The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2014-02-10 CPC PacketCITY OF STILLWATER PLANNING COMMISSION NOTICE OF REGULAR MEETING PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 7:00P.M. City of Stillwater Planning Commission will meet on Monday, February 10, 2014 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 January 13, 2013 MINUTES 3. ANNUAL ELECTION OF OFFICERS 4. 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 five minutes or less 5. 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. 5.01 Case No. SUP I 2014-5 Request for a Special Use Permit to remodel the interior of the commercial structure at 215 William Street North. The remodeling will be for the addition of a one bedroom apartment to be used as a primary residence in the RB -Two Family zoning district. Robert and Michelle Jorgensen, property owner and applicant. 5.02 Case No. V /2014-6 Request for variance to the 25' rear yard setback for 66 square foot enclosed addition and a 160 square foot deck for the structure as well as a 3.3% increase to the maximum building coverage area located at 321 Moore Street West in the RB-Two Family District. Brian Larson, applicant. 6. NEW BUSINESS 6.01 Consideration of a recommendation to the Stillwater City Council for an amendment to the Planning Commission meeting schedule. 7. OTHER BUSINESS 8. COMMISSION REQUEST ITEMS 7.01 Stillwater Orderly Annexation Agreement 7.02 Downtown Stillwater Parking District Assessment 7.03 Planning Commission Application Review 7.04 PD Pappy's Parking Inquiry 8. ADJOURNMENT i}fyyater TH E 1/II TH HACE O f IUWHUGTA PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES January 13, 2014 REGULAR MEETING Chainnan Kocon called the meeting to ord er at 7:00p.m. 7:00P.M. Present: Chairman Kocon , Commissioners Collins, Fletcher, Hade, Hansen, Kelly, Lauer, Middleton, Siess , Council Repre sentative Weidner Absent: None Staff: City Planner Wittman APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion by Commissioner Hade, seconded by Commissioner Collins, to approve the December 9, 2013 meeting minutes. Motion passed 9-0. OPEN FORUM There were no public comments. PUBLIC HEARINGS Case No. 2014-1. Request for an amendment to a Special Use Permit for the expansion of an elementary school, a permitted special use located at 6355 Osman Avenue in the RA, One Family Zoning District. Kristen Hoheisel representing ISD #834, applicant. City Planner Wittman explained that the applicant is requesting an approximately 2,300 square foot expansion to create a new entrance to the school. The addition will be situated in the open courtyard area at the western entrance to the school. The entrance will provide for a more secure entryway while bringing the administrative offices closer to the front entrance. Staff recommends approval. Dennis Bloom, District 834 Director of Operations, explained the project will require all visitors to sign in through the main office before having direct access to the school. This will provide more security for students and staff. There were no public comments. Chairman Kocon closed the public hearing . Motion by Commissioner Collins, seconded by Commissioner Hansen, to approve the amendment to the Special Use Permit for the expansion of an elementary school. Motion passed 9-0. Planning Commission January 13, 2014 Case No. 2014-2. Request for an amendment to a Special Use Permit for the expansion of a junior high school, a permitted special use located at 523 Marsh Street in the RE, Two Family Zoning District. Kristen Hoheisel representing ISD #834, applicant. City Planner Wittman summarized the request. The applicant is requesting a 194 square foot expansion to create a new vestibule at the existing north entrance to the school to provide for a secure entryway. Staff recommends approval. Mr. Bloom stated that the addition will designate the front entrance more clearly and direct visitors to the front desk before being able to access the rest of the school. There were no public comments. Chairman Kocon closed the public hearing Motion by Commissioner Fletcher, seconded by Commissioner Siess, to approve the amendment to the Special Use Permit for the expansion of a junior high school. Motion passed 9-0. Case No. 2014-3. Request for a Special Use Permit for a proposed brewery and tap room facility with outdoor seating, and variance to the parking regulations for the structure located at 225 Main Street North in the CBD, Central Business District. Frank Fabio, owner. City Planner Wittman stated the applicant is requesting: a special use permit for a micro-brewery; a special use permit for a tap room to include outdoor seating; and a variance to the off-street parking regulations ( 45 parking spaces required, 27 available). A coffee trailer was approved for the property last fall which would occupy three parking spaces. The applicant indicated the two uses are exclusive and would not be operating simultaneously. She reviewed nine possible conditions of approval. Staff recommends approval with conditions. Frank Fabio, applicant, discussed the proposal and the conditions of approval recommended by staff. He hopes to open by May. The business would be contained on the main level with no associated uses upstairs. The coffee trailer would be shut down at noon, so it would never be open at the same time as the microbrewery. There is an area in southeast corner that is large enough for an external trash receptacle with fence around it. Under his current loan, the parcels are all separate. If he needs to combine the parcels (PIDs) as a condition of approval, he may have to redo the loan. Commissioner Kelly commented that combining the PIDs is a good idea; he doesn't think it will cause a problem with the loan. Chairman Kocon acknowledged the comments in the Thomas Wortman and Mary Franzmeier letters and closed the public hearing. Chairman Kocon said he would not want the brewpub and coffee trailer to be open simultaneously due to concerns about traffic flow within the site. He asked if this could be a condition of approval. City Planner Wittman responded yes, but the condition would be hard to enforce . Commissioner Hansen said he doesn't see a need to add that restriction as he believes it will be self regulating. Page 2 of 5 Planning Commission January 13, 2014 Council Representative Weidner suggested with the seasonal coffee trailer, there appears to be too much going on on that property right now. Commissioner Hansen remarked that the Commission has approved other seasonal vendors on much smaller properties with no parking lots. Commissioner Middleton expressed concerns about traffic flow. Commissioner Hade stated that the brew pub is a great idea but he believes the coffee trailer will create traffic issues within the site. Commissioner Collins asked if the combination of the PIDs would be a deal-killer for the applicant. City Planner Wittman noted that an alternative to requiring that the parcels be combined would be to enter an agreement with the property owner stating that the parcels cannot be sold separately. Mr. Fabio responded he intends to keep all three parcels together. Motion by Commissioner Fletcher, seconded by Chairman Kocon, to approve the Special Use Permit for the brewery and taproom and the variance as conditioned, with revisions to Condition #4 that a trash shall be stored at the southeast comer of the lot and that a screening plan shall be approved by the Heritage Preservation Commission, and to Condition #8 that the property owner enter an Agreement to be approved by the City Council that the three parcels may not be sold separately until such time as all zoning requirements are met, and adding a condition that there be no outdoor storage. Motion passed 6-3 with Hade, Siess, and Lauer voting nay. Case No. 2014-4. Request for a 50' variance to the 100' Manning Avenue setback for the future platting of a low/medium density residential development located on three lots in Stillwater Township. Chris Aamodt, Settler's Pines, LLC and James DeBenedet, applicants. City Planner Wittman summarized the request. The applicant is requesting a 50' variance to the 1 00' setback for three parcels located along Manning A venue in Stillwater Township for construction of a 51 -lot residential neighborhood development. The variance is being requested before the preliminary plat and annexation because the development potential and design would be dramatically altered if the variance is not granted. Washington County is proposing to take a 50' strip of land along the western boundary of these parcels for the continuation of the Manning A venue Trail and the expansion of Manning A venue . When this occurs, the 1 00' Manning setback will be enforced from the new ROW line. Staff recommends approval with two conditions plus the additional condition that approval be contingent on Joint Board approval if required. Commissioner Hade and Chairman Kocon questioned the authority of the Commission to review the proposal since the property is in the township. City Planner Wittman replied that City Attorney Magnuson had indicated that the Commission has authority to review it. Commissioner Had e suggested tabling the issue and asking City Attorney Magnuson to come to the next meeting to expl ain why the Commission has jurisdiction over the request. Page 3 of 5 Planning Commission January 13 , 2014 Commissioner Kelly stated he is OK with reviewing the proposal because one of the conditions of the variance is that the property would have to be platted before the variance becomes effective. He understands that before the owner goes through the expense of annexation, he would like to know if it needs to be platted with or without the extra 50'. Chairman Kocon stated he is OK with reviewing the request because there are a lot of other actions that have to happen before final approval. Commission review is a useful exercise that tells the property owner which way the Commission is leaning on the variance. Chris Aamodt, the developer, explained that in a previous development, Liberty West, he was given Planning Commission advice on a concept plan which then went forward to the City Council. So the Planning Commission can make decisions now contingent on future final plat approval. To go forward with any civil engineering, he needs to know whether or not the variance request would be acceptable to the Planning Commission. Chairman Kocon asked the developer and engineer about lot lines, setbacks and ROW. Jim DeBenedet, engineer for the project, said as drawn the lots are 170' deep and will lose 50' due to the Right of Way (ROW) change. Adjustments will have to be made to make the resulting lots a little deeper, for instance 130 '. The width of the lots will be 72 '. If the variance is not granted, they would have to move the street to the east and lose six lots. This would also result in the development density being too low to comply with the zoning regulations. The developer feels the single family home is best for this neighborhood and fits the market today. There isn 't much of a market for townhomes right now . Kathy Hemen, 8233 Marylane Avenue, pointed out that Manning is a very heavily traveled road that will have more traffic when it becomes four lane. She cited the potential for future noise issues , traffic congestion , and public safety especially with the Gateway Trail being so near. She encouraged the Commission to wait until after annexation before making a decision. Eric Fosgate, 8355 Manning Avenue, told the Commission he would apply for annexation if it would help the process. Chairman Kocon clo sed the public hearing. Commissioner Hansen stated he feels the plan accomplishes the Low-Medium Density delineated in the Comprehensive Plan. He likes the idea of having single family homes on this property and has no problem granting the variance. Commissioner Hade said he doesn't think the Commission has the authority to render advisory opinions on the issue because the property is outside the City. Chairman Kocon pointed out with the berm and landscaping, some of the noise issues may be mitigated. The Commi ss ion must grant the variance if the development is to comply with the Comprehensive Plan. Motion by Commission er Hade, seconded b y Commissioner Siess , to table the request in order to obtain further information from th e City Attorney outlining the Commission 's jurisdiction. Commissioner Siess r es cind ed her second. Th e motion to table died for lack of a second. Page 4 of 5 Planning Commission January 13, 2014 Motion by Commissioner Hansen, seconded by Commissioner Lauer, to approve the variance request as conditioned, with added conditions that the final plat must be approved by the Planning Commission and the Council, and that the variance be reviewed by the Joint Board if applicable. Motion passed 7-2 with Commissioners Siess and Hade voting nay. NEW BUSINESS There was no new business. OTHER BUSINESS Commissioner Hade asked for clarification about why some business uses come before the Commission and others don 't. City Planner Wittman responded that it has to do with the use proposed. She will provide documentation in the next packet about what items come before Commission according to the zoning ordinance . She also will get all members a copy of the Annexation Agreement, and ask City Attorney Magnuson to provide a statement of order about the annexation and approval process. She will try to put the Comprehensive Plan and other materials into the Dropbox folder for Commissioner access. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Commissioner Hansen, seconded by Commissioner Siess, to adjourn the meeting at 10:10 p.m. Motion passed 9-0. Respectfully Submitted, Julie Kink Recording Secretary Page 5 of 5 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE: February 10,2014 CASE NO.: V /2014-6 APPLICANT: REQUEST: Brian Larson, representing Wendy Adams, property owner Request for variances to the rear yard setback and maximum imperious surface coverage for the structure locate d at 321 Moore Street West ZONING: RB-Two Family Res. COMP PLAN DISTRICT: Low /Medium Density Res. PREPARED BY: Abbi Jo Wittman, City Pia* REQUEST The applicant is requesting: • A 6' 6" variance to the 25' rear yard setback requirement for 66 square foot additional living space; and • A 10' variance to the rear yard setback for the addition of a 160 square foot deck; and • A 3.3% increase to the 25% maximum building coverage for additional living space. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS AND STANDARDS The purpose of the variance is to allow variation from the strict application of the terms of this chapter where, by reason of the exceptional physical characteristics of the property, the literal enforcement of the requirements of this chapter would cause practical difficulties for the landowner. In no case may a variance be granted to permit a use or a density other than a use or density permitted in the district. Nonconforming uses or neighboring lands, structures or buildings in the same district or other districts may not be considered grounds for issuance of a variance. The planning commission may impose conditions in the granting of a variance. A condition must be directly related to and must bear a rough proportionality to the impact created by the variance. Section 31-208, Varian ces, indicates economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. It additionally 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 Cod e is to reg u late and resh"i ct u se of land for the protection of p ublic he al th , safety and w elfare. T he RB -Two Family Resi d ential zoning dis tri ct allo w s for single family dwellings. The modes ad d itions to this structure would allow for u pgr ades to the aging structure, preserving th e property's (and n eighborhood's) v alu e. 2. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan. The Housing section (Chapter 4) of the Comprehensive Plan identifies Policy 2: "Maintain the city housing stock in good condition." The applicant is proposing significant upgrades to the structure which will help support this City policy. Comprehensive Plan Chapter 3: Natural Resources, indicates the City shall utilize natural area protection resources and techniques, such as Low Impact Development (LID). LID is a sustainable storm water management strategy that focuses on managing stormwater locally. The property owner has indicated the desire to create a rainwater garden onsite and is currently working with the County Conservation District on the development of a site specific d esign. 3. The applicant for the variance establishes that there are practical difficulties in complying with this chapter. HPractical 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 RB-Two Family Residential zoning district allows for single family dwellings . ii. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property and that are not created by the landowner. The 6750 square foot (75'X90') lot is a preexisting, non-conforming lot in that is does not meet the minimum lot area of 7,500 square feet. When the RB-Two Family setbacks are applied to a traditional 7,500 square foot lot, approximately 56% of the lot is reserved for setback areas. When all setbacks are applied to this corner lot, approximately 73% of the lot is reserved for setback area. As the property is a corner lot, the rear yard setback area is the side yard to the property to the south·. If the site were not a corner lot, the structure's front yard setback would be calculated off of Martha Street North. The structure would then have a (minimum) 5' setback requirement from the south property line; the enclosed living area and deck would be complaint with the setback provisions if this were applicable. The property's smaller than average lot size, coupled with setback restrictions placed on this corner lot, there are significant practical difficulties in m eetin g the setb ack requirements as well as the impervious surface coverage limitations . As 3 21 Moor e Street We s t C ase N o. V /2014-6 (F e bruary 10, 2014 CPC) P age 2 of 3 indicated, the site's se tb ack s cre ate ample impervious s urface coverage to the north and the west. iii . The variance, if granted, will not a lter the essential character of the lo ca lity. The s tructure will r emain a single family residence, thus keeping with the use of the n e ighborhood . FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION Staff finds the variance request, which will not alter the essential character of the locality, is reasonable given the unique circumstances . Additionally, staff finds the application is consistent with the zoning ordinance and comprehensive plan. Staff recommends approval of a 6' 6" variance to the 25' rear yard setback requirement for 66 square foot additional living space; a 10' variance to the rear yard setback for the addition of a 160 square foot deck; and a 3.3% increase to the 25% maximum building coverage for additional living space with the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall work with the Washington County Conservation District or the Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization on the development of a rain garden design. The design shall be submitted to the City of Stillwater at the time of building permit submittal. ATTACHMENTS Site Location Map Narrative Request (2 pages) Washington County Map Site Photographs Existing and Proposed Site Plans Proposed Main Floor Sketch Plan Proposed Second Floor Sketch Plan Elevation Sketches 321 Moore Street W es t Case No. V /2014-6 (February 10 , 2014 CPC) Page 3 of 3 cStillwate~ --~~~, The Birthp lace of Minnesota .) 321 MOORE STREET WEST SITE LOCATION E::J Si te Location ,.,.,_..._ Browns Creek and Tri butaries t::J Surface Water D Parcel Boundaries N ~ W~E s 0 135 270 540 ---===-----Feet Stillwater Planning Commission C ity of Sti ll water 216 North Fo urth Street Stillwater MN 55082 01/17/20 14 The pmpose of this letter is to describe in detail a proposed remodeling and addition to the house at 321 Moore Street Wes t in Stillwater, and request variances for a rear yard setback, and for maximum building lot coverage, as noted below. The existing lot is located in the RB zoning district. The minimum standard area for a single-family lot in this district is 7500 sf This lot is smaller than the minimum: 75' -0" x 90' -0 " = 6750 sf. Because this lot is smaller than the minimum lot size for this zoning, the setbacks established for larger lots present difficulties for even the most modest remodeling or addition . In fact, the setbacks render the existing house noncomplying, as it is. Few other lots in this neighborhood are as small as this one, and none of the smaller lots in the neighborhood are also located on a comer, as this one is .. A comer lot creates an additional burden of an equivalent front yard setback requirement on two of the lot's four sides. These setback requirements, intended for larger lots, create unusual conditions and practical difficulties for this landowner. The existing house, built in 1956, is a 1092 sf one story, two bedroom rambler with a single stall, attached 323 sf garage. As it currently sits on the lot, the house does not comply with some setbacks: the east wall of the garage extends about 1 '-6" into the interior (5'-0") sideyard setback, and the south wall ofthe house extends about 6'-6" into the (25' -0") rear yard setback .Note that the south or rear yard is actually the equivalent of a sideyard condition for the adjoining house to the south, since that house is (as are all of the houses facing North Martha Street) rotated 90 degrees to the subject house at 321 Moore St. The existing house and garage has a total existing building footprint of 1415 s£ The proposed building additions consist of 498 sf of living, bedroom and front porch additions to the north and west, and a 160 sfuncovered deck to the south. With a 555 sf second floor including two bedrooms and a bath, the total first and second floor living area is 2144 sf. The total proposed building area footprint , including the garage and covered porch structures, is 1 913 sf. Rear Yard Setback Variance Request: As the attached Site Plan shows, we are requesting a variance of 6' -6" to the rear yard setback, to allow a small portion (about 6'- 6" x 11 '-0") of the southwest comer of the proposed addition to align with the existing house's south walL We also request to build a small deck (8'-0" x 16'-0") within the rear yard setback, at the rear entrance to the house near the garage. Building Area Lot Coverage Variance Request: The existing site allows a maximum building lot coverage of(6750sf x 25%) = 1688 sf. As the attached Site Plan shows , we are r equ est ing a building lot cov erage of 1913 sf, or 28 .3 % coverage, a var iance of 225 sf , or 3.3%. Th e imp ervio us surface a re as of the dri veway, entrance steps and proposed rear deck ar e 12.5 % of the site, far less than the maximum of25%, and require no variance. The Owner intends to make this house completely wheelchair accessible, which has require d a larger first floor area, and results in the plan configuration you see here. The Owner al so intends to include many sustainable features in the house and its mechanical and el e ctrical systems, including creating extens ivelandscaping, and raingardens and to help water infiltration on site. In summary, the small si ze of this lot, combine d with its comer location create unusual conditions and practical difficulties for the lot and any improvements to this house. The proposed additions to the house are modest and not detrimental to the neighborhood, and are in appropriate scale with the overall context and character of the neighborhood. Thank you for your consideration Wendy Adams Washington ~S County ParceiiD: 2103020340009 Parcel Address: 321 MOORE ST W, CITY OF STILLWATER Created on 1/21/2014 MAP FOR REFERENCE ONLY NOT A LEGAL DOCUMENT This drawing is the result of the compilation and reproduction of land records as they appear in various Washington County offices . The drawing should be used for reference purposes only. Washington County is not responsible for any inaccuracies. Existing north (front yard) elevation facing Moore street (trees no -t-·· I ED ·· · · GGl!illl!ill-il'llliZL2--lR!i!I!S!M!Hi: .. <e • znmm* -~~.... ···· --•· ..... I . . -~ • • •··---------•· ------·-·· ...... ______________ _ \It>'' -. 1 . . ll t • i --·--~---....... _ .... _ .. -- ,I J_· . .. If r I f +-- ~ ~~t-.lD~ ~LNJ ~~· lle>h ~./i' . I I . ! \ 'I :I I !=f==l1 r·y=(m-rn'-:-:n~, ~ ' J 1 , i : l l j 11 1~ ~z~ ·--·· ---,, _I ··~1-- ~------~--.------·------·------·-... ---~---------------~----+~=tt..~------~-~n- < t"- II --------- ! ,I j , ',; • >, ; ~ i . l l - rn 8 -=;; ;gg ·.!rtm m n · #m g ': ..... . . . /·, ' ... ·· .. · .•. ':. ·,, ' ••.. f\: .···.l· (&-- ~ .... ~.~ C!)E.'(.lOJ:\Wo'?l\E:. f'lMI '1J2. I .»=.· 0\•\-t•\4 l'.>UIU/1 ~0 eo.! ~I'IC!>E ', I "t I'? t\1 \'('/\ ~\l>J? lJO\ Ct>~ 15 '1,? t\1 ~====================================~==~-==~ ·---···-- ~E.tw-. ~D %\~~ \11\<q~ t2-~0~?T~. lN~o: (;&,[\1 '~ \ wOt\l~DECK, . ~4.$RNJ ' .c,\ •11·1+ ' . ~U\LOI~b (AI~'. \~\'?$ 1\V\~\J\lif:> l..t'\ ~ ·. -~ q:J ' ' '2.~.1,ofe \1.·?~ ' ' \ I ·. • ' :. ' . · ... <.St il lwj!! e~~ ····~ ~ 1 H f B I RTH P L A Ce O f M I NNf S O !~ ') P L ANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE: February 10 , 2014 CASE NO.: SUP /2014-5 APPLICANT: Robert and Michelle Jorgensen, property owners REQUEST: Re quest for a Sp ecial Use Permit to remodel the interior of the commercial structure at 215 William Street North. The remodeling will be for the addition of a one bedroom apartment to be used as a primary residence. ZONING: RB-Two Family Res. COMP PLAN DISTRICT: Low /Medium Density Res. PREPARED BY: AbbiJo Wittman, City Plann~ REQUEST The applicant is requesting consideration of a Special Use Permit (SUP) for mixed uses to be permitted at 215 William Street North. The SUP would allow for the remodel of the interior of the existing commercial structure for the conversion of a retail unit into a one bedroom apartment to be used as a primary residence. BACKGROUND The structure has contained exclusively commercial uses since it was constructed as a neighborhood grocery store in 1929. Several Special Use Permit requests have been approved by the City subsequent to grocery sales to allow for various office and studio activities to exist The commercial endeavors on this residentially zoned property have been allowed to exist as legal, non-conforming businesses as the commercial use predates the City's zoning ordinance . Most recently, in 2011 the City issued the Jorgensens a notice of compliance for a retail business (Mille Rose) to be located in the structure. The proposed use was substantially similar to the non-residential us es that hav e historically occurred on the property and did not represent an intensification of the non-commercial activities. In 2013 Mille Rose closed their retail storefront location in this building. The existing chiropractic offic e is proposed to remain in its storefront location in the building. SPECIAL USE PERMIT APPLICABLE REGULATIONS AND STANDARDS Municip al Code Section 31-207 indicates the following m u st be determined by the Planning Comm ission prior to the issuance of a Special Use P ermit: Th e pr op osed structure or us e conforms to the requirements and th e in te nt of this chapter, and of the co mpreh ensive plan, rel ev ant area plans and other lawful regulation s. • Zoning Ordinance o Use • Residences are permitted uses in the RB -Two Family Zoning District. Converting commercial space to residential as proposed, would bring this property closer to compliance with the intention of the zoning ordinance. • The applicants intend to continue a 150 square foot home office for Rose Mille. Additionally, less than 100 square feet will be utilized onsite for storage (of personal and business items). With no retail storefront/ separate business entrance, signage and/ or nonresident employees, the business would be classified as a Type I Home Occupation, permissible by the zoning ordinance and through staff approval of a Home Occupation Permit. o Parking • The residence is required to have two off-street parking spaces. One space is proposed to be located in the onsite (approximately) 12'X20' garage. • The chiropractor's office will be the only remaining commercial use on the site. It requires "one [parking space] for each 200 square feet of gross floor areas; but need not exceed an average of five spaces per practitioner." • Online records indicate there may be three practitioners (Lawrence, Franks and Jeske) operating out of this space. The parking regulations indicate no greater than five spaces is required per practitioner. This wpuld indicate no more than 15 spaces is required. • The business, however, is (approximately) 2,400 square feet in size. Therefore, the total number or required spaces for the commercial use is 12 (as the 1 space per 200 square feet requirement would apply). • The total required parking for the two uses on this property will be 14. All required parking will be met onsite. At this time, the parking lot contains 17 parking stalls. Seven of those stalls are striped. The installation of a 36' long patio for the apartment will remove four of the striped stalls. The three remaining striped stalls, plus the ten non-striped stalls (13 total stalls), coupled with the one space in the garage will provide the 14 required parking spaces for the property 215 William Street North Case No . SUP /2014-5 (February 10, 2014 CPC) Page 2 of 3 • Comprehensive Plan -Th e Housing chapter of the C omprehensive Plan (C hapter 4) encourages the preservation of n eighborhood charac ter. With minimal ex t e rior changes, the removal of one d oor and the addition of one window, the n eighborhood will not b e adversely aff ec te d due to phy sica l d evelopment o f this site. Any additional conditions necessary for the publi c interest hav e bee n imposed; and th e us e or stru cture will not constitute a nuisance or be detrim ental to the public welfare of the community. Staff has not identified any public interest concerns. As the applicant has indicated, a residence in this location will increase presence at this site at all hours of the day. ALTERNATIVES The Commission has the following options: 1. Approve the Special Use Permit request with or without conditions . · . 2. Deny the Special Use Permit request. 3. Table the consideration of the request for more information. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Commission approve SUP /2014-5, approving the conversion of a retail unit into a residential unit for a mixed use property, with the following conditions: 1. The two parcels shall be combined with the Washington County Assessor's office. 2. Ten (10) parking stalls, 9' wide by 18' long, shall be striped onsite. 3. A Type I Home Occupation permit must be obtained prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the continued operation of a home-based business in this location. 4. Major exterior modifications not depicted in the SUP permit request shall be reviewed by the Heritage Preservation Commission. ATTACHMENTS Site Location Map Narrative Request Certificate of Survey Building Plan 215 William Street North Case N o . SUP /2014-5 (February 10, 2014 CPC) Page 3 of 3 1207 1209 1211 1210 1208 116 1202 1127 212 1205 1111 119 117 111 1122 1 1118 233 232 231 226 225 219 213 202 203 I 126 125 122 119 118 117 114 113 110 111 106 1112 1104 1018 236 230 218 214 210 206 204 1-w w 0::: 235 1913 225 221 215 211 205 905 226 220 214 210 202 t:i w 0::: 1- (f) (U _J w w 0::: (9 WEST~ RICE STRE§! 126 120 116 112 106 104 126 ~ (f) 1-1.:.:2:...:.1--t-----j 0 z 119 118 z U!- 125 3: 0 115 107 101 ;14 112 106 817 236 230 225 228 216 213 214 211 208 201 1 1810 204 121 124 117 120 -----:---- 1 t 1 110 820 808 1 804 813 231 229 219 215 218 202 129 123 WEST RICE ST 115 ,J 116 109 110 618 718 104 612 611 ' The Bi rtllplace oi Minnesota .) 215 WILLIAM STREET NORTH SITE LOCATION CJ 215 William Street North ..,.,._ 2012 city limit 0 Parcel Boundari es ~J Surface Wa ter ~ Browns C reek and Tri butaries N • . W E s 0 100 200 400 ----==::::::~-----Feet January 17, 2014 Attn: Planning Commission Robert Jorgensen 215 William Stree t N Stillwater, MN 55082 Home: 651-351-0775 Work: 651-342-0152 Cell: 651-491-5107 Subj: Description of proposed use of the building/property located at the address above requiring a Special Use Permit for Mixed Use To whom it may concern: My wife and I have owned this property for over two years now. During that time we have leased the front of the building to a Chiropractor who has been running his office at this location since long before we acquired the building and his intention is to remain at this location. We have been operating a small retail business, Rose Mille (open only a few days a week) out of the rear portion of the building. We have a letter provided to us from the city that permits us to use the property as such -copy attached. We recently closed the retail store at this location and we are proposing instead to construct a small one bedroom apartment in the rear of the building that we intend to use as our primary residence. Our living at this location would be consistent with the current residential zoning of this property. However, since we intend to retain the Chiropractor in the front of the building, as I understand it, the property would then be considered "mixed use". The proposed new living space would occupy approximately 60% of the total building space (or roughly 3100 SF), including the existing one car garage and attached storage areas. The impact on the neighbors would be minimal. There are no proposed changes to the exterior of the building, except for perhaps removing several of the existing 17 parking spaces to the north of the building to used as a patio area. One exterior door to the north would be removed and one window to the rear of the building would be added. Since we no longer operate the retail business at this location, there will be less vehicle traffic, and from a neighborhood "security" standpoint, the building would be occupied rather than vacant during off business hours. Thank you for your careful consideration in this matte r. I can be reached at the phone numbers listed above should you have any questions . Sincerely, ~/) / <.,L:-- Robert Jorgensen KEMPER & ASSOCIATES PROFESSION AL LAND SU RVE YOH S 721 OLD !JJGHWAY 6 N.'lf. NJ.:1f BRIGHTON , MINNESOTA 5511 2 6 5 1-63 1-0JSl FAX 651-631-6005 Email: k empcr6pro-ns:.nel ..,.......,kempers urveys.c om SECTION 2 8 , TJO N, R20W VICINITY MAP (NO SCALE) FRONT OF 215 WIWAM STREET NORlH ZONING REQUIREMENTS 'THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY ZONED RB: lWO-fAM!LY RESIDENTIAL D!SlRICT 'THE CURREN T OfFICE USE IS GRANTED UNDER SPECIAL USE PERMIT. J.!IN!!,.!U!.l l OT STANQARQS LOT AREA: 10,000 SQUARE fEET LOT WIDTH: 75 FEET LOT DEPTH: 100 FEET NO SETBACK INFORMATION IS AVAILABLE FOR THE CURRENT USE Of THE PROPERTY AS SUa-t lHE MOST RFSJRICTI\If SfmAct(S SHAl I GOYfRN. FRONT: 20 FEET MINIMUM SlOE: THE TOTAL Of BOTH SIDE YARDS MUS T EQUAL 15 FEET WITH AT LEAST FIVE FEET ON EACH SIDE CORNER SIDE: 20 fEET MINIMUt.4, 5 fEET ON INTERIOR SIDE. REAR : 25 FEET MINIMUM t.jAX!MliM I OT CO'tLBAGE BUILDINGS: 25Y. IMPERVIOUS SURFACES: 25% MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT: 35 FEET PARKING REQU IREMENTS: MED ICAL & DENTAL CUNIC= ONE SPACE FOR EACH 200 SQUARE FEET Of CROSS FLOOR AREA, BUT NEED NOT EXCEED AN AVERAGE Of fiVE SPACES PER PRACTITIONER. 1 HANDICAP STAll. IS REQUIRED. AS PER CITY Of STILLWATER ZONING ORDINANCE CONTACT MIKE POGC£. CITY PLANNER, PHONE: 651-430-8820. LOT COVERAGE SUMMARY fOOTPRINT AREA OF BUILDING .. 5,320 SQ. FT. AREA OF PAV£D SURFACES=-8,909 SQ . fT . TOTAL AREA OF PROPERTY= 15,739 SQ. fT. PERCEN TAGE OF BUILDING COVERAGE= .33.80% PERCENTAGE OF lt.4PERV10US COVERAGE= 90.41X INC . ENCROACHMI:NT SUMMARY A. THE WEST FAt,[ Of" THE BUILDING ENCROACHES INTO THE FRONT ~.f.TBACK A MAXIMUM DISTANCE Of 18.97 FEET. (CONSIDERED LEGAL NON-CONFORMING) 8. THE SOUTHYftST BUILDING CORNER ENCROACHES INTO THE CORNER SIDE SElBACK A MAXIMUM DISTANCE Of 15.29 FEET. (CONSIDERED LEGAL NON-CONFORMING) C. THE SOUTHEAST BUILDING CORNER ENCROACHES INTO THE REAR SElBACK A MAXIMUM DISTANCE OF 2.37 FEET. (CONSIDERED LEGAL NON-CONFORM ING) 0. THE OVERHANG ON TI-lE WEST SIDE Of THE BUilDING ENCROACHES A MAXIMUM DISTANCE Of 0.97 FEET OVER THE WEST PROPERTY UNE. E. THE CONCRETE CURB AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE PROPERTY ENCROACHES ONTO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY 3.73 FEET EAST OF THE 'M::ST LINE AND 3.27 FEET NORTH Of THE SOUTH LINE. PARKING SUMMARY 7 STANDARD PARKING STALLS 10 NON-STRIPED PARKING STALLS 0 HANDICAp pARKING SIAl ! S 17 TOTAL PARKING STAl.l..S FLOOD ZONE DESIGNATION THE SUBJECT PROPERTY UES IN FLOOD ZONE -x· AS SHO'I'IN ON fLOOO INSURANCE RATE MAP NO. 27163C0262E, V!HICH HAS AN EFfECTIVE DATE OF FEBRUARY 3, 2010, AN IS PUBLISHED BY THE fEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY. LEGAL DESCRIPTION STEWART llTL£ GUARANTY COMPANY FILE NO.: J34895 -POLICY NO.: PRO FORMA DATE OF POLICY: DATE AND TIME OF RECORDING lots 8. 10 ond the North Holf of lot 12. Block 4 of Thompson, Porker ond Mower's Addilion to Slll!woler, Wosh lnglon County, Minnesota. CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY I i 1 : I I : I i I I ¥1 I ~· I i! il:l £1 I ~" 3~ ~-~~ ~- i 1 : 1 i 1 i I I PAAKIM(;lOf ENTRAAC( I I-- 0:::: 0 I z I I-~ ~~ w 1. t< ~,. w 00 I t< ~0 X~ a::: ii1~ 1-~-~ (f) I irE I • w :E ~ <( _l _l 5 4 .• •. 215 WILLIAM STREET NOR_ TH CITY OF STILLWATER, WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA I AD JACE NT RESIDENCE 225 Yl\lliAM STREET NOR 'TH """"'""' S 89"49'46" E 125.91" {PS) s ag·ss'3s" E 125.91' (M) 126.00' {R) __!:5 lOT...!_ _ . _ 5'flTrniORSIO£S£lliAO< 611\}I.(!NOUSP~C lO T A PR(W)US SUR'otY Of" lOT~. IJ(.(l(l( ~. lH~.PAAKERAUOIIO\IIrn'S.I,IJOmOO PR!;PAAf08Yl!ARR£TT Y.STACI<(RI..S 1J 7H) WAS UllUZlD IN PREI'AAIHG Tl-IIS SUR'wl:Y. (SUR'otY \JIS'N0.05695 1N lHEII{ASii:NCTON COUtHY Sffi~'S omct) """' fOIC.f -,-I '"'::"l!"~'"" I 215 WILUAMI STREET NORlH ONE-STORY COt.IWERCIAL/OffiCE BUILDING BUILDING FOOTPRitNT AREA= 5,320 SQ. FT. ~~~~liTO OF"LOT10 ----+---\__, __ 111.7 \ ""'"'"" Ofl.OT12 -------------------1---- ~~----~ ~-----~-----~----~ 1 T .. .,,.., _ ($}1. 2:,, t-. TWO (2) PREVIOUS SURYEYS PREPARED BY BARREIT t.l. STACK :!I Q\ 1. aU a..n\)\11\~ ;:j (RLS 13774) Vt£RE UTILIZED IN PREPARING THIS SUR\fi. ONE :_I \.! t-~.t:S ,_.~Jl.(0\:!1'2. -SAID SURV"EY WAS PREPARED ON AUGUST 2, 1983 AND FilED I \\'\OR2B·QY:>·'i_0S""I"t•\RV.. AS SURVEY MAP NO. 02598. THIS WAS A SURV£Y OF LOT 2, ~~tR: ~~ ' ~~D \u~:r~ ~~!~E~~ M~~~S 1':4~";·A~ AOJ"-CE:HT RESiffiENCf" 209 'MWA1o4 STREE-.T NORTli Fll£0 AS SURVEY ~AP NO. 05685. THIS WAS A SURVEY OF LOT 6, Bloct< -4-, TH()t.jPSOH, PARKER AND MOVIER'S ADDITION. BOTH Of THE SUR'v"t:YS LISTED ABO\"t ARE ON fiLE IN THE WASHINGTON COUNTY SUR\€YOR'S OfFICE AND LIE WITHIN SECTION 28, TO'M-ISHIP 30 NORTH, RANCE 20 'NEST. I ~ PREPARED FOR: CINDY CARlSON VICE PRESlOENT-Cot.IMERCI•l BANKING WESTERN BANK 2711 H.E. COUNTY ROAD 1: MOUNDS V£W, MINNESOTA 15112 DIRECT: 651 -290-7867 BASISfORB(AAINCS: WASHINGTON COUNTY COOR04tiATESYSTEio! llAD&J(llmiA.OJ.) LEGEND ... 0 "0 0\etHEAD Url.ITY UN£ -If- "'"' DDIOltSOIE:HSION '"'' -"'""'"""' """"' DEHOTES OII>IEMSION (W) WEASU!llltu!t!GlHE COIJRSEOflltSSt.IIM:Y OOIOlESI!ECQRD ~) Dlt.IENSIOH~PERPLAT OR l£CAL DESaUPTIOtl 00101ESS£TSIJR\EY iii0Htlloi£HTI.IAA!((D ~1 S.f0r I HERiliY (Utf'Y THAT 1\tS SOR'tt:Y. I'VJf. OR I!EPORT WAS PREPARED BYWE OR liNO£R MY DIRECT 5l.!PER~SION NfJ "niAT INIAOUI..Yua::NSED~I..AHD SUR'oE'tOR utWER mE lAWS Of 1HE STAT£ Ofi>IHIIESOTA.. I ! '2. 1 o,"'"· w; &. t..l A 1~1 -,. r,e ;;~ r - l ?t/lt-DI N(r fi..P,,...J .~• -; ._, ,.,., .. ~;~&C>Aii.o~<d..~~~:;;:;;;:;::-1 '" ·'~~·-.,__.,,-----·-~'1L:[ t i ;! t:.~ ,J J' ·1 /I 7/,/ y ---- PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE: February 10,2014 REGARDING: Planning Commission Meeting Schedule PREPARED BY: Abbi Jo Wittman, City Pia~ At your last regularly scheduled meeting, the Commission expressed concern there is not enough time between packet distribution/ receipt and Monday's meeting. While staff is working on transitioning the Commission to electronic packet distribution (which would provide for packet receipt on Thursdays), there are still Commissioners who have not begun participation in the portable device reimbursement program nor have indicated they would prefer to download their packet from the City's website or receive packet notification through the City's email notification list. Given this, staff has also inquired as to whether or not moving the meeting day from the 2nd Monday to the 2nd Wednesday of each month would work as this, too, was expressed as a way provide more time between packet distribution and the regularly scheduled meetings. Staff has determined the change in meeting date would work with the City's monthly meeting schedule, Valley Access (public broadcasting) as well as with the city's audio visual technician, Don. Staff has discussed the concept with the City Council who has indicated they would be favorable to the change, if a request was made. Following last month's meeting, staff inquired with all Commissioners of the preference to Monday or Wednesday evening meetings. Chairman Kocon, and Commissioners Hade, Hansen and Fletcher have indicated either day would work sufficiently. Commissioner Kelly expressed the change would not be desirable but he could make the date change work. Commissioner Collins indicated there would be a conflict in the date change. Staff has not received a response from Commissioners Siess or Middleton. Staff is bringing this matter before the Commission for determination as to whether or not the Commission would like to make a request to the City Council for a change in the Planning Commission meeting schedule to hold meetings on the 2nd Wednesday of every month. Staff recommends the Commission discuss this for determination of action. Abbi Wittman From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Abbi, Dave Magnuson <dtmagnuson@magnusonlawfirm.com > Thursday, January 23, 2014 4:59 PM Abbi Wittman Bill Turnblad RE : Annexation Agreement The reason for taking the approach we do is to increase our control over development. If the property were annexed before approvals were given, we would have only the zoning and subdivision ordinances and applications would be subject to the 60 Day Rule. And, since it comes in as Ag Preserve, the property must be re-zoned for anything to take place. But re-zoned to what? Further, by reaching agreement with an owner before annexation, we are able to apply all of our impact fees without challenge. The process was out of sync with the recent Jon Whitcomb development and the development agreement was not signed before the annexation. Because of that we gave up some impact fees because of challenges from his lawyer, some of which were valid challenges,. So that is the reason for the pre annexation policy. It has been done this way since 1996 . The authority for this policy is that annexation is a discretionary decision vested in the City Council. That policy was challenged by the Bruggemans. The City was not happy with a proposed plat that was consistent with the camp plan and the proposed zoning for the area . In spite of that, the City Council would not agree to annex the parcel. (now the armory fire station site). Bruggemans sued claiming that the City Councii was arbitrary and capricious in their denial, that the city had annexed other parcels and had no reason to deny Bruggeman . The right to deny the annexation was sustained in the District Court, and in the Court of Appeals, and the Supreme Court denied Cert. So the city may deny annexation for any reason. This is extraordinary control. In practice, the pre annexation approvals cannot be formally enacted until the property is part of the City. So the pre- annexation approvals should be set forth in a Development Agreement that binds the City to take formal action to enact a re-zoning change or to take action on a variance should it be needed, or to re-zone to a certain District . The agreement also binds the property owner to accept the new zoning and to pay any and all impact fees . We would not have the same control over any of this if we were to annex first and before agreement. I hope this makes sense to you and to the planning commission . I would be happy to meet with them to explain this policy. Let me know . dave From : Ab bi W ittman [m ailto :aw ittman @c i.s till water.mn.u s] Se nt: T hu rs da y, January 16 , 20 14 11 :32 AM T o : Dave Mag nu son Cc: Bi ll Turnb lad Subject: An nexa tion Agre emen t ORIGINA L AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF STILLWATER AND THE TOWN OF STILLWATER FOR GROWTH MANAGEMENT, ORDERLY ANNEXATION AND THE EXERCISE OF JOINT POWERS FOR PLANNING AND LAND USE CONTROL THIS AGREEMENT is made this / IP -tz... day of ~~ , 1996, ("Effective Date") between the City of Stillwater, Washington County, MiiUleta ("City") and the Town of Stillwater, Washington County, Minnesota ("Town") and is an agreement relating to growth management and constitutes a "Joint Resolution" between the City and Town authorized by Minnesota Statutes §414.0325 providing for a procedure and a framework for orderly annexation of a part of the Town to the City. This Agreement also provides for the joint exercise by the City and Town of their respective planning and land use control authority pursuant to Minn. Stat. 471 !59 and Minn. Stat. 414.0325 (Subd. 5). SECTION ONE INTRODUCTION 1.01 Certain land owners within the Town have petitioned the City for annexation and for the extension of municipal utilities. Since receiving the petition, the City has undertaken a review of its Comprehensive Plan and has studied the ability of the City to provide services to the area and has concluded that if the area requesting services is developed into urban uses the City would ultimately be benefited by a broadened tax base and a more vital community and that urban growth in the annexation area would benefit the City. The Town has participated in a review of the City's Comprehensive Plan and has concluded that it would be beneficial to the Town, and to property owners remaining in the Town after annexation, to enter this Agreement with the City so that the area to be annexed will be developed in an orderly fashion and with the least possible impact on the people of the Town. INTENT 1.02 The parties to this agreement intend it to be binding with all the rights, privileges, and obligations attached thereto. Both parties intend to be bound by this agreement and shall not violate its terms. Neither party shall exercise any legislative authority either now existing or which may be later created in a way which violates the terms of the agreement. Both parties understand that they may not limit the power of the legislature over annexation, and such is not their intent. Instead, the parties agree to refrain from exercising any legislative authority, now or into the future , in a way that would violate the terms of this agreement. 356 67.0 1F 05/23/96 -1- INCLUSION INTO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 1.03 Within sixty (60) days of the City's adoption of this Joint Resolution, the City shall adopt and forward to the Metropolitan Council a Comprehensive Plan Affiendment incorporating the Orderly Annexation Agreement into the City's Comprehensive Plan. SECTION TWO ORDERLY ANNEXATION AREA 2.01 The property described in Exhibit "A" that is subject to annexation by the City pursuant to this Agreement will constitute the "Orderly Annexation Area". This area includes all that area of the Town not now within the City that lies North of Highway 36, East of County Road 15 and South of Highway 96, except for that portion of the Town that lies North of the right-of-way of the Minnesota Zephyr Track and East of the Oak Glen development. The Orderly Annexation Area is designated as in need of orderly annexation and no consideration by the Minnesota Municipal Board is necessary, no alteration of the boundaries is appropriate, and all conditions of annexation have been provided for in this Resolution and the Minnesota Municipal Board may review and comment only and within thirty (30) days of receipt of this Resolution and each subsequent phase as described in this Agreement upon the filing of a Resolution as described in this Agreement. SECTION THREE PHASING SCHEDULE 3.01 The Town and City agree that phasing the growth envisioned for the annexation area would benefit the City by reducing the fmancial risk of extending core facilities into the Orderly Annexation Area by extending such facilities gradually rather than at one time. This would also allow for the burden imposed by the growth to be gradually born by the City so that the level of services needed by the new development could be supplied on a gradual and phased basis. The Town bas agreed that a phased development plan as envisioned by this Agreement would benefit the Town by phasing the impact of lost tax base on the remaining Town government and easing financial and lifestyle burdens that an immediate annexation of the entire area would impose on Town residents. For the purposes of this Agreement, the Orderly Annexation Area will be divided into four (4) phases described as follows: Phase I Description 3. 02 Phase I contains that property described in Exhibit "B", generally described as that part of the Town that is South of County Road 12, East of County Road 15 and North of Highway 36, except for the following property that will remain as Phase IV property unless Annexation is requested by the property owner pursuant to Section 4.08 herein: 35 667.01F 05 /23/96 -2- d. Any property which hooks-up to City sanitary sewer shall pay a hook-up charge which will not exceed Twenty-Five Hundred Dollars ($2,500.00). The $2,500 limit shall be inclusive of all trunk or core facilities, laterals and other public costs associated with the installation of and hook-up to the system. , e. Any property which hooks-up to City municipal water system shall pay a hook-up charge which will not exceed Twenty-Five Hundred Dollars ($2,500.00). The $2,500 limit shall be inclusive of all trunk or core facilities, laterals and other public costs associated with the installation of and hook-up to the system. f. Property which is not being subdivided will not be assessed for the cost of street improvements necessitated by development occurring within the orderly annexation area. However, if the street is substandard at the time of the improvement, the property may be assessed an amount equal to the assessment that would have been levied by the Town, if any, under the Town assessment policy in effect prior to the annexation of Phase One. The property may be subject to additional deferred assessments payable if and when the property is subdivided. "Substandard" is determined by Township standards in effect prior to the annexation of Phase I. g. If a property hooks up to City sewer or water it will be charged for one hook- up as per Section 6.01 d and e regardless of whether the property can be further subdivided. Additional hook-up charges will be due at the time the property is subdivided based upon the hook-up charges in effect at that time. 6.02 Concurrent with the City's adoption of this "Joint Resolution", the City will adopt a sanitary sewer and water hook-up policy which includes the following provisions relating to property within the orderly annexation area: a. Prior to subdivision of the property, no property owner will be required to hook-up to the City's municipal water system. b. Prior to subdivision of the property, no property owner will be required to hook-up to the City's sanitary sewer system unless hook-up is mandated by State Statute or Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) regulation and enforcement action is initiated. A property owner will be permitted to upgrade or replace a failing system in accordance with MPCA standards. The City ordinance will not impose regulations that are more stringent than those required by the MPCA. 6.03 This section does not require the City, if requested to by a Property Owner, to extend sanitary sewer service to property which has a failed on-site system if the extension is not feasible or cost effective. 6.04 The benefits and limitations set forth in this Section do not apply nor are they for the bene fit of owners who subdivide their property. 35667 .01F 05/23/96 -6- '· 6.05 The limitations in Sections 6.01 d and e will be annually adjusted commencing January 1, 1997 based upon the Consumer Price Index for Urban Consumers (CP-U). SECTION SEVEN REAL ESTATE TAXATION 7.01 Rural Tax Rate Adjustment. It is recognized that there is a significant difference between the City's municipal percent of tax capacity rate, which is approximately .35 percent for the calendar year 1996, and the Town's existing percent of tax capacity rate of .17 percent and that to · require property that is brought into the City against the wishes of a property owner to pay the full municipal rate would be burdensome. The City, therefore, will concurrent with the City's adoption of this "Joint Resolution" amend, subject to the second reading required by City Charter, its Rural Service Taxing District Ordinance to include: a. A rural service district that will include only parcels that are not connected to municipal sewer or water services. b. A rural service tax rate that will be set at seventy-five percent (75%) of the City Urban Service District rate. c. Pursuant to Minn. Stat. 414.035, for parcels that have not requested annexation, the initial rural service tax rate in the year of annexation will be Fifty percent (50%) of the urban rate, with the percentage being increased five percent ( 5 %) each year to the seventy-five percent (7 5 %) rural service rate. 7.02 Tax Rate Adjustment for Parcels Not Requesting Annexation. Pursuant to Minn. Stat. 414.035, for parcels that have not requested annexation and do not qualify for the rural service taxing district, the initial urban tax rate in the year of annexation will be fifty percent (50%) of the urban rate, with the percentage being increased 10 percent (10%) each year for five (5) years to the full urban rate. 7.03 Tax Payment to Town. During the term of this Agreement, taxes received by the City based upon the tax capacity generated from any area annexed in the year of annexation will be paid over to the Town and thereafter the amount to be paid to the Town will be reduced by twenty percent (20%) each year until the amount reaches zero (0), when taxes based upon the full tax capacity will remain with the City. For the purpose of this section, any increase in tax capacity over the tax capacity generated in the year of annexation will remain with the City. 7. 04 Year of Annexation. If the annexation becomes effective on or before August 1 of any year, the City may levy on the annexed area beginning with that year. If the annexation becomes effective after August 1 of any year, the Town may continue to levy on the annexed area for that year, and the City may not levy in the annexed area until the following year. 35667 .01F 05 /23 /9 6 -7- SECTION EIGHT JOINT PLANNING AND LAND USE CONTROL 8.01 The purpose of this section of the Agreement is to provide for the joint exercise of governmental authority by the City and Town pursuant to Minn. Stat. 471.59 and 414.0325, Subd. 5 in order to insure orderly development within the annexation area in accordance with this Orderly Annexation Agreement and the City's Comprehensive Plan. 8.02 The powers set forth herein shall be exercised by a four (4) member board consisting of two (2) City Council members appointed by the City and two (2) Town Board members appointed by the Town Board of Supervisors. 8.03 The Joint Board will review official controls necessary to regulate development of property and development applications within the Orderly Annexation Area before its annexation by the City in order to insure that the property remains in a status available for development into urban density residential uses in accordance with the City's Comprehensive Plan. The area north of the railroad tracks and east of the Oak Glen development and south of Highway 96 shall remain in the present conservency zoning classification now in effect in the area. A zoning classification for the Bergman farm that is the same as the City's Research and Development Zoning District will be adopted in order to protect the area from development that would prevent or frustrate the eventual urban development of the farm as an Urban Research and Development Center, Nothing in this subsection shall preclude the Town's approval of a subdivision of a parcel of land into three or fewer lots with a minimum lot size of 2.5 acres. 8.04 As to property within the Orderly Annexation Area after its annexation into the City, the Joint Board shall have the following delegated powers: a. b. c. d. e. f. 35 667 .01 F 05/23/9 6 Approve amendments to the City's Comprehensive Plan relating to the Orderly Annexation Area; Approve the initial adoption of, amendments to, or variances from the City's official controls relating to the Orderly Annexation Area. Approve any special assessment and sanitary sewer and water hook-up ordinance or policy and any amendments for consistency with Section Six. Approve the Rural Service Taxing District ordinance or any amendments thereto, for consistency with Section Seven herein. Review and comment on the consistency of any development application with City's Comprehensive Plan and Orderly Annexation Agreement. All matters subject to approval by the Joint Board as set forth in §8.04 (a), (b) or (c) sh all be processed in the same manner by the City as any other such -8- matter. Any required public hearing before the City Planning Commission or City Council shall also be noticed as a public hearing before the Joint Board. g. Final action by the City relating to matters described in §8.04, Subd. (a), (b), (c) or (d) may not be taken unless the Joint Board certifies approval of the action. If the Joint Board fails to certify approval, the Joint Board Members shall designate a qualified neutral from the Minnesota Supreme Court Certified Neutrals list to conduct Alternative Dispute Resolution ("ADR") in the form of mediation/arbitration ("Med-Arb") or such other agreed upon ADR format. If mediation fails, the Neutral will issue a recommended decision. The Joint Board will adopt Findings of Fact and Decision consistent with the Neutral's recommendation and supported by the administrative record developed by the City and Joint Board. The Neutral shall base the recommended decision on the City and Joint Board administrative record, any applicable provision of the Orderly Annexation Agreement and legal principles which the Joint Board and City are required to follow in determining the matter at issue. h. Development applications subject only to review and comment by the Joint Board pursuant to Paragraph 8.04(e) herein shall be processed in the same manner as all other development applications except as follows: (1) The Joint Board shall meet before the Planning Commission completes its consideration of the application. Minutes of the Joint Board's discussion of the application shall be included in materials submitted to the Planning Commission. No public hearing need be conducted at the Joint Board meeting; (2) The Town Board representatives on the Joint Board shall be ex officio members of the City Planning Commission when any development application subject to the Joint Board's review and comment is being considered, and shall be provided with all staff reports and other documentation provided to City Planning Commission members. 8.05 "Official controls" means ordinances, regulations and policies which control the physical development of the city and use of land, or any detail thereof and implement the general objectives of the comprehensive plan, including ordinances establishing zoning, subdivision controls, site plan regulations and official maps. 8.06 The Joint Board will not be responsible for any staff time, consultant expenses or other costs incurred by the City and Town in connection with the processing and review of any matter which requires approval by the Joint Board. The Town and City will be responsible for paying their own employees, consultants and Joint Board members. Any expenditure incurred by the Joint Board, including the appointment of a Neutral to conduct ADR proceedings, if necessary, shall be apportioned seventy-five percent (75%) to the City and twe nty-five percent (25%) to the Town. 35667 .01F 05 /23/96 -9- ·, 8.07 This Joint Powers Agreement shall terminate concurrently with the Orderly Annexation Agreement on January 1, 2020, except as follows: As to the matters set forth in Section 8.04 (b), (c) and (d) herein, the Joint Powers Agreement shall remain in effect so long as there are any Phase IV properties that are still entitled to the protection of Sections Six and Seven herein, pursuant to Section 16.01 herein. 8.08 Concurrent with the City's adoption of this Joint Resolution, the City shall amend, subject to the second reading required by City Charter, its zoning ordinance to provide that property is zoned agricultural upon its initiii.I inclusion into the City upon annexation. The Agricultural zone shall not allow any non-agricultural commercial use. The owner of any property proposed to be annexed pursuant to Section 4.09 which has an existing non-agricultural use shall agree to terminate the use as a condition of annexation. Nothing herein precludes the City, subject to Joint Board approval pursuant to Section 8.04 (b) herein, from rezoning the property to another use at the time of or subsequent to its annexation. SECTION NINE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS 9.01 The City agrees to develop Performance Standards for developers who work within the Orderly Annexation Area. The standards will measure developer performance in the areas of fmancial responsibility, protection of the environment during construction, construction traffic management, compliance with established time tables and responsiveness to citizen complaints. Each developer will be reviewed annually for compliance with these standards and the City will develop a system to sanction developers who fail to meet standards. SECTION TEN INCLUSION OF JOINT TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATIONS 10.01 To the extent feasible and permitted by law, the City agrees to include the recommendations of the Joint City/Town Planning Task Force within the ordinances and policies of the City. These recommendations are adopted and made a part of this Agreement as Exhibit "F". SECTION ELEVEN ENVIRONMENTAL AND OPEN SPACE PRESERVATION 11.01 The City agrees that environmental assessment worksheets will be required at each critical stage of any development review process as required by the Rules of the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board. Further, the recommendations developed by the Stillwater Area Open Space Committee will be implemented when feasible and the guidelines for protection of open space and the environment within the Orderly - Annexation Area will be followed when feasible or when permitted by law. The Stillwater Area Open Space Committee Report prepared by Kathryn Malady, 35667.0 1F 05/23/96 -10- ·• ., Botanical Consultant, dated August 1995 is adopted and made a part of this agreement as Exhibit "G", and the recommendation set forth in the study for sites within the Orderly Annexation Area must be made available to the Planning commission and City Council when any planning review is made of any proposed development within the Orderly Annexation Area. SECTION TWELVE INFRASTRUCTURE INSTALLATION WITHIN THE TOWNSHIP 12.01 When sewer and water trunk facilities will be extended through Town area in order to serve phases of the Orderly Annexation Area that are ready for urban development, the City agrees to notify the Town Board of the development plans. The City will copy the Town Board on any correspondence with Town property owners relating to easements or right-of-way acquisitions. SECTION THIRTEEN MAINTENANCE OF EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE WITHIN TOWN 13.01 The Town will continue to maintain streets and other public improvements in the Annexation Area so long as they remain in the Town. If improvements are required in this area which are not necessitated by growth in the City Annexation Areas, the City will pay to the Town a portion of the cost of the improvement which extends the useful life of the improvement beyond the time at which the street or other improvements is projected to be annexed into the City. The City's portion of the cost will be prorated based upon the following formula: Useful Life After Cost of Improvement x Projected Annexation Date = City's Share Total Useful Life 13.02 If public improvements are required in the Orderly Annexation Area that remain in the Town and are necessitated by the growth occurring in an area annexed pursuant to this Agreement, the City shall pay the cost of the improvements, except for an amount approximating the cost of maintaining (e.g. patching, sealcoating, and overlays) the street to a Township rural standard under the policy in effect prior to the annexation of Phase One based upon average daily traffic that existed prior to Phase One. This amount will be the Town's responsibility. 13.03 Road maintenance costs for the Orderly Annexation Area remaining in the Town will be shared based upon the City assuming road maintenance cost increases over the base year 1995. The amount of maintenance costs equal to the base year 1995, annually adjusted by the appropriate construction cost index, will continue to be the responsibility of the Town. 35667.01F 05/23/96 -11 - .•. SECTION FOURTEEN MODIFICATION 14.01 This Agreement may be modified at any time by written agreement approved by both the City and the Town, provided that the Resolution approving the modification be approved by 4/5ths vote of both the City and the Town. SECTION FIFTEEN GENERAL PROVISIONS 15.01 The words "shall" or "will" are mandatory. The word "may" is permissive. 15.02 If any provision of this agreement is declared invalid, for any reason, by a court of competent jurisdiction, the validity of the remaining terms and provisions shall not be effected and the agreement shall be construed and enforced as if the agreement did not contain the particular term or provision held to be invalid. SECTION SIXTEEN TERMINATION 16.01 This Agreement will terminate on January 1, 2020 in all respects, except that any Phase IV properties annexed subsequent to January 1, 2015, shall be entitled to the protection of the provisions of Sections Six and Seven for a period of five (5) years after the year of annexation. CITY OF STILLWATER By~ imble, ts Mayor ATTEST: 35667 .01F 05/23/96 TOWN OF STILLWATER ATTEST: Pat Bantli, Town Clerk -12- .. : · .. : . Hwy. #36 ~o bs Frank Roo s As3oci~tc s, Inc . 15050 23rd A .... e . ~. Ply •outh , ~~-55447 612/476-6010 fa~ 6 l2/47b -E S32 Engine ers Pla n ne rs Sur .,..eyors Orderly_ Annexation -Area EXHIBIT j A CITY & TOWNSHIP OF STILL WATE R ORDERLY ANNEX ATION AGREEMENT ~L_----------------------~---- Ju.r~ 10. 1996-I :3!PM-W .,rss FRANK ROSS------ McC c a bs Frank Roos A ~sociates, Ine. 15050 23rd A ~e -N. Plyaouth, MN . 55 447 bl2/4 76-6010 Engine er s Pll!nners EXHIBIT ~ B .... -~ ---- CITY &. TOW NSHIP OF STILUlRTER ORDERLY ANN EXATION ,..,,...n..-r ._.rl iT •. u11. !0.1996_ 1:31P1~f"""\fBS FRA~iK ROSS~------__ No. 616B_P. 4/6 __ ~·I._. • !,.-!.,, i'""'· PHASE II ;t·_/ ~cCc~bs Frenk Reo~ Assc~iatcs. Inc . 15050 23r d Ave. H. Ply •o uth, MN. 554G7 Engine er s c1?/d7C-~n1n Pl~~~~r~ :;;: .... z ; ,..,or CITY &. TOWNSHIP I I !~'\..' I OF STILLW ATER ORDERLY ANN EXATION ,..,, r c .... = = = ~ •.• -l ,, 80th Street I I 1:>X ~ ! ~~Combs Frank Roos A3sociates, Inc. 15 050 23rd AYe. H. P ly •o~th, MH. 554~7 6 12 1~76-5010 Fa x 612/4?6-8532 Engineers Planne rs Surve;r ors I ::oun: 2 HE'-~ c:C?-.; n..-. '! ~ ~;~ .... ':'-· ..... -, CITY &. TO WNSHIP OF STILL WRTER ORDERL Y ANN EXATION AGREEME NT D 5/6 :'11, -...... - ~WI I I I I 1 I l I L· DRAFT Exhibit "E" Country Village Architectural and Site Design Guidelines Goal: Create high-quality country village consisting of country store with fuel, country school (daycare) and other village scale professional services. The building shall have a related though not identical village residential character. Architectural Style: Gable roofs are preferred. Architectural detailing should be consistent with the style of the structure selected. Materials: Building Design: Canopies: Building Orientation: Building Setback: Parking or paved Streets or Driveways : Lo t Coverage : Brick, stone, painted or natural architectural cedar or red wood siding are to be used as exterior materials or high grade reduced maintenance materials that will achieve the same exterior appearance goals as natural materials may be used. The roofing shall be heavier weight asphalt shingles or cedar shingles or high-grade reduced maintenance materials· that will achieve the same exterior appearance goals as the natural materials may be used. No franchise or prototypical commercial building design shall be allowed. The village· area shall have a unique rural character related to its surroundings~ Pump area canopies shall be of a subdued design consistent with the building design and materials. Any under-canopied lighting shall be recessed and not show the light source from off the service area. The country village will be visually arid functionally connected to the immediate neighborhood, be accessible but not visually prominent from County Road 12 and 15 . 50' from County Road 12 or 15 20' from public right of way for County Road 12 o r 15 (if bermed and landscaped) 6 0 p e rc en t maximum buil ding and hard su rfa ce co ve rag e. EXH IBI T E -~ .. Building Height: 35' to gable peek Road and Parking Configuration: The preferred configuration !s one of curved and angled orientation Landscaping:-40 percent minimum of the land area shall be in permanent maintained landscaping, open spaces and natural wetlands. Screening: Signage: Utilities: Lighting : Areas around building shall be planted with hearty species of deciduous and coniferous stock and should assists in blocking sight lines of parking facilities and highlight attractive architectural features in a landscaped setting. Parking areas that can be viewed from adjacent roads or residential areas shall be screened with a combination of deciduous and coniferous planting and berming . Commercial signs are to be placed on linear walls, composed of the same materials and bearing a similar design theme to the building being identified. Interchangeable tenant identification will be provided but if internally lit must show lit letters only, not letter backgrounds. Preferred building identity signage is by cut out letters of durable materials, mounted on the above mentioned walls, lit with internal backfacing lighting or reflective lighting from ground, wall or tree mounted spots. Spot lights must not provide glare to adjacent roadways or perimeter residential uses. Identity monument type freestanding country village signs without tenant identification consistent with the village design and material may be allowed along County Road 12 and 15 and at the residential roadway entrance . All utilities will be underground and HVAC equipment will be screened from view. Roof mounted units will be screened via roof configuration, wall extensions either vertical or horizontal. All trash . areas shall be completely enclosed and screened from view by a structure of a design compatible in design to village building and perimeter landscape. Site lighting selected to minimize visibility and glare from residential areas. Overall site light levels will be achie ved by a blend of streets and parking lights not to exceed 20' in he ight. Walkw ay lighting, bu i lding lighting, si t e ameni ty, sign li ghti ng and vegetat i on lighting shall be reviewed to ma k e sure it is com patible with the residential quality of the nei ghborho od . Pedest;ian Access: The country village shall be linked to surrounding residential areas , the elementary school and trails along County Road 12 and 15 by sidewalks and pathways. ,, ·.· '. STILLWATER/STILLWATER TOWNSHIP JOINT TASK FORCE REC01.11v1ENDATION . REGARDING CO:tviPREHENSIVE PLAN It is the recommendation of the Ad Hoc Committee that the City and Township establish a joint planning committee that would at a minimum include two City Council members and two Town Board members for the purpose of addressing the specific concerns and remaining unresolved issues, and to co-ordinate the implementation of the updated City Comprehensive Plan as it relates to the URPT A Planning Area. f/~ CfZ'L-. ~~4 Rn~/~/;;_1/ !{ ~ l(u·r;tb- /J~~;h~ v EXHIBIT F cSt il l wa t e ~ --~---~-==== ~ 1H [ g ;q;H ~i.hCE Of MINilc ~fi 'A ) PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE: February 10, 2014 REGARDING: Downtown Parking District Update ..... -7.....---- PREPARED BY: Bill Turnblad, Community Development Director -~-i • Overview The Zoning Ordinance establishes the minimum number of parking spaces required for all land uses within the City. In general, every proposed use must provide the required spaces on the subject property. However, if the proposed use is located within the Downtown Parking District, its responsibility for providing parking can be satisfied either with on-site parking (if possible/ practical), or by requesting that the City allow it to use the public parking lot system to fulfil its obligation. The City has traditionally referred to this as a "variance" request. However, neither by State . definitions nor by the City's Zoning Ordinance is this a variance . It is simply a request for the City to allow an" alternative parking provision" to be applied. The Zoning Code specifies that these "alternative provisions" (City Code, Ch 31-510 (d)(1)) can be applied if the property is located within a parking district. The City has adopted only one parking district; that is the Downtown Parking District. If a downtown property is proposing a n:ew use that intensifies its parking need, and there is not sufficient space on-site to accommodate the increase, the owner can ask the City to apply the alternate parking provision. By policy instituted in 1999, the only condition attached to approval is that any deficit parking spaces be off-set by purchasing an equal number of monthly parking permits to park in the public lots. In essence, the purchased permits help defray the cost of maintaining the public parking district. Downtown Parking District Spaces There are 1,875 public parking spaces in the downtown parking district. 1,260 of these spaces are located within city parking lots, the rest are on-street spaces. Of the 1,260 parking lot spaces, during peak seasons when restaurants have the peak number of employees working, 129 monthly parking permits are valid to compensate for the on-site parking shortages discussed above . That is that is 10.2% of the total number of spaces in the public lots. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE: February 10, 2014 REGARDING: Plarming Commission Case Information PREPARED BY: Abbi Jo Wittman, City Pia~ At the Commission's last regularly scheduled meeting, Commissioner Hade inquired as to why certain items come before the Commission where others do not. Outlined in City Code Ch. 31- 204-5, the following table addresses which items come before the Commission and which do not. This table is used in conjunction with Ch. 31-315: Allowable Uses in the Residential District and Ch. 31-325: Allowable uses in Non-Residential Districts; both code sections have been attached for Commissioner review. There was a specific inquiry regarding Case No. 2012-34: A Special Use Permit for an event center located at 214 Main Street South. The applicant proposed a significant remodel of the s tructure for the development of a sec ond-story event center. Vi ewed similarly to a restaurant and commercial recreation us e, both uses were id entified as Special Uses il1 the Central Busil1ess District. Giv en the item was d et ermined to be a Special Use, this item came before the Planning Commission. The significant remodel triggered th e parkil1g recalculation. In regards to the other inquiry, th e n ew ch ee se shop loc a ted at 308 Chestnut Street, the business proposed is a retail business. As outlined in City Code Ch. 31-510-1 (b), the City do es not calculate parking requirements for business units until " ... the time any building or stmcture is constructed or erected or modified ... " During building pennit review, the Building Official determined the use consistent with previous uses of retail sales . As the proposed use was not an intensification of the previous uses on the parcel, City staff detennined no recalculation of parking was required for the proposed bu siness. ATTACHMENTS Ch. 31-315: Allowable Uses in the Residential District Ch. 31-325: Allowable uses in Non-Residential Districts February 10, 2014 CPC CPC Case Information Page 2 of 2 Sec . 31-3 15 .-Allowa ble u ses in residentia l districts. !ALLOWABLE ZONING DI STR ICT S USES iA -P LR CTR RA TR CC R RB CR ITH CTHR RCL RCM Single-family p p p p p p p p p CUP dwelling 1 !Two -family p p2 CUP dwelling 1 ~ttached single-SUP p family dwelling or townhouse 3 Townhouse, row p house, group house 1 Multifamily SUP dwelling4 and condominiums Accessory SUP p SUP dwelling (See Section 31 -501 Duplex SUP accessory unit (See Section 31-502 Roominghouses 1 CUP !Type I home p ~UP p p SUP p p p SUP ~ SUP occupation (See ~ection 31· 500 Type II home SUP SUP SUP SUP SUP SUP 10 SUP SUP SUP occupation (See Section 31-500 Type Ill home SUP SUP occupation (See Section 31· 500 Accessory A fA ~5 A ~6 fl\.7 fAB fA building and use Public schools p CUP Elementary SUP p CUP school Public and sup1o SUP9 ,1 0 private primary and secondary schools 9 Early childhood SUP education Parks, p p p p p p p p p playgrounds and other open space areas ·Pr ivate r-ec rea t i o n ifa cility !ch urch o r other lplace of worsh ip 1Ce meteries I 'Hos pital, nursing I Jho me or rest ho me Institutional building Bed & Breakfast Off street parking & loading A~ricultural uses P Agricultural p !produce sales Commercial p [gre enhouse Fish hatcheries p and aviaries Fishing lakes anc P loicnic groves 12 Forest and p wildlife reservations or similar facilities Fur farming p (raising fur bearing animals, excluding skunks and civet cats) Riding p academies or stables Essential p services Commercial uses not found objectionable by neighbors Retail business of a corner store nature Senior care living facility Armory Municipal fire station SUP 10 SUP 10 SUP 10 SUP 10 SUP 10 SU P10 SUP 10 p p p p p p SUP SUP 10 SUP 10 P = Permitted use SUP = Use permitted with a Special Use Permit CUP = Use permitted with a Conditional Use Permit p A A p CUP p CUP p11 SUP A A p p p p CUP CUP CUP A= Ac ces sory use Blank cell in ta ble means th at the us e is NOT a llo we d. Only one prin c ipal structure is a llowed on a parce l. Two-family dwelling allowed onl y o n corner lots . An attached single-family dwelling or townhou se is defined as : A single structure co nsisting of not le ss than 3 dwelling units located or c apable of being loc ated on a separate lot, and being separate d from the adjoining dwelling unit by a n approved wall extending from the foun dation through the roof and structurally independent of the adjoining unit. Dwelling units for three or more families on a single parcel. Accessory structures are limited to one detached garage or one accessory dwelling . Accessory dwelling is permitted only with a special use permit. Garage is limited to a total of three stalls and all detached accessory structures shall be regulated by the standards found in Section 31-501, Subd . 2 (performance standards for accessory dwelling units in CTR district). Accessory structures in the TR district are subject to the regulations found in Section 31-503, Subd. 1 Accessory structures in the RB district are subject to the regulations found in Section 31-503 , Subd. 2 Garage is limited to two stalls wide . Including accessory buildings and uses located upon property contiguous to that occupied by the main building. SUP may only be issued by city council. Must be located at least 900 feet from another bed & breakfast. No concession or retail sales are permitted . (Ord. No. 1003, § 2, 1-20-09; Ord. No . 1030, § 2, 5-17-11 ; Ord. No . 1055, § 2, 12-18-12) M unicode http ://library.munic ode.com/print.aspx?h=&cl ientiD =l3056&HTMRequest=http :i/library.m .. Sec. 31-325. Allowable uses in non-residential districts . !ALLOWABLE USES ZONING DISTRICTS CA CBD vc BP-C BP-0 BP-I CRD PA PWFD PR OS Retail General retail p SUP p SUP business uses or service; local ma r ket1 General retail p p p SUP business uses or service; local and regional market Specialty retail, p p incl. antique shops Department store p p p Drug store p Interior decorating P p sales; sale of floor covering, paint, !wallpaper, materials and objects of interior decorating Appliances and p p furniture , sale of Household goods , p p sale of (including china) Books, magazines , p newspapers , stationary; sale of Gifts , flowers , p photographic supplies; sale of !Tobacco products; p sale of Hardware , sale of p p 1 of9 2/5/201 4 8:33AM Munico de http:/ /library.municode .cornlprint.as p x ?h=&clientiD= 1305 6&HTMRequ est=http :1/li brar y. m ... Sporting goods; p sale of Music store p p Retail : Food Supermarket, p SUP p retail food Baked goods, p p manufacture I retai sale of ($. 5 persons emploved) Baked goods, SUP 2 p manufacture I retai sale of (> 5 .persons employedJ Eating establishment5 Restaurants 3 p SUP supzz p SUP Fast food outlet p Tea rooms, deli, SUP coffee shops, soda fountains, not including the sale of alcoholic beverages Outside eating SUP establishments Drive-in or drive-SUP SUP through: restaurant, eating places or any other use involving a drive-in or drive- through activity Services Barber or beauty p p p shops Shoe repair shop p Printing shop p Photo processing SUP Tailoring or p pressing Laundry; agencies, P p p self-service, full service , dry cleaning. 2 o f 9 2/5/201 4 8:33 AM Municode http :/ /library.municode. com/printasp x ?h=&clientiD= 13 0 5 6 &H TMKeq ue s t= http :/ /li brary.m ... Laundry employing SUP 4 > 5 persons Carpet, bag and SUP 4 rug cleaning Banks Banks and financia p institutions Offices Office; general, p p SUP p p p business or professional Offices; finance, p SUP p p p insurance, editorial or real estate services Offices; p p administrative Offices; business SUP offices that are accessory to permitted uses on the site Office building p Consultant services SUP such as advertising, engineering, architects and designers Radio or television P SUP stations Offices; medical p SUP p p p p and dental Office display or p sales soace5 Automotive Automotive sales, p service and storage, excluding gasoline filling stations. (See Section 31-515 for performance standards) 3 o£9 2/5/201 4 8:33AM M u nicode http :/ /library.municod e. com/p r int.asp x ?h =&cl ientiD= 13 0 56&HTMReq u e st= http :! /library.m ... Service stations or SUP SUP fuel sales (See Section 31-515 for performance standards) Gasoline filling SUP 2 station Auto repair and SUP p6 related services Entertainment Commercial SUP recreational uses Commercial SUP recreational entertainment Amusement and p SUP SUP 24 recreationa l establishments7 Outside SUP entertainment, commercial 8 Outdoors Outside sales or SUP SUP SUP special events8 Outside storage SUP 9 SUP 10 Commercial SUP SUP nurseries Exterior SUP phonographs , pag i ng systems , musical instruments, etc that may disturb the peace and !quiet of the public Parks p Trails p Park structures 11 p Playgrounds p Nature preserve p Athletic f i e l ds SU P with lights 12 4 of9 2/5/2014 8:33AM M uni co de http ://library.municode.com/print.as px?h=&clientiD=l 30 56 &HTMRequ est=http ://library.m ... Outside tennis SUP courts with lights 13 Outside basketball SUP courts with lights 13 Outside hockey SUP rinks with lights 13 Athletic fields p without lights 13 Outside tennis p courts without lights Outside basketball p courts without lights Outside hockey p rinks without lights Recreation SUP center14 Multiple purpose SUP !park building Golf course p Golf course club SUP house Dog park SUP Public boat launch SUP Other passive p recreational or natural open spaces Parking lot ACC Institutional Schools, business p p and technical Schools and studio' p p for arts and crafts, photography, music dance Educational SUP p institutions, schools 5 o£9 2/5/2 014 8:33 AM M unico d e http :/ /library.municode. com/print. aspx'?h=&clientiD= 13 0 5 6&HTMRequest= http: I /library.m ... Libraries, art SUP SUP SUP SUP galleries, theaters for the performing arts, and other such cultural facilities Libraries or post p office Churches, other p !places of worship Day care/nurseries SUP SUP 15 sup1s Group day care p Governmental SUP SUP facilities Fire station SUP Hospitals, SUP convalescent hospitals and nursing homes Hotel or motel p sup16 SUP Manufacturing Manufacturing, p limited 17 Manufacture of p baked goods Manufacturing, SUP processing, fabrication or assembling of limited commod itv 18 Retail sales of SUP products manufactured on the site19 Wholesale I storage Wholesale trade p SUP SUP Warehousing and SUP outside storage Warehousing and SUP inside storage Mini-storage SUP 6 of9 2/5/2014 8:33 ANl Municode http :/ /library.municode. com/print. aspx ?h=&clientiD= 13 0 56&HTMRequest=h ttp :1 /library.m ... Industrial Light industrial SUP that is clean and compatible with surrounding properties Limited bottling SUP 2 SUP works20 Printing 8: SUP SUP SUP publishing or lithographic shop Laboratories Laboratories SUP Chemical SUP laboratories Research SUP establishment of industrial, medical or scientific nature Research facilities p p or research laboratories Transportation I public Transportation p SUP works /etc. station or terminal Helioads SUP Public works PUD facility including office and meeting soace Essential services p p p p p p p p p Public utility SUP transmission lines and facilities Telephone p exchanQe ParkinQ facilities SUP Private parking SUP facilities > five cars Misc. Funeral home or p SUP SUP mortuary Club or lodge p 7 of9 2/5/2014 ~\:33 AM Municode 8 of9 http:/ /library.municode . com/print. aspx?h=&clientiD= 13 05 6&HTMRequest=http :/ /lib rar y.m ... Residences of all SUP 2 SUP supz1 classes Temporary SUP structures P = Permitted use SUP = Use permitted with a Special Use Permit CUP = Use permitted with a Conditional Use Permit PUD =Use permitted with a Planned Unit Development Permit A = Accessory use supz 3 ACC = Allowed as an accessory improvement to an allowed use located on or adjacent to the site Blank cell in table means that the use is NOT allowed. Such as grocery, fruit and vegetable store, bakery, general store, barber and beauty shop, clothes cleaning and laundry pickup statio n, business and professional office and the like , supplying commodities or performing services. SUP may only be issued by the city council. Including restaurants, lunchrooms, cafeterias, and other such eating places; and places for the sale and consumption of soft drinks, juices, ice cream and beverages of all kinds; BUT, excluding drive-in establishments. SUP may only be issued by the city council. For a wholesale, jobbing or distributing establishment in connection with which not more than 25 percent of the floor area of the buildin g or part thereof occupied by such establishment is used for making, assembling, remodeling, repair, altering, finishing or refinishing its products or merchandise, and provided that: 1. Any resulting cinders, dust, fumes, noise, odors, refuse matter, smoke, vapor or vibration is effectively confined to the premises; and 2. The ground floor premises facing upon and visible from a major street upon which the premises abut shall be used only for entrances, office or display. Automotive painting, upholstering, tire recapping and major repair, when conducted completely in an enclosed building. Such as armories, assembly halls, bowling alleys, dancehalls, pool and billiard parlors , skating rinks and other social , sport o r recreational centers operated as a business, provided the place or building in which it is operated is sufficiently sound insulated to effectivel y confine the noise to the premises . These uses may be approved directly by the city council if the event is a one time special event not occurring on a regular basi s. All outside storage shall be screened by a solid wall or fence and landscaping for public view. 2/5 /2014 8:33 Al\!1 Municode http:/ /library.municode.com/print.asp x?h=&clientiD= 13 056&HTMRequ est=http ://library. m ... Must be screened . Gazebo, picnic shelter, playground equipment, rest rooms , band shelter, and substantially similar park structures; but not incl udin g multiple purpose park buildings or recreation center buildings . Six-acre minimum site area. Three-acre minimum site area. Ten-acre minimum site area . Including pre-schools. Hotel or motel or other uses providing visitors with overnight accommodations. Limited manufacturing means conducting a process fabrication, storage or manufacturing of light materials , including electronic components and accessories. Except junk or storage. So long as no more than 20 percent of building floor area is for retail purposes . 2 0The bottling machinery is limited to manual/semi-automated bottling line without a conveyor system associated with the bottling line. 9 of9 Residences of second level only. Gross receipts must be at least 60% attributable to the sale of food . Live entertainment, which includes DJs, is perm itted only inside the building, and then only if it is not audible outside of the building. Outside music is strictly limited to unobtrusive arrangements of pre-recorded songs that may only be played as background music and then only without a DJ. Hours of operation are limited to 6:0 0 a.m. to 10:00 p .m. Sunday through Thursday and 6:00 a.m. to 10:30 p.m. Friday and Saturday. The closing time in the preceding sentence means when the last call for service must occur. Happy hour specials must cease at 6:00 p .m. Residences subject to RCM regulations . Provided the special use permit review criteria found in§ 31-207 and all of the performance standards found in§ 31-515.1 a re met. (Ord. No. 993, §§ 2, 3, 4-15-08; Ord. No. 997, § 2, 9-16-08; Ord. No . 1000, § 2, 10-21-08; Ord. No. 1019, § 2, 9-21-16; Ord. N o. 1032, § 3, 6-7-11 ; Ord. No. 1038, § 1, 7-25-11; Ord. No. 1060, § 1, 6-4-13) 2/5/2014 8:33AM PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE: February 10, 2014 REGARDING: Request for PD Pappy's parking calculation PREPARED BY: Abbi Jo Wittman, City Pia~ At the Commission's last regularly scheduled meeting, Commissioner Hade inquired of PD Pappy's parking requirement calculation. Staff researched the property and found that there has never been a threshold event triggering the need for a parking compensation calculation. Prior to 1999 parking calculations were routinely placed into planning reports that reviewed new and expanding business cases. But, in the downtown area, the assumption prior to 1999 was that public parking lots were provided for businesses that did not have on-site parking. So, the deficit in on-site parking was simply a notation, but no compensation was required. In 1999 the City created the Downtown Parking District. At that time all existing uses and structures then in effect were determined to be legally non-conforming with respect to the municipal Off-Street Parking and Loading requirements. That is, the parking situation for established businesses (whether they met the requirements or not) was 'grandfathered.' But, with the creation of the Downtown Parking District, the City began requiring businesses that intensified their parking need to compensate for that by supporting maintenance of the downtown parking lots. Practically speaking, this meant that for each NEW parking space needed, the business had to compensate by purchasing a monthly parking permit for the downtown parking lots. The following Planning Commission cases were found for PD Pappy's: • 603a (1986): Construction of 100'X200' storage shed with corresponding Conditional Use Permits for construction in the Flood Fringe, Shoreland and Buffland Districts. o Identified maximum occupancy of 90 patrons inside and 90 occupants on deck. • CPC SUP /V /1987-28 Modification to SUP to allow for use of gazebo and gave licens e for improvements on public lands o The packet additionally included information on 1987 parking plan "supply exceeded the demand in Area 6 [consisted primarily of Mulberry Point]' • The plan identified t950 S.F. of space for PD Pappy's which required 16 parking spaces • V /89-33: Awning for 1500 square foot patio. Since all of these cases occurred before 1999 , no parking compensation was ever required by the City.