Motion passed 8-0. NEW BUSINESS Discussion on zoning code amendment for the Cottage Residential District. City Planner Wittman informed the Commission that a significant number of driveways in the CR zone exceed the 12 foot maximum width. Staff recommends amending the zoning regulations to increase the maximum width for driveways in the CR District from 12 feet to 18 feet. Council Representative Weidner, who was on the Planning Commission when the Liberty area was developed, said that all garages were to be set back so as not to dominate the face of the homes. The concept of restricting driveway width was specific to that type of building style due to the uniqueness of the neighborhood with the smaller lots. City Planner Wittman reminded the Commission that CR zone exists only in Millbrook and Liberty, so one option would be to amend one or both of the PUDs for the developments. The restrictions Page 2 of 3 Planning Commission August 12, 2013 may be left as is, but there will be property owners wishing to expand their driveways as their neighbors have. Commissioner Kelly remarked that if the Commission amends the zoning code allowing driveways up to 18 feet wide, homeowners would be able to have an 18 foot wide driveway no matter how little sense it makes on their lot. He would rather see each case come before the Commission or the Council to request a variance rather than giving blanket approval. Chairman Kocon suggested a straw poll. Seven of the eight commissioners indicated they prefer to handle individual variance requests rather than amending the zoning code for the CR District. OTHER BUSINESS There was no other business. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Commissioner Kelly, seconded by Commissioner Fletcher, to adjourn the meeting at 8:06 p.m. Motion passed 8-0. Respectfully Submitted, Julie Kink Recording Secretary Page 3 of 3 j 1 iwatet: ){ E F M I N N ti t' A_..,� PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE: October 14, 2013 CASE NO.: 2013-20 APPLICANT: Kim Gipple, Representative REQUEST: Consideration of a 19' variance to the fence regulations for the installation of a protective netting system to be located at 1320 Amundson Place ZONING: RA - One Family COMP PLAN DISTRICT: Low Density Residential PREPARED BY: Abbi Jo Wit Ilan, City Plann REQUEST The applicant is requesting consideration of a 19' fence variance for a 25' high, 46' wide, steel pole golf netting system to be located at 1320 Amundson Place. APPLICABLE HISTORY On August 12, the Planning Commission heard an application for a 35' high and 50' wide protective golf netting system. At that time, the Commission was concerned about the visual impact of the proposed improvement. The Commission directed the applicant to look into aluminum poles as well as to submit additional materials including: an on -the - ground site plan depicting where the poles would be in relationship to the structure, the flagpole, the pool and the tree line; and exact specifications of the poles, including diameter and height; and exact specifications of the netting. Since the August public hearing, the applicant has submitted a site plan. Furthermore, the applicant has a sample of the netting to share with the Commission. Attached are four aerial photographs depicting the proposed location of the netting system as well as the heights of the property's mature vegetation. The aerial photos are from 2011 and do not adequately represent the present-day height of the trees. The Commission further directed staff to look into community zoning ordinances for the possible amendment of the City's zoning regulation for the inclusion of protective golf netting systems. In coordination with the League of Minnesota Cities, staff was able to find three community ordinances: Fountain Hills and Gilbert, AZ, and Thorton, CO. 1320 Amundson Place Page 2 Since the public hearing the City has received a letter of support from the property owner at 1300 Amundson Place. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS AND STANDARDS Section 31-305, RA - One Family District, indicates the maximum height for a structure is 35'. Section 31-508, Fence Regulations, indicates the maximum height for fence in residential districts is 6'. Section 31-208, Variances, indicates the Planning Commission may grant a variance, but only when all of the following conditions are found: 1. The variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of this chapter. The general purpose and intent of the Zoning Code is to regulate and restrict use of land for the protection of public health, safety and welfare. The variance, if granted, would create greater safeguards for the residents of the property. 2. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan. No application elements are contradictory to the Comprehensive Plan. 3. The applicant for the variance establishes that there are practical difficulties in complying with this chapter. "Practical difficulties," as use in connection with the granting of a variance, means that all of the following must be found to apply: i. The property owner proposes to use the land in a reasonable manner for a use permitted in the zone where the land is located, but the proposal is not permitted by other official controls; The proposal of a protective golf netting system is reasonable for this property and its location to the golf course. The subject property is surrounded by mature deciduous and coniferous trees that are near or exceed the height of the netting system. ii. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property and that are not created by the landowner; and As the representative indicates, the circumstances have been this way since the property owner's purchasing of the property in 2011. iii. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Golf netting systems are common in neighborhoods on golf courses. The city has permitted two netting systems on private property: 920 Amundson Drive (Case No. 2004-23) and 1931 Oak Glen Place (Case No. 2007-14). A third netting system is located on golf course property adjacent to 1850 Johnson Court. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. RECOMMENDATION Based on the aforementioned findings, recommends approval of a 19' variance to the fence regulations for the structure located at 1320 Amundson Place. ATTACHMENTS 1320 Amundson Place Page 3 Narrative Request, Midwest Fence Site Plan (Dates September 20, 2013), Aerial Photography with Approximate Netting Location and Vegetation Heights, Applicant Photographs, Application Attachments (3), and Certificate of Survey Fountain Hills, AZ, Zoning Ordinance Chapter 5: General Provisions (3) Gilbert, AZ, Zoning Ordinance Article 4.1: Site Regulations Ordinance No. 3020, Thornton City Code 1320 Amundson Place letter of support July 15, 2013 City of Stillwater 216 North 4th Street Stillwater, MN 55082 Attn: Abbi Jo Wittman, City Planner Re: 1320 Amundson Place — Variance Request Dear Ms. Wittman, June 28, 2011 my mother, Gloria Gipple, purchased a home at 1320 Amundson Place. Her home is on the 5th fairway of the Oak Glen Golf Course and has a large yard and swimming pool. At the time of the purchase, the previous owners indicated they would find an occasional golf ball in their yard. Unfortunately, it did not take long for us to realize, this was far from the truth. On an average summer day, we find 5 to 15 golf balls in the backyard or pool. Being a golfer myself, I am aware how fast a golf ball can travel (average speed of a man's drive is 150mph) and when it hits a solid surface, it will hit hard. I have witness golf balls dropping from the sky and hitting the concrete so hard they bounce up and over the roof of the house - later to be found in the front yard. We've learned that when a ball rips through the trees we should take cover for a minute as a second one will typically follow (same golfer, same bad shot). It has become impossible for us to relax and enjoy the yard and pool for fear that someone will be hit by a golf ball or worse yet killed. Due to the dangers associated to flying golf balls, coupled with the fact that we have a pool and spend a great amount of time in our backyard — we are requesting a variance to install a golf netting system. A few facts (Attachment 1): • 5th hole is 398-yards (from the men's white tee). • The white plate in the center of the fairway represents 150-yards to the center of the green or 248-yards from the tee box. This plate aligns with the diving board on the north -end of our pool. • The fairway is approximately 37-yards wide or 110-feet (at the white plate). • The rough, including the cart path, is approximately 33-yards wide or 100-feet (to our fence). • The fence to the backside of the house is approximately 25-yards wide or 75-feet. • In total...the center of the fairway to the back of the house is 76-yards or 228 feet. The netting system details are (Attachment 2): • 35'(h) x 50'(w). • 2 steel poles (6-5/8" diameter). • The netting would bisect the property in half, from the house to the golf course (at the 230 yard point). • It is our intent to work with Midwest Fence. The required netting system would be similar to those at the following Oak Glen properties (Attachment 3): • 920 Amundson Drive • 1850 Johnson Court • 1921 Oak Glen Place We appreciate your time and consideration for what has become a critical situation to our family. Should you have questions, do not hesitate to contact me at 651-439-1011. Thank you, Kim Gipple y, 1 4-Ni to :4'1/41 4 q, •ta L, •. 41,!***t>K A X CUSTOMER ADDRESS CITY PHONE: (Hm) (Wk) KmA 611124._ Salesperson ouSe- 444scAPC e-: oUS FENCING DIAGRAM Hudson page no Hudson grid no Intersecting St Received SEP 2 0 2013 Community Dev&01mnt Department 3: • = = = = t = = = 4 = = = :eta 1320 ITY OF 4` } 1: 1320 A7. U'<DSON :P=Lc GLORIA A O Res 1 unit Pieta rnetry N 111,1-VV,A K PIN: 2003020+40022 Owner Address Line 1: 1320 AMUNDSON PL Taxpayer Name: r7IPPLE GLORIA A acres poly : 0,14 use 1 desqiption: 100 Re' F 1 unit use2 desciption: use3 description; use4 description: 25' Coniferous 4 W E 4 Parcel: 13 O Pid PL. CITY OF 4S s ne _. 1' 20 L,(-' _! lDSON G:PPLE GL CR A A ,44 Ca :02Res 1unt MIUNDSOrt PL, CM" OF iLLWATER PTN: 20030204-10022 0,'.'11& Add! ess Line 1: 1320 AMUNDSON PL .'."axpayer Name: GIPPI.E GLORIA A acres poly : 0.44 use 1 description: 100 Res 1 unit use 2 descrIption: uge-:,1 de-sr:000w ;;:e4 description: Attachment 1 Attachment 2 Attachment 3 ERTIFICIE OF SURVEY di ,r Doled this ei day of AP?' 18 83 R v,;S /*vemier c''• /y8.7 HANS HAC)TN HOMES , I NC . / QPv/. 09c ' 0 t /Z -- J9- s:14? Af cf J7 e i 4e4S'4J"4P "E /'1 ti 4Z (320 Lot 4, Block 4, 02\R GLEN, W,n hindton County, o nne.,oi_ :. no //"a/'1.rc. Vf,e,_�q SCALE;1 Inch = -'° Feet o Denotes Iron Bearings shown are on an assumed datum. Job No. 0-cc Book_ Rage We hereby certify that this Is o true and correct representation of a survey of the ►oiindaries of the about described land and of the location of all buildings, If any, thereon, and all visible encroachments, it any,fronn or on sold lond. E.O. RUD a SONS , INC. �- n? by syt' _ _ �...vyt` Minn. Reg. No .YrOr E. G. RUD a SONS, INC. LANb SURVEYORS 9560 Lexington Avenue N New Brighton (Lexington), Minnesota 55112 Telephone: 786 — 5556 Town of Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance Chapter 5 7. In any zoning district, one flagpole per lot flying the American Flag, Arizona State Flag and/or the Town of Fountain Hills Flag so located and constructed that if it should collapse, its reclining length would be contained on the property on which it was constructed. In any commercial or industrial zoning district, one flagpole flying the American Flag, Arizona State Flag and/or the Town of Fountain Hills Flag may be located per lot in a required front yard or street side yard setback as long as the flagpole does not exceed the building height permitted in the underlying zoning district. C. Residential Accessory Buildings: No building, which is accessory to any residential building, shall be erected to a height greater than one (1) story or fifteen (15) feet except as otherwise may be permitted by a particular zone regulation. Section 5.08 Height Limitations on Corner Lots Within a triangle formed by the street front and side lot lines and a line connecting these lot lines at points measured along these lot lines a distance of twenty-five (25) feet from their intersection, all fixtures, walls, fences, construction, hedges, shrubbery, and other planting shall be limited to a height not more than three (3) feet above the elevation of the street line level at the same intersecting streets. Within the said triangle, and in cases where front yards are terraced, the ground elevation of such front yards shall not exceed three (3) feet above the established street line elevation at the said intersecting streets. Section 5.09 Walls and Fences A. Height: 1. Except as otherwise provided, no wall (whether retaining or not), fence or hedge, more than three (3) feet six (6) inches high shall be constructed or maintained nearer to the front or street side property line than the required front or street side building setback line. Retaining walls that lie within the front or street side yard may be allowed to a maximum height of six (6) feet if all of the following three (3) criteria are met: a. The retaining wall is on a slope gradient that is lower in elevation than the finished roadway surface. Page 8 of 25 July 6, 2013 Town of Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance Chapter 5 b. Both the retaining wall does not exceed three and one-half (3 1/2) feet above an imaginary line created by a horizontal extension of the roadway -finished surface. c. No vehicular sight lines are obstructed and road "clear zones" are established that are approved by the Town Engineer and meet with approved Traffic Engineering Standards. cur; roadway wali rtn' yarC voperty I=r1e Fences or hedges, which exceed the above heights, may be built around schools and other public or quasi -public institutions when necessary for the safety or restraint of the occupants thereof, within Industrial Zoning Districts, when a special use permit has been secured for such purposes. Except as otherwise provided, no non -retaining wall or fence shall exceed six (6) feet in height. Retaining wall heights and non -retaining walls on top of retaining walls with less than fifty (50) percent openness, shall follow the standards in Section 5.06 of the Town of Fountain Hills Subdivision Ordinance, however in no case shall the non -retaining wall exceed six (6) feet in height. These height regulations shall not apply when fences of greater height are required by the Planning and Zoning Commission or Town Council in order to provide adequate screening as required by this ordinance. Note: Those utility companies, Page 9 of 25 July 6, 2013 Town of Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance Chapter 5 which are regulated by the Arizona Corporation Commission, may be allowed increased fence heights due to national, state or local standards. Golf ball fences may be developed by Special Use Permit if all of the following characteristics apply: a. Golf ball fences may only be developed on lots that directly abut a golf course or driving range, however, they may not be developed within any front or street -side yard setback. b. Golf ball fences should only be developed within Six - Hundred (600) feet of the forward -most golf course tee box or driving range position. Golf course fences to protect against errant secondary golf shots may be approved due to unusual site or course layout circumstances. c. Golf ball fences shall be set back from any abutting residential property at a distance not Tess than the height of the fence. Golf ball fences may be located nearer to such a property line with the prior written consent of the abutting residential property owner. d. The maximum height of a golf ball fence shall not exceed twenty-five (25) feet. e. Pole color must blend in with background features as viewed from neighboring properties to minimize its visibility. Net color shall be black. f. Landscaping should be used where appropriate to obscure the poles from neighboring properties. 2. Exceptions: When necessary to meet pool enclosure requirements, the height of a freestanding fence may exceed six (6) feet. a. This section shall only apply when all of the following conditions exist: (1) The exempted fence serves as a pool enclosure, and Page 10 of 25 July 6, 2013 Article 4.1: Site Regulations a manner as to prevent uninvited access. C. Exceptions. 1. The above regulations shall not apply to non -permanent wading pools made of rubber, plastic or similar materials and containing water up to a maximum depth of not more than 18 inches. 2. Where the premises upon which the pool is located abuts a body of water in an approved Planned Area Development, the fence enclosure parallel to the water shall not be required provided that the abutting enclosure extends horizontally 18 inches beyond the lake bank. For purposes of this exception, the word "abutting" shall mean terminating at the point of contact with the lakeside edge of the bank. 3. Double width gates which are not the sole means of ingress and egress shall not be required to be self -closing and self -latching but must be padlocked at all times when not being used. 4.108 Underground Utilities On -site electric utility, cable television, and all other communication and utility distribution lines providing direct service to a development shall be placed underground. Overhead wires are prohibited. 4.109 Fences These fence regulations are in addition to the requirements of Section 4.104: Outdoor Business Property Storage and Article 4.2: Off -Street Parking and Loading Regulations. A. Residential Districts. 1. Single Family Residential Districts. a. In all single family residential districts, except SF-43 and SF-35, fences within the required front setback area shall not exceed a height of 3 feet. Any fence located in the side or rear setback area shall not exceed a height of 8 feet. A fence constructed on a side or rear property line shall not exceed a height of 8 feet from finished grade on either side of the fence. b. In SF-43 and SF-35 residential districts, other than open fencing, fences within the required front setback shall not exceed a height of 3 feet. Open fencing within the required front setback area shall not exceed a height of 6 feet. Any fence located in the side or rear setback area shall not exceed a height of 8 feet. A fence constructed on a side or rear property line shall not exceed a height of 8 feet from finished grade on either side of the fence. Revised: 2-24-11 Chapter I, Article 4.1 - Page 9 Town of Gilbert Land Development Code c. A separation fence is required when a single family residential use is adjacent to an arterial street, a multi -family district or use, or a nonresidential district or use. The fence shall be 8 feet in height and located on a property line and outside of any required landscape area. The Planning Commission may modify these requirements pursuant to Section 4.109G: Modification of Separation Fence Requirements. d. Golf ball safety nets and associated poles are permitted in the side and rear setback area of lots adjacent to a golf course or driving range. e. Chain link or woven wire tennis and sport court fencing is permitted within the building envelope. 2. Multi -Family Residential Districts. a. In multi -family residential districts no fence is permitted in the required front setback area. No fence shall exceed a height of 8 feet. A fence constructed on a side or rear property line shall not exceed a height of 8 feet from finished grade on either side of the fence. b. A separation fence is required when a multi -family residential use is adjacent to a single family residential district or use or a nonresidential district or use. The fence shall be 8 feet in height and located on a property line and outside of any required landscape area. The Planning Commission may modify these requirements pursuant to Section 4.109G: Modification of Separation Fence Requirements. c. Golf ball safety nets and associated poles are permitted in the side and rear setback area of lots adjacent to a golf course or driving range. d. Chain link or woven wire tennis and sport court fencing is permitted in the building envelope. 3. Temporary Fencing. Temporary fencing is permitted in conjunction with: a. Construction sites. b. Temporary uses pursuant to Section 4.5012: Temporary Uses. c. Special events, pursuant to a Special Event permit. 4. Prohibitions. a. Barbed wire, razor wire, and electric fences are prohibited except Revised: 2-24-11 Chapter 1, Article 4.1 - Page 10 Article 4.1: Site Regulations as permitted in Gilbert Municipal Code Sec. 42-110: Fences, barbed wire and electric. b. Except at recreation facilities, the use of permanent chain link, woven wire, and similar fence material is prohibited. c. Except as permitted in Sections 4.107B: Enclosures and Gates, 4.109A.1e, 4.109A2.d., the use of permanent chain link fence material is prohibited. B. Commercial and Office Districts and Uses. 1. Requirement. A solid separation fence is required when a commercial or office district or use is adjacent to a single family residential or multi- family residential district or use or adjacent to a Light Industrial or General Industrial district. The fence shall be 8 feet in height and located on a property line and outside of any required landscape area. A fence constructed on a side or rear property line shall not exceed a height of 8 feet from finished grade on either side of the fence. The Planning Commission may modify these requirements pursuant to Section 4.109G: Modification of Separation Fence Requirements. 2. Temporary Fencing. Temporary fencing is permitted in conjunction with: a. Construction sites. b. Temporary uses pursuant to Section 4.5012: Temporary Uses. c. Special events, pursuant to a Special Event permit. 3. Prohibitions. a. Barbed wire, razor wire, and electric fences are prohibited except as permitted in Gilbert Municipal Code Sec. 42-110: Fences, barbed wire and electric. b. Except at recreation facilities, the use of chain link, woven wire, and similar fence material is prohibited. c. Except as permitted in Section 4.107B: Enclosures and Gates, the use of permanent chain link is prohibited. C. Employment Districts. 1. Business Park. A solid separation fence is required when a Business Park district is adjacent to a single family residential or multi -family residential district or use or adjacent to a General Industrial district. The fence shall be 8 feet in height and located on a property line and outside of any Revised: 2-24-11 Chapter 1, Article 4.1 - Page 11 Town of Gilbert Land Development Code required landscape area. A fence constructed on a side or rear property line shall not exceed a height of 8 feet from finished grade on either side of the fence. 2. Light Industrial. A solid separation fence is required when a Light Industrial district is adjacent to a single family residential or multi -family residential district or use or adjacent to a General Industrial district. The fence shall be 8 feet in height and located on a property line and outside of any required landscape area. A fence constructed on a side or rear property line shall not exceed a height of 8 feet from fmished grade on either side of the fence. Permanent chain link, woven wire, and similar fence material is permitted in areas not visible from streets. Such fences shall not exceed the height of the separation fence. 3. General Industrial. A solid separation fence is required when a General Industrial district is adjacent to a single family residential or multi -family residential district, commercial or office district or use, or adjacent to a Business Park or Light Industrial district. The fence shall be 8 feet in height and located on a property line and outside of any required landscape area. A fence constructed on a side or rear property line shall not exceed a height of 8 feet from finished grade on either side of the fence. Permanent chain link, woven wire, and similar fence material is permitted in areas not visible from streets. Such fences shall not exceed the height of the separation fence. 4. Temporary Fencing. Temporary fencing is permitted in conjunction with: a. Construction sites. b. Temporary uses pursuant to Section 4.5012: Temporary Uses. c. Special events, pursuant to a Special Event permit. 5. Prohibitions. a. Barbed wire, razor wire, and electric fences are prohibited except as permitted in Gilbert Municipal Code Sec. 42-110: Fences, barbed wire and electric. b. Except as permitted in Section 4.107B: Enclosures and Gates, permanent chain link, woven wire, and similar fence material is prohibited in Light and General Industrial districts in locations visible from streets. D. Public Facility/Institutional District. 1. Requirement. Revised: 2-24-11 Chapter I, Article 4.1 - Page 12 Article 4.1: Site Regulations a. A solid separation fence is required when a Public Facility/Institutional district is adjacent to a single family residential or multi -family residential district or use or as otherwise required by the Planning Commission of Zoning Administrator as a condition of a use permit approval. b. The fence shall be 8 feet in height and located on a property line or outside of any required landscape area. A fence constructed on a side or rear property line shall not exceed a height of 8 feet from finished grade on either side of the fence. Except as required by the Planning Commission or Zoning Administrator as a condition of use permit approval, the Planning Commission may modify these requirements pursuant to Section 4.109G: Modification of Separation Fence Requirements. 2. Temporary Fencing. Temporary fencing is permitted in conjunction with: a. Construction sites. b. Temporary uses pursuant to Section 4.5012: Temporary Uses. c. Special events, pursuant to a Special Event permit 3. Prohibitions. a. The use of barbed wire, razor wire, and electric fences are prohibited except as permitted in Gilbert Municipal Code Sec. 42- 110: Fences, barbed wire and electric. b. Except at recreation facilities, the use of chain link, woven wire, and similar fence material is prohibited in locations visible from streets. c. Except as permitted in Section 4.107B: Enclosures and Gates, the use of permanent chain link is prohibited. E. Construction Standards. All fences, except those on single family residential lots, shall be constructed of a minimum of 8 inch wide concrete block, exclusive of decorative elements. F. Maintenance. All fences shall be permanently maintained in good condition and repaired or replaced when necessary to ensure continued compliance with the requirements of this section. G. Modification of Separation Fence Requirements. The Planning Commission may approve modifications to the requirement for separation fences between single family and multi -family residential districts or uses; single family residential uses adjacent to an arterial street; residential and nonresidential Revised: 2-24-11 Chapter 1, Article 4.1 - Page 13 Town of Gilbert Land Development Code districts or uses; commercial and office districts or uses adjacent to a Light Industrial or General Industrial district; and Public Facility/Institutional district adjacent to a single family residential or multi -family residential district or use. 1. Application. An application for Modification of Separation Fence Requirements shall be filed with the Development Services division in accordance with the procedure and provisions for application, public notice, staff report, and public hearing set forth in Section 5.402B: Conditional and Special Use Permits. 2. Action. The Planning Commission shall approve, approve with modifications and/or conditions, or deny the proposed modification to the separation fence requirements. If the Planning Commission fails to take action within 90 days after closing the public hearing, the Planning Commission shall be deemed to have denied the application. 3. Findings. The Planning Commission may approve the proposed modification of separation fence requirements or may approve the proposal with modifications and/or conditions only after making the following findings of fact: a. The proposed modification will not be detrimental to health, safety, or general welfare of persons living or working in the surrounding area, to adjacent property, to the neighborhood, or to the general welfare of the town as a whole; b. The proposed modification conforms with the purposes, intent, and policies of the General Plan and any applicable area, neighborhood, or other plan adopted by the Town Council; c. The proposed modification conforms with all other conditions, requirements, or standards required by the Zoning Code and any other applicable local, state, or federal requirements; d. The project is compatible with adjacent and nearby development; e. The owners of a majority of all real, contiguous property that are subject to the separation fence requirements have approved modification of the separation fence requirements by submitting a notarized letter of approval, along with a site plan depicting the location of the separation fence to be modified, to the Director of Planning; and f. The separation fence is not a condition of a Final Design Review or a use permit approval as set forth in Section 4.109D.1: Requirement. Revised: 2-24-11 Chapter 1, Article 4.1 - Page 14 Article 4.1: Site Regulations 4. Revocation. Modification to separation fence requirements may be revoked by the Planning Commission following a public hearing if the uses or districts change, should the uses become incompatible, or because of failure to comply with the conditions of the approval. a. Initiation of Revocation. Proceedings for the revocation may be initiated by the Zoning Administrator. The Zoning Administrator shall prepare a written report to the Planning Commission that contains the following information: The separation fence modification to be revoked; The property to which the modification applies; and The reason or reasons for the proposed revocation. b. Notice of Revocation Hearing. Notice of a revocation hearing shall be given by first class mail at least 15 days prior to the hearing as follows: To the property owner(s) of record; To the property address; and To the business address. Notice of the public hearing shall be published at least 15 days prior to the date of the hearing at least once in a newspaper of general circulation published or circulated within the Town of Gilbert. Notice shall be posted at least 15 days prior to the date of the hearing at 3 public places within the town designated by Town Council resolution for posting of public notices. c. Hearing. The revocation hearing shall be held in accordance with the procedures for public hearing set forth in section 5.206: Public Hearing Procedures. d. Required Findings. In order to revoke the modification to separation fence requirements, the Planning Commission shall make one or more of the following findings: (1) One or more of the terms of conditions of the modification have been violated or there has been a violation of other applicable laws or regulations; (2) The neighboring uses or zoning districts have changed; or Revised: 2-24-11 Chapter 1, Article 4.1 - Page 15 Town of Gilbert Land Development Code (3) The neighboring uses have become incompatible. e. Action. Upon revocation, the Zoning Administrator shall set forth the decision in a Notice of Decision describing the Planning Commission's action, with its findings. The Notice of Decision shall be sent via first class mail to: (1) To the property owner of record; (2) To the property address; and (3) To the business address. 5. Appeals. Any decision to modify the separation fence requirements may be appealed to the Town Council pursuant to Section 5.2011: Procedures for Appeals. Revised: 2-24-11 Chapter I, Article 4.1 - Page 16 111 11111E1 11111111 ORD ORDINANCE NO.: 3020 INTRODUCED BY: Bach C.D. No. 2007-227 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING PORTIONS OF SECTIONS 18-3, 18-230, 18-356, 18- 422 AND 18-423 OF THE THORNTON CITY CODE TO INCLUDE GOLF SAFETY NETTING AS AN ACCESSORY USE IN ALL ZONING DISTRICTS. WHEREAS, Chapter 18 of the Code regulates land use in the City; and WHEREAS, the City Council has approved golf course development under the Planned Development (PD) zoning category in the City; and WHEREAS, this amendment is intended to broaden the allowed uses under existing and future PD zoning districts; and WHEREAS, the intent of the zoning districts is to allow for the reasonable enjoyment of property by its owner; and WHEREAS, the proposed amendments are to promote the public health, safety and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF THORNTON, COLORADO, AS FOLLOWS: 1. Section 18-3 of the Code is hereby amended by the addition of the words double - underlined to read as follows: Section 18-3. Definitions. The following words, terms and phrases, when used in this chapter, shall have the meanings ascribed to them in this section, except where the context clearly indicates a different meaning: Fence means any structure that is comprised of posts, boards, wire, stakes, rails or any combination of similar elements that provides a physical barrier, enclosure, or boundary, except this definition does not include Golf Safetv Nets as defined in Section 18-356(14). 2. Section 18-230 of the Code is hereby amended by the addition of the number, words and letters double -underlined to read as follows: Section 18-230. Use charts. C.D. No. 2007-227 Legend: R = Permitted use by right S = Use permitted by Specific Use permit L = Limited Use permitted by right T = Use permitted by Temporary Use Permit `o v Residential Estate Single -Family Detached Single -Family Attached Multifamily Manufactured Home Neighborhood Services Community Retail Regional Commercial Q g City Center Industrial Use chart Residential Districts Nonresidential Districts Part X I V . Accessory Uses. 14 Golf safety net S SS S 3. Section 18-356 of the Code is hereby amended by the addition of Subsection 18- 356(14) of the Code double -underlined to read as follows: Sec. 18-356. Specific accessory uses. (14) Golf safety net. a. Definition. A barrier consisting of support posts and netting panels erected adjacent to a golf course or golf driving range for the purpose of preventing golf balls from entering property adjacent to the golf course. b. Districts permitted. By SUP only in all zoning dis riots includin. all existing and future PD districts.• c. Required off-street parking. None. d. Required off-street loading. None. e. Additional provisions. 1. Golf safety nets may be permitted only on lots whose side or rear yard abut a golf course or golf driving range or are across the street from a golf course or golf driving range. 2. Golf safety nets may be erected on property adjacent to or across the street from the golf course or golf driving range. The restriction in Subsection 18-355(b) requiring an accessory use to be located on the same lot as the main use does not apply to this use. 3. A person hall o -rect or maintain a golf safe , net more than 60 feet above grade when located in the rear or side yard. Golf safety nets are prohibited in the front yard. 2 C.D. No. 2007-227 4. In the event a Development Permit and Specific Use Permit is approved with golf safety net standards different from the standards in this subsection, the standards established in the Development Permit and Specific Use Permit review process shall control. 5. Golf safety nets may not be located within a floodplain easement without consideration of flooding conditions and as approved by the Floodplain Administrator. 6. The loca ion of a golf safety net shall comply with all visual obstruction regulations contained in Subsection 18-456(c). 7. Flags, signs, banners and other appurtenances are prohibited from being attached to the support structure or netting. 8. Golf safety nets shall be constructed in accordance with the following minimum standards: All golf safety nets require a building permit. i. Support posts and netting shall be consistent in all detail includin• hei•ht, color and style, with existing golf safety nets surrounding an adjacent golf course or driving range if any. ii. All golf safety nets shall be constructed in accordance with the manufacturers recommendations. iii. Support posts shall be constructed of rust -resistant metal approved by a structural engineer and shall meet all requirements of the City's Building Code and all other applicable codes. iv. Nettin material shall be black in color and of a ouality designed for the purpose of obstructing golf balls. Netting shall also be designed to withstand the area's climate conditions and shall meet all reauirements of the City's Building Code and all other applicable codes. v. Support structures should be fitted with a device, such as a halyard. that allows the net panel(s) to be removed for repair or storage. C.D. No. 2007-227 9. Golf safety nets shall be maintained and re aired b the property owner in accordance with the following minimum standards: i. Any missing or broken support post that was a comps. of the original design of the golf safety net shall be repaired or replaced with similar material. ii. Torn netting which not longer serves the inte • ed purpose shall be repaired or replaced with similar material. 4. Section 18-422(d) of the Code is hereby amended by the addition of the words double -underlined to read as follows: Section 18-422. Side yards. (d) Required side yards shall be left open and unobstructed except for fences, landscaping, golf safety nets as permitted in Section 18-356(14), and buildings less than 120 square feet in area. 5. Section 18-423(d) of the Code is hereby amended by the addition of the words double -underlined to read as follows: Section 18-423. Rear yards. (d) Required rear yards shall be left open and unobstructed except for fences, landscaping, golf safety nets as permitted in Section 18-356(14), and buildings less than 120 square feet in area. 6. If any portion of this ordinance is held to be unconstitutional or invalid for any reason, such decision shall not affect the constitutionality or validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance. City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this ordinance and each part hereof irrespective of the fact that any one part be declared unconstitutional or invalid. 7. All other ordinances or portions thereof inconsistent or conflicting with this ordinance or any portion hereof are hereby repealed to the extent of such inconsistency or conflict. 8. The repeal or amendment of any provision of the Code by this ordinance shall not release, extinguish, alter, modify, or change in whole or in part any penalty, forfeiture, or liability, either civil or criminal, which shall have been incurred under such provision, and each provision shall be treated and held as still remaining in force for the purpose of sustaining any and all proper actions, suits, proceedings, and prosecutions for the enforcement of the penalty, forfeiture, or liability, as well as for the purpose of 4 C.D. No. 2007-227 sustaining any judgment, decree, or order which can or may be rendered, entered, or made in such actions, suits, proceedings, or prosecutions. 9. This ordinance shall take effect April 1, 2008. INTRODUCED, READ, PASSED on first reading, ordered posted in full, and title ordered published by the City Council of the City of Thornton, Colorado, on December 4, 2007. PASSED AND ADOPTED on second and final reading on December 18, 2007. CITY OF THORNTON, COLORADO Erik Hansen, Mayor ATTEST: Q 7)M(e/ Nanc . Vin�nt, City Clerk THIS ORDINANCE IS ON FILE IN THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION. APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: m.d MargarEmerich, City Attorney PUBLICATION: Posted in six (6) public places after first and second readings. Published in the Northolenn-Thornton Sentinel after first reading on December 13, 2007, and after second and final reading on December 27, 2007. (f/e4$a � , y €LI /c qg Gif,les e'L9//3 61; Id teli#And,e /94ei#Let-- -21 6 y57`/1/ S7�llw�j % .SSogg "G ' �Qvi P.�,�eref pest 4 /(i �7 6i , !e 7 /le system /2f ems, II/ 6c: l ` d G� 2 (.4 d7/ l()- h`J crlo� -e f yd off, ash � �� / � _ � 7���rr ,D d.es q71 dP459///5 7ei-e ,9V-7e co. -se 1..1"of,pf /.6e IM!4/42cd -re 7‘;f- ZL, 4,Qfr, Q - y ,57., e,e/7' ,4/.5- f ' , e iee-ca,V402e7e `//�++ 4qse5 , < ' / 30 a/90 o n� 0,1 A% T € '' /,*s �cyzd 4V /C ?1',A?&/ r 7/14-e/f Sqi e-e,4ae /1, "- f4t C4 (- sae ,._._ /Lo / s' o//T 4 i ',F 4fr5c'n74 dei-eqi oz b7//4,4.i5�/h rs o 74x /s "of �► Qe /��4._ 5 ; 4 al7 0 Pi ri C' � 4.A QcA„ C f-freeI/4. ' le 2C'�e sh e //;°41 /S 4.E4 /ei- /), 4c ,-e, �� � eAe te/ S ear -74 c.i;/ e gee k' Ce e e di* cue/ ce907 s/4/.-- /ram L � �/� /�1' f' 0 n�� v� �f 4, cc Q s �ZZ.Gi 1 / ( / S �/ ©Fens r i 5" 1� a�C �-�e fe sue. s ,i4A- re�, �aa Qs Casa k ,Let f�.. / ►� q .64 aftecia*6 �9.w se SEP 3 2013 Community Development DePe et* PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE: October 14, 2013 APPLICANT: REQUEST: Joe Ehlez CASE NO.: 2013-24 Consideration of a Special Use Permit for a restaurant, Bar Lolo American Kitchen, to be located at 229/233 Main Street South ZONING: CBD-Central Business COMP PLAN DISTRICT: DMU-Downtown Mixed Use PREPARED BY: Abbi Jo Wittman, City Planner REQUEST The applicant is requesting consideration of a Special Use Permit for a restaurant, Bar Lolo American Kitchen, to be located on the first floor of a newly constructed structure located at 229/233 Main Street South. APPLICABLE HISTORY On July 10, 2012, the City of Stillwater granted a Conditional Use Permit for the construction of an infill structure located at 229 Main Street South. At that time, the City was aware of the property owner's intentions to lease the space to a restaurant. Upon building permit submittal, the new structure was addressed as 233 Main Street South. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS AND STANDARDS Municipal Code Section 31-207 indicates the following must be determined by the Planning Commission prior to the issuance of a Special Use Permit: (1) The proposed structure or use conforms to the requirements and the intent of this chapter, and of the comprehensive plan, relevant area plans and other lawful regulations; Zoning Ordinance - Parking: A condition of the Conditional Use is for the property owner to purchase 22 parking permits each month to compensate for the deficit in on -site parking. 233 Main Street South Page 2 Comprehensive Plan - The Local Economy chapter of the City's Comprehensive Plan (Page 7-4) "encourages small locally owned businesses particularly in the downtown". (2) Any additional conditions necessary for the public interest have been imposed; and Architectural Design - No exterior modifications are proposed. For exterior signage, not included in this submission, a design permit application will need to be submitted to the Heritage Preservation Commission for review and approval. Trash - With the construction of the newly -constructed structure, the City of Stillwater discussed entering into a cooperative trash agreement with the property owner. At this time, an agreement has not been developed. (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. ALTERNATIVES The Planning Commission has the following options: 1. Approve the Special Use Permit requests with the following conditions: a. Building permit plans must be approved by the fire marshal and building official prior to issuance of a building permit for any interior alterations. b. No outdoor seating is permitted. c. Prior to installing any exterior signage, a design review application must be submitted to the Heritage Preservation Commission for review and approval. d. All trash must be stored inside or in the combined trash enclosure on Water Street. 2. Deny the requested Special Use Permit. With a denial, findings of fact supporting the decision must be provided. 3. Table the request for additional information. RECOMMENDATION Based on the aforementioned findings, staff recommends conditional approval of a Special Use Permit for a restaurant, Bar Lolo American Kitchen to be located at 229/233 Main Street South. ATTACHMENTS Site Location, Narrative Memo (3 Pages), Interior Layout Order Granting a Variance and a Conditional Use Permit, City of Stillwater • To: Stillwater Planning Commission From: Bar LOLO American Kitchen LLC Re: Conditional Use Permit Application for 233 Main Street South, Lower Level for use as a restaurant, Bar LOLO American Kitchen 233 Main Street South is the newest commercial building in Downtown Stillwater Business District. The building was designed and built for the use we are requesting. The Owner is HAF Architects and the space on the first floor was envisioned as restaurant space. HAF Architects occupies the second floor. This request is for the conditional use of the first floor for a new restaurant Bar Lolo American Kitchen. Attached to our application form you will find a legal description, layout of the interior space and a concept document of the type of restaurant we envision. Upon approval of this conditional use permit we will apply for all necessary liquor, building, parking, county health and any other business requirements of the city, county or state to conduct a business of this type. HAF Architects are the space designers and will be contracted for the construction of said space to meet city and state codes. They have completed many projects locally including the building at 233 South Main Street. The city should have confidence in their ability to produce a high quality product that matches the product we want to make for our patrons. We have also attached a contact list for all key decision makers for our venture. Please feel free to contact us at any time regarding any issue relating to this proposal. The Adjacent building to the South is Marx's, The building to The South is a clothing store and 45 degrees. The building across Water Street to the east is the Freighthouse. The intersection of Main Street / Highway 95 and the east end of Olive Street is in front of the building. Thank you for considering our proposal. Sincerely, Bar LOLO American Kitchen -- Joe Ehlenz & Brad Nordeen Bar Lolo American Kitchen will be an open kitchen and bar concept in a modern setting with chef driven small plates focused on American street foods, fresh handmade cocktails and unique craft beers. The restaurant will offer a comfortable & cozy upscale ambiance while remaining unpretentious in nature. The Design • Bar Lolo will be a mix of metals, leathers, & dark woods, accented with pictures, bright colors, an exposed ceiling, and high brand new finishes. The restaurant will have lots of natural light coming through each entrance and will sparkle against the contemporary finishes. The ceiling will be left open to give the feeling of the classic industrial look that matches the small plates and street food twist. Designer Mike Hoefler, who has designed, built, and orchestrated the finishes on hundreds of buildings and restaurants, will take the lead on this design. His expertise will play a large part in the design and overall decor of Bar Lolo. The kitchen and bar will be connected side by side on the north wall, completely open and surrounded by diners, which will add an entertainment "show" aspect to the dining experience. Lighting will be used to draw attention to decorative pieces. Customers will be able to see focal pieces all over the restaurant that will be constant conversation pieces. There is a definite science to matching the decor to the overall theme so as to not create a void in the understanding of the overall experience. • The music will upbeat, with be a mix of classic & contemporary, and will be fun nature always maintaining a certain level of excitement. • The building is brand new and so the floor, walls, tables, chairs, etc. will be brand new also. However, some pieces could be repurposed as seen fit by the owners. The use of textures, colors, and finishes may be found in old pieces of furniture and finishes that are made new again but have a more classic design look than a newer item. Since the space is small, all elements within the design will need to all have purpose, stay within the theme, and also have conversation draw. A definite wow factor is the goal in mind to change the overall normal nature of most of the restaurants in the area. The Menu (Food) • The menu will be small and concise, focused on exciting small plates, delectible salads, mouthwatering burgers, and reinvented American street food with high quality ingredients. The creative food items will be very approachable, playful, perfectly executed, and have high value price points. They will be a combination of our chefs modern interpretations of American street food and other bold flavor combinations interspersed with local, seasonal ingredients using classic and modern cooking techniques. • Menu highlights include: o Candied Spiced Pecans 3 o Smoked Salt & Rosemary Fries 5 o Prosciutto Wrapped Shrimp w/ Maple Glaze, House Cured Pancetta, & Guinness Bubbles 8 o Seared Ahi w/ Avocado & Citrus -Soy Emulsion 10 o Black & Blue Burger w/ Bacon & Smoked Blue Cheese 12 o Surf n Turf Burger w/ Lobster & Green Peppercorn Aioli 20 o Hanger Steak Tacos w/ Pico, Avocado, & Lime 14 o Lobster Roll w/ Lemon Chive Mayo 15 o Pork Tenderloin w/ Mojo Verde, Roast Tomato Jam, Braised Shallot, Candied Bacon 15 o Sea Scallops w/ Lobster Crema, Bacon, & Corn 18 • Bar Lolo will also offer smaller happy hour and late night menus focused solely on a limited number of small plates and American street food including sriracha chicken wings, lobster rolls, roast duck tacos, bacon wrapped hot dogs, etc. The Menu (Bar) • The menu themes will be focused around fresh, handcrafted cocktails featuring tequila, rum, & bourbon. Also, artisinal beers will be featured. Using the expertise of the owners, the cocktails will be able to match the creativity of the food and push the market toward new levels of enjoyment in the world of mixology and the spirits that are used. Using artisan bitters, teas, fresh fruits, sours, vinegars, and flavored ice will bring Stillwater the type of mixology that it is currently lacking. The beers will be designed with the brewers in mind, in an effort to capitalize on specialty beers not available to all restaurants. This will make it so Lolo has beers that most restaurants cannot get their hands on. Beers will rotate and change seasonally. Owner Joe Ehlenz will demand expertise of all aspects of cocktails, beers, and wines from his staff in order to create consistency for all tables and bar customers. Holding a staff accountable for knowledge and such precision of service will make the bar menu work best. A small, highly focused wine list will be present and will be skillfully composed by wine expert Bill Abrahamson of Top Ten Liquors and owner Joe Ehlenz. Lolo will further enhance the bar menu by offering a small reserve beer list. These will include beers that will be aged in house and are currently highly sought after by beer connoisseurs. No restaurant -in the area is offering such a program. The Ownership Team • Partners Brad Nordeen and Joe Ehlenz have extensive experience in different aspects of the restaurant industry in the St. Croix Valley and have maintained excellent reputations. Combined they have over 25 years experience in food, bar, business management, finance, and marketing arenas. StUwaler IHE BIRTHPLACE Of MINTEFSOIA PLANNING COM MISSION MEETING DATE: October 14, 2013 CASE NO.: 201372.6'7.5-- APPLICANT: Kari Branjord represented by Raymond Pruban, Amaris Custom Homes REQUEST: Variances to massing (front and side yard setbacks and maximum height) and slope regulations for construction of a home on at 115 Willow Street East ZONING: RA -One Family COMP PLAN DISTRICT: Low Density Residential PREPARED BY: Abbi Jo Wittman, City Planne REQUEST The applicant is requesting the Planning Commission's consideration of a series of variances for the construction of a single family residence proposed to be located on a legal, non -conforming, undeveloped lot. The variances are to the required massing (front and side yard setbacks and maximum height) and slope regulations, specifically noted as: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. An 18.5' variance to the front yard setback. A 30' variance to the corner (west) side yard setback. A 1/2 story variance to the height regulation. A 3' variance to the height regulation. A 30' variance to the slope setback regulation. A 21.5' variance to the location of a structure on a slope greater than 24%. Washington Pansel,CITY Of eSTILLWATER P H: 2103020 f 30076 7::net add'ess.ne 1: 18620..I81: -t T.'-avt: 1+eme:-WaCe TZ 17215TT1& 0 TAR, Iuse) desapton: 150 Pe, e-d I use1 dewybe. use desnoan dew ' 115 Willow Street East Page 2 APPLICABLE HISTORY Significant correspondence has occurred between the City of Stillwater and the property owner within the last ten years. Property file documentation includes statements by former Community development Director Russell including: • Buyers are free to build a home on said property. • Said property is not a part of a Historical District. • Said property has been deemed a developable site. • There are no style restrictions as to the building of a home on said property with the exception of abiding by the zoning laws of the City of Stillwater. Additionally included in the property file is a City of Stillwater site plan depicting estimated elevation contours. The plan outlines an area staff determined as buildable as well as an area where no slopes were greater than 24%; this area is noted as an area which staff could support variance applications for as it sits within the front yard setback area. In July of this year staff discussed with the applicant the information in the property file. Through their due diligence process, the applicant has been able to determine the previously -developed staff site plan is not accurate; a larger area of the lot has been determined to contains slopes greater than 24%. REQUEST ANALYSIS AND APPLICABLE ZONING REGULATIONS The parcel is a legal nonconforming lot of record meaning the parcel of land has been of record in the Washington County Record's Office prior to January 1,1963 and that has had no property line modifications since that date. The lot was platted in 1867, clearly before the advent of the modern zoning code. Given this, the City has determined that the lot is legal (as it was legally platted), but it does not conform to the following existing zoning regulations. • Minimum Lot Area (10,000 square feet): While the total lot area for the subject parcel is 20,169 square feet, the slope regulations indicate parcels with a portion of the area in slopes of 25 percent or greater require the minimum lot area of the applicable zoning district in slopes of less than 25 percent. When the total land area is reduced by the amount of slopes greater than 24%, the minimum lot area does not conform. • Minimum Lot Width (75') and Minimum Lot Depth (100'): While the average lot width and depth conforms with the zoning regulations, the addition of the vacated portion of Willow Street (conducted in 1987) has created a non-conformance. This area, however, contains the largest portion of buildable area for the parcel. The Zoning Code specifically allows the City to permit the construction of a home on a legally non -conforming lot, as long as the lot was platted before May 1,1974, and as long as City sewer and water are connected to the new home. ' 115 Willow Street East Page 3 Section 31-305, RA - One Family District, indicates the applicable massing regulations: Minimum Front Yard Setback (30'): Yard, front means an open unoccupied space on the same lot with a main building, extending the full width of the lot and situated between the front lot line and the front line of the building projected to the sidelines of the lot .City staff has interpreted the front yard as the area adjacent to the roadway. In this case, the area adjacent to Willow Street is determined to be the front yard. The applicant is requesting an 18.5' variance to the front yard setback. The structure, if approved would sit 11.5' from the front (northern) property line. The structure would sit 27.9' from the Willow Street easement. The lands between the northern property boundary and the Willow Street easement are public lands. Minimum Corner Side Yard Setback (30'): Yard, side means an open, unoccupied space on the same lot with the main building situated between the building and the sideline of the lot and extending from the front yard to the rear yard. Any lot line not a rear line or a front line shall be deemed a lot line. The applicant is requesting a 30' variance to the corner side yard setback on the west side of the property. The structure, if the variance is approved, will sit on the edge of the 30' roadway, utility and drainage easement. Maximum Building Height (2 1/2 stories, not to exceed 35'): While the code does not define a story, city staff has interpreted a story to exist when greater than 50% of the total wall area is exposed. In this circumstance, greater than 50% of the lowest floor is proposed to be exposed. Height, building means the vertical dimension, measured from the average elevation of the finished lot grade at the front of the building to the highest point of ceiling of the top story, in the case of a flat roof, to the deck line of a mansard roof and to the average height between the plate and ridge of a gable, hip or gambrel roof. The applicant is requesting a 3' variance to the height regulations for a maximum allowable height of 38' though the applicant has indicated a total height of 36' 3 '/s" may be able to be achieved. Section 31-521, Slope Regulations, indicates the regulations are enacted to minimize the risks associated with project development in areas characterized by vegetation and steep or unstable slopes. These areas include ravines, blufflands and shorelands. A further purpose is to avoid the visual impact of height, bulk and mass normally associated with building on any steep slope. For the purpose of these regulations, steep slopes are defined as slopes of greater than 24 percent as measured over a distance of 50 feet measured horizontally. • Slopes 25 percent or greater may not be considered in meeting the lot area size requirements. ' 115 Willow Street East Page 4 • Parcels with a portion of the area in slopes of 25 percent or greater require the minimum lot area of the applicable zoning district in slopes of less than 25 percent. The area in slopes of less than 25 percent must be contiguous to the proposed building site. • No structure may be located on a slope of greater than 24 percent or within 30 feet of a 25 percent or greater slope. • All roads and paved surfaces must be set back ten feet from the top of the slopes greater than 24 percent. VARIANCE REGULATIONS Section 31-208, Variances, indicates the Planning Commission may grant a variance, but only when all of the following conditions are found: 1. The variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of this chapter. The purpose of the Zoning Ordinance is to regulate and restrict the use of land and the use and location of buildings and structures and determine the area of yards and other places surrounding them; regulate and restrict the density of population; divide the city into districts for this purpose; adopt a map of the city showing boundaries and the classification of the districts; and prescribe penalties for the violation of its provisions. The applicant is proposing a single family dwelling which is consistent with the zoning regulations for this district. 2. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan. The Comprehensive Plari s Future Land Use Plan map indicates the property shall be zoned Low Density Residential. The proposed improvement is consistent with the future use. An objective of Comprehensive Plan Chapter 3, Natural Resources, outlines the City shall preserve, protect and/or restore natural features including...bluff lands. No policies are associated with bluff land development. 3. The applicant for the variance establishes that there are practical difficulties in complying with this chapter. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. "Practical difficulties," as use in connection with the granting of a variance, means that all of the following must be found to apply: i. The property owner proposes to use the land in a reasonable manner for a use permitted in the zone where the land is located, but the proposal is not permitted by other official controls; ii. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property and that are not created by the landowner; and iii. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. While the applicant has not made specific statements of practical difficulties, the application demonstrates there are practical difficulties in complying with the provisions of the front ' 115 Willow Street East Page 5 and side yard setbacks, the slope setback regulation and the location of a structure on a slope greater than 24% for the construction of a single family dwelling with an attached garage. • The proposal of a single family home with an attached garage is reasonable. Construction into the front and corner side yard setbacks, to reduce the encroachment into the hillside is reasonable. If engineered plans were submitted, encroachment into the slope setback area and slope greater than 25% is reasonable. While a three-story structure, to accommodate a tuck under garage is reasonable, an overall height of 38' may not be reasonable given a purpose of the slope regulations is to avoid the visual impact of height, bulk and mass normally associated with building on any steep slope. • While portions of the application (front and corner side yard setbacks, slope setback and construction on a slope greater than 24%) are due to the uniqueness of the property, the scale and height the proposed structure has been created by the applicant. • Though a cut into the bluff will be made, the essential character of the bluff will be preserved. Additionally, the structure, set into the hillside and away from the park and more significantly travelled roads will not alter the essential character of the locality. ALTERNATIVES The Planning Commission has the following options: 1. Approve all, or a portion of all, variances with the following conditions: a. A Stormwater Management Plan shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineering Department. i. The two retaining walls to the south of the proposed structure must be engineered. b. Building Permit plans shall be reviewed and approved by the City Building Department. i. The south facing portions of the structure, at a minimum, must be engineered. c. A Design Review Permit for construction in the Neighborhood Conservation District shall be reviewed and approved by the Heritage Preservation Commission. d. A tree replacement plan shall be reviewed and approved by the City Forester. 2. Deny all variances. 3. Table the request for additional information. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Planning Commission approve, as conditioned, an 18.5' variance to the front yard setback, a 30' variance to the corner side yard setback, a 1/2 story variance to 115 Willow Street East Page 6 the height regulation, a 30' variance to the slope setback regulation, a 21.5' variance to the location of a structure on a slope greater than 24%. Staff further recommends the Planning Commission deny the 3' variance to the height of the structure to help preserve the visual impact of height, bulk and mass normally associated with building on any steep slope. ATTACHMENTS Application Narrative (4 Pages) Certificate of Survey Steep Slope area Tree Removal Plan Floor Elevations (3) City of Stillwater Elevation Map Letter from Julie and Duane Paulson CUSTOM HOMES ... where healthy living is built-in September 20, 2013 Abbi Whitman Planning Director City of Stillwater 216 North Fourth Street Stillwater, MN 55082 Reference: 115 Willow Street 6 Stillwater, MN Variance Application cc: Planning Commission (via staff report) City Council (via staff report) To All: In July of this year, long-time resident of Stillwater, Kari Branjord, secured the above mentioned property via purchase agreement from the Sellers (Terry Fisher & Kristin Hankwitz) with the goal of building a single family residential home. My company Amaris Custom Homes has been hired by Kari Branjord to help her develop the above referenced lot into a single family residence. This is going to be her "forever" home and will include an elevator for those ultimate plans. The lot in question is extremely -extremely challenging. Let me document and review these challenges narratively for consideration by staff, planning commission and council. 1. The setback requirements for the RA district are 30' front yard, 30' corner side yard, 25' rear yard and 10' interior side yard. The most logical location to place a structure is on the flattest portion of the lot closest to the park, thereby significantly minimizing the impact to the steep slope and trees. The further you move the home back (towards the south) into the slope, the more you have to cut into the steep slope and cut down more trees (doing this is not practical or even realistic). It should be noted the proposed depth of the home (north/south) is set at about the minimum it can be and maintain a basic two car garage and egress into the home and generally the home is very modest in size. If you we were to move the home back (south) 20' to BOX 10695 WHITE BEAR LAKE, MN 55110 651.426.0584 WWW.AMARISCUSTOMHOMES.COM 651.426.0585 (AMIAR if CUSTOM HOMES ... where healthy living is built-in obtain the 30' corner side yard setback, it would literally totally destroy the slope and would create huge retaining walls. Therefore, we have determined the best situation is to keep the home as close to the park as possible. Unfortunately, even a modest home plan on the front portion is sandwiched in all directions, yet in our estimation is the only and best alternative for this lot. Based on our understanding of ordinances in general, since the front door and porch faces west, the west appears to the technical "front" of the home. Based on this assumption, we request the following variances on setbacks requirements: a. Front yard from 30' to 15' to the porch and 19.2' to the structure. b. Corner side yard from 30' to 10' (showing 11.5' now) c. Rear yard setback from 25' to 10' It is worth noting that there is a sliver of park land between the Willow Street ROW and the corner side lot setback which will give the appearance the home is setback approximately 28'+/- from the ROW. 2. Height Requirements of the RA Zoning District. The RA zoning district states the height of the structure cannot exceed 2 1/2 stories and not to exceed 35'. Due to the topographical nature of the lot, what would traditionally be the basement is fully exposed to the north, east and west. The height requirement language potentially requires two variances. a. The 2 1/2" stories. The home will have three full stories exposed to the west, north and east, yet is really just a 2 story home with a tuck under garage and 3-sided walkout situation (it is a very unique situation no zoning ordinance could really anticipate). As a result of this, we are not sure if the proposed home will be interpreted by staff as a two- story with a three sided walkout situation or three-story home. If it is a three-story, we request a variance from the 2.5 story to a 3.0 story home. b. The height cannot exceed 35'. Staff has explained this to be calculated from the bottom of the front door to the halfway point between the top of the top plate and the ridge of the roof. The height of the home from the bottom of the front door to the top of the top plate will be 29'11/2" (plus 1/2 half the height of the roof structure). As a result of the variances involved with this lot, we have not fully O P.O. BOX 1 0695 ' WHITE BEAR LAKE, MN 551 10 651 .426.0584 WWW.AMARISCUSTOMHOMES.COM Q651.426.0585 (-AMARifo CUSTOM HOMES ... where healthy living is built-in developed house plans with roof lines. However, to meet the architectural guidelines we need the flexibility to have an 8/12 primary roof structure. Based on the width of the house at 35' (gables running east to west) the total rise is 11'8" and at' that amount is 5'10". We use a 16" energy heal so adding all this together we are 36' 3 1/2". Therefore, we request a variance on the height of 2-3'. I would like to note that we looked at making the second floor a1 or 3/4 story, but since we are keeping the foundation footprint so condensed (due to the slope considerations) it simply does not work without significantly increasing the foundation footprint, which grows a different problem. 3. Section 31-521 subdivision 1(b/c) states "slopes greater than 25% may not be considered in meeting the lot size area requirements. The RA district calls for a 10,000 square foot minimum lot size. Based on our calculations we have determined the approximate area outside the slope is 4,200+/- square feet. In prior emails, staff indicated this condition was "preexisting to the ordinance and is grandfathered in". As part of the variance application, we would like this to be included in the staff report and acknowledged by planning commission and city council, so there are no sudden surprises after Kari Banjord acquires the lot. 4. Section 31-521 subdivision 1(d) states that no structure may be placed on a slope of greater than 24% or within 30' of a slope of 25%. There appears to be potentially two variances involved here. a. No structure may be placed on a slope of greater than 24%. Technically, we are not placing a structure on a slope of greater than 24%, but we are disturbing slopes greater than 24% and it is not clear to us the intent of the regulation. We are planning on cutting into the slope horizontally 21.5'. Looking at the City of Stillwater in general, it seems this language is talking about "placement of structures" not "cutting into slopes". We may or may not need a variance on this, depending on the City of Stillwater's interpretation of this language. b. A structure may not be placed within 30' of a slope of 25% or greater. Our intention is to locate a structure within approximately 10' of the slope after we cut it back and install retaining walls (e.g as -built conditions). It is not clear to us if this language is intended to be measured from the pre-existing or the as -built conditions. If it is P.O. BOX 1 0695 I WHITE BEAR LAKE, MN 55110 0 651.426.0584 0 WWW.AMARISCUSTOMHOMES.COM 0 651.426.0585 l'AMARIL CUSTOM HOMES ... where healthy &Ingis built-in measured from pre-existing conditions of the slope, we will have 0' setback. If it is measured from the as -built conditions, we are requesting a 10' setback. It should be noted that based on staffs recommendations, Amaris Custom Homes has hired a civil engineering firm (e.g. Plowe Engineering) to review storm water conditions for this site. They are looking at the storm water to the south, west and east. Based on the recommendations of the civil engineering firm, we may need to increase the 21'5"' cut into the slope for additional storm water management thereby increasing the 10' setback by the same amount. Staff has indicated it would make the variance approval subject to review and approval of that final site plan with civil engineering recommendations 5. Section 31-521 subdivision 3(b) states that no trees in the steep slope area can be cut down that are greater than 6" inches measured 54" above ground level. I have attached a map showing we have four trees in the steep slope area that would need to be removed to develop this site as proposed. As you can see from the enclosed, this is a very challenging lot and there is no way to build even a modest home without multiple variances. We have analyzed several different methodologies and believe we have submitted a site plan that is both reasonable and well thought out. The site plan minimizes the impact to the site and the neighborhood and is compatible with the neighboring homes. We look forward to working with the City of Stillwater. If you have any questions, or need more information please let me know. Sincerely, Raymond Pruban Chief Manager Amaris Homes, LLC CeII 651-248-3631 www.amariscustomhomes.com P.O. BOX 1 0695 I WHITE BEAR LAKE, MN 55110 0 ogok 651.426.0584 WWW.AMARISCUSTOMHOMES.COM 651.426.0585 TEFICATE OF S -for- AMARIS CUSTOM HOMES -of- l i 5 Willow Street DESCRIPTIONS RVEY The West 40.00 feet of Lot 1 and all of Lot 6, Block 44, CARLI & SCHULENBERG'S ADDITION to Stillwater, os amended by Myron Shepard's Perfected Plot of the City of Stiliwoter doted Moy 21, 1878, according to the plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the Registrar of Titles of Washington County, Minnesota: subject 10 on exception and reservation of minerals and minerol rights by the State of Minnesota, in trust for the taxing districts concerned os provided by lows. And all that port of vacated Thiro Street lying between the Westerly projections of the Northerly ono Southerly lines of said Lot 6, Block 44, CARLI & SCHULENBERG'S ADDITION. And clso all that port of vocoted Willow Street described OS follows, to -wit: Beginning 0t a point in the Northerly line of said Lot 6, Block 44, CARLI & SCHULENBERC'S ADDITION, distont 34.09 feet Eosterly of the Northwest corner thereof; thence Easterly olong the Northerly line of sold Biock 44 to the Northeast corner of soid -West 40.00 feet of Lot 1; thence Northerly along o Northerly projection of the Easterly line of soid West 40.00 feet of Lot 1 to the Southerly line of Block 47 of sold CARLI & SCHULENBERG'S ADDITION; thence Westerly oiong said Southerly line to 0 point 75.22 feet Eosterly of the Southwest corner thereof; thence Southerly, olong o line hereinafter referred to 05 " Line A", to the point of beginning. Excepting therefrom all that port of the vocoted North holf of Willow Street. Line A is described os follows: Beginning at o point on the Northerly line of Block 44, 34.09 feet Eosterly of the Northwest corner thereof; thence North-easterly olong a line hereinafter referred to as 'LINE A" to o point in the Southerly Inc of Block 47 of soid CARLI & SCHULENBERG'S ADDITION distant 75.22 feet Easterly of the Southwest corner thereof, said point being the end of "Line A". Subject to and together with on easement for roadway, drainage and utility purposes over, under and across o strip of land 30.00 feet in width, being 15.00 feet on either side of the before described 'tine A". The Northerly and Southerly terminus of the sideiines of soid easement being prolonged or shortened os to terminate, respectively, on said Southerly line of Block 47 and on said Northerly line of Block 44, CARLI & SCHULENBERG'S ADDITION. WARRANTY DEED DOCUMENT NO. 755226 All that port of vocoted Willow Street described os follows, to wit. Beginning of o point in the northerly line of soid Lot 6, Block 44, CARLI & SCHULENBERC'S ADDITION, distont 34.09 feet easterly of the northwest corner thereof; thence easterly along the northerly Inc of soid Block 44 to the Northwest corner of the West 40 feet of Lot 1; thence northerly along o northerly projection of the eosterly line of the west 40.00 feet of Lot 1, Block 44 to the centerline of vocoted Willow Street, which is the point o4 beginning; thence Northerly along soid projection of the Easterly line of the West 40 feet of Lot 1, Block 44 to the Southerly Inc of Block 47, thence Westerly along said Southerly line of Biock 47 to o point 75.22 feet Eosterly of the Southwest corner thereof, thence Southwesterly aloha o ijne hereinafter referred to os "Line A" to the centerline of vocoted Willow Street; thence Easterly olong said centerline to the point of beginning. Subject to and together with on easement for roodwoy, drainage and utility purposes over, under and across o strip of loud 30.00 feet in width, being 15.00 feet on either side of the before described "Line A". The northerly and southerly terminus of the sidelines of soid Line A being prolonged or shortened os to terminate, respectively, on soid southerly line of Block 47 and on soid northerly line of Block 44, CARLI & SCHULENBERG'S ADDITION. Line A is described as follows Beginning at o point on the northerly Inc of Block 44, 34.09 feet easterly of the northwest corner thereof; thence northeasterly along a line hereinafter referred to os "Line A" to a point in the southerly line of Block 47 of soid CARLI & SCHULENBERG'S ADDITION distant 75.22 feet easterly of the southwest corner thereof, soid point being the end of 'tine A". GRAPHIC SCA,E ID 20 ( IN FEET ) I inch = 20 10. Exisrinc Grope 848.74 N89°49'24", 84.09 645.22 e46J0 845A2 PC1W'_ 7C46.06 TOP3 844.31 ELS,L PROPOSES /RETAINING. WAL 40 Q x Bo5.72 so OD t4ON841.7 x 3 i084.65 84301 C 843.09 x t0i • t7. 0E / CC 6• BIRO/3-14-2-16 x842 62 3774 / PROPOSED 3 foal ,r'� Ell 00 64463 REIMNI00 WALL 40 80P-851 D BgTTOM-8460 843 001212 \ \ 832.S2ORu / STORM-INV i81 41/ N89/9'24"11' isi- x8 1.2 06 ' fix Floor` 843.5 Ora 25 x 824.25 829.38 N 821.54 SArv-1I EBIi2 83E3E6n ' J146orB T-50 FOOL ROADWAY IAND UTILITY �n EASEMENT PER DOC. N0. 1028838 - - 834.29 534.91 __ / 10E-Eert u -„ B3zELDERJD 'SrB BIRE-GAREN-FENCE 8308>sx n w13RC-GAREN-FEN4C�^pE�K 0817 °9 f 65.46 84 839.16,E n SCREEN PATIO Proposed house 101 N40b 9P H8 844.04 \ 856.81 DAK26 COL; MIT SAB 845 70 `'r x 851.8'' 852.36 850.85 859.2D 81RCN10 DJ <J REIw.-TOP" 856.07RI2 w POG6�R10 DPLA 80,00 83DIP1317< x836.97 839.59 S89'49'41" E 189.12 NOTES +BEARINGS ARE ASSUMED. *BUILDER TO VERIFY HSE DIMENSIONS, SEWER DEPTH AND FOUNDATION DEPTH +DRIVEWAYS ARE SHOWN FOR GRAPHIC PURPOSES ONLY. FINAL DRIVEWAY DESIGN AND LOCATION TO BE DETERMINED BY CONTRACTOR. +FINISHED GRADE ADJACENT TO HOME SHALL BE 0.5 FEET BELOW TOP OF BLOCK EXCEPT AT DRIVEWAY AND PATIO xTHIS SURVEY WAS PREPARED WITHOUT THE BENEFIT OF TITLE WORK. ADDITIONAL EASEMENTS, RESTRICTIONS AND/OR OTHER ENCUMBRANCES MAY EXIST OTHER THAN THOSE SHOWN HEREON. SURVEY SUBJECT TO REVISION UPON RECEIPT OF A CURRENT TITLE COMMITMENT OR AN ATTORNEY'S TITLE OPINION. (8' POURED WALL WALKOUT) PROPOSED ELEVATIONS: TOP OF BLOCK = 851.2 GARAGE FLOOR = 843.5 LOWEST FLOOR = 843.5 TOP OF FOOTING = 843.2 838.02 I hereby certify that this survey, plan or report was prepored by me or under my direct supervision and that I am o duly Registered Lond Surveyor under Date: 9-20-13 License No. 41578 DRAWN BY: JEN JOB N0: 13571MS I DATE: 0B/21/13 CHECK BY: JER SCANNED ❑ 1 09/06/13 JEN 2 09/20/13 Proposed Grodes & Bldg. JEN 3 N0. DATE DESCRIPTION BY www.egrud.com Lino Lakes, MN 55014 Tel. (651) 361-8200 Fax (651) 361-8701 837.60 WZ.Z • 81n E811-50 TC 820ffi serf-Tc T LEGEND DENOTES DENOTES DENOTES DENOTES DENOTES DENOTES DENOTES DENOTES 8H0-58ORM NORTH IRON MONUMENT FOUND AS LABELED CATCH BASIN EXISTING CONTOURS PROPOSED CONTOURS STORM SEWER APRON EXISTING STORM SEWER BITUMINOUS SURFACE GRAVEL SURFACE ® DENOTES PROPOSED ELEVATION. x 1011.2 DENOTES EXISTING ELEVATION. DENOTES DIRECTION OF DRAINAGE. DENOTES WOOD HUB/METAL SPIKE AT 11 FOOT OFFSET. (UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED) DENOTES RETAINING WALL DENOTES SLOPE GREATER THAN 25% DENOTES SLOPE GREATER THAN 25%, BUT LESS 50 FEET WIDE (331 S.F.) DENOTES PROPOSED DISTURBED AREA WITHIN SLOPE EXCEEDING 50 IN WIDTH. (1,524 S.F.) E.G. RUB a SONS, INC. m'9n Professional Land Surveyors 6776 Lake Drive NE, Suite 110 13571HS N89°49%.?4" .65.45 f.09 25' Front Setback Area 30' Toe Setback Requirement 30' Setback from 50' Exception Area 50' Exception Area Steep Slope Area e Area wt Variances 4,199.97 SQ FT 839.11 /J , EGRV /OTee; /03 << o `<e 843.27 EGRVL ,44 0 • 843.31 EGRVL 43. TOE. /,. G 844. 54• E 72 - /841 74 TOE 835.46 ..837.41/ xTOE 834.29.. sp4e • . 1 837.95 . 838.74 x p, ' WIRE-GAREN-FeNgF . 4a- TOP ri Cr) --- X . • 04/ CO 4";17-..•...65. 45 " X / �".•. 834.91•'''••••.. •834..0.9 .� TOE-EBIT. . • . 838.58 ....•...........F.. BOXELDER30 Garaae 843.17 Proposed - o ........... — TOE / Drive tri Floor ROP ED 4 .FOOT --, . ... 843.5 - TTAI ING...WALL .. �'.........................•• -.PROPOSED 3••F00T.• RETAINING 'WALL • .•'rno-.Ql1 n • 839.18A SCREEN. PATIO co 840.18 •• WIRE-GARRENFEfTE 837.91 FNDIP13774 AREN-FENCE 7 FENCE LIES !WI OF LOT LIN Trees to be cut down in steep slope area. x 21..00 82.32 T E if 842.82 xTOE gO 839.75\ j_ 41.88 ETWL-TOP co z N wrn M..co w:^ Q. w :0 :z o: WC.0 ,L o z cw•. o Q • 11.1 r • Grade 842" 4=6" 20'-0" Porch ,842'11 ' 1 ---] 4'-7" -c\ 22-5 1/4' 19=11 1/2" 2- Car Garage w/drain 843'2"ish 843' 6" 26-6" optional patio or home addition area 11'-5" 10-7 1/4" chase Elevator Grade 842" 1 optional patio addition area chase 21'-1 1/4" 843' 6" Screened Patio 842'11" 6-0" 5=6" storage/flex 21=0" Optional Home Addition Area X 4'-0 ' 4,-1 2 story foyer entry 7'-4 3/4" 7-8' books 20'-0" 10'-0" 4'-0"W 16Rx 10"T 5'41 "11111 Great Room floor protection Hearth Area 12'-0 3/4" non-cjombustibles _ - _ T71 . 3'-10" 19'-9 3/4' optional porch c. or home addition optional porch area addition area 5'-0" chase 6'-5' III window seat 5'-5 1/2" TV/Sitting Ar 9' foot ceill gs Kitchen 10'-4" _4" 3'-4" 21=6" 13'-6" sink 1 3'-4" / 4'-6" 7-e.r eo chase 1/2 Bath Elevato 6'-5" PORCH 4'-10" Office/ Future Bedroom Future Closet 14'-7" Optional Home Addition Area cn 0) 63 o3 8'-4 1/4" 6'-2 3/4" 541" Loft or bedroom #3 21'-6" Zo optional home addition area 5'-1" 6'-4" 1 Zptional balcony area 5'-0 1/8" 5-6 7/8" Optional Hutriu-Addition Area • City of (flIgtgs Community Development Department 115 Willow Street Note: Elevation contours are at a 2 foot interval. But, the elevations are estimates. +/- 50' Area is the buildable footprint (no slopes >24%) Area requires front setback variance: staff would support this (no slopes >24%) 10 ft side setback 20 Scale From: Julie Jacobson [mailto:juliejac1@gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, October 05, 2013 12:28 PM To: Abbi Wittman Subject: FW: Case 2013-25 - 115 Willow Street - objection to variance Importance: High From: Julie Jacobson [mailto:juliejac1@gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, October 05, 2013 9:58 AM To: 'ssanders@ci.stillwater.mn.us'; 'awhitman@ci.stillwater.mn.us'; 'dMagnuson@ci.stillwater.mn.us'; ' bTu rn blad @ci . sti l lwater. m n . us' Cc: dpaulson@linearcorp.com Subject: Case 2013-25 - 115 Willow Street - objection to variance Importance: High Hello — We have learned that there is a meeting on Oct. 14 to discuss Case No. 2013-25 for 115 Willow St. which directly abuts our property at 104 Poplar St. We strenuously object to any variances. Our property's value is unique in the area due to its privacy, which is a huge portion of our land's value. The property in question (Willow) has been abandoned on numerous occasions as unbuildable, which is why we haven't bothered to preserve our property value by buying the land in question. We have done due diligence on that parcel and have recognized that a building there would not be a nuisance because of the restrictions imposed. It is extremely important that those restrictions are preserved. We now live in California and cannot attend any meetings. Kindly let us know at your earliest convenience all details of this case and how we can object to any variances. Regards, Julie and Duane Paulson Duane: 612-802-8506 3 jj1water THE SITU N P I A C E OF MINNESOTA Planning Commission Report DATE: October 9, 2013 CASE NO.: 2013-26 APPLICANT: Tyler Strachota, Metro Mechanical Contractors PROPERTY OWNER: Lakeview Hospital REQUEST: Special Use Permit Amendment to add Roof Top Fluid Coolers LOCATION: 927 W. Churchill St. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GUIDING: LDR, Low Density Residential LMDR, Low/Medium Density Residential ZONING DISTRICT: RA, Single Family Residential RB, Two -Family Residential PUBLIC HEARING: October 15, 2013 REPORT AUTHOR: Bill Turnblad, Community Development Director BACKGROUND Lakeview Hospital would like to install a fluid cooler on the roof of the mechanical room, which is a 2009 addition built at the southeast corner of the hospital. The Lakeview Hospital site is zoned RA and RB for one and two family homes. In these residential zoning districts, hospitals are allowed by Special Use Permit (SUP). Lakeview Hospital operates the hospital under a SUP. Each time an addition or exterior improvement is proposed, a SUP amendment is requested. Most Special Use Permits are approved by the Planning Commission. However, there are a few like a hospital that must be approved by the City Council.1 So, the Planning Commission will hold a public hearing on this case, make a recommendation and forward it to the City Council for another hearing and a decision. SPECIFIC REQUEST Lakeview Hospital has requested an amendment to their Special Use Permit to allow the construction of a fluid cooler on the roof of their mechanical room. City Code Section 31-315 Lakeview Hospital SUP October 10, 2013 Page 2 COMMENTS The fluid cooler proposed for the roof of the mechanical room would have measurements of 4' - 8 1/4" tall, 6' - 7 1/4"wide and 24' - 31/2" long. It would have 12 fans. The entire unit would be installed well back of the eastern edge of the roof, which locates it as far as possible away from the nearest homes in the neighborhood. Two aspects of the cooler need Planning Commission review comments. The first is the potential aesthetic impact. Staff believes that given the mass of the hospital structure serving as a backdrop to the units that their visual impact will be minimal. The second concern with this type of improvement is the potential noise impact on the neighboring homes. The mechanical contractor has retained an acoustical engineer to review the cooler. A preliminary review from the engineer indicates that even the City's most restrictive night-time noise standards will not be exceeded by the equipment. ALTERNATIVES The Planning Commission has the following options available: 1. Recommend that the City Council approve the Special Use Permit Amendment with the following conditions: a. The rooftop equipment must be painted the same color as the background brick colors. b. The applicant shall present supporting written information to the City Council concerning noise levels of the new coolers as they will be perceived from surrounding residences. c. Once installed, an acoustical engineer must verify that the noise levels will conform to City noise standards. 2. Recommend that the City Council deny the Special Use Permit. 3. Table the request for more information on the noise levels. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the SUP amendment with the three conditions identified above. Attachments: Air Photo Plan drawings 09.16.13 AERIAL VIEW NO SCALE PLOT DATE August 28, 2013 — 3:54pm ROOF EDGE GENERAL NOTE: UNIT LOCATED MINIMUM 1O'-0" FROM ROOF EDGE 4 00 EXISTING GRADE (APPROX. -\, 15-0" BELOW ROOF EDGE) ELEVATION LOOKING NORTH NO SCALE FLUID COOLER ROOF SUPPORT (TYR) ROOF EDGE CO 24'- EXISTING GRADE (APPROX. - \8'-0" BELOW ROOF EDGE) ELEVATION LOOKING WEST NO SCALE FLUID COOLER ROOF SUPPORT (TYP.) co co II U to d m O DRAWN: JSTARK a THE B[RYHPL CE OK MIN$ESOTA Planning Commission DATE: October 8, 2013 APPLICANT: Frank Fabio REQUEST: Seasonal Food Vending Permit LOCATION: 225 North Main Street ZONING: CBD - Central Business District PC DATE: October 14, 2013 PREPARED BY: Bill Turnblad, Community Development Director PERMIT NO.: 2013-04 BACKGROUND Frank Fabio, owner of the property at 225 North Main Street (former Ace Hardware Store), has submitted an application for a seasonal food vending permit to sell coffee from a food vending trailer that would be parked in the parking lot on his site. City Code Section 41-7, Subd. 2 provides a review process and standards for issuance of the requested permit. The permit must be reviewed by the Planning Commission for the first year of operation. Each year after that the annual permit can be issued by City staff if there are no substantial changes to the business plan or operations. SPECIFIC REQUEST Mr. Fabio has requested a seasonal food vending permit for his coffee trailer. EVALUATION OF REQUEST An annual permit for a seasonal food vending cart, vehicle or trailer 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. (a) Address of the private property upon which the cart or vehicle will operate. 225 N Main Street. (b) Site and operations plans detailing at least the following: 1. Size and location of the area being occupied by the Seasonal Food Vending operation. Fabio Coffee Vending Page 2 The 8 ft x 24 ft vending trailer (depending upon which trailer is actually purchased, the length may be as little at 20 ft) is proposed to be parked in the center of the 24 foot wide drive aisle of Mr. Fabio's parking lot to allow customers to drive up on each side for service. See attached site plans. 2. Picture and dimensions of vehicle or cart. The actual trailer has not been purchased yet. Two possible used trailers were submitted and are attached. 3. Location of exits from principal building on the property. The vending equipment and operation must not block the exits. The entrances to the principal building on the property will not be blocked by the trailer or the customer vehicle cues. 4. Storage location for vehicle or cart when not open for business. Mr. Fabio intends to leave the trailer in the parking lot year round. As retail/office space is leased out and demand for spaces increase, the trailer will have to be moved to altemate locations in the lot. But in any case, the trailer is proposed to be parked somewhere in the lot when the trailer is not in use. 5. Method of containing trash. The applicant proposes a garbage can in the trailer only. As long as all of the business customers are vehicle drivers, this may be sufficient. But City staff believes that foot traffic will be a portion of the sales and therefore recommends an outside garbage can for customers as well. 6. Pedestrian and traffic control safety measures. The sales area may not impede pedestrian or vehicular circulation patterns on or around the site. Staff has concems with the proposed vending location. It dominates traffic flow and parking in the lot. There is only 8 feet of drive aisle on either side of the trailer, which means that the abutting parking stalls on both sides of the lot are blocked and useless while the trailer is located here. Staff understands the desire to have vehicular service on both sides of the trailer, but the parking lot cannot function properly then. Currently there is no demand for the parking spaces, the only use for the property is office space on the second floor, and the parking fot that space is in the parking lot on the east side of the building. So conflicts will not exist or at most be minimal. As the building attracts tenants and customers, the parking lot will be needed to service the building's parking needs. At that point, the proposed location would no longer be acceptable. Then, Alternates A or B will be more appropriate, depending upon the need for parking spaces. Alternate A would preserve the row of parking on the south side of the lot, but cueing would block all parking spaces on the north side of the lot. Alternate B would preserve almost all of the lot's spaces and functionality, but this location would tend to create coffee customer vehicle cues into Water Street. Since the vending permit must be reviewed annually, the location and parking needs will have to be monitored each year to identify the best trailer location. 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 1 Fabio Coffee Vending Page 3 spaces required of the principal use of the private property shall not be reduced below the minimum number required by ordinance. Currently with a lack of tenants, there is no demand what -so -ever for the subject parking lot. 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. The coffee vending trailer's hours of operation are tentatively proposed to be year round from 6 am to 6 pm, Monday — Saturday. (c) Utility plan. Indicate how utilities will be provided to the operation. The trailers being considered are completely self-sufficient and would be equipped with a super -quiet generator. If a different trailer model is actually purchased, and the generator does not have quiet technology, that would present a problem to surrounding property owners and tenants. (d) 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 City policies. 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. A complete sign plan has not been submitted yet. The Planning Commission will need to decide whether to table the application for this material, or add as a condition of approval that a sign plan meeting the above standards and the standards of the Downtown Design Guidelines must be submitted and approved by City staff prior to issuance of the permit. (e) Signed agreement from the property owner allowing the proposed Seasonal Vending operation. The vending permit applicant is also the owner of the property that it is proposed to be located on. (2) Submittal of a satisfactory inspection report of the proposed cart or vehicle from the Stillwater Fire Department. This has not been done yet. Prior to release of the vending permit from City offices, a satisfactory inspection report by the Stillwater Fire Department of the proposed vending trailer must be submitted. (3) Submittal of a permit issued for the cart or vehicle by Washington County health officials. This has not been done yet. Prior to release of the vending permit from City offices, a permit for the food vending must be issued by Washington County's 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. Fabio Coffee Vending Page 4 Since it is so late in the season, staff recommends issuing the permit through 12/31/14. (5) The annual permit for subsequent years of operation shall be reviewed by Community Development 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. (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. This condition is met. (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. The applicant proposes to close at 6 PM each day. ALTERNATIVES The Planning Commission has the following options: 1. Approve the requested food vending permit with the following conditions: a. The permit would be valid until December 31, 2014. b. No storage or product sales are allowed outside of the vending trailer. c. An outside garbage can must be provided by the business for its customers. d. Each year when the business is reviewed for reissuance of a vending permit, the location of the trailer must be analyzed so as not to dominate the traffic flow or parking spaces, if the drive aisle and spaces are needed for tenants and building customers/clients. e. Prior to release of the permit a sign plan meeting the standards of City Code Sec. 41-7, Subd 2(1)(d) and the standards of the Downtown Design Guidelines must be submitted and approved by City staff prior to issuance of the permit. f. Prior to release of the vending permit from City offices, a satisfactory inspection report by the Stillwater Fire Department of the proposed vending trailer must be submitted. g. Prior to release of the vending permit from City offices, a permit for the food vending must be issued by Washington County's health officials. h. If there is to be a generator supporting the trailer, the manufacturer's noise specifications must be submitted. If the generator is not a quiet technology, then the hours of operation may have to be re-examined. 2. Deny the requested 3. Continue the review until the November 13, 2013 Planning Commission meeting. RECOMMENDATION If the Planning Commission finds the proposed coffee vending trailer's location acceptable, staff would recommend that the Planning Commission approve the permit with the conditions identified in Alternative 1. Attachments: Site plan, picture of vending trailer, applicant's letter Fabio Coffee Vending Page 5 View of parking lot layout from north. Yellow rectangle represents proposed location. Pink striped rectangles represent alternate locations that do not dominate the entire parking lot. Frank Fabio Company FFC 6517314853 p,3 ti Frank Fabio 225 Main St. N. Stillwater MN 55082 1) Coffee trailer approximate is 8X20-24 Operating in, a private lot owned by Frank Fabio. Lot is approximately 100X100 with an entrance on Main St. and an entrance on Water St. 2) Trailer to be purchased after approval. 3) Building exits will not be blocked by trailer. 4) Trailer to be parked in a existing parking stall in private lot. 5) Trash will contained in trailer and disposed of in dumpster for building. 6) Pedestrian and traffic will be as normal being trailer is not located on a street. 7) Parking stalls will not be affected. Trailer will be parked after hours of principle business. 8) Operation of Coffee trailer hours TBD depending on what the area of demand will be and follow City guidelines. For now, 6am-6pm? Monday -Saturday? Frank Fabio Will oversee all operations. 9) Trailer plan is to be self supporting. Thank you. /0/77/.4. 2008 Wells Cargo Food Concession Truck Trailer - Loaded - Page 1 of 1 CL > minneapolis > hennepin co > all for sale / wanted > business/commercial - by owner Reply to: see below flag u : miscategorized prohibited vein best of Ponied' 2o13-10-05, 9:49AM CDT 2008 Wells Cargo Food Concession Truck Trailer - Loaded - - $11000 (Mound) 2008 Food Concession Trailer with equipment to start food truck business! Great deal on a great trailer in great shape. 949-400-007six • Location: Mound • it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other commercial interests Posting ID: 4110953278 Posted: 2013-10-05, 9:49AM CDT cipail, ty a friend Avoid scams deal locally! t)o NOT wire funds (Western Union, Moneygram). Beware cashier checks, money orders, shipping, non -local buyers/sellers.More info —No contact info? lithe poster didn't include a phone number, email, or other contact info, craigslist can notify them via email Send Note! FORMAT: !nubile standatU cd 2013 craigslist help terms privacy safety feedback about pl jobs http://minneapolis.craigslist.orglluiplbfs;. 1 10953278.htm1 10/7/2013 FOOD CONCESSION STAND Page 1 of 1 CL > minneapolis > hennepin co > all for sale / wanted > general for sale - by owner Reply � fthxk-4114116662Qsale craigslist,org kt flag u : miscategorized prohibited spam of Posted: 2013-10-6,10:4.5PM ern' FOOD CONCESSION STAND (Storm Lake, Iowa) FOR SALE: FOOD CONCESSION TRAILER PRICE REDUCF,D! tt 21' X 8' fully equipped food concession trailer especially equipped for Mini Donuts, Includes: Lil Orbit Mini Donut machine (plus extra equipment), exhaust system, refrigerator, 2 freezers, 2 small deep fat fryers, 2 microwaves & much more. Please contact Ron (c� (Seven One Two ) 299-4402 • Location: Storm Lake, lowa • it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other comet 1interests Posting ID. 4114116662 Posted: 2013-10-06, 10r45PM CDr email to a friend Avoid scams,deal Jocattyl Do NOT wire funds (Western Union, Moneygram), Beware cashier checks, money orders, shipping, non -local buyers/sellers. More info FORMAT: mobile eleedaeu © 2013 craigslist help terms privacy saf5 feedback about cl jobs http://minneapolis.craigslist.org/hnp/tier/4114116662..html 10/7/20I3