Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2015-09-01 CC PacketREGULAR MEETING RECESSED MEETING 1NE OIRTNELACE OF MIMNESOTA AGENDA ll rater r No Change to Agenda L.= CITY COUNCIL MEETING Council Chambers, 216 Fourth Street North September 1, 2015 4:30 P.M. AGENDA I. CALL TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL III. OTHER BUSINESS 1. Budget Workshop (Continued from August 18, 2015 meeting) IV. STAFF REPORTS 2. Doug Brady 3. Police Chief 4. Fire Chief 5. City Clerk 6. Community Development Dir. 7. Public Works Dir. 8. Finance Director 9. City Attorney 10. City Administrator 7:00 P.M. AGENDA 4:30 P.M. 7:00 P.M. V. CALL TO ORDER VI. ROLL CALL VII. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE VIII. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 11. Possible approval of August 18, 2015 special and regular meeting minutes IX. PETITIONS, INDIVIDUALS, DELEGATIONS & COMMENDATIONS X. OPEN FORUM The Open Forum is a portion of the Council meeting to address Council on subjects which are not a part of the meeting agenda. The Council may take action or reply at the time of the statement or may give direction to staff regarding investigation of the concerns expressed. Out of respect for others in attendance, please limit your comments to 5 minutes or less. XI. CONSENT AGENDA (ROLL CALL) all items listed under the consent agenda are considered to be routine by the city council and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion on these items unless a council member or citizen so requests, in which event, the items will be removed from the consent agenda and considered separately. 12. Resolution 2015-148, directing payment of bills 13. Resolution 2015-149, approving the Certified Local Government Grant Acceptance Form from the Minnesota Historical Society 14. Resolution 2015-150, approving SEH to perform bridge inspection on box culvert at Neal Avenue and Browns Creek 15. Resolution 2015-151, approving Northstar Mudjacking & More to perform sidewalk repair work on Fourth Street XII. PUBLIC HEARINGS - OUT OF RESPECT FOR OTHERS IN ATTENDANCE, PLEASE LIMIT YOUR COMMENTS TO 10 MINUTES OR LESS. 16. Case No. 2015-22. This is the date and time for a public hearing to consider a request by Sterling Black of Fairway Development LLC. to approve a 20 lot residential preliminary plat and associated variances, Zoned RB: Two Family Residential, all for property located at 1902 Williams St N. Notices were mailed to affected property owners and published in the Stillwater Gazette on June 26, 2015. (Tabled from August 18, 2015 meeting) (Approval — Resolution (Roll Call); Denial — Straw Vote (Roll Call) - Findings of Fact back to Council on 9/15/2015 meeting) XIII. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 17. Continued consideration of the Minnesota Shooting Academy request for a Special Use Permit to operate an indoor gun range at 2159 Curve Crest Boulevard - Case No. 2015-15 (Tabled from August 18, 2015 meeting). (Approval — Resolution (Roll Call); Denial — Straw Vote (Roll Call) - Findings of Fact back to Council at 9/15/2015 meeting) 18. Possible approval of second reading of Ordinance 1082, an Ordinance Amending the Stillwater City Code, Chapter 29, Sewers, Sec. 29-3 (2nd reading — Roll Ca11) and approval of agreement with Washington County for septic system permitting and inspection services (Resolution — Roll Call) XIV. NEW BUSINESS Moved to a future meeting XV. PETITIONS, INDIVIDUALS, DELEGATIONS & COMMENDATIONS (CONTINUED) XVI. COMMUNICATIONS/REQUESTS XVII. COUNCIL REQUEST ITEMS XVIII. STAFF REPORTS (CONTINUED) XIX. ADJOURNMENT RESOLUTION 2015-148 DIRECTING THE PAYMENT OF BILLS BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Stillwater, Minnesota, that the bills set forth and itemized on Exhibit "A" totaling $385,024.56 are hereby approved for payment, and that checks be issued for the payment thereof. The complete list of bills (Exhibit "A") is on file in the office of the City Clerk and may be inspected upon request. Adopted by the Council this 1st day of September, 2015. Ted Kozlowski, Mayor ATTEST: Diane F. Ward, City Clerk EXHIBIT "A" TO RESOLUTION #2015-148 Page 1 LIST OF BILLS 1ST Line/Leewes Ventures LLC 4Front LLC Abbott Paint Accela Inc Action Rental Inc. Al's Coffee Company Animal Humane Society APMP Aspen Mills Becker Arena Products Board of Water Commissioner Bolton and Menk Inc. Boyer Trucks Brady Doug Brimeyer Fursman LLC Burks Tree and Landscape Care Carquest Auto Parts CDW Government Inc. Cedar Ridge Landscaping Century Link Century Power Equipment Chappell Central Inc City of St. Paul Coca-Cola Refreshments Cole Papers Comcast Cope Plastics Inc. Crosstown Masonry Inc Cub Foods Daka Corporation Delta Dental Plan of Minnesota Diamond Vogel Paints ECM Publishers Emergency Automotive Tech. Fastenal Company Felsch Chris Fire Safety U.S.A. FleetPride Foremost Promotions Frontier Ag & Turf G & K Services Goodyear Commercial Tire H&L Mesabi Iceman Industries Inc. iSpace Furniture Food for concession Rapid remover Paint Community Development App Lev 1 Maint Equipment reantal - stump grinder Coffee for concession Animal impound charges Stillwater bridge tour Uniforms, supplies & badges Equipment repair supplies Neptune meter Myrtle lift station Equipment repair supplies Reimburse for mileage Strategic planning retreat Tree and landscape care Auto parts & supplies Supplies Fire Hall Telephone Equipment repair supplies Fire Hall Asphalt Beverages for concession Janitorial supplies TV Internet & Voice Polycarbonate Fire Hall Food & supplies for picnic Fire Hall AP COBRA Traffic & field paint Publications Dodge Ram 2500 Outfitting Supplies Reimburse for FLIR Hose Hubcap Nite to unite fire education materials Equipment parts and supplies Uniform shirts Tires Equipment repair supplies Ice melt Flip n go Table tops 193.55 25.00 18.69 902.00 97.00 234.95 165.00 15.00 972.89 205.00 562.94 3,270.00 214.69 48.31 3,500.00 1,781.00 110.91 1,554.94 19,230.38 98.86 274.02 28,112.02 2,080.38 450.32 1,479.58 649.46 47.75 3,577.70 417.30 90,205.98 210.50 675.70 54.60 7,181.18 7.45 3,160.19 405.00 12.64 1,206.55 823.22 269.63 2,282.92 599.00 2,000.00 2,200.00 EXHIBIT "A" TO RESOLUTION #2015-148 Jahnke Brian Jefferson Fire and Safety Inc. Jordan Joel Lakeview Hospital Loffler Companies M.J. Raleigh Truck Co. Mansfield Oil Company Marshall Electric Company Menards Metropolitan Mechanical Contractors Middle St Croix Watershed WMO Mi-Tech MN Dept of Labor and Industry MN Pollution Controll Agency MN State Fire Chiefs Assn Modern Heating Mulcahy Nickolaus Multiple Concepts Interiors Municode My Alarm Center NAC Mechanical and Electrical Services NAPA Auto Parts Needels Supply Inc. NEOPOST USA Inc. Office Depot O'Reilly Auto Parts Otis Elevator Company Overhead Door Company Papco Inc. RDO EQUIPMENT CO. Regency Office Products LLC Riedell Shoes Inc. Safe Fast Inc Schwaab Inc. Sentry Systems Inc. Sonus Interiors Inc Standard Spring Parts Stillwater Farm Store Stillwater Medical Group Stillwater Motor Company Stillwater Turf & Power LLC T.A. Schifsky and Sons Tekton Construction Company The Locals Toll Gas and Welding Supply Tri-State Bobcat Tri-State Pump and Controls Inc. Reimburse for work boots Supplies Reimburse for work boots Certification and materials Copier Lease Sand gravel & dirt Fuel Electrical services Supplies Building repairs 2nd half 2015 Sink hole Boiler pressure vessel Collection Systems Basic Seminar Conference Public owrks AC unit repair Fire Hall Fire Hall Pages of code of ordinances Alarm Monitoring Services Fire Hall Auto parts & supplies Cleaning supplies Postage machine maint agreemen Printer ink Auto parts & supplies Elevator contract Fire Hall Mid grit brushes Equipment repair Supplies Skates Gas alert gas detector Red stamp Alarm monitoring Fire Hall Rear shackle kit Cornerstone plus herbicide Drug screen Vehicle service Speed feed trimmer head Asphalt Fire Hall Return of Unspent Deposit Cylinders Bobcat skid -steer loader Lift station repairs Page 2 160.00 297.06 89.99 300.00 -4,931.05 253.54 6,819.86 3,997.35 3,087.85 758.30 16,822.57 820.00 10.00 710.00 275.00 345.00 1,029.80 1,282.50 1,190.00 88.62 3,140.70 331.53 196.30 1,387.19 315.75 197.15 1,532.68 12,062.15 447.44 495.38 19.64 340.58 780.00 39.75 140.85 1,653.00 229.00 99.88 68.00 56.36 58.07 11,584.53 294.50 6,892.00 42.04 6,000.00 9,511.26 EXHIBIT "A" TO RESOLUTION #2015-148 USAble Life Valley Trophy Inc. Verizon Wireless WalMart Community Wholesale Fitness Winnick Supply LIBRARY 16 Wins Advantage Companies Baker and Taylor Bertalmio Lynne Blackstone Audio Brodart Co Card Source Demco Inc. Infogroup MarKir/Clean Midwest Menards Midwest Tape MN State Horticultural Society Office of MN IT Services Papco Inc. Stripe A Lot Doug McLean dba Toshiba Business Solutions Washington County Library CREDIT CARDS Amazon.com AMEM Amsterdam Print BonTon Cub Foods Dream Host Ebay Festival Foods Government Finance Officers Asso Herbergers ICMA Membership Renewals Kowalski's Market Minnesota's Bookstore Rose Floral St. Croix River Assn Starbucks Target Term Life Insurance Name plates Wireless Services Nite to Unite Equipment for fitness room Equipment repair supplies Website Support Microfilming (SPLF) Materials Materials Materials Materials Borrowers Cards Processing Supplies Materials - Reference Parking Garage Washing Janitorial Supplies Materials Materials - Periodicals Telephone Janitorial Supplies Striping Maintenance Contract Ref. Database (ST Library Share) Materials & supplies Membership Supplies for Fire Education Supplies Bakery for Retirement Tech support Monitor mount Log Jam Publications for Exam Cookware & Housewares - Fire Hall Conference Reg Refreshments for Gallery Reference materials Outdoor plants St. Croix workshop for local leaders Staff recognition Nightstands - Fire Hall Page 3 427.20 199.20 1,486.87 576.44 6,743.00 713.68 520.00 1,125.00 1,040.85 65.97 145.98 586.87 695.00 83.65 620.00 1,699.00 70.71 63.13 34.00 341.75 244.26 500.00 37.18 473.10 626.64 150.00 574.63 310.66 24.49 19.95 22.03 40.43 39.90 580.49 705.00 116.61 598.00 44.74 120.00 10.00 314.88 EXHIBIT "A" TO RESOLUTION #2015-148 VistaPrint.com AUGUST MANUALS Fun Jumps Rainbow Corral Critters Xcel Energy ADDENDUM Avenet Web Solutions Bernicks Clark Dan Lakeview Hospital Magnuson Law Firm St. Croix Boat & Packet Wholesale Fitness Inc Xcel Energy Adopted by the City Council this 1st Day of Sept, 2015 Printing Obstacle course Nite to Unite 2nd half Petting zoo Nite to Unite Energy Graphic web design package Aspire Custodial service Legal blood draws Professional Service Arena billing Fitness room equipment Energy Page 4 41.92 240.00 525.00 15,149.41 8,945.00 85.80 1,265.00 50.00 5,620.83 34,936.66 1,537.00 11,068.23 TOTAL 385,024.56 Bill Turnblad From: Michael <m.sobieski@comcast.net> Sent: Monday, August 31, 2015 4:21 PM To: Ted Kozlowski; Bill Turnblad Cc: Doug Menikheim; Bill Turnblad; David Junker; Tom Weidner; Mike Polehna Subject: Comments for the Public Hearing on Hazel Street Vilas development proposal Mayor of Stillwater & Council Members, We are writing this to express our views on the proposed development - Hazel Street Vilas. As long time North hill residents we have seen the changes to the North hill. Especially the traffic on 2nd and Wilkins Streets. Since the original development(s) around the Stillwater Country Club area on the north hill started we have seen the traffic and road noise greatly increase. It started out with many large trucks going by to fill in lots, empty lots, and provide construction materials. Once that construction was completed the number of cars, trucks, and SUVs has stayed at that increased level. In the past few years we were required to pay to redo Wilkins Street (and I know 2nd Street was also done). None of us can say that the increased traffic from the developments around the Stillwater Country Club caused the decline of the streets, but with all of that construction and increased traffic it certainly did not extend the life of these streets. Wilkins Street did not last as long as it was designed to and had to be rebuild. 2nd and Wilkins Streets provide the main route out of the North hill for residents heading towards the cities as well as Cub, Target, etc on the hi -way 36 strip. Adding the proposed new houses to the North hill will add to that noise, the traffic, and add additional wear and tear to these streets as they bring in the heavy construction equipment for this proposed development. As you are aware the proposed development is at the end of a cul-de-sac and would be yet another dead end. Today with the existing homes there are very few ways out of that area and most rely on a single road for access. This development would only add to the number of homes back off of multiple dead ends. Continuing to add to the dead end roads in this area will continue to cause issues with snow removal and increase the time it takes for fire and emergency vehicles to reach these homes. If for any reason one of these roads was blocked (snow, stalled car, tree down) emergency vehicles could not reach these homes or people in need. We do not believe that the City of Stillwater needs this type of development in the North hill area, especially off of an existing dead end. It is our understanding that the Planning Comission did not approve this development due to existing Stillwater city policies/code. We believe that the Mayor of Stillwater and the Stillwater City Council should uphold the finding of the Planning Commission and deny this development. Michael and Pat Sobieski 1022 3rd St N (on Wilkins) Stillwater, MN 651-430-2694 1 ENGINEERING Ted Kozlowski Mayor, City of Stillwater 1207 3rd Street N Stillwater, MN 55082 David Junker Council Member Ward 2 640Main Street N #27 Stillwater, MN 55082 Michael Polehna Council Member Ward 4 1100 Northland Ave. Stillwater, MN 55082 Dear Mayor and Members of the City Council, Engineers ■ Land Surveyors ■ Planners PO 50x 948 ■ Hudson, WI 5401 6 Doug Menikheim Council Member Ward 1 527 Broadway Ave S. Stillwater, MN 55082 Tom Weidner Council Member Ward 3 1725 Johnson Drive Stillwater, MN 55082 Humphrey Engineering is the engineer working on the design of Hazel Place Villas in the City of Stillwater. Attached please find a brief response to the concerns of those stated in the August 12th Planning Commission minutes. I would like to first apologize for having to delivery this to your door steps. We had to work all through the weekend to review relevant documents and obtain the input from others so I could fully and accurately responded to the above comments. Humphrey Engineering prides itself in providing the highest level of professional engineering, planning and surveying services to our clients and community. We have been involved with this project since 2007. We have worked hard and stand committed to meet the concerns of the community, watershed district and City staff Again, we appreciate the opportunity to submit these responses for your consideration. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact me direct at 715 781 5162. We look forward to working with you on this project. Sincerely Roger L. Humphrey P.E. RLS President, Humphrey Engineering Inc. Encl. CC: David Magnuson, City Attorney Bill Turnblad, Community Development Director Sterling Black Len Pratt Bruce Malkerson ■ www.humphreyengineering.com■ AldRU E N G I N E E R I N G Summary Response to: Neighborhood Concerns as Stated in the August 12th Planning Commission Minutes Ken Harycki - Concern about Narrow Street - Response: Hazel Street was reconstructed in 2004. It is 30.8 ft. wide, back to back of curb, between 5th street and this project. The city allows for an alternative design standard. This standard allows for 28 feet of width between the face of curb. Hazel Street is not a substandard roadway. James Purcell - Concern about Defoliation - Response: The newest plan moves the grading limits south about 20ft from the previous single family plan. This saves about 15 significant trees. We are just over 50 feet from the north property line with our new grading limits. The 20 lot twin home development as approved is an average of 10 feet from the property line. We have worked closely with the watershed district to ensure the BCWD's policy objectives with respect to the Development site are met. Brian Boucher/Brian Larson - Concern about Density - Response: The desire by some to see lesser density in the development is not relevant at this time (if any). These densities are set by the City Zoning Code which is required by Law, and is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan. This development meets all of these standards. The attached "Stillwater North -side Summary, Illustrations of development patterns, Stillwater, MN" shows numerous areas on the north side of Stillwater where existing rural neighborhoods having lower densities are near and/or adjacent to higher density neighborhoods. This development is no different. Numerous cul-de- sac's are also shown that are in excess of 600 feet. Debbie Sinclair - Concern about Light Pollution. Response: The project will meet the minimum standards for street lighting and all lights provided by this subdivision shall be arranged so as to reflect the light down and away from any adjacent properties or streets. Tim Sinclair - Concern about Retaining Wall size. Response: As previously stated the newest design has only 6 foot walls instead of the 12-15 feet in the plan that was previously approved. All walls were designed by a third party Structural Engineer. hA7 F L PLACLV1LLA5 5TILLWATER NORTH SIDE 50MMARY ILLUSTRATIONS or DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS STILLWATER, MN CITY or 5TILLWATL K, MlNNL 5OTA August 5 I , 201 5 Prepared 15y: PO box 948 Hudson, WI 5+o i 6 gAt 2 0 12064 111111.1111r... MS4=4.4,4144 41.104.4.44•440.* m~/410,!•04.04.."." 12120 / 5466 8401 8355 12210 azu 1315 .11 0033 t zoo r South Twin Lake c, ') tit III %LOOK 2 • • 0.' 1 -0,.. 1.• r. ,.. -3- -- ,-4 -- — — - •p.., 3: 72 IN! illimia tilimawal • , . ''' , k' •-• -:;, ... .. m g c3 0 o ' , • x ; r '.' 2 -. -- - ' ,, a' • '4" 4, ,..„ ,,, 7, 7., ----- 7 ,-----,,f .., -- - x...., - ,-- 1 -,Fe- , lanmit MI•=110 .1'717_ ____ J dliiiMI Ail 1 3 - -- 8 mo. 40, CC, 67i 12 725 Ex tsrik4 oar•ookwos. MCKUSICK_ _ ftCPAD NORTH "IMMO 11EMP amp tamomp 12123 8393 _ 145.5 165, 100 144 144/ .14° 1435 1444 1-;., • 14 14 2 1426 M1 :3 Z 8313 I 31K •‘: %ff*., 4 0." "Li Frt ' C r -e '40 Z, MCKUSICK ROAD NORTH a5za 0502 I IMTJ -------- 1520 Ilsoo 1755 174t GoN143-z —to 44c Aw'x IV 04 di 14 • I ssAlkols �' 3277�J scatua r—RORO__tf[OR.Pi couwTr ROAD rs fir, 12123 19 e :1a 5a 5453 8401 8393 8355 8313 8335 i" al Lit +015.7.50:405b7 + • •!i!i!�+!taw OP AOTM._ -. _.,*_ i 6a 1455 "3271 320 12055 12121 3231 1755 14 1148 12211 14 5 F 1400 v7G'., 144i 14S? 1y.51+ - 1435 1425 ky .,1t1 110A 91 -411/EmiliRPVI .44; t. 12125 2:74'F' L., %re %1^.KU$ICK ROAR ^:Cfr“ IIMIL,8060 f,r IT.4-127 8077 c 055 8 45 79606`fr. AA, 12840 PeA4•!so 7880 8300 8210 14• a Pit° 11228 B220 241: rmt 17C0 1205 2401 1.701 BIB0 am. ifilp 1140 '; A120 9080 5045 7600 S Ll 7940 4 0 B321 B313 2304 2361 , 2343 2337 04 1z a VJ EAGLE-RIDGE.TR - -....F 2350 h 11, Po IN 8075 8031 79 '11 f Ex I sn orrytt tryl• 210 ! ;#. NA 014 So& _ I goo 231 e 1139 ;V: r _ Ike _ 23" ` zt 2 Vp I ntlo i 7111 .11''' 2;4 ' . *- 5 ; ..!. * ; 22.7.47.1111:: ii. 431 i 1 Or -::.,..I,: '''' •:,2'7 JP i :1'0 -t.- ,,s, • 47.44) 3P ! : t 1 1 'J 4 4 i 4 Fri, i \ i1C41 i; I., 210T . I P . iiiimob it (or offs v kr i. I .I :ON 7011 NI* /IA '-. DAM • 21:r',3 17 i .7ti f i f:4 i XA . .„,,. ----- nia 4WD MO S a. ''t I 1 • _ , ; • r f ..A I. t $4 4 :4 AO t maw %Fr ; teas `vm =••20 t ofic imEn. 2.144 rbMi on•st 40mvs.e. 4114. IMO 111.1M. OMB ammo 144 10.4144. Rs • Z.° int t r T o 4 ' - - -----_, /INV taMMOlialtiba r • • :01 &WI 2544, 4 re is, — !GlfwAr 3 00 140 5771 82;0 5262 1230 5200 7 8226 ,17 2351 'CK 2309 34 If, 2 :La 123,5 1235 2127 1228 c'f, 122: 2400 8220 , 4, 1714 11'15 EAGLE RIDGE 1R - E84714E -ROG& - TRA14.- - - . 1202 1205 2401 2359 r.; 1223 4 - 1111 1201 8100 9120 Aoe 6040 7990 0 C71. 110t 1105 116 ▪ IFfao 1 .„,... 1131 1107 - -WAO NUT CHEEK -DRIVE I .8, --' 11 70 44;51',1":-':'' 15..• ,.., 1121 .3$11 1102 ...,,., P; ,•') CA ▪ MA) .. 1024 004' 1103 -, '...- .43.' CY 44) I 8031 8075 1150 1120 1°15 1903 eas 1 - 1 NI 100 I'C' 1027 1028 .' 104 ...... •,. 0.?....".„.,.411') I./........›:.111c4:11,2r ▪ C 441%._ I;? 1170 9 039 " , 142f, 1015 1413 0)111o131 c}..11fr.4 1 T241 1240 ,T 1203 1240 CE th 12920 8C0f, :it° 7959 &lir:4904 1 5 in fg7 7 1 c3 cc • 0 3 12993 -8. 4,4 ram .57 13055 13129 Milemb 11 in cin6 5 ry....t a 935 520 000 1310 0,907 020 E '' , 915 n rc 4110 L., 901 911 7960 930 1-1-1 92.7 840 , F.AGcE.Roc.,.. , Ei -e n ./ 84 5 0 4:0 e,, 85 595 / o at') 875 881 871 , 807 8 i 821 • 775 802 - n i : 855 ft/ft ' 757 e 25 ' IV. 1 ?Z 't ,.. ao 1 in 7;1 K;1 r" 841 /4 . 4 II:5-7ITRA71: 1- 70 1 E - iu 771 ICk,c 7 :tt 11 1 1 13310 1 , 087 , 540 560 `1;e,,,, ,.,s7 t I., 041 ono Do 521 64C1 501 em gn 620 ""r 620 900 580 6-45 2211 701 d 1171 K1.11;1c.1", 1599 Outiel G 7. • 1340 1350 1330 AVI •",13 1300 1310 11 1240 1250 1230 CO LAW: 44, - l'OSANF (1 (930 0) 'co R05 io" 835 0,40 ' 825 .‘P 815 4, OLITLOT o5 A Ian° 1210 1140 451 750 770 1120 1 4 64- 755 Lake McKus 14163 14411 ^+r -.�•r•y Il••slYe mnYY mee•ilYlllll e•fMlP 1 PO 9 703 2� t' 2012 7012 A ten WA ze 0 7613 r 70L9 I dam, 5 _ :, ,22 litigiriiidie. tt Z.O. g 1913 321 315 312 1912 ' 1- 1902 600 i FR11` . (, r-rillk--- 9 5-° -- AYp.T Arr. 311 404 4312 31 s /�fioetr�wc t 4rY■•r, s,45,1••••1e4 r'..4•1••••••4ea••••44A1 2001 1422 1411 141t 1015 S�.�iiy 9150 ••4V 7* WF6T F c rtRF i1151 W '1't7k1. 37RCit - 13i5 5324 1220 d 12,5 1122 W. 41 1313 1314 Q' 1311 261 612 1i50 1245 99i 1310 N x p a n y 3G9 c 050 500 t300 I . M 1241 1007 V' K _ �... �. r• WES1••-91-- 04,1i-5 ..9119TC,r6Dir - ak• 11% I x WEST $$. CRC 1-1Y g 110.1E i ,'--1716 1 cg 1721 o ry ` 11T135 6'19 1212 01 - - B -. 1216 Ir.."; 2 2 1115 g it G, 1050 11341 A, 110-5 90, 920 604 1212 ' r ® A 005 SSTI TttWATER".',AVENUE2r; -t� 1 ounoT 6OUTioT 11:0 r' 1065 A s , •4E14?` ` -NA-d•T _. ..... .... m 1.11..41 .... 1119 1315 1404 STREET 1322 131E 1314 411 flnt]3!C r!1 '� � YI � '• � Y 5 0 •a c1 c r Iv 1'CA!6S: n n , 1122 'f• Y • 1316 8 g Y 7, 1210 507 421 V y 411 403 416 214 1764 1901 1902 07 1619 104 125 41.11111 'wE51 - POPLAR-$1RE:61 - 19 MEM. I r7 5 VEi, Hp1C,t11S- 'ORIVE - 9TRQ£T 321g 303 71: 1413 14F37 377 r.F. 1410 1407 - _.-911i'r9! 1312 3131313 1307 304 1305 3118 303 706 710 315 106207 12Lq n n 714.1. Al .1--r nn '1 t 14 41 1221 1215 110 1224 1216 1212 1200166 WEST-5T1 1174 1120 1117 106 1119 112.1 .- 1116 1112 W I 1074 i 1915 1905 166P ` 9G 1 224 .3 _AST•-W1L5OW u 181E 1624 = 1616 1613 1616 1801 1723 172 1400 EA91 9004)4ORE- R.T ▪ 1315 Iy 1374 t 1315 207 1320 1311 t310 1310 2 0 E 1- 1724 1212 5 1201 1203 1202 '45 29722616 JDO7016 0 374HAZEL-STHE1:T -x 1611 1921 2103 s t$7ALi]F[-S1 7071 2013 2021 2017410 429 �1,2921 2619 2011 7069 120 }00 x 116 1616talz18041p110 3061a02=6 -POPLAR-STREE 1'. 305 17 7 1615 0 1971 k 2. 07 w 1611 W t611et a•. t605 1609 s. 166 ? ., da - R,GGE-LAt4E 019/5 1710 ✓ 1275 1524 6 202 '511 1512 1511 ;. +594 •a tSOJ 1505 i1 1606 T ri" 1421 1422 2 ld sp 1421 +475 1415 1414 t417 1419 1475 r. 1415 ' 1401 1413 9, oYGAL,1 1127 1333 13•70 131: 13u t312 1313 317 130; P 1304 1305 324 B 1:lOt 7 107 -ST ROIO •AVEH11F--, 12Q5 r n 1713 1105 1226 1214 704 214 IX 1203 1/21- :212 1220 1217 1206 1204 AVE- -.EAST -STkLWAT€R---AVF.WE-• 1121 711 0 € 1117 1118 1111 1112 1123 1115 1107 1122 1116 1110 721 1117 114 107 11813 514 MORRISON SUND PLLC SUITE 200 5125 COUNTY ROAD 101 MINNETONKA, MINNESOTA 55345 TEL: (952) 975-0050 FAX: (952) 975-0058 www.morrisonsund.com Writers' Direct Dial: 952.277.0129; 952.252.2262 rivilliams@morrisonsund.com japplebaum@morrisonsund.com Hon. Ted Kozlowski Mayor City of Stillwater 216 North Fourth Street Stillwater, Minnesota 55082 Doug Menikheim Councilmember City of Stillwater 216 North Fourth Street Stillwater, Minnesota 55082 David Junker Councilmember City of Stillwater 216 North Fourth Street Stillwater, Minnesota 55082 August 31, 2015 Tom Weidner Councilmember City of Stillwater 216 North Fourth Street Stillwater, Minnesota 55082 Mike Polehna Councilmember City of Stillwater 216 North Fourth Street Stillwater, Minnesota 55082 RE: Hazel Place Villas Development Preliminary Plat Application of Fairway Development, LLC. Dear Mayor Kozlowski and Councilmembers: Our firm represents a group of concerned North Hill homeowners (collectively, the "Concerned Neighbors") in connection with the Hazel Place Villas development proposed by Fairway Development, LLC ("Fairway Development"). As you are aware, on August 12, 2015, the City Planning Commission recommended the City Council deny Fairway Development's preliminary plat application on the grounds that Fairway Development failed to obtain a variance to allow the cul-de-sac to exceed by over 800 feet the 600-foot maximum length set forth in City Subdivision Ordinance § 32-1, subd, 6(3)(1). This letter supplements the testimony and responsive materials we expect the Concerned Neighbors and others will provide in opposition to the current iteration of Hazel Creek Villas at the Letter to Stillwater Mayor and Council Re: Hazel Place Villas September 1, 2015 Page 2 September 1st City Council meeting, and directly addresses the positions and arguments set forth by Fairway Development's learned counsel from Malkerson Gunn Martin LLP in the letter dated August 26, 2015. In the interest of brevity, this letter will not restate the background facts or procedural posture provided by Mr. Malkerson, however nor will it presume their accuracy. For the reasons set forth below, the Planning Commission' s recommended denial is the correct disposition of Fairway Development's application, and the City Council is urged to reach a similar conclusion and deny the preliminary plat application for Hazel Place Villas. 1. The Application does not comply with the intentions or spirit of the City's Subdivision Ordinance regarding cul-de-sac streets: Denial is warranted and defensible. Stillwater Subdivision Ordinance imposes a maximum length limit on permanent cul-de-sac streets, so they "may not exceed 600 feet in length." City Subdivision Ordinance §32-1, subd. 6(3)(1). The Subdivision Ordinance does not, however, answer the question "six hundred feet from where?" We understand City staff have historically measured proposed cul-de-sacs from the center of the turnaround to the curb line of the existing street being joined. That same approach was applied here, and the proposed plat for Hazel Place Villas appears to provide a cul-de-sac measuring roughly 590' from its center turnaround to the existing Hazel Street, based on beginning and end points provided to Fairway Development by City staff. But what if staffs approach is inconsistent with the meaning and intention of the Ordinance? This question matters, because the existing Hazel Street is itself a dead-end, terminating almost immediately to the northwest of Hazel Place Villas in an existing cul-de-sac at Hazel Place, then running more than 850 feet east until it intersects with 5th Street North. In essence, the existing Hazel Street plus the proposed cul-de-sac street in Hazel Place Villas join to create a dead-end street measuring more than a quarter mile. This distance is of no concern to Fairway Development, who suggests the City's policymakers end their inquiry there, construe the "six hundred feet from where?" ambiguity in favor of the applicant under Frank's Nursery Sales, Inc. v. City of Roseville, 295 N.W.2d 604, 608-09 (Minn.1980), and approve the preliminary plat for Hazel Place Villas for fully complying with the Subdivision Ordinance. In truth, however, the analysis is not that simple and the City Council is not so bound by staffs interpretation of ambiguous provisions in the Code. True, municipal ordinances should be strictly construed against the city and in favor of the applicant, however that is only one factor in the three-part balancing test articulated by the Minnesota Supreme Court in the Frank's Nursery case. Also guiding a reviewing court's (and policymaker's) decision are the principles that (1) the language at issue should be construed according to its plain and ordinary meaning; and (2) an ordinance must always be considered in light of its underlying policy. Frank's Nursery Sales, Inc., 295 N.W.2d at 609. 1‘4A Letter to Stillwater Mayor and Council Re: Hazel Place Villas September 1, 2015 Page 3 Under Frank's Nursery principle (1), when the plain language of a provision is ambiguous, as here, contextual study and extrinsic sources may be relied upon to discern meaning. Id.; Occhino v. Grover, 640 N.W.2d 357, 359-60 (Minn.App.2002). Examining contextual and extrinsic sources for an answer to the "six hundred feet from where" question brings us to a great many instances in the record pertaining to this preliminary plat application, both in its 2007 iteration and today, where staff, Commissioners, and Councilmembers alike have repeated the maxim that the longer a dead end, cul-de-sac street is, the greater the chance that, for instance, a tree or power line falling onto the lone right-of-way could cut off first responders' access to an entire portion of the neighborhood. Under Frank's Nursery principle (2), an ordinance must always be considered in light of its underlying policy. Frank's Nursery Sales, Inc., 295 N.W.2d at 609. The policy underlying the 600- foot limit on permanent cul-de-sacs is widely understood, as indicated above and throughout the record and minutes, to be a public safety measure instituted to prevent those above -mentioned catastrophes from occurring, or at least from having as devastating an effect. Although ambiguities are to be construed in favor of the applicant, the balance of the Frank's Nursery factors weigh in favor of the Planning Commission's interpretation of City Subdivision Ordinance §32-1, subd. 6(3)(1), and a lawful basis exists for denial of Fairway Development's preliminary plat application based on Fairway Development's (inadvertently) inaccurate measurement of the proposed cul-de-sac and failure to obtain a variance for such non- complying condition. Where a preliminary plat application does not meet the applicable standards and criteria contained in municipal zoning and subdivision codes, the City is under no statutory nor common law obligation to approve that application and possesses a rational basis for denial. See Minn. Stat. § 462.358, Subd. 3b; Stotts v. Wright County, 478 N.W.2d 802, 806 (Minn. App. 1991) (supporting denial of land use application when supported by legally sufficient reasons reflected in written findings based on the record). 2. The City Council cannot be estopped from denying the Application, even when denial is inconsistent with prior interpretation of the City's Subdivision Ordinance. The law in Minnesota is clear that administration of zoning ordinances is a governmental and not a proprietary function, and the municipality cannot be estopped from correctly enforcing the ordinance even if the property owner relied to his detriment on prior city action. Frank's Nursery Sales, Inc. v. City of Roseville, 295 N.W.2d 604, 607 (Minn.1980) (citations omitted). Moreover, estoppel would only be applied against a municipality "if the equities advanced by the individual are sufficiently great." Ridgewood Dev. Co. v. State, 294 N.W.2d 288, 292 (Minn.1980) (citation omitted). Accordingly, one seeking to assert estoppel against a governmental entity has a "heavy burden of proof' and must establish wrongful conduct on the part of the city, which Fairway will be unable to do on this record. Id. A municipality's prior knowledge of a violation does not diminish the municipality's ability to later enforce an ordinance. Stillwater Twp. v. Rivard, 547 N.W.2d 906, 911 (Minn. App. 1996). _ _ g Letter to Stillwater Mayor and Council Re: Hazel Place Villas September 1, 2015 Page 4 In short, the City is not bound by past errors nor prevented from getting it right this time around. The Council should deny Fairway Development's preliminary plat application for failure to properly measure the proposed cul-de-sac or obtain an according variance. 3. Denial will not create legal precedent binding the City vis-a-vis future developments that properly comply with the City Code and community objectives. Municipal officials can be reluctant to deny land use applications due to concerns that such decision will limit their discretion in approving or denying later land use applications submitted by different property owners for different projects. However, such concerns are not supported by Minnesota law. Minnesota courts have consistently declared that land use decisions made by local governments fail to create any sort of binding precedent because every application involves different facts and circumstances and takes place at different times from previous situations whereby similar applications were considered and granted. The Minnesota Court of Appeals rejected a property owner's argument that a county zoning board was required to grant him a setback variance because the zoning board had granted his neighbor a similar setback variance. Stotts v. Wright County, 478 N.W.2d 802, 806 (Minn. Ct. App. 1991), citing In re Johnson, 404.N.W. 2d 298, 301 (Minn. Ct. App. 1987), rev'd on other grounds 562 N.W. 2d 21 (Minn. Ct. App. 1997). In In re Johnson, the Minnesota Court of Appeals held that "an applicant for a variance is not entitled to a variance merely because similar variances were granted in the past. Otherwise, the granting of one variance would likely result in the destruction of the entire zoning scheme." Id. at 301. Accordingly, the Council's decision to reject the Application must not be swayed by the false pretense that doing so precludes either Fairway or other developers from submitting plans that duly comply with City Code and the comprehensive plan while carefully considering the fabric of the community in which the development sits. 4. The City is free to un-do the 2007 Development Agreement under several theories. The 2007 Development Agreement has been in place for over eight years without substantial physical activity or improvement work initiated by Fairway Development or its predecessor in title. Pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 462.358, Subd. 3(c), after passage of one (1) year from the date of preliminary plat approval, a municipality may once again amend its comprehensive plan or official control to affect the use, development density, lot size, lot layout, or dedication permitted by the approved application. Minnesota case law is also instructive, explaining that a developer has no vested right in completing a project under prior land -use regulations unless the developer has "progressed sufficiently with construction or otherwise[.]" Eagle Lake ofBecker County Lake Ass 'n v. Becker County Bd. Of Com'rs, 738 N.W.2 788, 795 (Minn. App. 2007). Despite its representations, Fairway Development does not possess the unassailable right to Letter to Stillwater Mayor and Council Re: Hazel Place Villas September 1, 2015 Page 5 develop the 20 twin homes previously approved and memorialized in the 2007 Development Agreement, and the City could act without consequence to invalidate the terms of that prior development agreement and prevent its shadow from further tinting the current proceedings. 5. Conclusion Based on the foregoing and on behalf of the Concerned Neighbors, we respectfully urge the City Council to adopt the recommendation of the Planning Commission and deny the Application. Thank you for your consideration. Very truly yours, MoRiusoN SUND PLLC (0-4/--62/eA Robert Q. Williams, Esq. Jonathan Y. Applebaum, Esq. Diane Ward From: Tom McCarty Sent: Tuesday, September 01, 2015 2:53 PM To: Ted Kozlowski; Mike Polehna; Doug Menikheim; Tom Weidner; David Junker Cc: Bill Turnblad; Diane Ward Subject: FW: Gun Range Mayor and Council, I just recently received this communication from a citizen and wanted to make certain you received it as well. Tom McCarty City Administrator 216 4th Street N. Stillwater, MN 55082 651-430-8801 tmccarty@ci.stillwater.mn.us From: Carlisle Runge [mailto:frunge@umn.edu] Sent: Tuesday, September 01, 2015 1:48 PM To: Tom McCarty <tmccarty@ci.stillwater.mn.us> Cc: melissa.douglas@nextern.com Subject: Gun Range Dear Mr. Mayor: We reside at 901 West Pine St. I am a faculty member at the U of M (Applied Economics and Law) and my wife Susan is a rate analyst at the MN PUC. We have two grown children, one of whom, Elizabeth, lives at home and is disabled. I am a gun owner and keeps my guns in a gun safe in the basement. I am an occasional hunter. Given this, I cannot conceive of a worse use for the furniture store than as a gun range site and have trouble believing that the idea could be seriously entertained by responsible public officials. I urge you to dispatch this truly bad idea expeditiously. Thank you. Carlisle Ford Runge i Shawn Sanders From: bruce werre <brucewerre@yahoo.com> Sent: Tuesday, September 01, 2015 7:44 AM To: Shawn Sanders; Tim Moore Subject: Re: McKusick Lake - Stillwater MN From:"bruce werre" <brucewerre@yahoo.com> Date:Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 12:22 PM Subject:McKusick Lake - Stillwater MN I want to take this time to thank everyone responsible for your dedicated work. Specifically regarding reducing the phosphorus load into McKusick Lake. The dozens of Rain Gardens and the Sand Iron Filter in the Settlers Glen area have helped tremendously in the reduction of phosphorus entering the lake. This has significantly reduced the size and occurrence of the algae blooms the past two summers on McKusick Lake. All of this, plus its removal from the MPCA impaired waters list. Quite an accomplishment for our little well loved lake. Please keep up the great work! Bruce Werre McKusick Lake Water Association Member bcc: MLWA members and WMO's 1 REGULAR MEETING RECESSED MEETING i 1 1 a t e r 1NE OIRTNFLACE OF MIMNESOTA AGENDA CITY COUNCIL MEETING Council Chambers, 216 Fourth Street North September 1, 2015 4:30 P.M. 7:00 P.M. 4:30 P.M. AGENDA I. CALL TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL III. OTHER BUSINESS 1. Budget Workshop (Continued from August 18, 2015 meeting) IV. STAFF REPORTS 2. Doug Brady 3. Police Chief 4. Fire Chief 5. City Clerk 6. Community Development Dir. 7. Public Works Dir. 8. Finance Director 9. City Attorney 10. City Administrator 7:00 P.M. AGENDA V. CALL TO ORDER VI. ROLL CALL VII. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE VIII. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 11. Possible approval of August 18, 2015 special and regular meeting minutes IX. PETITIONS, INDIVIDUALS, DELEGATIONS & COMMENDATIONS X. OPEN FORUM The Open Forum is a portion of the Council meeting to address Council on subjects which are not a part of the meeting agenda. The Council may take action or reply at the time of the statement or may give direction to staff regarding investigation of the concerns expressed. Out of respect for others in attendance, please limit your comments to 5 minutes or less. XI. CONSENT AGENDA (ROLL CALL) all items listed under the consent agenda are considered to be routine by the city council and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion on these items unless a council member or citizen so requests, in which event, the items will be removed from the consent agenda and considered separately. 12. Resolution 2015-148, directing payment of bills 13. Resolution 2015-149, approving the Certified Local Government Grant Acceptance Form from the Minnesota Historical Society 14. Resolution 2015-150, approving SEH to perform bridge inspection on box culvert at Neal Avenue and Browns Creek 15. Resolution 2015-151, approving Northstar Mudjacking & More to perform sidewalk repair work on Fourth Street XII. PUBLIC HEARINGS - OUT OF RESPECT FOR OTHERS IN ATTENDANCE, PLEASE LIMIT YOUR COMMENTS TO 10 MINUTES OR LESS. 16. Case No. 2015-22. This is the date and time for a public hearing to consider a request by Sterling Black of Fairway Development LLC. to approve a 20 lot residential preliminary plat and associated variances, Zoned RB: Two Family Residential, all for property located at 1902 Williams St N. Notices were mailed to affected property owners and published in the Stillwater Gazette on June 26, 2015. (Tabled from August 18, 2015 meeting) (Approval — Resolution (Roll Call); Denial — Straw Vote (Roll Call) - Findings of Fact back to Council on 9/15/2015 meeting) XIII. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 17. Continued consideration of the Minnesota Shooting Academy request for a Special Use Permit to operate an indoor gun range at 2159 Curve Crest Boulevard - Case No. 2015-15 (Tabled from August 18, 2015 meeting). (Approval — Resolution (Roll Call); Denial — Straw Vote (Roll Call) - Findings of Fact back to Council at 9/15/2015 meeting) 18. Possible approval of second reading of Ordinance 1082, an Ordinance Amending the Stillwater City Code, Chapter 29, Sewers, Sec. 29-3 (2nd reading — Roll Call) and approval of agreement with Washington County for septic system permitting and inspection services (Resolution — Roll Call) XIV. NEW BUSINESS 19. Possible approval of Palmer property remnant purchase for park land. (Available Tuesday) XV. PETITIONS, INDIVIDUALS, DELEGATIONS & COMMENDATIONS (CONTINUED) XVI. COMMUNICATIONS/REQUESTS XVII. COUNCIL REQUEST ITEMS XVIII. STAFF REPORTS (CONTINUED) XIX. ADJOURNMENT .ti a 2O16Proposed i—r Budget CITY OF STILLWATER September 1, 2015 Property Tax Levy Initial Proposed 2016 vs Adopted 2015 As discussed on August 18, 2015: CITY-WIDE LEVY 2015 2016 Adopted Proposed $ Increase % Increase General Operating Tax Levy $7,825,610 $8,449,839 $624,229 7.977% Debt Service Tax Levy $3,514,043 : $3,840,145 $326,102 9.280% Totals $11,339,653 112,289,984 $950,331 8.381% ti Debt Service Tax Levy Amount Required Debt Service Tax Levy $3,190,145 New Debt Service Tax Levy: G.O. Improvement Bonds $150,000 G.O. Capital Outlay 2016 $500,000 Total $3,840,145 r-- i Option #1 a -illAdopted Proposed Start Date 2015 2016 $ Increase % Increase Beginning Levy* $11,339,653 $12,289,984 $950,331 8.381% Operating Reductions: Christmas Tree ($1,000) HR Manager July 1, 2016 ($54,763) Zoning Administrator Remove ($56,036) Building Inspector July 1, 2016 ($9,385) Debt Service Reductions: Remodel ($150,000) Street Improvement ($0) Total Reductions ($271,184) Result $11,339,653 $12,018,800 $679,147 5.989% *Includes Operating and Debt Service Levies r Tax Impact STEP 1 - Calculate Tax Rate Item Actual Pay 2015 Proposed Pay 2016 % Change Levy before reduction for state aids $11,968,699 $12,664,403 5.813% State Aids - $629,046 $645,603 2.632% Certifed Property Tax Levy = $11,339,653 $12,018,800 5.989% Fiscal Disparity Portion of Levy - $1,184,086 $1,115,191 -5.818% Local Portion of Levy = $10,155,567 $10,903,609 7.366% Local Taxable Value - 18,492,942 19,456,350 5.210% Local Tax Rate = 54.916% 56.041% 2.049% Note: Values for 2016 are only estimates and have been recently provided by Washington County Option # 1 (continued) STEP 2 -Calculate the impact of the tax rate on selected residential homesteads in Stillwater Market Value Before Exclusion Homestead Market Value Exclusion Taxable Market Value Tax Capacity Taxing District Portion of Tax Actual Pay 2015 230,200 16,500 213,700 2,137 $1,173.55 99,600 149,400 249,000 398,400 28,300 23,800 14,800 71,300 125,600 234,200 1,400 397,000 713 $391.55 $689.74 $1,286.13 3,970 $2,180.17 1,256 2,342 Proposed Pay 2016 231,100 16,400 214,700 2,147 $1,203.20 100,000 150,000 250,000 400,000 28,200 23,700 14,700 71,800 126,300 235,300 1,200 398,800 718 $402.37 $707.80 $1,318.64 3,988 $2,234.92 1,263 2,353 • Assumes a 0.4% change in market value from 2015 to 2016, which is the median change for Stillwater. Percentage and Dollar Change from 2015 to 2016 0.4% 0.5% 0.5% 2.5% $29.65 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% - 0.4% - 0.4% - 0.7% -14.3% 0.7% 0.6% 0.5% 0.5% 0.7% 0.6% 0.5% 0.5% 2.8% 2.6% 2.5% 2.5% $10.82 $18.06 $32.51 $54.75 The row indicated in blue is the median value home in Stillwater. Option #2 (Recommended) a -111 Adopted Proposed Start Date 2015 2016 $ Increase % Increase Beginning Levy* $11,339,653 $12,289,984 $950,331 8.381% Operating Reductions: Christmas Tree ($1,000) HR Manager July 1, 2016 ($54,763) Zoning Administrator Remove ($56,036) Building Inspector April 1, 2016 ($0) Debt Service Reductions: Remodel ($150,000) Street Improvement ($25,000) Total Reductions ($286,799) Result $11,339,653 $12,003,185 $663,532 5.851% *Includes Operating and Debt Service Levies r Tax Impact STEP 1 - Calculate Tax Rate Item Actual Pay 2015 Proposed Pay 2016 0/0 Change Levy before reduction for state aids $11,968,699 $12,648,788 5.682% State Aids - $629,046 $645,603 2.632% Certifed Property Tax Levy = $11,339,653 $12,003,185 5.851% Fiscal Disparity Portion of Levy - $1,184,086 $1,115,191 -5.818% Local Portion of Levy = $10,155,567 $10,887,994 7.212% Local Taxable Value - 18,492,942 19,456,350 5.210% Local Tax Rate = 54.916% 55.961% 1.903% Note: Values for 2016 are only estimates and have been recently provided by Washington County Option # 2 (continued) STEP 2 -Calculate the impact of the tax rate on selected residential homesteads in Stillwater: Market Value Before Exclusion Homestead Market Value Exclusion Taxable Market Value Tax Capacity Taxing District Portion of Tax Actual Pay 2015 230,200 16,500 213,700 2,137 $1,173.55 99,600 28,300 71,300 713 $391.55 149,400 23,800 125,600 1,256 $689.74 249,000 14,800 234,200 2,342 $1,286.13 398,400 1,400 397,000 3,970 $2,180.17 Proposed Pay 2016 231,100 16,400 214,700 2,147 $1,201.48 100,000 150,000 250,000 400,000 28,200 23,700 14,700 71,800 126,300 235,300 1,200 398,800 718 1,263 2,353 $401.80 $706.79 $1,316.76 3,988 $2,231.72 • Assumes a 0.4% change in market value from 2015 to 2016, which is the median change for Stillwater. Percentage and Dollar Change from 2015 to 2016 0.4% -0.c . 0.5% 0.5% 2.4% $27.93 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% -0.4% - 0.4% - 0.7% -14.3% 0.7% 0.6% 0.5% 0.5% 0.7% 0.6% 0.5% 0.5% 2.6% 2.5% 2.4% 2.4% $10.25 $17.05 $30.63 $51.55 The row indicated in blue is the median value home in Stillwater. Option #3 a -illAdopted Proposed Start Date 2015 2016 $ Increase % Increase Beginning Levy* $11,339,653 $12,289,984 $950,331 8.381% Operating Reductions: Christmas Tree ($1,000) HR Manager July 1, 2016 ($54,763) Zoning Administrator Remove ($56,036) Building Inspector April 1, 2016 ($0) Debt Service Reductions: Remodel ($150,000) Street Improvement ($75,000) Total Reductions ($336,799) Result $11,339,653 $11,953,185 $613,532 5.411% *Includes Operating and Debt Service Levies r Option #3 (continued) Tax Impact STEP 1 - Calculate Tax Rate Item Actual Pay 2015 Proposed Pay 2016 Levy before reduction for state aids $11,968,699 $12,598,788 State Aids $629, 046 $645,603 Certifed Property Tax Levy $11, 339, 653 $11, 953,185 Fiscal Disparity Portion of Levy Local Portion of Levy Local Taxable Value $1,184,086 $10,155, 567 $1,115,191 $10,837,994 19,456,350 18, 492, 942 Local Tax Rate 54.916% 55.704° % Change 5.264% 2.632% 5.411 6% 6.720% 5.210% STEP 2 - Calculate the impact of the tax rate on selected residential homesteads in Stillwater, Market Value Before Exclusion Homestead Market Value Exclusion Taxable Market Value Tax Capacity Taxing District Portion of Tax Actual Pay 2015 230,200 16,500 213,700 2,137 $1,173.55 99,600 149,400 249,000 398,400 28,300 23,800 14,800 71,300 125,600 234,200 1,400 397,000 713 $391.55 $689.74 $1,286.13 3,970 $2,180.17 1,256 2,342 Note: Values for 2016 are only estimates and have been recently provided by Washington County Proposed Pay 2016 231,100 16,400 214,700 2,147 $1,195.96 100,000 150,000 250,000 400,000 28,200 23,700 14,700 71,800 126,300 235,300 1,200 398,800 718 $399.95 $703.54 $1,310.72 3,988 $2,221.48 1,263 2,353 • Assumes a 0.4% change in market value from 2015 to 2016, which is the median change for Stillwater. Percentage and Dollar Change from 2015 to 2016 0.4% - 0.6% 0.5% 0.5% 1.9% $22.41 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% - 0.4% - 0.4% - 0.7% -14.3% 0.7% 0.6% 0.5% 0.5% 0.7% 0.6% 0.5% 0.5% 2.1% 2.0% 1.9% 1.9% $8.40 $13.80 $24.59 $41.31 The row indicated in blue is the median value home in Stillwater. Revised Capital Outlay Plant/City Hall Plant/City Hall IMI z City Hall Renovations: City Hall Foundation Leaking* City Hall Clock Tower Roof Rehabilitation City Hall Parking Lot Light Replacement City Hall Access Control System (Including Public Works) Building Monitoring Cameras Added Security (Council Chambers & Reception) Recabling (IT) for City Hall Emergency Generator Code Updates City Hall Awning for NW Entrance City Hall Water Faucet Replacement (Front)* Update Office Cubicles (3rd Floor) Police Department Remodeling Construction Estimate (Including Contingency) Design Development Phase I Remodel Fees & Testing (10%) Furniture/Equipment/Technology Construction Management 65,000 50,000 23,400 50,000 40,000 35,000 40,000 6,000 15,000 5,000 20,000 1,800,000 180,000 150,000 150,000 50,000 23,400 50,000 50,000 40,000 - 35,000 - 40,000 40,000 6,000 6,000 15,000 15,000 5,000 20,000 20,000 1,800,000 180,000 150,000 150,000 200,000 740,000 Total Plant/City Hall 2,629,400 2,564,400 1,071,000 . *Projects to be done in 2015 Revised Proposed Street Projects and Funding Sources 2016 Proposed Improvements Description/Reason :ounty Road 5 Pedestrian County planned project in 2016 Safety Improvements with City Cost Share Cost State Aid TAF Assessment City $420,000 $420,000 County Road 12 Safety County planned project in 2016 Improvements with City Cost Share $500,000 $400,000 $100,000 Neal Avenue Reconstructs a collector road in the Improvements annexation area $1,300,000 $180,000 $650,000 $300,000 $170,000 2016 Street Improvement Road improvement project to Project repair poor condition roads $1,500,000 $1,050,000 $450,000 Sidewalk Improvement Project repairs tripping hazards on Project sidewalks throughout the City $100,000 $50,000 $50,000 Initial Amounts: $3,820,000 $600,000 $1,050,000 $1,400,000 $770,000 Recommended Reduction (Option #2): ($10,000) Revised Amount: $760,000 G 41-1i1L' Debt Service Balance - n Last Ten Years and Budget Year 2016 $40,000,000 $35,000,000 $30,000,000 $25,000,000 $20,000,000 $15,000,000 $10,000,000 $5,000,000 $o 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Capital Outlay Bonds* • Improvement Bonds* Revenue Bonds Tax Increment Bonds Capital Lease Other Long -Term Debt ■ Not yet issued E Revised Proposed (Option #2) *2015 bonds for Capital Outlay ($1 M) and park land purchase (1.25M) have not been issued in 2015 as of today's date, but may be issued with 2016 bonds. "...stable financial operations supported by healthy reserves and a manageable debt limit." -- Moody's 03/17/2014 i 1 1 a t e r 1NE OIRTNELACE OF MIMNESOTA CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES August 18, 2015 SPECIAL MEETING 3:30 P.M. Mayor Kozlowski called the meeting to order at 3:30 p.m. Present: Councilmembers Menikheim, Junker, Weidner, Polehna, Mayor Kozlowski Staff present: OTHER BUSINESS City Administrator McCarty Finance Director Harrison City Attorney Magnuson Community Development Director Turnblad Police Chief Gannaway Fire Chief Glaser Public Works Director Sanders Public Works Superintendent Moore Library Director Bertalmio IT Technician Bornt City Clerk Ward Budget Work Session City Administrator McCarty and Finance Director Harrison presented the City Administrator's 2016 Budget Recommendations for Council review and consideration. The total proposed 2016 budget is $17,838,631. Upon review and analysis of all revenue and expenditure requests, the 2016 Budget Recommendations propose a balanced 2016 budget. The City Administrator and City Finance Director met with all departments and agencies and reviewed and analyzed all proposed 2016 program operations, revenues, expenditures, staffing levels, capital projects and long-term debt, collaborative efforts and use of fund balances. The preliminary levy funding requests for the proposed 2016 operating budget exceeded the 2015 levy by $1,042,755, excluding capital project requests. The recommended 2016 balanced budget proposes a combination of resource allocations, revenue increases, expenditure adjustments and fund balance allocations to enhance the services and programs for Stillwater citizens in alignment with the strategic issues identified by the City Council. The Council must adopt a preliminary 2016 budget and certify the maximum City property tax levy to the County by September 30, 2015. The Council must also schedule the Truth in Taxation meeting date in December for adoption of the final 2016 budget. In response to concerns from Councilmembers about levy impacts of the Police Department remodeling project, City Administrator McCarty agreed to look at some design options and come back with some alternatives on September 1. The Council agreed to set a budget work session at 4:30 p.m. September 1, 2015. City Council Meeting August 21, 2015 RECESS Motion by Councilmember Polehna, seconded by Councilmember Junker, to recess the meeting. All in favor. The meeting was recessed at 5:23 p.m. REGULAR MEETING 7:00 P.M. Mayor Kozlowski called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Present: Councilmembers Menikheim, Junker, Weidner, Polehna, Mayor Kozlowski Staff present: City Administrator McCarty City Attorney Magnuson Sergeant Magler Fire Chief Glaser Public Works Director Sanders Community Development Director Turnblad Finance Director Harrison City Clerk Ward PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Kozlowski led the Council and audience in the APPROVAL OF MINUTES Possible approval of minutes of July 28, 2015 regular and Pledge of Allegiance. recessed meeting Motion by Councilmember Weidner, seconded by Councilmember Polehna, to approve the minutes of the July 28, 2015 regular and recessed meeting. All in favor. OPEN FORUM There were no public comments. STAFF REPORTS Fire Chief Glaser informed the Council that the new Fire Station has received its final inspection and Certificate of Occupancy. The move is underway to the Department's fourth Fire Station in 143 years. There will be a Grand Opening on October 10 with fire prevention activities. He thanked the Council for its support. Public Works Director Sanders reported that MnDOT's contractor will start working on the Loop Trail next week. He presented a tree planting plan for Lowell Park, done by a volunteer landscape architect. A bid proposal will be put together and most of the planting should occur this fall. Councilmembers expressed support for the plan. He also reported that staff has been speaking with Xcel Energy about burying the power lines in Lowell Park at an estimated cost of $1.5 million. Installation of new parking lot lights would be an additional cost. The City would be responsible for working with telephone and cable companies to bury those lines as well. An engineering scoping study costing approximately $30,000, which is not budgeted, is needed to obtain a more accurate estimate for burying the Xcel lines. A City -facilitated surcharge to consumers could be used to fund the project. Mayor Kozlowski asked if there are any service - Page 2 of 11 City Council Meeting August 21, 2015 related advantages to burying the lines. Public Works Director Sanders stated it is mainly aesthetic. City Attorney Magnuson offered that Tax Increment Financing could possibly be used to fund the engineering scoping study and he would check on that. Motion by Councilmember Weidner, seconded by Councilmember Junker, to order the engineering scoping study to determine the cost to bury Xcel Energy lines in Lowell Park, if the study can be funded by Tax Increment Financing. All in favor. CONSENT AGENDA Resolution 2015-141, directing the payment of bills Resolution 2015-142, approving agreement for Replacement of Video Cameras in Council Chambers with Valley Access Cable Resolution 2015-143, approving purchase of Tritech technology appendices — Police Department Resolution 2015-144, approving the 2015 Data Practices Policy for Members of the Public and the Data Practices Policy for Data Subjects Possible approval to purchase Forward Looking InfraRed Viewing Device — Police Department Possible approval to purchase equipment for the workout room Possible approval to purchase camera for the Fire Department Possible approval to purchase presentation projector for the Police Department Possible approval of sanitary sewer adjustments Motion by Councilmember Junker, seconded by Councilmember Weidner, to adopt the Consent Agenda. Ayes: Councilmembers Menikheim, Junker, Weidner, Polehna, Mayor Kozlowski Nays: None PUBLIC HEARINGS Case No. 2015-15. A public hearing to consider an appeal to the request by Paul Simonet for approval of a Special Use Permit and associated variances for MN Shooting Academy to redesign the existing building into an amusement and recreational establishment to be located 2159 Curve Crest Blvd., located in the BPO, Business Park Office District. Councilmember Weidner recused himself from discussion and the vote due to a conflict of interest. Community Development Director Turnblad explained that the MN Shooting Academy applied for a Special Use Permit and two variances for an indoor gun range. On a 5-3 vote with one abstention, the Planning Commission approved the Special Use Permit and the 4,040 square foot size variance, but denied the parking variances. Subsequently, the City received two appeal letters. As an appeal is made, the Council must hold a de novo public hearing, meaning the application is reviewed as a brand new application. The MN Shooting Academy has submitted revised plans that are substantially the same as those that were reviewed by the Planning Commission, but with two changes: the firing range area is the same size but reconfigured to 14 lanes rather than 12; and 795 square feet of classroom space is being added by removing a warehouse area. There would be office, classroom, retail, warehouse space and a gunsmith's office. Most of these uses are permitted in the Business Park Office District. The gun lanes themselves require a Special Use Page 3 of 11 City Council Meeting August 21, 2015 Permit. Three main discussion points were identified: 1) usage - whether an indoor gun range is an allowed use in this district. Firearms are included in the definition as an allowable use. 2) sound level - the DNR gun range rules limit the sound to 63 decibels measured at the nearest building. The difficulty is that technically speaking it is a challenge to separate background noise, which is probably higher already than the 63 decibels. Staff recommends that the Shooting Academy retain a sound engineer to measure the gun range noise against the 63 decibel limit and determine whether sound can even be isolated from the gun range. 3) lead - the interior of the building will be constructed with a shell inside a shell that will contain all the bullets that are shot. Therefore when the use ceases or the property is sold for another use, the lead will be removed with the removal of that shell. Regarding airborne lead, there is a sophisticated air handling system designed for the gun range that allows the air to continuously meet MPCA standards. It will be filtered before leaving the building so there will be no traces of lead. The air handling equipment will need to meet the City's noise limits, so the sound engineer will need to look at that as well. Staff concurs with the Planning Commission's recommendation to grant the SUP and the size variance with conditions, and deny the parking variances. Staff recommends the addition of one condition: there should be a noise study done by a licensed sound engineer. Ideally, the noise study would be submitted before the Council decision, so perhaps the decision should be tabled tonight. As an alternative, the Council could require that before the SUP is effective, a noise study be submitted and the noise level be found to meet all the standards. Councilmember Junker inquired how the number of required parking spaces was determined, and Community Development Director Turnblad responded that the revised plan with classrooms increased the parking need. Staff considered the square footage of the classroom, the office, the retail, and the firing range. 84 spaces are required and there are 49 on site, so the deficit is 35. There is green space to allow more parking space construction; however the new parking area would need to be pervious pavement so as to not exceed the 60% impervious coverage allowance. Mayor Kozlowski opened the public hearing. Mark Kamas, 13699 - 127th Street North, Stillwater and Gary Shalkle, 2752 Lehman Trail, Woodbury, representing the shooting range, explained that the lead is trapped in the rubber berm and recycled to ensure proper handling. It must be handled and disposed of properly with no traces must follow OSHA, EPA and NIOSH regulations. There is negative air pressure that moves the air to the filters, so when the air leaves the building, it will be cleaner than when it goes in. Addressing the sound issues, Mr. Shalkle summarized the measures taken to reduce the sound both inside and outside the building. The air filters will be on the roof behind a three foot high wall, so noise from them will go up and be dissipated as white noise. The outside of the building will not be changed. He explained that the range is design as a box within a box. There is the outside wall and then the gun range wall. Mr. Kamas added that they believe the current parking area is adequate and that as demand for parking grows, they will install more spaces, but they would prefer to wait until it is needed to minimize the cost. On a question by Mayor Kozlowski about security, Mr. Kamas replied that all entrances have magnetic locks so they cannot be opened after hours and concrete bollards will be put around entry points. Mr. Shalkle added that motion detector real-time cameras will be placed around the building and indicated that an alarm will sound and a fogger will fill the building with fog within 35-45 seconds in the event of a break-in. Page 4 of 11 City Council Meeting August 21, 2015 Mr. Kamas stated the range will be open from 8 a.m. to 9 p.m. seven days a week, opening later on Sundays. Exceptions to the hours will be made for law enforcement training. Jonathan Ingalls, representing Action Targets, stated Action Targets has been building shooting ranges for 30 years for various gun ranges for FBI, law enforcement agencies and many commercial facilities throughout the country and abroad. He offered to answer questions any questions Council may have. Mayor Kozlowski asked about the sound, and Mr. Ingalls responded that the design will keep sounds from escaping to the outside of the building. He provided two examples of ranges next to a mattress store and a Target and that the noise cannot be heard outside of the building. Councilmember Polehna inquired about lead entrapment, and Mr. Ingalls stated that the design is to be "green" and that lead will be reclaimed and mined from traps to keep it out of the environment and that ventilation will push air away from shooters and employees. He informed the Council that air put back into the environment will be cleaner than when it went in. Community Development Director Turnblad added that upon complaint, the City would work with the MPCA to monitor the standards. Mr. Ingalls reiterated that all occupational and health standards will be followed because business owners have to maintain those standards because OSHA could come in at any time and do an inspection. Mayor Kozlowski asked about safety protocol, especially regarding people coming in who may have been drinking or on drugs. Mr. Kamas stated the business will follow OSHA and NIOSH procedures in determining who can and who cannot use the range. On a question by Councilmember Polehna about who regulates the operation of indoor ranges, Mr. Kamas replied that the DNR regulates outdoor ranges and that Minnesota State statutes, OSHA and NIOSH regulate indoor ranges. Councilmember Junker inquired about staffing, and Mr. Kamas noted that all instructors are NRA-certified and must go through their certification process to be an instructor. Those who work behind the range must have formal firearms training and background investigations. Roger Tomten, ARCHNET, the architectural firm that built the building in 1996, spoke to the parking issue. The majority of the parking requirement is being generated by the retail use. The zoning code lumps various types of retail uses. He feels there should be some leeway on the parking requirement; the City should allow the applicant to add parking as the need arises. It would be a shame to remove trees to put in a parking lot that may not be needed. Mr. Kamas provided signatures of neighboring businesses collecting signatures of supporters, indicating that the community accepts the business. Community Development Director Turnblad informed the Council that the City received two letters of comment from residents; it did not receive letters from businesses in the area. Sandy Wolfe Wood, 220 Pineridge Lane, stated the site is not a good place for a gun range, across from a skate park, close to a liquor store and a flower store. It is not a good use of space. Anne Siess, 170 Interlachen Way Court, Planning Commissioner, told the Council it was difficult to assess this case because Stillwater has no gun ordinance. She urged the Council to table or deny the request, to provide time to develop a safe, reasonable ordinance. She felt that a gun, which is a weapon, used in a gun range demands a different level of regulation than other types of uses. Page 5 of 11 City Council Meeting August 21, 2015 Bruce Fontaine, 13872 Upper 58th Street North, Stillwater, stated that he has conceal and carry license, explained the process for getting a gun. It cannot be obtained without a permit and a background check. Regarding the parking requirement, this use will not fill 84 parking spaces at one time. It is not the guns that are dangerous, it is the people who obtain them unlawfully who are dangerous. Education on handling and operation of a weapon is the safest way to train people. The applicants are going through the proper channels. Mr. Shalkle told the Council that he and Mr. Kamas met with the Washington County Sheriff & Stillwater Police Chief who expressed no concerns. If the gun range staff felt that someone has been drinking or is mentally unstable, they will deny them the ability to use the range. Mayor Kozlowski closed the public hearing. Mayor Kozlowski stated he has looked at other communities' gun range ordinances and that everything he heard tonight covers most of the points in the Chanhassen ordinance except the distance from a liquor store. Councilmember Menikheim stated as a retired military veteran, he has no problem with guns. He does not doubt the benefits of the program as proposed, but feels the zoning regulations should be looked at to see if they accomplish what is intended. He pointed out that one of the two appeals stated that City Code prohibits commercial recreational uses in the Business Park Office District, but the City Attorney's opinion states these uses are permitted. This difference of opinion raises his concerns about the City's due diligence in following its own code. He was concerned that if there is a problem with the business, according to State statutes, gun range closure could only be accomplished through court action, diminishing the City's ability to enforce and govern. He felt the request should be tabled for further information. Motion by Councilmember Menikheim, seconded by Mayor Kozlowski to table Case No. 2015-15, an appeal to the request by Paul Simonet for approval of a Special Use Permit and associated variances for MN Shooting Academy, to September 1, 2015. Mayor Kozlowski expressed concerned that the City has no ordinance on gun ranges. He felt that compared with what other groups and types of businesses must do, there are no hoops to jump through, such as submitting a safety plan. He stated he is not against gun ranges, but wants to look at whether the City has everything it needs in order to have successful gun ranges and felt the City is not prepared for this. It sounds like the applicant has all their ducks in a row, but the City does not. He agreed with Councilmember Menikheim that the Council should table the issue for 2 weeks. Councilmember Junker remarked that two weeks may not be long enough to examine the issues and develop an ordinance and was unfair to ask the applicant to wait. He stated that shooting is a sport and he is impressed with the applicants' explanation and preparation, but is concerned that if the case gets tabled, the Council will still face the issue of locating the perfect spot where it does not affect anybody and it would be hard to put a gun range anywhere in Stillwater where it would not have any effect on a business or a home. Councilmember Polehna agreed with Mr. Fontaine. He noted that he belongs to gun clubs and the ranges he uses are very safe and secure. He was more concerned about the lead but that question was answered. He felt that the City should not tell people how to run their businesses and disagreed with Councilmember Menikheim about having rules on how they operate their business. Community Development Director Turnblad and City Planner Wittman have called Page 6 of 11 City Council Meeting August 21, 2015 around and investigated other communities and that the Council needs to trust its staff. He is not versed in how to run a gun range. Councilmember Menikheim responded that he was not talking about the operators running their business. He was talking about the City Code. He feels the City has not done due diligence and that is why more discussion is needed. Mayor Kozlowski remarked it looks like every city that has an indoor range has an ordinance, which gives the City a little more control. If they do not follow the ordinance and regulations, the City can pull the Special Use Permit. Seeing all the other communities that have drafted ordinances made him feel like the Council was not prepared for this decision. Councilmember Menikheim restated that his questions concern whether the Council has followed its code. He also would like Melissa Douglas to be able to come and talk about her appeal. Speaking to statements in Ms. Douglas's appeal about gun ranges not being recreational, Councilmember Polehna stated yes, they are recreational. Councilmember Menikheim stated why put something in place that the City essentially loses control over until we have answered all the questions. City Attorney Magnuson pointed out to Council that a motion to table is not debatable, so the vote should be called. Councilmember Junker asked if the motion could be amended to denote something specific for which it is being tabled. Councilmember Menikheim answered because there are questions that need to be answered that will take some time, and to allow a person who was not able to be here tonight to come and hear the discussion. Mayor Kozlowski stated he does not want the applicants to have to wait for the Council to draft an ordinance. Councilmember Junker suggested if the reason for tabling the issue is to draft an ordinance that would not happen in two weeks however if the Council is looking to make a decision on this case in two weeks that may be possible. Councilmember Polehna commented the Council is not gaining anything by tabling the issue for two weeks, and Councilmember Menikheim replied it would give time for answers to questions. Councilmember Polehna felt that that questions by Council should be answered by the Community Development Director not by someone else's interpretation of the City's code. Councilmember Menikheim stated he wants the person to be able to come in and speak. Mayor Kozlowski called the vote to table. Motion failed Ayes: Councilmember Menikheim and Mayor Kozlowski Nays: Councilmembers Junker and Polehna Abstain: Councilmember Weidner. Councilmember Junker remarked he would vote in favor of tabling the issue for two weeks if there are specific questions to be answered, but if the Council intends to go through the process of creating an ordinance, that would not be done in two weeks. Page 7 of 11 City Council Meeting August 21, 2015 Councilmember Polehna noted the public hearing is closed. The purpose of tabling the issue is not to give someone the opportunity to come back in two weeks to provide public testimony. Mayor Kozlowski stated that a couple weeks to talk to City staff about it would give him more confidence to make a decision on this case. He has no desire to make this applicant wait until after an ordinance is drafted. Motion by Mayor Kozlowski, seconded by Councilmember Menikheim, to table Case No. 2015-15, an appeal to the request by Paul Simonet for approval of a Special Use Permit and associated variances for MN Shooting Academy, for two weeks until September 1, 2015, to allow Council to confer with staff. Case No. 2015-20. A public hearing to consider a request by Todd Baumgartner of WB Development LLC. to approve a 15 lot residential Preliminary Plat and associated variances. The property is zoned TR: Traditional Residential, located at 8528/8602 Neal Avenue North. Community Development Director Turnblad explained Todd Baumgartner of WB Development LLC has applied for a Preliminary Plat for a 15 lot single-family residential development to be known as Brown's Creek Cove. The property is located at the northwest quadrant of the intersection of Neal Avenue North and McKusick Road North. The project has a total gross area of 8.91 acres. Lots range in size from 10,070 square feet to 19,917 square feet. Two of the 15 lots will include the two existing homes on the property. The development density is 2.93 homes per developable acre. The project represents the continuation of infrastructure and development pattern established by the Millbrook neighborhood abutting the property immediately to the north. Zoning of the property is a bit complicated. In addition to the base zoning of TR, Traditional Residential, the property is also encumbered partially by two overlay districts: the Natural Environment Lake Shoreland Management Overlay District (referred to as the "Lake Overlay District") and the Brown's Creek Stream Shoreland Management Overlay District (referred to as the "Stream Overlay District"). The proposed single-family use and density are allowed within the overlay districts with a Conditional Use Permit (CUP), which has been requested. Almost half the property is included in Outlot A. The developer would like to dedicate this as public park. The Parks Commission, in looking at the previous request in 2007, found this would not fulfill the public park requirements. It is recommended that the developer fulfill the park dedication requirement via a fee. Staff recommends approval of the Preliminary Plat and Conditional Use Permit with conditions. Mayor Kozlowski opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. The public hearing was closed. Motion by Councilmember Junker, seconded by Councilmember Polehna, to adopt Resolution 2015- 145, Approving the Preliminary Plat and Conditional Use Permit for Brown's Creek Cove, a Single - Family Development located on Neal Avenue North, (Case No. 2015-20) with the additional condition suggested by City Attorney Magnuson that the Development Agreement must be finalized. Ayes: Councilmembers Menikheim, Junker, Weidner, Polehna, Mayor Kozlowski Nays: None Page 8 of 11 City Council Meeting August 21, 2015 Case No. 2015-22. A public hearing to consider a request by Sterling Black of Fairway Development LLC. to approve a 20 lot residential Preliminary Plat and associated variances, Zoned RB: Two Family Residential, located at 1902 Williams Street North. Community Development Director Turnblad informed the Council that the public hearings for this case were originally noticed to occur on July 15th before the Planning Commission and August 18th before the City Council. However, the Planning Commission tabled action in July. Therefore, the case will not be ready for Council consideration until September 1. Therefore, staff requests the Council open the hearing and continue it without discussion until September 1. Mayor Kozlowski opened the public hearing. Motion by Councilmember Weidner, seconded by Councilmember Polehna, to continue the public hearing for Case No. 2015-22, a request by Sterling Black of Fairway Development LLC. to approve a 20 lot residential Preliminary Plat and associated variances, until September 1, 2015. Ayes: Councilmembers Menikheim, Junker, Weidner, Polehna, Mayor Kozlowski Nays: None UNFINISHED BUSINESS There was no unfinished business. NEW BUSINESS Possible approval of first reading of Ordinance 1082, an Ordinance Amending the Stillwater City Code, Chapter 29, Sewers, Sec. 29-3. City Attorney Magnuson explained that annexation resulted in a substantial number of homes being brought into the City with septic systems. Until now a formal agreement has not occurred. Washington County has proposed a formal agreement which would require the City to change its ordinance regarding septic systems. This will be the first reading. At the next meeting, the contract and the ordinance will be finalized together. Motion by Councilmember Polehna, seconded by Councilmember Menikheim, to adopt first reading of Ordinance 1082, amending the Stillwater City Code, Chapter 29, Sewers, Sec. 29-3. Ayes: Councilmembers Menikheim, Junker, Weidner, Polehna, Mayor Kozlowski Nays: None Possible acceptance of bids and awarding contract for 2015 Street Improvements. Public Works Director Sanders reviewed the proposed 2015 Street Improvements. He informed the Council that the two bids were substantially over engineering estimates with the low bid of $577,509.72 submitted by Hardrives Inc.(Engineer's estimate $507,000). He continued that a Bid Alternate was included to mill and overlay the North Main Parking Lot in the amount of $59,748.62. He presented three options for proceeding with the project; the first option would result in increasing the assessments 10-15%, the second option would keep the assessment rates as proposed in the feasibility study and reducing some construction costs that would not impact the project or the third option would reject the bids and rebid next year which could result in higher bids. Page 9 of 11 City Council Meeting August 21, 2015 He recommended Option 2 and that this has been discussed and approved with the low bidder and awarding the contract for the 2015 Street Improvement Project and the Bid Alternate to mill and overlay the North Main Parking Lot to Hardrives Inc. Motion by Councilmember Polehna, seconded by Councilmember Junker, to adopt Resolution 2015- 146, accepting Bid and Awarding Contract for 2015 Street Improvement Project (Project No. 2015- 02) with Option 2, as stated. Ayes: Councilmembers Menikheim, Junker, Weidner, Polehna, Mayor Kozlowski Nays: None Possible approval of No Parking on Hazel Street from intersection of the Brown's Creek Trail west to 50 feet west of North First Street. Public Works Director Sanders explained that staff has received safety complaints in the Hazel Street neighborhood west of TH 95 regarding the increased traffic and the number of vehicles parking on the street since the opening of the Brown's Creek Trail. Residents are worried about the poor visibility due to the steep incline of the road, and narrow driving lanes when vehicles are parked on the road. He informed the Council that Street widths on Hazel Street range from 18 feet near the trail to 24 feet at First Street and when vehicles are parked on the streets, through traffic must drive in the opposite lane which increases the potential for accidents. He recommended that no parking for Hazel Street from intersection of the Brown's Creek Trail west to 50 feet west of North First Street. Motion by Councilmember Junker, seconded by Councilmember Polehna, to adopt Resolution 2015- 147, authorizing No Parking on Hazel Street from Brown's Creek Trail West to 50 Feet West of North First Street. Ayes: Councilmembers Menikheim, Junker, Weidner, Polehna, Mayor Kozlowski Nays: None COUNCIL REQUEST ITEMS There were no Council request items. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Councilmember Menikheim, seconded by Councilmember Junker, to adjourn the meeting at 9:16 p.m. All in favor. Ted Kozlowski, Mayor ATTEST: Diane F. Ward, City Clerk Resolution 2015-141, directing the payment of bills Resolution 2015-142, approving the agreement between the City of Stillwater and St. Croix Valley Community Access Corporation for replacement of video cameras in council chambers Page 10 of 11 City Council Meeting August 21, 2015 Resolution 2015-143, approving the Police Department purchase of technology from Tritech Resolution 2015-144, approval of data practices policy for members of the public and the data practices policy for data subjects Resolution 2015-145, approving the Preliminary Plat and Conditional Use Permit for Brown's Creek Cove, a Single -Family Development located on Neal Avenue North, Case No. 2015-20) Resolution 2015-146, accepting bid and awarding contract for 2015 Street Improvement Project (Project No. 2015-02) Resolution 2015-147, authorizing No Parking on Hazel Street from Brown's Creek Trail West to 50 Feet West of North First Street Page 11 of 11 EXHIBIT "A" TO RESOLUTION #2015-148 LIST OF BILLS 1ST Line/Leewes Ventures LLC 4Front LLC Abbott Paint Accela Inc Action Rental Inc. Al's Coffee Company Animal Humane Society APMP Aspen Mills Becker Arena Products Board of Water Commissioner Bolton and Menk Inc. Boyer Trucks Brady Doug Brimeyer Fursman LLC Burks Tree and Landscape Care Carquest Auto Parts CDW Government Inc. Cedar Ridge Landscaping Century Link Century Power Equipment Chappell Central Inc City of St. Paul Coca-Cola Refreshments Cole Papers Comcast Cope Plastics Inc. Crosstown Masonry Inc Cub Foods Daka Corporation Delta Dental Plan of Minnesota Diamond Vogel Paints ECM Publishers Emergency Automotive Tech. Fastenal Company Felsch Chris Fire Safety U.S.A. FleetPride Foremost Promotions Frontier Ag & Turf G & K Services Goodyear Commercial Tire H&L Mesabi Iceman Industries Inc. iSpace Furniture Food for concession Rapid remover Paint Community Development App Lev 1 Maint Equipment reantal - stump grinder Coffee for concession Animal impound charges Stillwater bridge tour Uniforms, supplies & badges Equipment repair supplies Neptune meter Myrtle lift station Equipment repair supplies Reimburse for mileage Strategic planning retreat Tree and landscape care Auto parts & supplies Supplies Fire Hall Telephone Equipment repair supplies Fire Hall Asphalt Beverages for concession Janitorial supplies TV Internet & Voice Polycarbonate Fire Hall Food & supplies for picnic Fire Hall AP COBRA Traffic & field paint Publications Dodge Ram 2500 Outfitting Supplies Reimburse for FLIR Hose Hubcap Nite to unite fire education materials Equipment parts and supplies Uniform shirts Tires Equipment repair supplies Ice melt Flip n go Table tops Page 1 193.55 25.00 18.69 902.00 97.00 234.95 165.00 15.00 972.89 205.00 562.94 3,270.00 214.69 48.31 3,500.00 1,781.00 110.91 1,554.94 19,230.38 98.86 274.02 28,112.02 2,080.38 450.32 1,479.58 649.46 47.75 3,577.70 417.30 90,205.98 210.50 675.70 54.60 7,181.18 7.45 3,160.19 405.00 12.64 1,206.55 823.22 269.63 2,282.92 599.00 2,000.00 2,200.00 EXHIBIT "A" TO RESOLUTION #2015-148 Page 2 Jahnke Brian Jefferson Fire and Safety Inc. Jordan Joel Lakeview Hospital Loffler Companies M.J. Raleigh Truck Co. Mansfield Oil Company Marshall Electric Company Menards Metropolitan Mechanical Contractors Middle St Croix Watershed WMO Mi-Tech MN Dept of Labor and Industry MN Pollution Control) Agency MN State Fire Chiefs Assn Modern Heating Mulcahy Nickolaus Multiple Concepts Interiors Municode My Alarm Center NAC Mechanical and Electrical Services NAPA Auto Parts Needels Supply Inc. NEOPOST USA Inc. Office Depot O'Reilly Auto Parts Otis Elevator Company Overhead Door Company Papco Inc. RDO EQUIPMENT CO. Regency Office Products LLC Riedel) Shoes Inc. Safe Fast Inc Schwaab Inc. Sentry Systems Inc. Sonus Interiors Inc Standard Spring Parts Stillwater Farm Store Stillwater Medical Group Stillwater Motor Company Stillwater Turf & Power LLC T.A. Schifsky and Sons Tekton Construction Company The Locals Toll Gas and Welding Supply Tri-State Bobcat Tri-State Pump and Controls Inc. Reimburse for work boots Supplies Reimburse for work boots Certification and materials Copier Lease Sand gravel & dirt Fuel Electrical services Supplies Building repairs 2nd half 2015 Sink hole Boiler pressure vessel Collection Systems Basic Seminar Conference Public owrks AC unit repair Fire Hall Fire Hall Pages of code of ordinances Alarm Monitoring Services Fire Hall Auto parts & supplies Cleaning supplies Postage machine maint agreemen Printer ink Auto parts & supplies Elevator contract Fire Hall Mid grit brushes Equipment repair Supplies Skates Gas alert gas detector Red stamp Alarm monitoring Fire Hall Rear shackle kit Cornerstone plus herbicide Drug screen Vehicle service Speed feed trimmer head Asphalt Fire Hall Return of Unspent Deposit Cylinders Bobcat skid -steer loader Lift station repairs 160.00 297.06 89.99 300.00 4,931.05 253.54 6,819.86 3,997.35 3,087.85 758.30 16,822.57 820.00 10.00 710.00 275.00 345.00 1,029.80 1,282.50 1,190.00 88.62 3,140.70 331.53 196.30 1,387.19 315.75 197.15 1,532.68 12,062.15 447.44 495.38 19.64 340.58 780.00 39.75 140.85 1,653.00 229.00 99.88 68.00 56.36 58.07 11,584.53 294.50 6,892.00 42.04 6,000.00 9,511.26 EXHIBIT "A" TO RESOLUTION #2015-148 USAble Life Valley Trophy Inc. Verizon Wireless WalMart Community Wholesale Fitness Winnick Supply LIBRARY 16 Wins Advantage Companies Baker and Taylor Bertalmio Lynne Blackstone Audio Brodart Co Card Source Demco Inc. Infogroup MarKir/Clean Midwest Menards Midwest Tape MN State Horticultural Society Office of MN IT Services Papco Inc. Stripe A Lot Doug McLean dba Toshiba Business Solutions Washington County Library CREDIT CARDS Amazon.com AMEM Amsterdam Print BonTon Cub Foods Dream Host Ebay Festival Foods Government Finance Officers Asso Herbergers ICMA Membership Renewals Kowalski's Market Minnesota's Bookstore Rose Floral St. Croix River Assn Starbucks Target Term Life Insurance Name plates Wireless Services Nite to Unite Equipment for fitness room Equipment repair supplies Website Support Microfilming (SPLF) Materials Materials Materials Materials Borrowers Cards Processing Supplies Materials - Reference Parking Garage Washing Janitorial Supplies Materia Is Materials - Periodicals Telephone Janitorial Supplies Striping Maintenance Contract Ref. Database (ST Library Share) Materials & supplies Membership Supplies for Fire Education Supplies Bakery for Retirement Tech support Monitor mount Log Jam Publications for Exam Cookware & Housewares - Fire Hall Conference Reg Refreshments for Gallery Reference materials Outdoor plants St. Croix workshop for local leaders Staff recognition Nightstands - Fire Hall Page 3 427.20 199.20 1,486.87 576.44 6,743.00 713.68 520.00 1,125.00 1,040.85 65.97 145.98 586.87 695.00 83.65 620.00 1,699.00 70.71 63.13 34.00 341.75 244.26 500.00 37.18 473.10 626.64 150.00 574.63 310.66 24.49 19.95 22.03 40.43 39.90 580.49 705.00 116.61 598.00 44.74 120.00 10.00 314.88 EXHIBIT "A" TO RESOLUTION #2015-148 Vista Print.com AUGUST MANUALS Printing Page 4 41.92 Fun Jumps Obstacle course Nite to Unite 2nd half 240.00 Rainbow Corral Critters Petting zoo Nite to Unite 525.00 Xcel Energy Energy 15,149.41 CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: September 1, 2015 REGARDING: 2015 Preserve Minnesota Annual Statewide Historic Preservation Conference Scholarships PREPARED BY: Abbi Jo Wittman, City Planner As a Certified Local Government, Stillwater's HPC is required to send one representative to the annual statewide historic preservation conference. As such, the Minnesota Historical Society provides scholarships for attendance. Commissioners Larson and Mino, Council liaison Menikheim and I have been awarded scholarships for registration and lodging to the two-day event; mileage for two vehicles has been awarded, as well. The scholarship covers all costs associated with attendance; scholarship attendees representing the City are aware meals will be at their own expense so there will be no cost to the City. The Council should move to approve the attached Resolution, accepting the scholarship awards and authorizing Mayor Kozlowksi to sign the award agreements. APPROVING THE CERTIFIED LOCAL GOVERNMENT GRANT ACCEPTANCE FORM FROM THE MINNESOTA HISTORICAL SOCIETY WHEREAS, the members of the City of Stillwater Heritage Preservation Commission seek to attend the Preserve Minnesota Annual Statewide Historic Preservation Conference; and WHEREAS, the City of Stillwater has been awarded a scholarship in the amount of $1,399 from the Minnesota Historical Society's Certified Local Government grant program for attendance of two commissioners, the City Council liaison and one city staff; and WHEREAS, the City of Stillwater will utilize 52,098 of in -kind services and donated materials for a total project cost of $3,497. BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Stillwater, MN that the grant agreement between the City of Stillwater and the Minnesota Historical Society for the 2015 Preserve Minnesota Annual Statewide Historic Preservation Conference, as on file with the City Clerk, is hereby approved. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the Mayor are hereby authorized to sign said grant agreement on behalf of the City of Stillwater. Adopted by the Stillwater City Council on this 1st day of September, 2015. Ted Kozlowski, Mayor ATTEST: Diane F. Ward, City Clerk MINNESOTA HISTORICAL SOCIETY CERTIFIED LOCAL GOVERNMENT GRANT AGREEMENT ACCOUNT NUMBER FISCAL OBJECT FEDERAL PROJECT DOLLAR AMOUNT YEAR CODE NUMBER 00114 2016 5260 27-15-13122.026 $1399 HPF grant funds P15AP00206.026 $2098 match Awarding Agency: National Park Service CFDA Name: Historic Preservation Fund Grants -In -Aid CFDA Number: 15.904 Grant Name: Historic Preservation Funds Grant Grant Number: 27-15-131222/P15AP00206 This Agreement is made by and between the Minnesota Historical Society hereinafter called the Society), and the City of Stillwater (hereinafter called the City), pursuant to authority granted by the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended. WHEREAS, pursuant to the Act, the Society has been allocated funds by the United States Department of the Interior for use by Certified Local Governments for qualifying historic preservation activities; and WHEREAS, the City has applied for and been granted Certified Local Government Status and has made application for Certified Local Government funds to be utilized in carrying out the project described below, NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of and in reliance upon the mutual covenants and agreements contained herein, the parties hereto do covenant and agree, each for themselves and their respective successors and assigns, to carry out the project under the following provisions. PROJECT DESCRIPTION A. Four members of the city's staff (and/or historic preservation commission member) will attend the Annual Statewide Historic Preservation Conference. B. The project period is September 16, 2015 to September 20, 2015. C. The Society will reimburse the City for the costs identified in budget outlined below, following submittal of materials as described in Section III of this Agreement. D. The budget is as follows: BUDGET ITEM Cost/rate per person Number of people/cars Grant Match Registration $100 4 400 Mileage 240 miles@ $.56/mile 2 264 Lodging 4 room @ $91.85 / 2 nights 4 734 In Kind Time (City Staff) $30.40 /hr x 20 hr 1 608 Volunteer Time (HPC) $24.83/hr x hr 3 1489.80 Total 1399 2098 II. ASSURANCES A. The City assures that this project will be administered and conducted in accordance with the following: 1. OMB Circular A-87 "Cost Principles Applicable to Grants and Contracts with State and Local Government" and OMB Circular A-102 (revised) "Uniform Requirements for Assistance to State and Local Governments." 2. Department of the Interior regulations 43 CFR Part 12, Subpart C - "Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Cooperative Agreements to State and Local Governments." 3. The "Single Audit Act of 1984" And OMB Circular A-133 (revised) "Audits of States, Local Governments and Non -Profit Organizations." 4. Historic Preservation Fund (HPF) Grants Manual (June 2007), found online at www.nps.gov/hps/hpg/downloads/HPF Manual.pdf. B. The City acknowledges that this project is being supported, in part, with funds from the United States Department of the Interior. As a condition of receiving such funds, the City assures compliance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and the Age Discrimination Act of 1975. The violation of this section is a misdemeanor pursuant to Minnesota Statutes. This Agreement may be canceled or terminated by the Society, and all money due, or to become due hereunder may be forfeited for a second or any subsequent violation of the terms of this section. C. The City will indemnify and save and hold the Society and the Department of the Interior harmless from any and all claims or causes of action arising from the performance of this project by the City. D. The City agrees to make repayment of grant funds to the Society if terms and conditions of this Agreement are not followed or costs claimed are subsequently disallowed. E. The City, in accordance with provisions of 18 USC 1913 regarding lobbying, assures that no part of grant budget will be used directly or indirectly or to pay for any personal service, advertisement, telegram, telephone, letter, printed or written matter, or other device intended or designed to influence in any manner a member of Congress, to favor or oppose, by vote or otherwise, any legislation or appropriation by Congress, whether before or after the introduction of any bill or resolution proposing such legislation or appropriation. This shall not prevent communicating to members of Congress on the request of any member or to Congress, through the proper official channels, requests for legislation or appropriations which they deem necessary for the efficient conduct of the public business. The City assures that transferred federal monies will not be applied as part of the matching (applicant) share, and that monies used as match on other federal grants will not be used as matching (applicant) share on this project. III. REIMBURSEMENT PROCEDURES A. Payments under this Agreement will be made to the City on a reimbursable basis. All supporting fiscal documentation must be submitted prior to reimbursement. B. Reimbursement requests must be submitted before September 30, 2015. C. A Request for Reimbursement must include the following: 1 Request for Reimbursement Form (see Attachment A) indicating the total requested for all attendees. 2. Travel Expense Form (see Attachment B) for each individual attending the conference. This form must be supplemented with receipts and invoices for all non -meal and mileage expenses. Undocumented expenses will not be reimbursed. D. The Request for Reimbursement Forms should be submitted to Mandy Skypala, Minnesota Historical Society, Grants Office, 345 Kellogg Boulevard West, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102-1906. E. When the financial documentation has been found to be acceptable by the Society, funds will be requested from the Department of the Interior and will be forwarded to the City when the funds have been received by the Society. IV. AUDIT The City must submit a copy of all audited financial statements completed pursuant to OMB Circular A-133 for all fiscal years which include the project period. These must be submitted to Monica Zarembski, Minnesota Historical Society, Finance Office, 345 Kellogg Boulevard West, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102-1906, within 120 days of their completion. V. CANCELLATION A. Cancellation. The Society reserves the right of termination for cause on a thirty (30) day notice should it be determined that the City has failed to materially comply with the terms and conditions of this Agreement. This Agreement may also be terminated when both parties agree that the project will not produce beneficial results commensurate with further expenditure of funds or because of circumstances beyond the control of the Society and/or the City. In the event of termination, the City may be reimbursed for eligible expenses incurred prior to termination or by a negotiated settlement. Once this Agreement is signed, it controls all activities during the project time period. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement to be duly executed on the date(s) indicated below intending to be bound thereby. Minnesota Historical Society 345 Kellogg Boulevard West Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102 Stephen Elliott, (date) Director and State Historic Preservation Officer Barbara Howard (date) Director Heritage Preservation Department and Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer MHS Contracting Officer (date) City of Stillwater 216 North Fourth Street Stillwater, Minnesota 55082 signature (authorized official) (date) (print name and title) Attachment A Minnesota Historical Society Grants Office Request for Reimbursement for Federal HPF Grants Project: Statewide Preservation Conf. Scholarship Federal Grant Number: 27-15-13122.026 /P15AP00206.026 City: City of Stillwater MHS Contract Number: (handwritten on top right corner of grant agreement) Federal Grant Amount: $1398.8 TOTAL AMOUNT REQUESTED: (Attach individual Travel Expense Forms with supporting documentation for each person) Supporting documentation for all costs claimed in this request must be attached. Each supporting document should be labeled with the appropriate Project Expenditure Classification. I certify that this request for Reimbursement represents actual project expenditures carried out within the period of the project. Date: Signature: Print name and title: Telephone: Name: Address: Phone: Minnesota Historical Society Grants Office Travel Expense Form Statewide Historic Preservation Conference: Little Falls, Sept. 17-18, 2015 City/HPC: Attachment B Expenses: In-Kind/Volunteer Labor: A. Registration: (attach copy of receipt) $ # of Hours X $_/hr. = Total $ B. Mileage miles @ $.575/mile $ (HPC members claim $24.83/hour. City staff claim C. Lodging (attach copy of receipt) $ actual wage rate. For city staff, please submit Expense Total (add A. through C.) $ documentation of claimed wage rate) Scholarship recipient signature Date City contact/supervisor signature Date Attachment C Minnesota Historical Society Value of Donated Services for HPC Members Time Sheet for Statewide Historic Preservation Conference City of Stillwater 27-15-13122.026/P15AP00206.026 City Federal Grant Number Name of Person Contributing Services Note: A form must be completed for each person attending the conference Attend Statewide Historic Preservation Conference Hourly Rate: $24.83/hr. Based on: $24.83 flat rate for all HPC members established by MNSHPO Time of Work Type of Work Performed Value Date Start End Total Hours Hourly Rate (Hours x Rate) $24.83 $24.83 $24.83 $24.83 $24.83 TOTALS: Signature of Person Donating Time Supervisor Verifying Accuracy Date Date Attachment C Minnesota Historical Society Value of Donated Services for City Staff Time Sheet for Statewide Historic Preservation Conference City of Stillwater 27-15-13122.026/ P15AP00206.026 City Federal Grant Number Name of Person Contributing Services Note: A form must be completed for each person attending the conference Hourly Rate: $ /hr. Based on: Actual rate of pay. * See note Attend Statewide Historic Preservation Conference Type of Work Performed * Note: Please attach documentation supporting claimed rate. This can be a payroll ledger which identifies the rates of pay or a "wage letter" from the controller or financial officer which states the names and rate of pay. The letter must be signed by an authorized city official. Date Time of Work Start End Total Hours Hourly Rate Value Hours x Rate) TOTALS: Signature of Person Donating Time Date Supervisor Verifying Accuracy Date MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Shawn Sanders, Director of Public Works DATE: August 28h, 2015 RE: Bridge Inspection DISCUSSION Every four years, the City is required by the State of Minnesota to inspect our one bridge in the City. The bridge, which is actually a box culvert, is located on Neal Avenue at the crossing of Browns Creek. Since I am not qualified as a structural engineer to perform the work, the City must hire someone to do the work. SEH, who has performed the inspection the previous three times, submitted a quote of $1500 to do the work. This work includes the inspection, and providing the necessary documentation to the State. Funds are budgeted in the engineering budget for this inspection. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that council approved the SEH to perform the bridge inspection for the City in the amount of $1500. ACTION REQUIRED If Council agrees with the recommendation, they should pass a motion approving SEH to perform the bridge inspection. MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Shawn SandersDirector of Public Works DATE: August 28h, 2015 RE: Sidewalk Repairs DISCUSSION As part of the street improvements on Fourth Street, it is proposed to raise portions of the sidewalk from Myrtle Street to Mulberry where the sidewalk has settled along the curb. The city requested quotes from a couple of mudjacking companies for the proposed work. Northstar Mudjacking & More submitted a quote of $8000 for the estimated 4000 square feet of work. This comes to $2.00/SF, considerable less than if the sidewalk was removed and replaced. Funds have been budgeted for this work. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that council approved the quote from Northstar Mudjacking & More in the amount of $8000 for work on Fourth Street between Mulberry and Myrtle Street. ACTION REQUIRED If Council agrees with the recommendation, they should pass a motion approving Mudjacking & More for the sidewalk repair work on Fourth Street. iliwater H E 6 1 R 1 H P 1 ACE OF MINNESOTA CITY COUNCIL TO: Mayor & Council DATE: August 28, 2015 MEETING DATE: September 1, 2015 APPLICANT: Sterling Black, Fairway Development, LLC LANDOWNER: Fairway Development, LLC REQUEST: Preliminary plat for 19 lot single-family subdivision LOCATION: Western terminus of Hazel Street CASE NO.: 2015-22 DECISION DEADLINE: 120 days for a preliminary plat request Decision date October 16, 2015 REPORT BY: Bill Turnblad, Community Development Director INTRODUCTION Sterling Black, Fairway Development, LLC is requesting preliminary plat approval for a 19-lot detached single-family development to be known as HAZEL PLACE VILLAS. The property is located at the western terminus of Hazel Street next to the Stillwater Country Club. The first version of the Preliminary Plat was tabled by the Planning Commission with a recommendation to eliminate the many variances. That was done. The revised Preliminary Plat eliminated one lot and all variances. An analysis of the applicable standards are presented in the attached planning report. Hazel Place Villas August 28, 2015 Page 2 SPECIFIC REQUEST Fairway Development, LLC requests approval of the 8/12/15 version of the Preliminary Plat known as HAZEL PLACE VILLAS. TESTIMONY In addition to the Planning Commission minutes, there are a number of letters attached to this memo that have been submitted subsequent to the Planning Commission public hearing. They include a letter from the developer's legal counsel, a petition and letter from the immediate neighborhood, and several emails. RECOMMENDATIONS Planning Commission On a 4-1 vote the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council deny the Preliminary Plat request. Park Commission If a trail connection to Brown's Creek Trail is feasible, then the Park Commission would like the developer to build that portion of the connection that would be located on his property. City staff Staff recommends approval with the conditions found in Alternative A of the attached planning report. bt attach: Planning Report Letter from developer's attorney Letter and petition from neighborhood Testimony emails ti1Lwatet HE B I R T H P L A C E fl+ M I H H E S fl T A Planning Report TO: DATE: MEETING DATE: APPLICANT: LANDOWNER: REQUEST: LOCATION: COMPREHENSIVE ZONING: REVIEWERS: Mayor & Council CASE NO.: 2015-22 August 28, 2015 September 1, 2015 Sterling Black, Fairway Development, LLC Fairway Development, LLC Preliminary plat for 19 lot single-family subdivision Western terminus of Hazel Street PLAN: LMDR, Low/Medium Density Residential 1) Base Zoning District: RB, Two -Family Residential 2) Overlay District: Stream Shoreland Management District for Brown's Creek. Public Works Director, City Planner, Deputy Fire Chief, Brown's Creek Watershed District PREPARED BY: Bill Turnblad, Community Development Director BACKGROUND Sterling Black, Fairway Development, LLC came before the Planning Commission on July 8, 2015 with a 20-lot preliminary plat to be known as HAZEL PLACE VILLAS. The property is located at the western terminus of Hazel Street next to the Stillwater Country Club. The initial application included numerous variances such as street width, lot frontage, cul-de-sac length, and building coverage. The Planning Commission could not find in favor of approving the variances requested and tabled action to allow the development team time to revise the preliminary plat. Hazel Place Villas August 28, 2015 Page 2 The revised plat eliminates one lot and all variances. The current 19-lot version meets all lot dimension standards, coverage standards and road design standards. The base zoning for the property is RB, Two -Family Residential. A small portion of the site is also encumbered by the Brown's Creek Stream Shoreland Management Overlay District (referred to as the "Stream Overlay District"). However, the Stream Overlay District only applies to the northern portion of the property with its steep slopes. As proposed, the steep slopes will not be disturbed during this project. The entire overlay district will be included within Outlot A, and as a condition of plat approval the steep slopes within the outlot will be encumbered by a conservation easement. The project site has a total gross area of 7.17 acres, 5.90 of which are located outside of the Brown's Creek buffer area and therefore considered developable. The 19 detached single-family lots range in size from 8,907 square feet to 32,088 square feet. SPECIFIC REQUEST The applicant requests approval of the 8/ 12/ 15 version of the Preliminary Plat known as HAZEL PLACE VILLAS. EVALUATION OF REQUEST A. Minimum Dimensional Standards 1) Minimum lot standards for the subject RB Zoning District are given below. Lot Standards Area Widths Frontage Depth Required 7,500 sf 50' 35' 100' All lot standards are met or exceeded by the 19 proposed lots. 2) Minimum building setbacks for the RB Zoning District are: Building setbacks Front (house) Front (garage) Side Rear Required 20' 30' Combined sides 15' (min 5') 25' ' Measured midway back along the side lot lines. Hazel Place Villas August 28, 2015 Page 3 All proposed building setbacks meet the letter of the Code. However, a primary goal of the RB Zoning District is to emphasize the house and not the garage. To accomplish this, staff believes the intent of the garage setback for the district is to set the garage at least 10 feet back of the front building line of the house. In other words, 10 feet further back from the street than the house. But, the words in the code say 10 feet back of the "front set back line" of the house. The effect of the literal words is to allow the garage to be 10 feet back of the 20 foot front set back line; or, 30 feet from the front lot line (irrespective of where the front wall of the building actually is located.) Therefore, the proposed garages meet the literal 30 foot setback requirement, even though they are in front of the house. In recognition of the conflict between literal and intended Code requirements, the developer is proposing to de-emphasize the proposed garages by side loading many of the garages. 3) Maximum impervious surface coverage. In this zoning district, buildings are allowed to cover 25% of the lot area, and in addition non -building impervious surfaces can cover another 25%. The driveways are all short enough that the impervious coverage is not an issue on any of the lots. And, as seen from the attached table, the building coverages have all been reduced below 25% in this version of the Preliminary Plat. B. Civil Engineering The City Engineer has reviewed the plans and makes the following comments: • At the recommendation of the City Engineer, the proposed Hazel Court/Hazel Place/Hazel Street intersection was redesigned to create a T-intersection. Hazel Court will now be straightened to become a 90 degree stop -sign controlled intersection. This creates a safer corner than the previous design. • To protect the integrity of the edge of the road, a minimum 12" wide, 7" thick concrete flat ("ribbon") curb will be installed along the edge of the road in all areas where standard curb and gutter is not Hazel Place Villas August 28, 2015 Page 4 installed. Though this is not on the current plan sets, the developer has agreed to add this to the final plat plan sets. • All the infiltration basins/rain gardens are shown to be on private property. They must therefore be privately maintained. Private maintenance will include all the storm sewer pipes including those under the right of way. Pipes under the road must be concrete. • The developer's civil engineer will need to submit data with Final Plat application materials to demonstrate that the pond material will achieve the proposed infiltration rate. • In reviewing the storm water calculations, there are a few concerns in areas where the ponds appear to overtop into the road. These need to be corrected in the Final Plat application materials. The distance from the High Water Level of a pond shall be a minimum of 10 feet from the edge of the road. • The overflow for pond 8C must not flow to the cul-de-sac, but to the west down Hazel Street. • The storm water plans must be reviewed and approved by the Brown's Creek Watershed District prior to City approval of the final plat. • The construction plans must be found satisfactory to the City Engineer prior to commencement of any site grading. • The property is serviced by sewer and water trunks that were installed as part of the North Hill Project. Trunk sewer and water charges are $11,249 per unit. Since the now demolished farm house was already assessed for sewer and water, one of the lots will be given credit. The total cost for the other 18 lots will be $202,482. This payment will be required prior to release of the Final Plat for recording with Washington County. • All electrical and communication utility lines are required to be buried. C. Fire Protection The Fire Marshal has reviewed the plans and has found them satisfactory. The street lanes at the entrance will need to be at least 14 feet in each direction around the entrance island. D. Tree Removal, Replacement & Landscaping The significant trees on site have been located, numbered, sized and identified, and this information is shown on the plans and an attached table of tree species and size. Grading (and clearing) limits are also depicted on the plan. The trees on this site are primarily of the species quaking aspen, Hazel Place Villas August 28, 2015 Page 5 red pine, spruce, bigtooth aspen, as well as some birch, oak and ironwood. The faster growing volunteer species on much of the site are not defined in City Code as "significant". Steep slopes with tree cover are not within the construction limits, so no removal of trees will take place in those areas. More than 35% of the tree canopy on site will be removed. Therefore, a 1:1 replacement is required for each significant tree removed. 45 significant trees are slated for removal and will need to be replaced with a 2.5" diameter tree (measured at 56" above grade). Also, landscaping calls out for 2 trees per lot. So that yields another 38 trees in addition to the 45 replacement trees. The total required is 83. The total number proposed is 40. So, 43 more trees will need to be added to the final plat application materials. Note: This tree removal and replacement information was reviewed based upon the 7/28/15 version of the preliminary plat. The amount of tree cover removal has been reduced with the 8/26/15 version of the tree removal plan. The additional tree mass being saved is shown in green in the attached tree removal plan (C1.4). This will likely reduce the number of replacement trees required, but review time was not available to complete a recalculation. Therefore, at the time of final plat application submittal, tree replacement will need to be re -calculated. E. Park and Trail Dedication The Comprehensive Plan shows no public park needs on this site, nor does it call for trail connections traversing it. Public park - Since the Comprehensive Plan does not call for parkland on the site, the public park obligation ought to be satisfied by fee in lieu of land. The fee currently is $2,000 for each single-family lot added to the park system. Giving credit for the farm house that was demolished last year, the 18 additional lots would be a total fee of $36,000. Public trail - As with park land, trails are not shown on the development site either. So, the standard method for meeting trail obligations would be to contribute $500 toward the City's trail system per lot, or $9,000. However, given the immediate adjacency to the recently developed Brown's Creek State Trail corridor, the Park Commission would like to see a connection to the trail and directed staff to investigate the feasibility of a Hazel Place Villas August 28, 2015 Page 6 connecting trail segment either to the north on this property or along Hazel heading eastward. Given the very steep protected slopes along the Brown's Creek Ravine, it is unlikely that Brown's Creek Watershed District or City Code will permit trail development as a series of switchbacks along this slope. City staff will review the feasibility and have additional information available for the Council at the time of Final Plat approval. F. Wetland and Stream Buffering As mentioned above, this property is near Brown's Creek and all property abutting this creek is required to provide a buffer that is not disturbed during or after development. The boundary of that buffer zone, as determined by the Brown's Creek Watershed District, is shown on the attached plans. No grading or other disturbances are proposed within the buffer zone. Though, as mentioned above, the Park Commission would like staff to explore the possibility of grading and tree removal for a trail connection down this slope. G. Outlots One outlot is proposed. It will encompass a stormwater pond as well as steep and heavily wooded slopes that lie within the buffer area of Brown's Creek. In addition to covenants and restrictions on the private outlot, a conservation easement protecting the steep slopes and creek buffer will be required at final platting. ALTERNATIVES A. Approval If the City Council finds the proposal to be compliant with City development standards and consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, then it could approve the 19-lot Preliminary Plat, with the conditions below. If the Council decides to pursue this alternative, a vote to conceptually approve would be necessary on September 1st. Staff would then bring a Resolution of Approval to the Council for formal action on September 15, 2015. (The 120-day statutory deadline for a decision on this Preliminary Plat application is October 16, 2015.) Hazel Place Villas August 28, 2015 Page 7 1. The site will be developed in substantial conformance with the following plans on file with the Community Development Department, except as may be modified by the conditions herein: • Existing Conditions • Tree Survey • Tree Removal Plan • Preliminary Plat • Site Plan • Utility Plan • Preliminary Grading Plan • Erosion Control Plan • Details • Planting Plan • Landscape Details • Planting Details Sheet C1.1 revision date 6/19/15 Sheet C1.2 & C1.3 revision date 6/19/15 Sheet C1.4 revision date 8/26/15 Sheet C1.5 revision date 8/12/15 Sheet C2.0 revision date 8/12/15 Sheet C2.1 revision date 8/12/15 Sheet C2.2 revision date 8/12/15 Sheet C2.3 revision date 8/12/15 Sheets C3.1-C3.5 rev date 8/12/15 Sheet L1.1 dated 6/19/15 Sheet L1.2 dated 6/19/15 Sheet L1.3 dated 6/19/15 2. Plan sheets L1.1, L1.2 and L1.3 must be revised to show the current 19-lot development configuration, and submitted at time of final plat application. 3. To protect the integrity of the edge of the road, a minimum 12" wide, 7" thick concrete flat ("ribbon") curb must be added along the edge of the road in all areas where standard curb and gutter is not installed. This change must be incorporated into the final plat application materials. 4. The trunk sewer and water fees of $202,482 will be paid to the City prior to release of the final plat for recording with Washington County. 5. All electrical and communications utility lines will be buried. This is to be specified in the plans submitted for final plat approval. 6. Review comments from the Brown's Creek Watershed District will be addressed in the Final Plat application materials. 7. All civil engineering plans and construction plans must be found satisfactory to the City Engineer, or revised to his satisfaction prior to release of the Final Plat for filing with Washington County. 8. If a trail connection to Brown's Creek State Trail is not feasible, then park and trail fees of $45,000 will be due to the City prior to release of the final plat for recording with Washington County. Trail connection feasibility will be analyzed and discussed at the time of Final Plat consideration by the City Council. 9. Outlot A will be covered by a conservation easement. As an alternative, only that portion of Outlot A within the so-called Modified Middle Zone Buffer of Brown's Creek need be encumbered by the easement. Under either option, the easement must be reviewed and found satisfactory by the City Attorney and Community Development Director prior to filing it together with the Final Plat at Washington County. 10. Outlot A will be owned and maintained by the Home Owners' Association for the subdivision. Consequently, pertinent Home Owner's Association Hazel Place Villas August 28, 2015 Page 8 documentation shall be submitted together with the final plat application package, found satisfactory to the City Attorney and filed together with the Final Plat with Washington County. 11. Maintenance of the rain gardens and ditches will be the responsibility of the Home Owner's Association. This will be included within the Home Owners' Association documents and the language will be found acceptable by the City Attorney and the City Engineer or revised to their satisfaction. 12. The 7/28/15 version of the preliminary plat landscape plan showed a replanting shortage of 43 trees. The 8/12/15 version of the preliminary plat grading plan shows fewer trees being removed. Therefore, the tree replacement requirement will need to be re -calculated when the final plat application materials are submitted to the City. 13. Landscape plan L1.1 (dated 6/19/15) must be updated to show the elimination of one lot and the recalculated tree replacement requirements. These revisions will be included in the final plat application materials. B. Table If the Council does not find that the preliminary plat request is complete enough to make a decision, it could continue the review until September 15th for additional information. (The 120-day statutory deadline for a decision on this Preliminary Plat application is October 16, 2015.) C. Denial If the Council finds the proposal to be inconsistent with City development standards and/or the Comprehensive Plan, it could deny permission to develop. If this is the course of action contemplated, a vote to conceptually deny would be necessary on September 1st. Staff would then bring a Resolution of Denial to the Council for formal action on September 15, 2015. (The 120-day statutory deadline for a decision on this Preliminary Plat application is October 16, 2015.) RECOMMENDATIONS Planning Commission On a 4-1 vote the Planning Commission recommended on August 12, 2015 that the City Council deny the Preliminary Plat request. The Commission based their recommendation on a different interpretation of cul-de-sac length than has been used by City staff. The City Code does not specify how to measure a cul-de-sac's length. It merely states that it cannot exceed 600 feet. Given the lack of Code specificity, City staff has historically measured a proposed cul-de- sac from the center of the cul-de-sac to the curb line of the existing street it is joining. Under this measurement method, the proposed cul-de-sac does not exceed the 600 foot length allowed by Subdivision Code. However, the Planning Commission measured it to Hazel Place Villas August 28, 2015 Page 9 5th Street, which is the first opportunity to take a second travel route option. Measured to 5th Street, the center of the new cul-de-sac is more than 1,400 feet distant. Park Commission If a trail connection to Brown's Creek Trail is feasible, either northward over the steep slopes on the development site, or eastward along Hazel Street, then the Park Commission would like the developer to build that portion of the connection that would be located on his property. The park and trail fees that would otherwise be due could be credited toward the construction costs of this trail. City staff Since the Preliminary Plat is consistent with the City Comprehensive Plan and compliant with development and zoning standards, staff recommends approval with the conditions found in Alternative A above. cc Sterling Black Bruce D Malkerson Roger Humphrey Attachments: Planning Commission minutes Location Map Zoning Map Development Plan Set Lot coverage table Hazel Place Villas August 28, 2015 Page 10 Excerpt from Planning Commission Minutes August 12, 2015 Present: Chairman Kocon, Commissioners Collins, Lauer, Middleton, Siess, Council Representative Junker Absent: Commissioners Fletcher, Hade, Hansen, Kelly Staff: City Planner Wittman Case No. 2015-22. Consideration of a 19-lot residential Preliminary Plat and associated Variances, located at 1902 William Street North. Sterling Black, applicant. City Planner Wittman reviewed the request. The applicant came before the Planning Commission on July 8, 2015 with a 20-lot preliminary plat to be known as Hazel Place Villas, located at the western end of Hazel Street next to Stillwater Country Club. The initial application included numerous variances such as street width, lot frontage, cul-de-sac length and building coverage. The Planning Commission could not find in favor of the variances requested and tabled action to allow the developer to revise the preliminary plat. The revised plat dated July 28, 2015 has eliminated one lot and all variances. The current 19-lot plan meets all lot dimension standards, coverage standards and road design standards. Staff received three comments: letters from Melanie Ebertz and Gail Plewacki, and a submission from 22 residents representing 10 properties, opposing the application on the basis the cul-de-sac is a risk to the public. Staff recommends approval with the conditions identified in the planning report dated August 6, 2015. Sterling Black, applicant, stated the lots have been reconfigured since the last meeting, one unit has been cut, and the length of the cul-de-sac has been reduced to comply with City requirements. The current proposal is a better product for them, the City, the neighbors, and the watershed district. Roger Humphrey, Humphrey Engineering, informed the Commission that the project was revised due to neighborhood and watershed district input. He explained the revisions - eliminating a lot and moving the cul-de-sac while maintaining the same number of units on the golf course side. New utility, grading, erosion and stormwater management plans have been done to create a better plan for everyone. The cul-de-sac length is measured from the center of the cul-de-sac to the edge of Hazel Street. It is based on the standard block which is 660 feet long. He offered to answer any questions. In regard to Condition #2 of the planning report relating to the "T" intersection, Mr. Black stated they have not fully studied its impacts and would prefer an island as a more defined entrance to the neighborhood, as proposed. Mr. Humphrey described the way the center island with plantings is designed, as opposed to the City -recommended "T." They would be willing to work with engineering staff to find a suitable controlled intersection design. Hazel Place Villas August 28, 2015 Page 11 Chairman Kocon opened the public hearing. Ken Harycki, 2004 Hazel Court, noted that the City's subdivision ordinance was completely amended in 1996. Cul-de-sacs are normally limited to 400-800 feet in the interest of public safety. A 1,500' cul-de-sac creates a public safety issue for access and for safety vehicles. Hazel Street is 28' wide, which is substandard according to City code. The street narrows down to 21.5' at its narrowest, going up the steep hill. Adding traffic through this narrow funnel is not a good idea. The previous 2007 approval won on a 3-1 City Council vote. It came down to a local person working their connections who got it through. It was a very ugly process. James Purcell, 2001 Hazel Court, expressed concern about the defoliation of the property. The existing foliage provides drainage, so eliminating it will force stormwater into the ravine in his backyard. If allowed to go forward, developers should be required to utilize the existing topography and leave a substantial amount of foliage in place to facilitate drainage. They also should be required to post a security bond so if they go bankrupt, the neighborhood can be restored. Brian Boucher, 317 West Hazel Street, summarized that the neighbors are not against the property being developed, but are concerned about the number of units. 19 units does not fit into the character of the neighborhood. Brian Larson, 2008 Hazel Court, agreed that the number of units proposed is too high. This affects the entire North Hill and the entire City. He submitted a letter with a number of signatures expressing concerns about the cul-de-sac length. The site is very unique in its topography. There is one way in and one way out, and it has ravines and the golf course on its sides. There won't be another way to access the homes if the street is blocked. The cul-de-sac is not truly 590 feet but more like 1,400 feet. The hill is treacherous. An often -quoted standard of the American Institute for City Planners lists disadvantages of cul-de-sacs including: access to interior lots can be blocked, long cul-de-sacs encourage increased traffic speeds and mid -block turning, dead- end watermains encourage sedimentation which adds to fire hazards, public equipment such as fire trucks have difficulty maneuvering. A second dead end street should not branch off from a cul-de-sac. Other research done in Massachusetts by the Pioneer Institute for Public Policy recommends that cul-de-sacs must be measured from center of the cul-de-sac to the nearest intersection with a through street (a street with more than one access). He asked the Commission to look at the issue as unique and see the public safety issue. It should be clarified in City ordinances as well. John Schoenecker, 301 Willow Street East, stated Willow is the only route available off Highway 95. So most of the construction and public traffic will be coming up and down Willow, whose residents are still paying for street reconstruction. He is concerned about the extra weight causing deterioration of the street. He asked if the developers will be held responsible for any damage. He does not like the density of the development but realizes development will occur regardless. Liz Nelson, 300 Willow Street East, stated on the two blocks of Willow there are six elementary aged schoolchildren. Busses don't use those streets so the kids are walking down the street. In Hazel Place Villas August 28, 2015 Page 12 icy conditions cars go off the road regularly. It doesn't make sense to add that much traffic into a small area. The integrity of the area should be preserved, especially considering the money that has been put into Brown's Creek natural area. Dave Hatch, 2009 Third Street North, voiced concern about safety and limited sight distances. James Meier, 405 West Hazel Street, pointed out that streets in the area are substandard, raising safety concerns. He agreed with previous speakers in opposing the development as proposed. Debbie Sinclair, 14411 Dellwood Road, shared her concern about light pollution spilling over into neighboring properties, especially with all the trees gone and the density of the development. As many of the trees as possible should be retained. Tim Sinclair, 14411 Dellwood Road, questioned the proposed engineered walls on the north edge of the property. The last two houses on the north are right up against those walls. Lots of pressure would be created against the wall by a heavy rainfall He would hate to have it all give way and end up on Brown's Creek Trail. The development as proposed is not feasible. Mary Harycki, 2004 Hazel Court, agreed with the previous speakers and thanked the Commission for listening. Melanie Ebertz, 1924 North First Street, reiterated concern expressed at the last meeting, about the bike trail. Her home is at the top of the hill, so she has seen a lot of close calls on the road. The previously approved project was planned before the trail was completed. Hazel Street is now a trailhead. People have to accelerate to get up the hill and they careen down it. She believes it would be negligent and unlawful for the City not to consider the use of the trail which is being promoted statewide. Chairman Kocon closed the public hearing. He summarized the public concerns that were expressed. He does not wish to denigrate any objections that were brought forward, but the developer has come forth with a proposal that fits the zoning and comprehensive plan. He feels property owners have the right to develop within the zoning codes. In contrast with the plans that were approved eight years ago, the revised plan has a shorter cul-de-sac, less density, less impervious surface, and does not require a variance. City staff has determined that the cul-de- sac will work within the City ordinances. Commissioner Middleton agreed that property owners have a right to develop. But the City's obligation is to ensure that codes are followed and that the fabric of the community is considered by the developer, and he feels that failed in this case. Stillwater has a cul-de-sac length restriction of 600 feet. In his opinion, a 1,400+ foot cul-de-sac is proposed. He cannot support the development. Commissioner Siess stated this new proposal is better than the previous one, but she strongly agrees that the proposal should be recommended for denial. Commissioner Collins said even though one house was eliminated, public safety issues remain. He thanked the neighbors for their input. He worries about safety after having driven back there Hazel Place Villas August 28, 2015 Page 13 numerous times. The street is very narrow especially when two cars pass. He believes the development as proposed would totally change the character of the neighborhood. Commissioner Lauer remarked he doesn't support the proposal, but he is feeling constrained by the fact that last month, the Commission told the developer to come back with a revised proposal. It now fits within the regulations set forth by the City. The streets are substandard, but the property owner has the right to develop even though the project will be completely detrimental to the area. Motion by Commissioner Siess, seconded by Commissioner Collins, to recommend denial of Case No. 2015-22, Preliminary Plat and associated Variances for a 19-lot residential development, located at 1902 William Street North. Commissioner Siess clarified that the basis for the motion to recommend denial is the finding that the cul-de-sac length does not meet the 600 foot requirement in the subdivision ordinance. City Planner Wittman suggested the Commission may want to document the finding that the applicant inadvertently has asked for an 850-foot variance and that there is not a practical difficulty established for a variance of that nature. This finding would essentially differ from staff's interpretation of the code. While it was staff s interpretation that no variances are needed, the Commission appears to believe that the cul-de-sac should be measured from Fifth Street, and if that is where the cul-de-sac is measured from, a variance would be needed. Commissioner Siess agreed that her motion was based on findings as City Planner Wittman stated. City Planner Wittman mentioned the motion could also include the findings of fact that were made by the Planning Commission in 2007. Commissioner Siess agreed her motion was made in support of the findings of the Planning Commission and its recommendation for denial in 2007. Motion passed 4-1, with Chairman Kocon voting against. 0 cn, 191i 0 0 1915 U u) 1905 1901 224 EAST WIL 1-81 H T8 J11E2 The Birthplace of Minnesota Hazel Place Villas 1902 William Street North Subject Parcels Parcel Boundaries ^�— Municipal Boundary 245 490 General Site Location 980 Feet 1.11"'"•4"1" DEULWGOu ,._ Brown's Creek Edge of Stream Overlay District 1 HAZEL_ STREET-_- POPLAR STREET 1\rater, THE BIRTHPLACE OF MINNESOTA Hazel Place Villas Zoning Map A-P, Agricultural Preservation RA- Single Family Residential RB - Two Family TR, Traditional Residential • LR, Lakeshore Residential CR, Cottage Residential CTR, Cove Traditional Residential CCR, Cove Cottage Residential CTHR, Cove Townhouse Residential ▪ TH, Townhouse RCM - Medium Density Residential ▪ RCH - High Density Residential VC, Village Commercial ▪ CA- General Commercial - CBD - Central Business District BP-C, Business Park - Commercial BP-O, Business Park - Office BP -I, Business Park - Industrial IB - Heavy Industrial CRD - Campus Research Development PA - Public Administration PROS - Park, Rec or Open Space Public Works Facility ROAD WATER R 0 E E N • a 5e r-/ jjie EAST WE OF of L 0 ; rS�E PODIA EAST74S0FET$Qr11.*RI 213.55 PIPE nLs IRsRAac 2121.65 rCIBLI LN. EAST LN! VW 1 N W 1/4 NO NOTES LOCA1E0 IN 1119 AREA 145.89 Ao1Y8'30"E DEVELOPMENT DATA TOTAL AREA OF PARCEL - 312,145 SQ. FT. / 7.17 ACRES PROPOSED 20 LOTS THERE ARE NO WETLANDS LOCATED WrIHIN THIS PARCEL OUTLOT R IS FOR DRAINAGE RIRPOSES PROPOSED 20 LOTS = 21 B,189 SQ.FT. AVERAGE LOT 512E = 10.909 SQ.FT. DEWY - 2.79/AC PROPOSED RIGHT OF WAY - 35.462 SQ.FT. 09. r ZONING - SETBACKS J / f / •/2 $4'1 /111/' f ; ?PLOT 9 THE PROPOSED ZONING FOR THE PMEEL 9 RS PROPOSED SINGLE ROILY MINIMUM LOT 51iE = 7.500 SQFT. MOTTf SETRACR - MAIN MULDING: 20 FEET, GARAGE 90 FEET REAR SETBACK - 25 FEET 911E SEISAGC . TOTAL OF MOTH 911E YARDS MUST EQUAL 15 FEET WITH AT LEAST 5 FEET CN EAOI SCE NINNr1N RGITT OF WAY WIDTH = 50 FEET BLOCK S22 1 .777Jb EE:S00 --9MT UNE EAST SB8 201.7E FEET • 1 / Ives DS A5 SYMBOLS: 301•11'45"E 659.35 W SANITARY MANHOLE E ELECTRIC NETER a GAS MEIER 0NCRETE ▪ DENOTES FOUND 1 T2' IRON RPE DENOTES SUSTAIN® SLOPS GRATER THAN 25% UTILITY INFORMATION O HYDRANT • POWER POLE OVERHEAD WIRES TREE Tg TELEPHONE SOOT GUY POLE THE UTI TTE5 SHOWN R91EON WERE FIELD LOCATE PER RIME SIRIICT1,R6 WHERE POSSIN.E OTHER UNDERGROUND UTILTIIES NOT SHOWN OR LOCATED. C COPONSHT2015 HHUMPH:EYEDRI•EEA•I7 ER: OEN. AU REPRO R as MOE OCCUBflS ARE AN PETRUBROF SERVE®AIA ATIETE PROPHiTY Cr HDAIA MAY NOTFEUSED CRCOP®WRIAITT RUORHNRTBIOONMDIT. OF STILLY/AO 47 CITY OF M i i / I§ FOLD D 0/ PIPE 4- STONE YONU EIIT CENT00. EE0.21. T30N, R201I. -11 NOI263a.a — r EAST LME OF NW 1/4-'" STONE MONUMENT N 1/4 COINER OF EEC. 21 1 0 OFNOI1145WBOOING FOUID 1 DMPIPE 9E CON OF SW___---r 1/4 MI 1/4 5 ocr DEsc-IPnoN- BIF GOR EAST 251s5 OF EMI/4 NW IA N019,1613 1�76 411 f —OVERLAP . iLL WA TER COUNTRY CLUB INC. Or Ivonr3rw 6— — 14.00 1{ T20NSTONE, R20M-4/2II0PC T MW m --00RNEH OF SEC 21 At - I PEST LIE OF NM 1� ! 1 251.75 STONE MONUMENT 8W COMER NM/4 5E0217' N01-13i9'M fr NORTH 0 40 80 r171-1 SCALE 1 INCH = 40 FEET ail 011 I ila! 1111 t - i m LJ u z gL J PREFECT NO 527-083 PRAWN 81'. RM CHEWED MY: RH DATE: 0.1.15 81EET H0: C1.5 GENERAL NOTES THE CURRENT EDfON OF THE MINEESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 'SIAM: ARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR Cp1STRUCTION' GOVERNS EtCEFT AS MOOFIED BY THE CRY OF STLLWATER CODES, ORDINANCES, STANDARDS AND SPECI CATIONS. BURNISH, INSTALL, INSPECT, M ANDAN AID REMOVE ALL NECESSARY TRAFFIC CONTROL SKMNAOE ALL TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES AND W AGE SHALL COFFORM TO ALL LOCAL COUNTY AND STATE TRAFFIC CONTROL GUIDELINES. INCIDENTAL TO PROJECT. THE DUSTING UTILITY INFORMATION SHOWN ON THESE DRAWINGS IS NOT GUARANTEED TO BE ACCURATE OR ALL INCLUSIVE CONTACT GOPHER STATE ONE CALL (661-064-01X19) FOR THE LOCATCN OF ALL LNDERGROLTID WIRE3S, CABLES. CONDUITS. PIPES, VALVES, MANHOLES. OR OTHER BURIED STRUCTURES BEFORE DIGGING. REPAIR ANY OF THE MOVE WHICH ARE REMOVED CR DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER THE EXACT LOCATION OF ALL UTILITIES AND UTILITY CONNECTIONS MUST EE VERIFED PRIOR TO COMNENCIA WDIE(. LOCATE, REID VERIFY AND PROIECTALL DOMING UTLJIIES AND TOPOGRAPHIC FEATURES PRIOR TO START OF SITE CONSTRUCTION. MYEDIATEL NOTIFY THE ENGINEER OF ANY DISCREPANCIES OR VARIATIONS FRp THE PLAN. EE IRE ALL NECESSARY PERMITS AND NOTIFY ALL LmLTTY COMPMIES WITH UIlmES ON SITE PRIOR TO THE CONSTRUCTION THE PROJECT. ADHERE TO ALL APPUCABLE LOCAL STATE. AOWRL FEDERAL LAWS FOR MY COST INCURRED DUE TO THE DAMAGE OF SALT IJ LmES. EKISTNG SURVEY AID TOPCGRAPHC INFO CORNERSTOPE LAND SURVEYING. HLIYFH NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR THE ACCURACY OF BY OTHERS. s111y/ __.�-•. 'DRY i / 11 / 1/1'/ �J,- ./ f �1 //i �f 7- J,-/ • - /�• / - // �.\ r - - - ��- _-- r� / I "yr I I I i I 4. 1 // . -J / �{r .`_JII+I // r I . • . 1 1 , 11 . r r . � / fI -? 1J + \ 1 `11 f ,//r'r ' - 1 J I f./i'/ 7- fi / f lI 44 {4,, 41 1 ', Ni 4 T / — : v •513 y \ 1 11 `A j \C� �) 1\ �;� F tv'vv'w � / JPQSSIBLE 30� �- * - 2 1 Sr y f /. i • ' 2 / f % / 1 1 + ! / 1 14 f In 1r. 1{/ . 1 1 4 4 4 � e- _ ��� 1 1 l4 � 11 ly \ - J►�p j1 I N 111 14 i 1 , \ \ `�. r 86b LOT 11 1Tk26 sq. R. C COPYRIGR4013FPJMRi1EY ENOIRAIIE IIG(FE7). ALL RIGIIB HUMMED.THEE DOCUBRB ARE ANIwrRUBNTOFImEFCESA1L AFETE PROPERTYDF HEI ME MAY NCT BE LIED CREWED EATFElTPRIM VORT17B1 O0NSENT. r zy c 1- ��f -b 4'N „a sow ,- I r d r — ~fie —Izul= s n ENV 4'94 �qA rr I &I 2 f4/4ff4i I 1 4 1 \ I 4 4 4 \ \ 1 I i)_7:1,,..7.1111, , 11. �1% I ltll \� \p /1 /I. �/1 1,11 r/I 11 .1 If I/f I �ffff�rl 111/11/ 11 r1; /1/ / 1 fir+ 1 IIIIfi � 11111 m I11+ I 11Iy1t J1y41``I / 1 ..9 / I Itio1' 1 !f 11 1 i r t 1 1 r r 1/ + 1 / / c r I 1 i h ( 1 4 4 h 4 m 1 { 1 0 43 1 1 l 0 1 ll ( I 1 sr 1 1 o ' ID \ \ ❑ 1 1 P 1 SO g 41721 Mil Mil PRAWN MI FOA CHEWED ET: RH DATE: 5.1.15 SLEET NA GENERAL NOTES THE CURRENT EDITION OF THE MWNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 'STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR CONSTRUCICN' GOVERNS EXCEPT AS MODIFIED BY THE CRY CF STILLWATERCCDE6, ORDINANCES, STANDARDS AND SPECFICATIONS. FURNISH, METALL, INSPECT, MAINTAN AEO REMOVE ALL NECESSARY TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNAGE. ALL TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES AND SIGNAOE SHALL CONFORM TO ALL LOCAL, COUNTY AND STATE TRAFFIC CONTROL OUL€LJNES, NCID@RALTO PROJECT. THE EXISTING UTLITY FIFORMATON SHOWN ON THESE DRAWNL45 IS NOT GUARANTEED TO DE ACCURATE OR ALL NCLUBIVE CONTACT GOPHER STATE ONE CALL (651454-0102) FOR THE LOCATION OF ALL UM3ERGROUND WRES, CABLES, CONDUITS, PIPES, VALVES, MANHOLEE, OR OTHER BURIED STRUCTURES BEFORE DOOM. REPAIR ANY OF THE ABOVE WHICH ARE REMOVED OR DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE CANNER. THE MAW LOCATION Cf ALL UTILMEB ATE UTL E YCONP EGTICNS MUST BE VERFIED PRIOR TO COMMENCNG WORK. LOCATE, FIELD VERFYAND PROTECT ALL EXISTNB IJIILTIEE AM3 TOPOGRAPHC FEATURES PRIOR TO START OF BITE CONSTRUCTION. IHLEDIATELY NOTIFY TFE ENGINEER OF ANY DISCREPANCIES CR VARIATIONS FROM THE PLAN. SECURE ALL NECESSARY PETITS AND NOTFY ALL UTILITY COMPANIES 1MTH LRILITIEB DPI SITE PRIOR TO THE C INETRIJCTIDN OF THE PROJECT. ADHERE TO ALL APPLICABLE LOCAL, STATE, AMOR FEDERAL LAWS FOR ANY COST INCURRED DUE TO TEE DAMVV3E QF I AID 1JTILTITEB. E XISTNG SURVEY AD TOPOGRAPHIC INFORMATION PROVIDED BY CORAERSTONE LAND 6URVEYNG• HUMPHREY ENGINEERING NC. I P OT RESPONBIBI5F3R 171E8 cUR9CY OF INFDRMATICPPROVEEO E Y orF£RB. F RIOR TO ANY 817E DEWATERNO, A PLAN IS TO BE APPROVED BY Y IATER9HED DISTRICT. SANITARY SEINER PEE EMNTARY SERVICE PIPE WATER NANPPE WAIHIERWCE PIPE ITIVRANT LEADS FIYDRANTE INSTALL 8' PVC 0 0.5 % MIN. GRADE AS NEEDED TO PROVIDE DRAINAGE TO RAIN GARDEN FROM GUTTER UNDERORAIN SYSTEM YSDREPVG 4'MIR SI PVC U. ore DU CANS ID I. TYPE IC COPPER I. OF, CLASS III MUTeadE RICER YRHO 1 1 6' ORIFICE RIM ELEV. 892.0 INV ELEV. 88.7.5 ' _. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR AL HORIZONTAL AND VERTIEC CONTROL ONCE THE AUGMENT HAS MEN ESTABLIBFED BYTEE SLINEYOR ADDT1@4AL COST FOR REST/MG APLWRREPLACNG DAMAGED STAKES IS TEE RDSPONBBLTY CF THE CONTRACTOR HYDRANT a' ORIFICE RN ELEV. 898.0 INV ELEV. 881.0 22.5' RENO INV ELEV. 888.90 PROVIDE ANY AM ALL TESTING TOINCLUOE BUT NOT LISTED TO SOL COMPACTION TESTING. WATER MAN PRESSURE COPCUCTNTTY AND BACTEAMTESTNI; &INI1RY SEWER PRESSUREAND MM1545 TEETIND, CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER SAMPLING AMD TESTNG TO OCCUR NO LESS THAN EVERY WV AND ADDITIONAL TESTING DE393 NECESSARY BY THE CITY DR ENGNEER WTH NO ADDTONAL COMPEREATIOII. ALL MESS MATERIAL, BTIJMNOUS SURFACING, CONCRETE ITEMS, REMOVED UTLJTY ITEMS AID OTHER UNSUITABLE MATERIALS EH9LL BECOME THE PROPERTY OF THE CONTRACTORND SHALL BE DISPOSED OF OFF THECONSTRIIC110N ERE IN ACCORDANCE WITH ALL APPLICABLE LAWS AND REGULATIONS UNLESS 0TNERVn8ERPECFED. 8' ORIFICE RIM ELEV. 880.0 INV ELEV. S85.47 46' REND INV ELEV. 885.09 ]dOF12' PVC L 1% 6' ORIFICE RN ELEV. 891.5 INV ELEV. 888.55 8' ORIFICE RIM ELEV. 899.0 INV ELEV. 895.5 INSTALL STORII NH #1 48' DIAMETER RIM ELEV.899.5 INN ELEV. M8.47 INV ELEV. 889.32 INV ELEV. (5) 889.22 R-1733 CASINO ////.// } Get 4`-,• j N k. CB RIM- fi8.04 INV.= 54.94 12' CMP ETN. INV ELEV. 872.0 17Y OF ,Y PVC fa =,3i 6' ORIFICE RIM ELEV. 891.5 INV ELEV. 685.7 8" ORIFICE RIM ELEV. 899.0 NV ELEV. 895.05 RIM ELEV. 885.5 INV ELEV. 891.5 REMOVE EXIS11NG CASTING, AD.LJST AND REPLACE W/ R-3350 OR EQUAL CONNECT TO EXISTINC SANITARY STUB ELEV. 850.68 (FIELD VERIFY) CONNECT TO EXISTING 8" WATERMAIN STUB (FIELD VERIFY} 6' ORIFICE RN ELEV. 873.5 INV ELEV. 871.0 8" CATE VALVE INSTALL STORM MH 43 46" DIAL 1E RIM ELEV. 888.0 I INV ELEV. (N) 984.00 INV ELEV. (MI) 874.15 INV ELEV. ( 874.05 R-1733 CASTING 6" ORIFICE RN ELEV. 891.5 INV ELEV. M87.5 PSOF12' ,P E�ri EM IOW w . .,. O r roc w.E 1 INSTALL STORM CB *1 48' DIAMETER RIM ELEV. 887.40 INV ELEV (51J) 884.0 R-1733 CA511NG PRCPOBED SOT ELEVATIONS AND COHTOI1MIARE TO PROPOSED FlNEFED GRADE. PAVERFJR OR TOP OF CURB, UNLESS OTHERWI8ESPECIRED. CARE MUST BE TAKEN DURING ALL CONSTRUCTION MO EACAVATON AOTNTTE 5 TO PEWIT:MNI SURVEY MONUMENTS AM]10R PROPERTY CORINR7& REPAIR ANY AND ALL DAMAGE TO EN0SITN° STRUCTURES AND 8TE FEATURES DUE TO CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY. ALL PROPOSED UTLITY CONSTRUCTION SWILL BE COMPLETED USINGAPPROVED INTERN$ METHODS OF RJK.EMENTAIO TESTING AS REQUIRED BY ALL GOVERNINGBPEORCATIWRB. LOCATE WATER BERVIC£ CURB STOPS la HERNO TIE PROPERLY LINE UNLESS OTHERWPIE SPECREA HYDRANTS LOCATED FROM BACK OF CURB. MLANTMN 78 0E COVER OVER TOP OF ALL PROPOSED WATER MAN IJEOALUGS SHALL BE USED ON ILL HOVER MAN FITTING& C C0PYEET401SFMMPFMEY EIMMEEPMS LIG BET. ALL RESITS R R5 THESE DOCI ENS ARE ANLETUSENTEFLHWICESAlCARETFE PROPERTY Cr HEI AID MAYN0r E LE® DROOPEDWRHOUT PRIOR WINTER CO MEO.. 8' ORIFICE RN ELEV. 899.E INV ELEV. 000.42 8' ORIFICE RL1 ELEV. 895 INV ELEV. 890 8" ORIFICE RN ELEV. 669.5 INV ELEV. 885.40 NSTALL SAN. UH .5 DIAMETER Its ELEV. 30.24 NV E1011. (SE) 883.72 NV ELEV. 863.812 -1 - .. I. 8' ORIFICE RIM ELEV. 888.5 INV ELEV. 684.26 22' SEND INV ELEV. 885.50 8' ORIFICE RIM ELEV. 679.5 INV ELEV. 676.5 INSTALL STORM CB 12 223 BOX RIM ELEV. 871.50 INV ELEV. (NE) 888.00 INV ELEV (SW) 663.25 R-1733 CASTING �, INSTORM CB #3 3 ECU ■ RN ELEV. 671.75 X NV ELEV. (NE) 88825 R-1733 CA-TING NOTE. SRN PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS. NSTALL SAN. MN 42 48' DIAMETER RIM ELEV. 373.05 NV ELEV. (NE) 881.39 NV ELEV. 881.49 R-1733- ENG 8' ORFICE RIM ELEV. 873.5 INV ELEV. FE no PFE "E r PPS 01'12'30"W NV. 075.5 SS EE GIP ■ BL NV. 876.5 12' FES INV. 879.5 2 FES NV. B&k0 INSTALL SAN. M1H J4 4E INAMETER RIM ELEV. 885.76 INV ELEV. (E) 87521 INV ELEV. (NW) 875.31 R-1733- CASINO 2 FES NV. 98&0 INSTALL STORM UH /5 46' DIAMETER RIM ELEV.891.0 INV ELEV. (5W) 674.65 INV ELEV. (NW) 885.35 INV ELEV. ( 874.80 R-1733 CASINO 45BEND INV ELEV. 1181.67 INSTALL SAN. UH y3 46' DIAMETER RIM ELEV. 682.24 INN ELEV. 670.07 INV ELEV. B70.17 R-1733- CASTING 7 SCALE: 0 15 30 50 � u_5: J ail Oh II Mil tipi i m PRO/3CT MP 527-003 PRAWN 81'. Rif MEWED MT: RH °m' 6.1.15 MEETNOc 1 C2.1 GENERAL NOTES THE CURRENT EDITION OF T}E MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 1TM1ARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR CONSTRUCTION' GOVERNS IDCEPT AS MOOFIED BY THE CRY OF STLLWATER CODES, ORDINANCES, STANDARDS MID BPECIRCATI0NS. BURNISH, INSTALL, INSPECT, MANTAN AMC REMOVE ALL NECESSARY TRAFFIC CONTROL NONAGE ALL TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES AND SEWAGE SHALL COWORM TO ALL LOCAL COUNTY AND STATE TRAFFIC CONTROL GUIDELINES, INCIDENTAL TO PROJECT. THE EXISTING UTILITY INFOMMTION SHIOWN ON THESE DRAWINGS IS NOT GUARANTEED TO BE ACCURATE OR ALL INCLUSIVE CONTACT GOPHER STATE ONE CALL (651-054-00O2) FOR THE LOCATION OF ALL UNDERGROUND WIRES, CABLES, CONDUITS, PIPERS, VALVES. MANHOLES, OR OTHER BURIED STRUCTURES BEFORE DIGGING. REPAIR ANY OF THE MOVE WHICH ARE REMOVED CR DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER THE EXACT LOCATION OF ALL UTIJTTES AND UI1LITY CCNNECTIONSr MUST EE VERIFED PRIOR TO CJOMIMEONCN1 WOPoC. LOCATE, REND VERIFY AND PRCTECTALL METING UTIJTIES AND TCROGRAPHIC FEATURES PRIOR TO START OF SITE CONSTRUCTION. NNEDIATELM NOTIFY THE ENGINEER OF ANY DISCREPANCIES OR VARIATIONS FROM THE PLAN. SECLIRE ALL NECESSARY PERMITS AND NOTIFY ALL LRILRY COMPARES WITH UFLFIIES ON STE PRIOR TO THE CONSTRUCTION THE PROJECT. ADHERE TO ALL APPLICABLE LOCAL STATE, MICR FEDERAL LAWS FOR ANY COST INCURRED DUETQ TH DA I OF SA NTE. H-M-- — 999555 y3i' I f, rJ stiff / EOSTNG SURVEYAMA TOPCG iAPHTC INFO -• . 1 ::,� D CCR IERSTOFE LAND SURVEYING. IMPART -... , NEiINC I NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR THE ACCURACY OF 14 BY OTHERS. / JJ : `�'--_'6 PRIOR TO ANY aim DEWATERNO. A PLAN-1 Jv/6grI"R0VV�1D WATERSHED DISTRICT. r -- / r / " J / t / II 4 1{ 1{{ tl'l• \\lllll\\\ 1J 111, 1 ,. \ i �111 ,r `\ ''�I \ +//// /7- J /(///////G if I 1 +r//�jI I// -`/ ji 11111//�r' � 'I11f/l // J14lfy�f/ i .— —�ll�lljI(Ir. `i/ ��Y—t --J ) Lit,„4HI r I" I (__I I , t7 ` (11, { {J i It f/ ��/ -/ �__� -1_ Iri \ \, \ ' 1_ !.../..... , r" ,� 7,-- _ t �I�- MIDDY IE 1 4- ( 4 L { ( / ByFFER J ' 1 l 11 \ 4 d ) yi 1 1 I f I �_ �_'▪ __=, P, I/ 4 I 1 ▪ •-.. 1 a ) `----.., ,... o 11 \ I. \� `� f '• t I— • \ , 1 \ \ \ RM A/IYITre \ CCMCC CONFORM IX IMIRMORATE WIMPS PROROlm IW CLNIXMLI FROPMED I11RRm1AS OONCERE TIE: lac CACIEAC I.EIAC FORE NADIR WRACK DIVINE ARROW ROAIIII MALL HP I LP TE NC OFE 1LE LSO NIGH FONT ION MIT 10-1W MICR MAMI EiW10N RP CF WILL EEIATEN IOTOR CF WAIL GEWI7IXI MAD ROIH I.EIRILN FROM FLOCK EIVACIFR TOR LONE! W IOMAT MIGHT CPEIAI NE M ORA IA13 LEA L COL MINE II'1 // / i • / /7i - RCDF OUTER SYSTEM TO CONVEY A MIL C RMFALL EVENT.. CATERS 10 BE CURER MANUFACTURED 111111 A WEAN QI0BB-SECTIONAL AREA OF 32 SOUME NOES AIC BE INSTALLED AT A IIFMNTI MACE OF PER FOYN. DONMBPOUTS SHALL HAW A MIL AREA CF 35 SNARE NCFE L CUTTER DBG4ARSE TD GRAN DNEC1LY TO RC FI4 RA CRETILAIC FLOW CR IHID A CUTER UWERDRAN MIEN (SEE CETAL SHEET G 3) N1O RD 4114 USE ONLY SUITABLE MATERIAL AS APPROVED BY TIE ENGNEER FORBULGING PADMC STREET CONSTRUC110P REMOVE INSURABLE AND UNSTABLE MATERIALS INCLUONG BREW MUTED TO TOPSOL, ORGANIC MATERIAL NC DEBRIS FROM THE OOLONG PAD AAC STREET AREAS. COMPACT THE LFPE R S FEET OF EMSAMWENT IN THE STREET TO HOC% OF 'Of STAL]ARO PROCTOR DENSITY. COMPACT STREET EMEANWERTS BELOW THE UPPERS FEET AND BULGING FOINDATIONB TO HOLED. THAN EL OF THE STANDARD MCCICR DENSITY. BACKFILL ALL BELOW GRADE EXCAVATIONS MMEDAATELY UPON REMOVAL OF TIE UNSUITABLE SOILS. SMALL EXCAVATIONS MAKER TO BOOTIE PAYMENTS PROMPTLY 1O AVOCUPCEMVINO OF THE RESTING PAVEMENT. SALVAGE AND PROVIDE A MNIMLM DEPTH CF INCHES OF TOPBOL TO AJLATHEAS DETURED BY CONSTRUCTION. 005- — 1 903,5 896.5U LBO 896.5 Poi —mjimEM _AO �rsi�r rt•IFR�i� 1ma1 ip SOZO ` i_rAI1_ _i1ru1► 4U ' ono-v-- -- ',r MFE Ft02.50 Th B95.5 LBO 895.50 NOTE SEE FINAL PLAT FOR DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS. TOP LOWER SLAB CRS}AND GARAGE FLOOR ELEVATORS (CAFE) SHOWN ON TIE PLAN ARE FNAL THE MPJN FLOOR ELEVATIONS (MAFE)AND LOW BUILDING OPENNGS p.BO}ARE SUGGESTED ELEVATIONS ONLY. THE ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION ELEVATIONS MAY CHANGE DUE TO BUILDERIOVNIER PREFERENCES. RETAINING WALL ELEVATIONS SHOWN ON THIS PLAN ARE FVRREFERENCE ONLY. SEE CONSTRUCTION PLANS COMPLETED BY FOR FINAL • - EN ELEVATIONS. GRAOINi, LIMITS \ l • PROYCE ALL SOIL TESTING AT NTERVN9 NO LESS THAN EVERY SOD AFC ADDITIONAL TESTING OEHi® NOTIFY THE CITY CFST LWATER, Mile MOOS IMPARTMENT AR HOURS N ADVANCE OF REFAMES ALL DAMAGE TO E]USITNG GLT ESRESOLTNG FROM CONSTRUCTION NECESSARY BY THE CITY OR ENGINEER WITH NO AGOROXAL COMPENBATIOII. WORKING WITHIN TFE RIGHT OFWAY. CRY CFSTLLWITER DEFECTORS MUST OBSERVE ACTWTITES AT NO COST TO THE OWNER ALL WORK COMPLETED, INC W ONO THE REMOVAL OF MONO CURB S BUTTER. EXCAVATION OF TRENCHES, PLACEMENT OF BTAFRI DRNN.QNNECTIONI lV EXIMTN0 UTLJTY LINES, BACICFUNG AND RECLACEEYTOF BITUMMOUS PAVEMENTANDOR CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER THE SPECFIED DENSITY METHOD OF COMPACTION IS REQUIRED FOR ALL PORTIONS OF PERMANENT COMPRUCTION IFAM]AIC CLIMFACT1ON IS RECLINED FOR AMY TEWORARY GCSLWrIFUOMPL DISPOSE OF ALL MESS MATERIAL, BRUMNOUS SUFFACINE CONCRETE ITEM, REMOVED UTUIY MIASMA OTHER UINBUITABLE MATERIALS OFF THE CONSTRUCTION BRE IN AOCCRDANCE IAITFI ALL APPLICABLE LAWS AND REGULATIONS, LNLESS OTHER/05E EPECFIR. PROPOSED SPOT ELEVATIONS AND CONTOURS ARE TO FNISHED GRADE, PAVEMENT SURFACE OR TOP OF CURB, UNLESS OTFERIMEE SPECKED. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL CONTROL ONCE THE AUGMENT HLAS BEEN ESTABLISHED BY THE SURVEYOR ADDITIONAL COST FOR RFSTAK NO AND/OR REPLACING DAMAGED STAKES IS THE REBPONSBILTIY OF THE CONTRACTOR C COPYRIGHT 2013 HUMPLREI EMOREERINA DG CEI ALL FRAHM FUESERM31 THE DOOIBRS ARE AN IWTRU®FTOFIECMCERPAIL. ARETIE PROPERTY OF HI AFC MAY NOT BE USED ORCOP® MIRCUTRTIORMRITTENCGNSEIT. COMPLETE ALL PROPOSED STREET CONSTRUCTION DENS APPROVED MATERIALS, METHODS OF PLACEMENT AND TESTING AS REQUIRED BY ALL GOWNING SPECIFICATIONS. CARE MUST BETAKEN DURNG CONSTRUCTION AMC EXCAVATION TO PROTECT ALL SURVEY MCNUMEJTS ANDAR PROPERTY IRONS ON ANDAD.NCENT TO THIS SITE. PFLTRATON AREAS SHALL BE STATED OFF DIMING CONSTRUCTION TO RESTRICT HEAVY EOUPMENT TRAFFIC FROM COMPACTING TIE NATIVE SOILS. PROVIDE ASMOOTH AND THOR011DH TRANSITION BETWEEN PROPOSEDSRE GRADES AND DRAINAGE WAYS AND DOSING BURROWING SITE GORGED AMC ORAIMMOE WAYS. RPRAP SHALL BE CLANS 11.1r, UNLESS OT-ERW IPECIRED. ALL CORE AND GUTTER SHALL BE O MICRETE DC1 L UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECFIED. SEE DETAIL WETTER DIMENSIONS PREVAIL OVER SCALEDDIMENSOHS. 2 VERTICAL CCNTCLA INTERVAL, N.G.VA VERTICAL TATUM. -- S CALE: 11 O 15 30 ID ANY STCCKPLE LOCATED ON SITE MUST BE PLACED ON BLOCK 1, LOTS 1-T. PLACEMENT OF STOCKPILES AT ANY OTHER LOCATIONS MUST BE APPROVED BY THE ENGINEER L.) g 721 g Hi Oh ila! 1111 fi i m z Q- PRO/3CTAR 527-003 DRAWN PA RANI CELTOC LW: RH 5.01.15 MEET NO C2.2 REMOVAL NOTES: CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY THE LOCATION AND REMOVAL CF ALL UTILITIES. / ALL PUBLIC AND PRIVATE UTILTTIES SHOWN ON THIS PLAN ARE APPROXIMATE N -` LOCATION APO DEPTH AND SHALL RE VERIFIED BY THE CONTRACTOR. OTHER LRTLITIEB MAY EX1STAIIO IT SHALL BE THE RES°ONSIBILRY OF THE CONTRACTOR TO OBTAIN THE LOCATIONS OF SUCH. TIE E7C TINO UTILITY INFORMATION SHOWN ON THESE DRAWINGS IS NOT G IARA TEED TO BE ACCURATE OR ALL WW1/HIVE. CONTACT GOPHER STATE ONE GILL (B51454-0O32} FOR THE LOCATION OF ALL LNDERG WUNDWIRES, CABLES, COMMITS, PIPES, VALVES, MMHOL.ES, OR OTHER BURIED ETRLICRURES BEFORE DIGGING REPAIR ANY OF THE ABOVE WHICH ARE REMOVED OR DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NO COMM THE OWNER. ALL EXISTING PARIONG LOT LIGHTS SHALL BE REMOVED. THE LOCATION OF K G 9 ELECTRICAL SERVICE TO THE LIGHTS IB UNIOIOYYN. C t , M1 L Od• ANY REMOVAL OF WATERMAN SHALL INCLUDE TIE REMOVAI1 OFAIpFWATERW4H,1, APPURTENENCEE NCLUDING PIPE. GATE VLLVES, HYCR4NW ATOMS. ETC. \ I1 y -- ANY BANTAM' OF BANTA!EWER AND $IPR I EVER SHALL INCL1LELE THE -�� • 'y 1, )( REMOVAL OF ALL PIPE. MAM IOL jS a -'I ) 1 r f f j RENOVAL I- rani APRJCALLI LAWTHE DI�OFALL REMOV®RE7M8IN 411ly 1I PIOCOR[iAP 1 i1r� DEACIJTION OF 9CISTING BUILDING SHALL BE COMPLETED N ACCORDANCE WITHA/4r APPLICABLE LAWS. ANY PERMITS REQUNED FOR THIS WORK WILL BE THE ! I RESPONBIBILTTY OF THE CONTRACTOR I z� AV L EAST SW 1/4 NB 1/4 ly111111j l \` .' 1 \1 `• , e 1\;`ii, . r,„ #t 1 OUILOT EAST IE A D` . EAST 1480 r T801•11, 46TE 1 oass STFEp VEST UM DT TO - ^JI NW COR. °UILOT B - %7!l1r7F1u If;@U11fJ I �'ygO .tillrllrllf,r SO UIHBI.V +1 n r111,r _ hill R/IY LINE :,rlil irllrf r . , 1i11lr1rlflrr trr�,illirr II+ I III+r NO mires 1^. 'I 4 LOCATED IN ) 1111 1 THIS AHEM J 1 I I 11 1 'Il 114r 11 11 11 L1114I \ I'' _ 1.141,1Y111Tin. PIrrE fo% / J. slAPrc ,� 1 1 1 1�I � � �ia . 1 h 1 :. NEW ,BOUT! DARY EST 1 PCMIELE SETBACK ^'OUN STEEP SLOPES. PVC 10De t. 0319, I` oRAWMO NrT� ' un 1 5E.3d TS WITH tiik i!k 1/4- H 5 H tiT 400 eac O SAWCUT ET. PAVEMENT, CURB AND GUTTER AND REMOVE TO THIS POINT • ❑:8 � aim 4 / r fly / LA -EAST r A7 341AODIFIE❑ MIDI o-...: ZONE B}ERER 14 a142e ` g - - V �.}y5 a•. REMOVE „AU_ TREES WITHIN eiso GWADPJG LIMITS EFEREf�OE SHEPT'.G1.3) 142 GRAMS LIMN -� LIMITS, C1:3.'r/ -� 1(*M 742,1e ?$ 1'•F" EES WITHIN OR f e LIMITS RENCE SHEET C1.3) PERIMETER SILT FENCE MUST BE IN PLACE PRIOR TO ANY LAND DISTURBING ACTIVITIES, INCLUDING TREE REMOVAL 3111.25 FEET - CGOPYRWDHT2013HUMPIREY EHDIEERNE ern SE7} ALL mama eeaaR THESE 002WIEN1li ME AN wirm11PB1TOF pERlJ IIL AAETFE PROPERTY OF HDA110 NAY ICT E.USED ORL'OPEO wnmotrr PRORMIRTEIIOGNSDYT. REMOVE EXISTING GRAVEL SURFACE REI.l VE. ALL TREES W THIN/-� +, UMI Br NCEGSHEETSCI.3)V,145 V I ; i 14 � � { ' I',111 1 DEMO EXISTING HOUSE, GARAGE, SHED, AND RE TAINING WALLS i 1 t 1 1 1 r, \ f -f 13e I IIi (`� 1137 J,39 ., �\ II g f f 1 1 \ { \ ^1 '--- L I I I 1 1 1 - \ 1 { 1 i '• - '� ,\ \ ` , REMOVE A_LL TREES WITHIN 11 I. \ \ '\ GRADING LIMITS \, \ \, (REFERENCE SHEE \C1.3) \ 1320.50 \ I ABANDON EXISTING WELLS PER DOH REQUIREMENTS --RETAINING 'WALL \--OVERLAP I 'OIL '1-�. SEC 21. TSON,. R2OW. 211111'45'2 - 2838.46 EAST UNE OF NW 1/4--' 1 .,_ STONE MOIJUMENT N 1/4 CORNER OF SEC. 21 oF STILL. � g5 C+ 0 pC• Nd. OVERHEAD ELECTRIC TO BE REMOVED OR RELOGATE❑ 1101132/ FENCE TO BE REMOVED J DT IMW PPE DESCRIPnon ,,$-LLWATER C UNZRY CL �►�L' smirxrw 1 r —Irieaao NT CFNDISIWII BEEIBIC FOUND 1/2 INCH RON PIPE 7T/ _ / 5E EATL CF 1/4 NW 1/4, oct Si CCR EASTII3H.2S CF sfl/4 MN I/4 STONE Fh019D RENT NW 2 `CORNER OF SEC. 21 STONE M4IJDMEI.T SW O1 3C'rl, RPPW. CORNER 115/4 SEG2l.'--tLNr Jq� WEST UNE CF NW 1I�� f - - V 28A4.75 H0113.15"W SCALE: 0 20 40 80 ail i '1.,di ' 1111 i i 1 PAO.ROI'NR 527-003 DRAWN 5Y: RM C EMED Ft RH DATE: 6.1.15 SHEET NG C1.4 (1/4' _____ x_\ 0 � f. N I, 0 • WEST LINE EAST 6125 FEET . .. =�— 45141 _NO-1 °1,2' 30" W STIL L WA TER CO GENERAL NOTES: CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT GOPHER STATE "ONE CALL" AT 651.454.0002 TO VERIFY UNDERGROUND UTILITY LOCATIONS BEFORE ANY EXCAVATIONS. CONTRACTOR TO STAKE LOCATIONS OF ALL TREES AND SHRUBS. ACTUAL LOCATION OF PLANT MATERIAL IS SUBJECT TO FIELD STAKING ADJUSTMENTS AND SITE CONDITIONS. OBTAIN OWNER AND LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT APPROVAL PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. Z RE: HOME SITE PLANTING: PLANTING PLAN & GROUND COVER PLAN & INSTALLATION SUPERVISION WILL BE BY OWNER, WITH BUILDER & MUTUALLY APPROVED LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR 0 15 30' 60' SEE SHEETS L1.2 AND L1.3 FOR PLANTING ALL OTHER PERMANENT COVER NOTES, DETAILS, SEED MIXTURES (NOT SPECIFIED OTHERWISE) AND PLANT LIST TO RECEIVE SOD INFILTRATION POND PLANTING KEY 646466464664. .0.4.00444.40 .4664.60460.466 -1,60-4066.6-6660 BUTTERFLY MILKWEED Plant Plugs 18" O.C. DWARF BUSH -HONEYSUCKLE Plant Plugs 18" O.C. WILD BERGAMONT Plant Plugs 18" Q.C. GRO-LOW SUMAC Plant Plugs 18" O.C. BLUE FLAG IRIS Plant Plugs 30" Q.C. INDIAN GRASS Plant Plugs 18" O.C. BIG BLUESTEM Plant Plugs 18" O.C. 64.644.6646...44 SWITCHGRASS Plant Plugs 18" Q.C. SEE SHT. L1.3 FOR DETAILED PLAN AND PLANT LIST PLANTING KEY DECIDUOUS OVERSTORY TREE Eg. Maple, Linden, Ash, Oak, Birch, & Willow CONIFEROUS OVERSTORY TREE Eg. Black Hill Spruce, White Pine Scotch Pine, Colorado Green & Blue Spruce DECIDUOUS UNDERSTORY TREE Eg. Japanese Tree Lilac, Amur Maple, Quaking Aspen, Poplar, Pagoda Dogwood, Crab & Yellow Birch CONIFEROUS UNDERSTORY TREE Eg. Arborvitae, Red Cedar DECIDUOUS LARGE SHRUB Eg. Lilac, Virbirnum, Dogwood, Cotoneaster, Euonymus, & Barberry DECIDUOUS MEDIUM SHRUB Eg. Alpine Currant, Golden Mock Orange, Snowmound Spirea • DECIDUOUS SMALL SHRUB Eg. Goldmound Spirea, Ivy 1 RAIN GARDEN SHADY WOODLAND SEED MIXTURE CLI�NTI FAIRWAY VILLAS LLC. I=ROO CT HAZEL PLACE VILLAS STILLWATER, MN dem TITL�i PLANTING PLAN O RTIr1CATION1 1 hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am d duly Licensed Professional Landscape Architect under the Taws of the State of Minnesota . Signature Name, Marc Putman Date: License: rxt6; D�IGND DRAWN MP RM DATE,1 DESIGNED CHECKED DRAWN TRANSMITTED 6.19.15 CO'RIGHTI 2015 PUTMAN PLANNING & DESIGN, Inc. • Drawings, plans, models, etc: (Works), fin electronic, paper or built forrns), are PP&D intellectual property. • Make no copies or transmittals without prior OK/agreement with us or our contrac- tual associates). • Anyone, (by accepting, opening, or any use of Works), accepts Terms of Use: 1) You'll take reasonable steps for confidentiality, 2) respect our copyright(s), 3) hold us harmless from your actions; and, with us & associates, make no effort to: 4) circumvent, 5) compete, 6) jeopardize governmental approvals. • Only use Works for contractual tasks: estimating, feasibility review, sales/enterprise potential, or within fair use. • Gov't. ap- plications provide no copyright or derivative works license_ • Works may have inaccuracies/updates; you're responsible for hardware, software compatibility & Works' accuracy verification. • Copyright protection extends to overall form, arrangement of spaces & elements in the design- • Works embody significant financial investment & future values. Copyright & Terms of Use violations will be defended under the law. ▪ COPYRIGHT 2015, PUTMAN PLANNING & DESIGN, it c. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED SYMB. DATIA A NOTE 70b NUM 1 �1-1T O .i1-1 T L1.1 LAND/CAI ARCNImOTURL • LAND PLANNING , I'�L/IDLNTIAL DL/IGN • WL_1=)NIG l�F /1GIV • ARCM ITLCTURAL ILLUJ1 ATION • GIUI.1-1IC DL/IGN PUTMAN PUNNING & DESIGN Metro Area Qffice & Studio 724 Riverside Dr. N., Hudson., WI 54016 phone.: (71.5) 381-8291 email: mare@putmanplanninganddesign.com web: ww^w.putmanplaruunaanddesicn.com UNDISTURBED AREA Outside of Construction Limit HAZEL PLACE VILLAS LOT CALCULATIONS (less one lot, Block 2) updated 7-27-15 LOT FRONTAGES Block 1 Lot Frontage: Lot 1 = 81.63 ft. Lot 2 = 46.11 ft. Lot 3 = 54.91 ft. Lot 4 = 44.73 ft. Lot 5 = 36.16 ft. Lot 6 = 39.53 ft. Lot 7 = 35.62 ft. Lot 8 = 45.62 ft. Lot 9 = 73.78 ft. Lot 10 = 80.66 ft. Lot 11 = 35.08 ft. Lot 12 = 35.06 ft. Lot 13 = 42.09 ft. Block 2 Lot Frontage: Lot 1 = 80.78 ft. Lot 2 = 47.96 ft. Lot 3 = 76.53 ft. Lot 4 = 60.00 ft. Lot 5 = 60.76 ft. Lot 6 = 254.94 ft. (corner lot) BUILDING AREA COVERAGE PER LOT Block 1: Lot Area Building Area Bldg. Area % of Lot Coverage Lot 1 = 18,464 SF 2,413 SF 13.07 % Lot 2 = 8,931SF 2,224 SF 24.90 % Lot 3 = 10,845 SF 2,706 SF 24.95 % Lot 4 = 10,172 SF 2,541 SF 24.98 % Lot 5 = 10,326 SF 2,541 SF 24.61 % Lot 6 = 11,105 SF 2,706 SF 24.36 % Lot 7 = 8,907 SF 2,224 SF 24.97 % Lot 8 = 10,853 SF 2,706 SF 24.93 % Lot 9 = 9,974 SF 2,413 SF 24.19 % Lot 10 = 9,667 SF 2,413 SF 24.96 % Lot 11 = 11,826 SF 2,705 SF 22.88 % Lot 12 = 8,965 SF 2,224 SF 24.81 % Lot 13 = 11,694 SF 2,413 SF 20.63 % Block 2: Lot Area Building Area Lot 1 = 32,088 SF 2,705 SF Lot 2 = 10,094 SF 2,224 SF Lot 3 = 10,739 SF 2,413 SF Lot 4 = 10,352 SF 2,413 SF Lot 5 = 12,776 SF 2,706 SF Lot 6 = 13,628 SF 2,706 SF Bldg. Area % of Lot Coverage 8.42 % 22.03 % 22.47 % 23.31 % 21.18 % 19.86 % Black = Lots Conform to 25 % coverage rule as shown on plan TILLWATE COUNTRY CL[IO 9_ St&`ift,, MYfyM,, PROPOSED FAIRWAY VILLAS (Single Family Layout w/ Safety Cooridor) MALKERSON GUNN MARTIN LLP 1 9 0 0 U. S. BANK PLAZA SOUTH TOWER 220 SOUTH SIXTH STREET MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402 TELEPHONE 612-344- 1 1 1 1 FACSIMILE 612.344-1414 Bruce D. Malkersnn, Esq. Direct Dial No. 612.344.1699 bdm wmgmllp.com August 26, 2015 Ted Kozlowski Mayor City of Stillwater 216 North 4th Street Stillwater, MN 55082 Tom Weidner Councilmember City of Stillwater 216 North 4th Street Stillwater, MN 55082 Mike Polehna Councilmember City of Stillwater 216 North 4th Street Stillwater, MN 55082 RE: Hazel Place Villas Development Our File No. 2945.001 Dear Mayor and Members of the City Council: David Junker Councilmember City of Stillwater 216 North 4th Street Stillwater, MN 55082 Doug Menikheim Councilmember City of Stillwater 216 North 4th Street Stillwater, MN 55082 We represent Fairway Development, LLC ("Fairway Development"), the owner and developer of Hazel Place Villas. We submit this letter in connection with the preliminary plat application that is currently before the Stillwater City Council for the development named Hazel Place Villas. As you know, the City Planning Commission recommended that the City Council deny Fairway Development's preliminary plat application based on its stated legal conclusion that the Hazel Place Villas development as proposed requires a variance from the 600-foot maximum cul-de- sac length requirement stated in the City's subdivision ordinance) I We do not understand that this conclusion was upon an opinion from the City Attorney or upon guidance from the City planning staff (which concluded that no variance was necessary and expressly advised the Planning Commission accordingly). To the contrary, we understand that the Planning Commission reached this conclusion based solely on cornments from project opponents at the public hearing on the Hazel Place Villas application. 179252.doc Mayor and City Council City of Stillwater August 26, 2015 Page 2 We disagree with the legal conclusion of the Planning Commission. The Hazel Place Villas does not require a variance for cul-de-sac length or for anything else. To the contrary, the development is fully compliant with the applicable standards set forth in the City's zoning and subdivision ordinances. The City therefore has no lawful discretion to deny the application. We therefore respectfully request that the City Council vote to approve the preliminary plat application for Hazel Place Villas. I. BACKGROUND. The original developer for the subject real property was Lynskey & Clark Companies, Inc. ("Lynskey & Clark"). Lynskey & Clark obtained zoning and preliminary plat approvals from the City for a 24-unit2 twin -home development named "Fairway Villas" at the subject real property in 2007. As part of those approvals, the City Council approved (among other things) a variance from the maximum cul-de-sac length requirement of the City's subdivision ordinance. The City Council approved a 690-foot cul-de-sac as part of the Fairway Villas plat, 90 feet longer than the 600-foot maximum cul-de-sac length allowed at that time. In approving this variance, the City correctly measured the length of the local street created by the Fairway Villas plat. It did not include part of the existing Hazel Street in its measurement of cul-de-sac length as the Planning Commission proposes that the City do here. Lynskey & Clark never built Fairway Villas due to the severe economic recession that began shortly after the City approved Fairway Villas. Fairway Development subsequently purchased the subject real property from Lynskey & Clark along with the rights related to the City's prior approval of Fairway Villas. We note that Fairway Development has the right to develop the subject real property into the 24-unit Fairway Villas twin -home development (with a 690-foot cul-de-sac with the plat) previously approved by the City in 2007. However, Fairway Development believes that the current application improves upon Fairway Villas by, among other things, reducing the number of units and by replacing the originally -approved twin -homes with single-family homes. Fairway Development made these changes to the project principally in response to feedback from neighbors and other members of the Stillwater community. However, as noted, Fairway Development will have no choice but to proceed with the Fairway Villas project already approved by the City in 2007 if the City Council does not approve the preliminary plat application currently before it. z As part of its application to obtain a permit from the Brown's Creek Watershed District, Lynskey & Clark subsequently agreed to modify the plans for Fairway Villas to include only 20 twin -home units. 179252.doc Mayor and City Council City of Stillwater August 26, 2015 Page 3 II. THE APPLICATION IS FULLY COMPLIANT WITH THE CITY'S SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE; NO VARIANCES ARE REQUIRED; AND THE CITY IS THEREFORE OBLIGED TO APPROVE THE APPLICATION AS A MATTER OF LAW. As noted above, the Planning Commission erroneously concluded that a variance from the maximum cul-de-sac length limitation stated in the City's subdivision ordinance is required in order for the City to approve the preliminary plat application for Hazel Place Villas. No such variance is required. The Hazel Place Villas preliminary plat application fully complies with the City's subdivision ordinance, and the City therefore does not have the discretion to deny the application as a matter of law. The City's subdivision ordinance defines cul-de-sac as follows: "Cul-de-sac means a local street with one outlet having a turnaround for the reversal of traffic movement." City Subdivision Ordinance § 32-1, subd. 3. The ordinance imposes a maximum length limitation on cul-de-sacs, stating in relevant party as follows: "Cul-de-sac streets. Permanent cul-de-sac streets, may not exceed 600 feet in length." City Subdivision Ordinance § 32-1, subd. 6(3)(i). Here, the proposed plat for Hazel Place Villas contains a local street with a turnaround and one outlet (onto Hazel Street). The proposed plat therefore contains a cul-de-sac. However, this cul-de-sac measures only 588.36 feet in length from the middle of the proposed cul-de-sac to the concrete curb on Hazel Street (which are the beginning and end points for measuring the cul-de-sac length provided to Fairway Development by the City's planning staff).3 The proposed plat therefore complies with the maximum 600-foot cul-de-sac length limitation set forth in the City's subdivision ordinance. Accordingly, no variance from the City's subdivision ordinance is required. We understand that the Planning Commission's recommendation of denial was premised on a conclusion that the length of the cul-de-sac within the Hazel Place Villas must include part of Hazel Street, the existing public road onto which the proposed cul-de-sac street has an outlet. However, there is nothing in the City's subdivision ordinance that requires or allows the length of a permanent road with a cul-de-sac to be defined or determined in this way. To the contrary, the cul-de-sac length limitation stated in the City's subdivision ordinance applies only to the length of the single local street created by and within the proposed plat. There is nothing in the ordinance that even suggests that parts of other, pre-existing local streets must be added to this length of the single local street created by and within the proposed plat for purposes of ascertaining compliance with the ordinance. To the extent that there is any uncertainty regarding the scope or the meaning of the City's subdivision ordinance as it relates to these issues, the City Council is surely aware of the axiom that municipal ordinances must be construed strictly against the government and in favor of the applicant who is the property owner. Frank's Nursery Sales, Inc. v. City of Roseville, 295 N.W.2d 604, 608-09 3 This is exactly the same method by which the 690-foot cul-de-sac approved by the City Council in 2007 was measured (from the middle of the cul-de-sac to the Hazel Street curb). 179252,doc Mayor and City Council City of Stillwater August 26, 2015 Page 4 (Minn. 1980).4 Applied here, this axiom compels the City to interpret whatever ambiguities exist in its subdivision ordinance provisions relating to the definition of "cul-de-sac" in favor of Fairway Development. Accordingly, the City must interpret the definition of"cul-de-sac" to include only the platted local street included in the proposed Hazel Place Villas plat. It may not interpret the tenri "cul-de-sac" to require that part of a different, existing local street be added to the length of the cul- de-sac street in the proposed plat. We note that the City staff has advised Fairway Development that there are other cul-de-sacs within the City that outlet onto other cuI-de-sacs.5 We understand that the City has not previously measured these cul-de-sacs in the manner now proposed by the Planning Commission (to wit, including in the measurement previously existing streets to which the proposed new local street connects). We further understand that the City has approved the creation of these other cul-de-sacs without requiring that the length of the streets outside of the plat be added to the maximum cul-de- sac street length limitation of 600 feet as set forth in the City's subdivision ordinance. It would be manifestly unfair to impose such a requirement here, for the first time, upon Fairway Development. We therefore respectfully ask that the City Council apply the correct definition of"cul-de-sac" to the Hazel Place Villas application rather than the erroneous definition applied by the Planning Commission and conclude that no variance for cul-de-sac length from the City's subdivision ordinance is necessary for the approval of the application. As the Hazel Place Villas application requires no zoning or subdivision variances of any kind, there is no lawful basis for the City Council to deny the application. Municipal land use decisions are entitled to great deference by the courts and are subject to what is known as a "rational basis" standard of review. SuperAmerica Group, Inc. v. City of Little Canada, 539 N.W.2d 264, 266 (Minn. Ct. App. 1995). A municipal land use decision has no rational basis if the municipality's reasons for acting are legally insufficient or without factual support on the record. Sagstetter v. City of St. Paul, 529 N.W.2d 488, 491 (Minn. Ct. App. 1995). Here, the preliminary plat application submitted by Fairway Development fully complies with the City's zoning and subdivision ordinances. Accordingly, there is no "legally sufficient" reason for denying the application. Indeed, Minnesota appellate courts have repeatedly held it to be unlawful for a municipality to deny an application for a permitted use that complies with all of the performance standards set forth in the a We also note that the Minnesota Supreme Court has stated that staff' interpretations of municipal ordinances are "entitled to respect." Frank's Nursery Sales, 295 N.W.2d at 609. Here, it is appropriate that the City Council defer to the City's staff's historical interpretation of the City's subdivision ordinance. 5 We do not know whether the City classifies or treats Hazel Place as a permanent "cul-de-sac" or whether it was approved by the City as a permanent cul-de-sac when the City approved the plat in which Hazel Place was first dedicated as a public street. We assume in this letter for the sake of argument only that Hazel Place is a permanent cul-de-sac because this is apparently what the Planning Commission assumed it to be when it voted to recommend denial of the Hazel Place Villas preliminary plat application. 5If the City were now to reverse its longstanding interpretation of this ordinance, then the City should require that variance be obtained for similar previously approved subdivisions. 179252.doc Mayor and City Council City of Stillwater August 26, 2015 Page 5 municipality's zoning and subdivision ordinances. See e.g. Chanhassen Estates Residential Assn v. City of Chanhassen, 342 N.W.2d 335, 340 (Minn. 1984); and Nat'l Capital Corp. v. Village oflnver Grove Heights, 301 Minn. 335, 337, 222 N.W.2d 550, 552 (1974). A decision to deny the Hazel Place Villas application here would therefore be unlawful. III. CONCLUSION. In summary, the cul-de-sac created by the proposed Hazel Place Villas plat fully complies with the City's subdivision ordinance, and no variance from the ordinance is required. To the extent that there is uncertainty about this conclusion, that uncertainty must be resolved in favor of Fairway Development. It would be unlawful, and plainly unfair to Fairway Development, for the City to apply a new interpretation of the definition of "cul-de-sac" here for the first time that it has not previously applied to other similarly -situated property owners (and when the City has already approved a variance for a significantly longer cul-de-sac street for the subject real property). For these reasons and the additional reasons set forth above, we respectfully request that the City Council vote to approve the preliminary plat application for Hazel Place Villas. Thank you for your thoughtful consideration of this matter. Please call us at 612.344.1111 if you have any further questions. Very truly yours, (a)tutiz. . ake-04444.4-2-L Bruce D. Malkerson Patrick B. Steinhoff BDM/PBS:ts cc: David Magnuson, City Attorney Bill Turnblad, Community Development Director Sterling Black Len Pratt Roger Humpluy f 79252.doc 08/26/2015 Mayor Kozlowski and Stillwater City Council Members am writing to request that you agree with the Planning Commission's denial of the proposed Preliminary Plat application for Fairway Development's Hazel Place Villas project (Case # 2015-22) and deny this application. As presented to the Planning Commission in its last meeting, the Planning Commission report dated 08/05/15 asserts incorrectly that there are no variances required for this development. The report indicated that the proposed cul-de-sac that will connect the development to Hazel Court is less than the 600' maximum in city ordinances. A cul-de-sac is a dead end street, by Stillwater Zoning Code definition- which does not allow a dead end street except with a cul-de-sac turning radius at its end. Cul-de-sac / dead-end street length is limited in the Code 32 Subd. 6 (3) 18.1 to a maximum length of 600 feet. Common definitions, engineering and planning guidelines, precedence and common sense indicate a dead-end street be measured from the first street intersection that allows two or more alternative paths for access or egress to the city road network. To interpret otherwise would allow length -unlimited chains of cul-de-sacs and dead-end roads, each connecting to the next. The nearest two-way intersection to the proposed cul-de-sac extension is the intersection of Hazel St. and 5th St. N. The distance from this intersection to the new proposed entrance to Hazel Villas is about 850 feet. Adding the proposed new cul-de-sac extension to this, the proposed development is accessed by a cul-de-sac dead end street of over 1450 feet in length — well over twice the maximum length allowed by City ordinance (see attached diagram). Planning reports appear to measure the proposed cul-de-sac length only from where it intersects the existing dead end Hazel Court cul-de-sac, which is incorrect. The Planning Commission agreed this is incorrect, and denied the application. The reasons for limitation of cul-de-sac dead end street length are well established in municipal law and civil engineering guidelines. These reasons include increased trip load on a neighborhood and street, traffic safety concerns, pedestrian safety concerns, and potential blockage of access for fire and emergency vehicles. Most cities recognizing these health, safety and welfare concerns, also limit their length to 350-600 feet. Mahtomedi, White Bear Lake, Bayport, Lake Elmo, Woodbury and Washington County all limit cul-de-sacs to 600 feet or less. Stillwater's zoning ordinance does not specifically state the measurement of cul-de-sacs. But many cities do, and their language is consistent and clear. A few examples: "The Point of Beginning of a Dead End Street...is the point of intersection of a through public way from whence there are two or more distinct vehicular access routes to the general roadway network of the Town." "Any dead-end street which intersects solely with a dead end street shall be deemed an extension of the dead end street." Again, common sense recognizes that a dead end street, by definition, is measured from a point where there is access to multiple alternate paths - to address health, safety and welfare concerns. Also relevant and attached are the Finding of Fact Conclusions and Order, Case no. 07-02, written by City staff in 2007 to support the denial of the original re -zoning request for this property. A few excerpts: Finding of Fact "5. The neighborhood through which traffic must be routed to reach the land has a street network that follows historical cartways, and even though the surfaces have been improved during the 2004 North Hill Project, the streets are substandard with regard to width and curves." Conclusion of Law 2. That a cul-de-sac length longer than the standard 600 feet with no other exit would create a risk of harm to the public 3. That the purpose of design regulations is to protect the health, safety and community welfare 6. That the Owner remains with reasonable use of the property. " Although this 2007 application's cul-de-sac length was for a different development on this site, the conclusion remains valid — that an extended cul-de-sac dead-end road in excess of 600 feet represents a community health, safety, and welfare threat, and should not be allowed. With the increased traffic from this development crossing the new Browns Creek Trail on Hazel, this public safety threat is now considerably greater. What are other alternatives for the developer and the site? As the 2007 Finding of Fact Conclusions and Order noted, the lot can still be developed. Given the length of (city) property line adjoining Hazel Street, it appears at least three to five single-family lots could be developed without a cul-de-sac extension. A significantly reduced number of units would have less traffic impact on the North Hill, its density could be similar to the existing surrounding development, and it could be closer to the original Comprehensive Plan guidelines, indicating there should be 20,000 sf or larger lots in this area. In other words, the development could fit, and be in harmony with the neighborhood. In recognition of these facts, I ask that you sustain the Planning Commission's denial of the Preliminary Plat application for Hazel Place Villas. The basis for this action is that the length of the proposed cul-de- sac serving as access to the proposed development is in violation of City Zoning Code, and would create a risk of harm to the public health, safety and welfare. A petition signed by 143 people and dated 08/20/15, is attached. The Petition requests the City Council sustain our Planning Commission's denial of this development, enforce their cul-de-sac length limit of 600', and that any proposed dead end street which intersects solely with another dead end street hall be deemed to be an extension of that dead end street. Brian Larson 2008 Hazel Court Stillwater MN ;oogle Maps https://WwW gOOgie.Comlmaps/(L 4a u ia.),Jaa,-74.v..1 ice, v r wn's Creek State Trail Brawn's Creek State Trail • • Stillwater Country Club Maintenance Traffic, Bicycling, Terrain, Directions r, Brown's Creek State Trail Brown's Creek State Trail Browns Creek State Trail Nide St E Alder St W 1 Schulenburg Park sIa Map data 2015 Googie 200 i? 040 -01 -Jangle Maps https://www.googke.conllmaps/Qa 45,0735O69.-92.8150822.1' wn's Creek State trail Tr3tfIc, Bicycling, Tet, Bt ow n's C ek State Trail ti qe 400 fog \1/4, !+rII Stillwater Country Club Maintenance Browns Creek Stale Trail 1!! • G0081c tor Brown's Creek State Trail ifiggant Brown's Creek State Trail ,eke • 13 rrEl 0 n Map data P2015 Google 200 11 r /Mr- I5 7.5I 1) ;I's.Cleek State hall Brown's ek State trot' rS90 iN0o5e0 Cul‘OEid5P1.', 116.).is (41%135d) tattdek9s 0E1 Poplar St W •cA, titir 406% oe 9944 -I- At% , .,gip nee eaa ri� SOO it t,oaa rt , uoo e� }/rL-1 Willow St W ID a 11,. Poplar St W pc:p°,al St %A, i tn z :.a z Poplar St W W Poplar Alder St W west z a z Hazel St t-� Total distanlce. 1,255.31 ft (382.62 ni) • STATE OF MINNESOTA CITY OF STILLWATER. COUNTY OF WASHINGTON BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL In Re: The Application ofMBM Development Case No. 07-02 FINDINGS OF FACT CONCLUSIONS AND ORDER The City Council convened the Hearing scheduled for 7:00 p.m. on April 3, 2007 at the Council Chambers in City Hall on the Application of MBM Development ("Applicant„) for approval of (i) a request to amend the Comprehensive Plan by changing the future land use plan from SFLL, Single Family Large Lot to SFSL, Single Family Small Lot; (ii) a request to rezone property from RA, Single Family to RB, Two Family Residential; (iii) preliminary plat approval for 24 twinhomes in 12 buildings with two units in each building; and (iv) a variance from the cul-de-sac length requirements of the City Subdivision Code in the RB, Two Family Residential District, and an application for a license to allow road access and construction on City property. The matter was before the Council on an appeal filed and perfected by the Applicant of a Planning Commission decision denying the applications for a variance and the Planning Commission recommendation against City Council approval of the remaining developer applications made at the conclusion of the Public Hearing held by the Planning Commission on January 8, 2007. At the Hearing, the City Council considered the report of Bill Turnblad, City Community • Development Director, testimony and exhibits submitted by the Applicant, the Staff Report and Minutes of the Planning Commission, a map, testimony of adjacent neighbors of the property in question, and the Planning file prepared by City Staff for the Application. to • NOW, THEREFORE, based upon the documents that have been made a part of this file, upon the testimony of all those who offered it, and upon all the files, records and proceedings herein, the City Council makes the following: F>f1DINGS OF FACT 1. This site is located south of the property at 1902 North William Street and is legally described on Exhibit "A." 2. The Applicant is requesting consideration of a variance to Chapter 32, subd. 6(3), of the Stillwater City Code to allow for the construction of a cul—de—sac that exceeds the 600 foot regulation by 90 feet to 690 feet. The subject site is zoned RA, Single Family Residential. In the RA Zoning District, single family homes, parks and playground are permitted uses. The parcel is 7.17 acres. The proposal is to develop a 24 twin home neighborhood in twelve buildings. This type of development is not consistent with the present Comprehensive Plan for the land and is not permitted in the RA —Single Family District, For this reason, the developer has applied for approval of a Comprehensive Plan amendment that would allow rezoning to RB Two Family Residential, a Zoning District that would allow the development as permitted uses. 3. The topography and slopes encountered on the property are a natural occurrence not created by the property owner and the land is in a pre -development status, except for a farmhouse and dilapidated farm buildings. Utilities, sanitary sewer, storm sewer and municipal water were installed in Hazel Street by the City in 2004 and are available near the east boundary of the land. However, the developer requires an easement or license from the City, since without the easement or license to cross City property, the land is land locked and does not enjoy road access or direct access to the municipal utilities that will be needed to serve the proposed development that is proposed as an urban small lot development. _2- 4. The neighborhood is known as the Dutchiawn area of the City has a variety of home styles and lot sizes. Immediately adjacent to the east, a development of large hornes on 2 1/2 acre lots abuts the property; on the north is the Minnesota Zephyr Railroad track and below that is Brown's Creek; to the west and south of the land, is the Stillwater Golf Club. 5. The neighborhood through which traffic must be routed to reach the land has a street network that follows historical cartways, and even though the surfaces have been improved during the 2004 North Hill Project, the streets are substandard with regard to width and curves. 6. That the current Comprehensive Plan land use guide for the land was large lot in order to provide a buffer between development and environmental sensitive areas such as Brown's Creek. 7. The subject site is zoned RA,Single—Farnily Residential. In the RA Zoning District, single family homes, parks and playgrounds are permitted uses. The current use as a single family home site could continue as reasonable use of the property. 8. The purpose of the steep slope regulations, as described in Chapter 31 -5.l of the City Code, is to protect the health, safety and community welfare and to otherwise preserve the natural environmental resources of the City in areas having significant and critical environmental characteristics. It is the burden of the Applicant to provide sufficient data that shows that if a Comprehensive Plan amendment and rezoning were to be granted, that it will not adversely affect or be detrimental to adjacent properties, and the developer has not met that burden. 9. Heavily wooded slopes lead down from the land to Brown's Creek. The primary concern regarding the property's proximity to Brown's Creek is that of storm water treatment. Development of the property will require careful consideration in this regard. 10. A single family large lot neighborhood is allowed on the property and is compatible with the golf course. A change to twinhome would be incompatible with the golf course. Because of the location of fairways, errant golf shots could become an irritant to owners when their homes take hits. I I. RA Single Family zoned properties in the City are included within the SFLL, Single Family Large Lot, designated areas of the Comprehensive Plan's future land use map. The City's RB zoned properties are within in the SFSL, Single Family Small Lot, areas of the future land use rnap. If the land use map guiding is changed from SFLL to SFSL, the total number of units on the property will be increased from 18 to 26. The 26 units could either be twinhumes or single family homes on small lots. The developer is proposing 24 twinhomes. 12. The six extra units proposed can not be supported because of the increased density. From a technical and physical point of view, the additional 6 units would not overburden any of the City's systems, however, the neighborhood is not compatible with. increased density. 13. The proposed intersection with Hazel Street appears dangerous because it is proposed on a corner of Hazel Street. 14. A portion of the intersection of the new proposed public road with Hazel Street would he on City open space property that is currently used for public works nursery stock. Therefore, a license may be necessary to that encroachment. 15. Brown's Creek Watershed District (BCWD) has regulatory jurisdiction over Brown's Creek and the slopes leading to the creek. Without a barrier that physically blocks the surface water flow toward the creek, or at least alters its flow, the Watershed District would vent development of any 12% slope on the subject property and some development is proposed on slopes greater than 12%. 16. The developer claims the railroad embankment just north of the property has the potential to act as a physical barrier and together with survey, the developer's consultants claim that the railroad creates a physical barrier and truncates the Watershed District's jurisdictional authority. 17, The Watershed District has not ruled out the possibility that the developer's consultants are correct. The developer's plan will need approval of the BCWD and that approval has not been given 18. City Code, §32, subd. 6(3)1, states that a permanent cul-de-sac may not exceed 600 feet in length. The proposed cul-de-sac is 690 feet long. 19. The location and situation of the property creates a set of circumstances that prevents the entire buildable portion of the property from being served by a 600 foot long cut -de - sac. One of the principle reasons far establishing a maximum cul-de-sac length is related to public safety. In general, the longer a dead end street is, the greater the chances are that something could block access to homes for emergency or other vehicles. 20. In some subdivisions, the road would be built to the far edge of the property and a temporary cul-de-sac would be created. There is no limit on the length of a temporary cul-de- sac. In theory, the road would be continued with the abutting property is developed. 21. In this case, the abutting property is a golf course, so it is not feasible to allow a temporary cul-de-sac, since it is unlikely that the Golf Course would ever be developed in a way that would allow another exit from the development. • • CONCLUSION OF LAW 1. That this matter was properly before the City Council pursuant to the procedure set forth in the City Code. 2. That a cul-de-sac length longer than the standard 600 feet with no other exit would create a risk of harm to the public. 3. That the purpose of the design regulations is to protect the health, safety and community welfare. 4. That a variance and Comprehensive Plan amendment and the rezoning, as requested in the Application, are not in harmony with the neighborhood. 5, That based upon the findings, the proposed variance, the Comprehensive Plan amendment, the request to amend the Zoning Ordinance, and the requested license will be a detriment to adjacent property, will frustrate the purpose of the Zoning Ordinance and violate the spirit of the guide of the Comprehensive Plan. 6. That the owner remains with reasonable use of the property. ORDER IT IS HEREBY ORDERED 1. The variance is hereby denied. 2. The Comprehensive Plan amendment request is denied. 3. The Rezoning request is denied. 4. The application of preliminary plat approval is denied. 5. The request for a license to build a road on City property is denied_ Adopted by unanimous vote of the City Council this day of April, 2007. -b- 08/20/2015 Received Hello Stillwater and North Hill neighbors - AUG 2 6 2015 This petition is regarding a proposed development in the North end of Stillwater. Seven years ago, a property near the end of Hazel Street was re -zoned to allow duplexes, with City approval for 11 duplexes or 22 units. The property has been now sold to a new developer, Sterling Black, who is proposing a differerrM9 4l41 Ark kpatyMtDepartment Place Villas: 19 units of tightly spaced single family houses along a new cul-de-sac. Though single family houses are preferred, the high number of units remains the biggest problem: • The addition of 19 houses at the end of Hazel (which is a dead-end street) will create a significant increase in traffic and safety concerns throughout the North Hill, especially along on Second Street, Hazel Street, Poplar Street and other streets feeding these. , so all traffic will have to go both in and in and out on Hazel, Second (and Poplar). • According to previous developer calculations, this will result in a calculated additional 182 more traffic trips - per -day than we currently see on our streets. • The proposed cul-de-sac will branch off Hazel, an existing dead-end street: (850' down Hazel + 590' new) 1440 feet long, which far exceeds our City's ordinance limits of 600 feet. • Our Planning Commission agreed with the cul-de-sac concerns, and denied the developer's application, but it is now being appealed to City Council. We welcome a development on this property, but want it to follow common sense, the overall patterns of the neighborhood, and our City's ordinances. Please join us in this petition requesting the Stillwater City Council sustain our Planning Commission's denial of this development, enforce their cul-de-sac length limit of 600', and that any proposed dead end street which intersects solely with another dead end street shall be deemed to be an extension of that dead-end street. Also, please join us in support at the City Council Meeting 7pm City Hall Tuesday September 1n• NitilirLY411/4) et L.a.r604L AA)/3 1 r+G G 6 atif.e.i.c., awe); C''>» /,:e..i::isn -tis1 rAirytri, ec ur "Zc r6$ tZec .0 T" 2 c2O' 1-/ 2&I r 7L 4,74,YA►-/4.3 / 7 114zl C i. -j1 t1 3 / 1 Gc Alit 2- e/ fT --; Vv1h.x v\ i'I I 0 S1 11 S f . 1. Na,c 3/zwiHood 5 lLJ r l -c 31 e I v 4i1 r1 CAMeii C L '31) W{(�G�,J 4.V M,KAT:T eA-FA L,E K-i ' -imP L 3(( .L.J A41 Y /./ G %fi rtp '' Lii/it) /trZ., Name Signature A-c.. St-(-Ort.t ( 11+ Address Ho/ eds,r(11--) ss-otz 1902 ' b51- 19-68z- I$ ►vms 5-T . s i l boj i M*( Cor-01 wrc3 h.-tk ►e:eA ri Fr72 Zi / 1. 326 Sr. Sr-. del z /1 v G /',i4 ,Z Ocs q 4/ VI0. S-4 l/ Pi 1!' SJv �ivZ rjt N \I Li I ti.Zz- 3 -t ikjcet LUr 703Z_ ea._-1117, / 33cg S. 3 'a/SA S h / ,4r/2,,, 4U& 0; / Z� 3 Zl s-rOg2 clakd - Gq Ceaz 1g s -s l ® z W/44 2- Zo d' o ( 1` z r 1 w 2 Z F-t ct ,( Sfi .)) rote&IC f. S '11 ffiif/ SaoBZ, 004-1, ,Wt. KervA tin ze(f. SS ����/',hl - 2- - itlr�� rr tA 6'3o a 5,4/' � .5Ze//, la/tai'd \,10 4_7.4 dobi n (30 ,( '6N ERuc1t 1-1 0,1 Pm& C-� ,y o/4 E1- S Ver5°►i ;e&A-& evCrt\_ 14-z- 3 ©t, IP, L . 30 W /m S o 41 f-i vi Tv- 6 /5 (A- S-f(, G- /o07 yhsi-Na4,s(,)-l( {n �I MAJ Name Signature Address �N 4 �{r0 H f' �..#. a.►.1... i )- 1 7L. .• - TG I rJ l f"� s or 9 !(J C4 L,L)Q C , Ala Sd 08/20/2015 Hello Stillwater and North Hill neighbors - This petition is regarding a proposed development in the North end of Stillwater. Seven years ago, a property near the end of Hazel Street was re -zoned to allow duplexes, with City approval for 11 duplexes or 22 units. The property has been now sold to a new developer, Sterling Black, who is proposing a different development- Haze( Place Villas: 19 units of tightly spaced single family houses along a new cul-de-sac. Though single family houses are preferred, the high number of units remains the biggest problem: • The addition of 19 houses at the end of Hazel (which is a dead-end street) will create a significant increase in traffic and safety concerns throughout the North Hill, especially along on Second Street, Hazel Street, Poplar Street and other streets feeding these. , so all traffic will have to go both in and in and out on Hazel, Second (and Poplar). • According to previous developer calculations, this will result in a calculated additional 182 more traffic trips - per -day than we currently see on our streets. ▪ The proposed cul-de-sac will branch off Hazel, an existing dead-end street: (850' down Hazel + 590' new) = 1440 feet long, which far exceeds our City's ordinance limits of 600 feet. • Our Planning Commission agreed with the cul-de-sac concerns. and denied the developer's application. but it is now being appealed to Citv Council, We welcome a development on this property, but want it to follow common sense, the overall patterns of the neighborhood, and our City's ordinances. Please join us in this petition requesting the Stillwater City Council sustain our Planning Commission's denial of this development, enforce their cul- de-sac length limit of 600', and that any proposed dead end street which intersects solely with another dead end street shall be deemed to be an extension of that dead-end street. Also, please Join us in 'support at the City Council Meeting 7pm City Hall Tuesday September 1' Name Signature Address tYlr lei 1 f t roc► 2 L t hy-\ r 1-_`)i s /7/ likdixitt( M7A1 115.7r 7 'NTOliti FTR / [-/- 6116-# IT) pleinc rb(ke4 0-/, zi/S-f. 4_ t, ;:1)(4/1( t€.( 1ok(k ik-16,AA) L-011 vt 'L'A) Name Signature Address , v f►S ' r--, 5 O Ili . 1''`: Lot_Ltk-t t‘cPetr 0/,.(1:11AL ahaVRTI &IL2-0 110 (4.0-A ,P4A- 11 a AIL ////fir- Susie'pa \ e\Soon ,30--teNut,} Sctr�1 l� recisitqe,i+ c 4 LI Z(] .1 ( sc(46,,/ uu/ 'a�u.P,Q�Zow 119schooc s+.c� 2b9 L 1? z sT. -515 `/ l'" 3f 1\,) EIS LNC& gi 08/20/2015 Hello Stillwater and North Hill neighbors - This petition is regarding a proposed development in the North end of Stillwater. Seven years ago, a property near the end of Hazel Street was re -zoned to allow duplexes, with City approval for 11 duplexes or 22 units. The property has been now sold to a new developer, Sterling Black, who is proposing a different development- Hazel Place Villas: 19 units of tightly spaced single family houses along a new cul-de-sac. Though single family houses are preferred, the high number of units remains the biggest problem: • The addition of 19 houses at the end of Hazel (which is a dead-end street) will create a significant increase in traffic and safety concerns throughout the North Hill, especially along on Second Street, Hazel Street, Poplar Street and other streets feeding these. , so all traffic will have to go both in and in and out on Hazel, Second (and Poplar). ▪ According to previous developer calculations, this will result in a calculated additional 182 more traffic trips - per -day than we currently see on our streets. • The proposed cul-de-sac will branch off Hazel, an existing dead-end street: (850' down Hazel + 590' new) = 1440 feet lone, which far exceeds our City's ordinance limits of 600 feet, ' Our Planning Commission agreed with the cul-de-sac concerns, and denied the developer's application. but it is now being appealed to Citv Council, We welcome a development on this property, but want it to follow common sense, the overall patterns of the neighborhood, and our City's ordinances. Please join us in this petition requesting the Stillwater City Council sustain our Planning Commission's denial of this development, enforce their cul- de-sac length1imit of 600', and that any proposed dead end street which intersects solely with another dead end street shall be deemed to be an extension of that dead-end street. Also, please/okras lasupportatthe Clt y Council 14Teetl'rrg 7pareltyllbli Tuesday September 1t. Name Signature Address /t /) / YZ' f//id gotr\5 r 7 W./7/r ,�rj%% _4 7kite( /IeLti�r Name r rids 711#(i/2leo s f ELitt/ e, MT`I Signature Address ob,✓ ST60rTv1.) .1447 !2, n(54- 44toz--- D rnY3Sknall 4 6 49-1 /a4-- I 01r+S C / 56-At o� rt z 1/4&4 9/3 A/- &o w co Ay Sr-. 08/20/2015 Hello Stillwater and North Hill neighbors - This petition is regarding a proposed development in the North end of Stillwater. Seven years ago, a property near the end of Hazel Street was re -zoned to allow duplexes, with City approval for 11 duplexes or 22 units. The property has been now sold to a new developer, Sterling Black, who is proposing a different development- jiazel, Place Villas: 19 units of tightly spaced single family houses along a new cul-de-sac. Though single family houses are preferred, the high number of units remains the biggest problem: The addition of 19 houses at the end of Hazel (which is a dead-end street) will create a significant increase in traffic and safety concerns throughout the North Hill, especially along on Second Street, Hazel Street, Poplar Street and other streets feeding these. , so all traffic will have to go both in and in and out on Hazel, Second (and Poplar). • According to previous developer calculations, this will result in a calculated additional 182 more traffic trips - per -day than we currently see on our streets. • The proposed cul-de-sac will branch off Hazel, an existing dead-end street: (850' down Hazel + 590' new) = 1440 feet Iona. which far exceeds our City's ordinance limits of 600 feet. • Our Planning Commission agreed with the cul-de-sac concerns. and denied the developer's application, but It is now being appealed to City Council. We welcome a development on this property, but want it to follow common sense, the overall patterns of the neighborhood, and our City's ordinances. Please join us in this petition requesting the Stillwater City Council sustain our Planning Commission's denial of this development, enforce their cul- de-sac length limit of 600', and that any proposed dead end street which intersects solely with another dead end street shall be deemed to be an extension of that dead-end street. Also, please join us in support at the City Council Meeting 7pm City Hall Tuesday September i'r Name Signature Address /`/hC r I d\r\Qt or1 m /m2_ )1 _3.4 r 1 L N. 2-1=d 5-f--S4i'11 wa. 4 ) ,U-1,40\ da,71-1404 /Iz_J N 4144/ /1)./4044"-e<_ //a C a A-4 5 74f '-e 7` 1✓ Ste: / /1#1 /' 1—coale fAr.- cdy)-00/ Hctz-ej C-- I'� ►-ems c -� u� k cSr-- Name Signature Address 08/20/2015 Hello Stillwater and North Hill neighbors - This petition is regarding a proposed development in the North end of Stillwater. Seven years ago, a property near the end of Hazel Street was re -zoned to allow duplexes, with City approval for 11 duplexes or 22 units. The property has been now sold to a new developer, Sterling Black, who is proposing a different development -Haze( Place Villas: 19 units of tightly spaced single family houses along a new cul-de-sac. Though single family houses are preferred, the high number of units remains the biggest problem: The addition of 19 houses at the end of Hazel (which is a dead-end street) will create a significant increase in traffic and safety concerns throughout the North Hill, especially along on Second Street, Hazel Street, Poplar Street and other streets feeding these. , so all traffic will have to go both in and in and out on Hazel, Second (and Poplar). According to previous developer calculations, this will result in a calculated additional 182 more traffic trips - per -day than we currently see on our streets. The proposed cul-de-sac will branch off Hazel, an existing dead-end street: (850' down Hazel + 590' new) = 1440 feet Ion¢. which far exceeds our City's ordinance limits of 600 feet` Our Planning Commission agreed with the cul-de-sac concerns. and denied the develooer's anolication. but jt is now being appealed to City Council. We welcome a development on this property, but want it to follow common sense, the overall patterns of the neighborhood, and our City's ordinances. Please join us in this petition requesting the Stillwater City Council sustain our Planning Commission's denial of this development, enforce their cul- de-sac length limit of 600', and that any proposed dead end street which intersects solely with another dead end street shall be deemed to be an extension of that dead-end street. '14k - .RPACA-, Also, please join us in support aHdheCify councll-Meeting 7pm City pll Tuesday September 1sr• Name Signature Address 01 N 2nc( 9!! (� ;6 w:tLo Sfi as'f j� 11 �r r i<-W;//c)L—) sYL 7 a eft I2.tl �(4 4.. 08/20/2015 Hello Stillwater and North Hill neighbors - This petition is regarding a proposed development in the North end of Stillwater. Seven years ago, a property near the end of Hazel Street was re -zoned to allow duplexes, with City approval for 11 duplexes or 22 units. The property has been now sold to a new developer, Sterling Black, who is proposing a different development- Hazel Pace Villas: 19 units of tightly spaced single family houses along a new cul-de-sac. Though single family houses are preferred, the high number of units remains the biggest problem: • The addition of 19 houses at the end of Hazel (which is a dead-end street) will create a significant increase in traffic and safety concerns throughout the North Hill, especially along on Second Street, Hazel Street, Poplar Street and other streets feeding these. , so all traffic will have to go both in and in and out on Hazel, Second (and Poplar). • According to previous developer calculations, this will result in a calculated additional 182 more traffic trips - per -day than we currently see on our streets. • The proposed cul-de-sac will branch off Hazel, an existing dead-end street: (850' down Hazel + 590° new) = 1440 feet lone, which far exceeds our City's ordinance limits of 600 feet. • Our Planning Commission agreed with the cul-de-sac concerns,_and denied the developer's aoulication. but it is now being appealed to Citv Council. We welcome a development on this property, but want it to follow common sense, the overall patterns of the neighborhood, and our City's ordinances. Please join us in this petition requesting the Stillwater City Council sustain our Planning Commission's denial of this development, enforce their cul- de-sac length limit of 600', and that any proposed dead end street which intersects solely with another dead end street shall be deemed to be an extension of that dead-end street. Also, please join ns'/n support otthe City Council Meeting 7pm City Hall $il aday September I" - Name Signature Address /-t klaitnAir‘ w 1 I I v Sf• - s-h i (wkkv, 1144(, o ko, /J //,) S, A°r 4. it)dierk)-V Ee6441- L Ojd cLcll% c5. ,c5/(10e64 307 Wii/ow 1 110 w'r 1 ' JO{{i'l Co I L ( fb- )4---0-1x0e4 1//14e714 1. A. Name Signature 2-2 N OW S? . E 312 car -Low P5 ( Nyorgiutt Soi 6(400W (\f\LA,1,2,e-il kZrOPiOVf ST Address 0 L9 ki ift`A6- IN, c-v-,± oroivi Siby y room '1 AkAVJ) ► V-21-02.14 FTh KOL-47t4,-Lcz-ry ejr- Coil 1 1 102 .„u 6i,oaci Bill Turnblad From: claude clavette <clavettece@yahoo.com> Sent: Thursday, July 09, 2015 1:52 PM To: Bill Turnblad Subject: Hazel Street/ Fairway Villas project Dear Mr. Turnblad, I would like to see less traffic along Hazel St. than what the proposed additional 20 single homes would bring. Please consider this in your planning. I live on the corner of 5 St. N and Hazel. Thank you. Claude Clavette i Bill Turnblad From: Carson Cannon <cncannon2011@yahoo.com> Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2015 12:10 PM To: Bill Turnblad Subject: Hazel Street Villas Bill Turnbald, My name is Carson Cannon and I live on 12125 80th Street N. I support the planning commission decision to deny the Hazel Street/Fairway Villas project. I think that it will lead to a number of different issues on the north hill. Sincerely, Carson Cannon 1 Bill Turnblad From: Brian and Tracy Serres <btserres@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2015 9:20 PM To: Bill Turnblad; David Junker; tkoslowski@ci.stillwater.mn.us Subject: Hazel Place Villas Hello, We are residents of the Dutchtown neighborhood and are concerned about the Hazel Place Villa development, primarily, the potential hazards from increased traffic. We agree with the Planning Commission and their denial of this proposal. This is an environmentally sensitive area and historically significant; any new development should conform to the current neighborhood (and also to City Ordinances). Thank You, Brian & Tracy Serres 104 Poplar St E Stillwater, MN 55082 i Bill Turnblad From: Gail Plewacki <gplewacki@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, August 10, 2015 12:45 PM To: Bill Turnblad Subject: North Hill development proposal Dear Mr. Turnblad. I am writing regarding the proposed development of the Hazel Villas. I live on 2nd St. less than 1/2 mile from Hazel. I have great concerns about the safety and traffic issues such a development would pose to the neighborhood. As you well know, 2nd St. is already utilized as a 'by-pass' for folks want to go north towards Marine. It is critical that the number of units be reduced significantly simply to fit in with the density of the neighborhood. I also think it is essential to sustain the 600' cul-de-sac length limitation and interpret it correctly- -to start at the intersection of 5th and Hazel. Gail Plewacki 1575 2nd St. N Stillwater, MN i PRATT HOMES August 27, 2015 Ted Kozlowski David Junker Mayor Councilmember City of Stillwater City of Stillwater 216 North 4th Street 216 North 4th Street Stillwater, MN 55082 Stillwater, MN 55082 Tom Weidner Doug Menikheim Councilmember Councilmember City of Stillwater City of Stillwater 216 North 4th Street 216 North 4th Street Stillwater, MN 55082 Stillwater, MN 55082 Mike Polehna Councilmember City of Stillwater 216 North 4th Street Stillwater, MN 55082 RE: Hazel Place Villas Development Dear Mayor and Members of the City Council: Pratt Homes is a custom home builder that began building homes in 1973. It was during those early years we began to realize our desire to build not just homes but neighborhoods as well. Our personal commitment to the Twin Cities home building industry has been marked by many milestones throughout the years, including: Parade of Homes Award of Excellence Builder Association of the Twin Cities (BATC) HAP Builder of the Year National Builders Association American Wood Council Award Both Len and Lowell were inducted to the Minnesota Building Industry's Hall of Fame Both Len and Lowell have served as President of the St. Paul Builders Association In 1992, Lowell worked closely with the Minnesota Department of Commerce to draft statewide home construction standards that must be met in order for builders to do business in the State. As a result, Pratt Homes was issued Builder License #1. Best Builder, Remodeler Award in the Best of White Bear Lake 2013, 2014 & 2015 Family by Family, home by home...since 1973 Pratt Homes Corporate Office • 3500 Willow Lake Blvd., Suite 100 • Vadnais Height, Minnesota 55110 Office (651) 429-8032 • Fax (651) 429-0255 • www.pratthomes.com Mayor and City Council City of Stillwater August 27, 2015 Page Two The proposed villa product is "executive level villas" that are designed to feature one level, main floor living with optional lower level finishing, all designed to accommodate the growing empty nester lifestyle needs. The price points will begin in the mid $500,000's with finished square footages ranging from 1,600 to 3,000 square feet (approximately). These individualized custom homes have been built by Pratt Homes since the early 1990's in a variety of northeast metro communities, including Woodbury, North Oaks, White Bear Township and Hugo. Frequently enough Stillwater area residents have asked "where might there be Stillwater area villas?" so that they could stay in the community where they have established roots and family connections. I would like to invite you to contact me and meet me out on the site, call with any questions or, for those interested in seeing a current example, our villa models are available for viewing at 1285 Palisade Circle and 1331 Palisade Path in Woodbury at Dancing Waters High Point or visit us online at www.pratthomes.com. Sincer Leonard W. Pratt cc: David Magnuson, City Attorney Bill Turnblad, Community Development Director Sterling Black Bruce Malkerson Roger Humphrey Pratt Homes Proposed - Hazel Place Villa Product Description The proposed villa product line is attached. These executive level "villas" are designed to feature one level, main floor living to accommodate the growing empty nester lifestyle needs. The price points will begin in the mid $500,000's with finished square footages ranging from 1600-3000 square feet (approx.). These individualized, custom homes have been built by Pratt Homes since the early 1990's in a variety of northeast metro communities, including Woodbury, North Oaks, White Bear Township and Hugo. Frequently enough Stillwater area residents have asked "where might there be Stillwater area villas" so that they could stay in the community where they have established roots and family connections. For those interested in seeing a current example, our villa models are available for viewing at 1285 Palisade Circle and 1331 Palisade Path in Woodbury at Dancing Waters High Point. Proposed Hazel Place Villas Floor plans & features Main Level Features (3-car garage standard) Lower Level Features (walkout standard) Franklin - Total 2785 sq. ft. - Main level 1585 / Lower level 1200 Master suite with walk-in shower and walk-through closet to laundry, vaulted great room, kitchen, informal dining, guest bath, office area, screen porch Family room, 2 additional bedrooms and bath Marquis - Total 2944 sq. ft. - Main level 1858 / Lower level 1086 Master suite with walk-in shower and walk-through closet to laundry, vaulted great room, kitchen, formal and informal dining, office, guest bath, mud room, screen porch Family room, 2 additional bedrooms and bath St James - Total 2764 sq. ft. - Main level 1654 / Lower level 1110 Master suite with walk-in shower and walk-through closet to laundry, vaulted great room, kitchen, informal dining area, office, guest bath, mud room, screen porch Family room, 2 additional bedrooms and bath St James 2 - Total 2788 sq. ft. - Main level 1782 / Lower level 1106 Master suite with walk-in shower and walk-in closet, 2nd bedroom, guest bath, vaulted great room, kitchen, informal dining, office, laundry, mud room screen porch Family room, 2 additional bedrooms and bath St Olaf - Total 2853 sq. ft. - Main level 1753 / Lower level 1100 Master suite with walk-in shower and walk-in closet, vaulted great room, kitchen, informal dining, den with walk-through office, guest bath, laundry, mud room, screen porch Family room, 2 additional bedrooms and bath St Olaf 2 - Total 2853 sq. ft. - Main level 1753 / Lower level 1100 Master suite with walk-in shower and walk-in closet, 2nd bedroom, guest bath, vaulted great room, kitchen, informal dining, office, laundry, mud room screen porch Family room, 2 additional bedrooms and bath Builder License #BC000001 Prices subject to change without notice Revised 8/4/2015 iliwater H E 6 1 R 1 H P 1 ACE OF MINNESOTA CITY COUNCIL DATE: August 26, 2015 CASE NO.: 2015-15 SUBJECT: MN Shooting Academy Appeal: Follow-up Items TO: Mayor & City Council FROM: Bill Turnblad, Community Development Director REVIEWED BY: Dave Magnuson, City Attorney BACKGROUND The Minnesota Shooting Academy has made application for a Special Use Permit (SUP) to operate a gun range and associated uses in the current Simonet Furniture building on Curve Crest Boulevard. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the SUP on a split vote. Their decision was appealed to the City Council, and a hearing was held by the Council on August 18, 2015. The public hearing on the appeal was closed and the Council deliberated the request. A decision on the appeal was tabled until September 1, 2015. Reasons for tabling the decision seem to be at least: 1) to allow both appellants to be present at Council deliberation; 2) to better understand whether the City Code allows the gun range use; and 3) to investigate whether the City has authority to enforce SUP conditions and City ordinances, even though gun ranges are regulated by State and Federal rules. The second and third items will be addressed briefly in this memo. ANALYSIS I. Use Issue To help understand whether the City Code allows the Minnesota Shooting Academy's proposed uses, staff presents the standard City Code analysis used whenever asked if a specific use is allowed on a property. Mn Shooting Academy Appeal August 26, 2015 Page 2 1. Verify Zoning - Staff refers to the zoning map to determine the zoning district classification for the property. 2. Verify Allowable Use a. Explicitly Allowed Use- Staff refers to the allowable use table in the Zoning Code chapter of the City Code (Ch 31, Sec 325) to determine whether the specific use is explicitly listed as allowed in the subject zoning district. If it is listed as "permitted" or "permitted with SUP" or "accessory", then staff cross-checks the definition section of the Zoning Code chapter to verify if possible whether the use listed in the table was intended to include the proposed use. b. Substantially Similar Allowed Use - If the proposed use does not appear specifically in the allowable uses table, then staff examines the use table to determine whether the proposed use is substantially similar to an allowed use. If it is substantially similar to an allowed use in the subject zoning district, then cross-check the definition section of the Zoning Code chapter to verify, if possible, that the use listed in the table was intended to include the proposed use. c. Use Not Allowed - If the proposed use does not appear explicitly in the allowable uses table, and a substantially similar use does not appear either, then staff concludes that the proposed use is not allowed in the subject zoning district. The standard analysis applied to this case: 1. Verify Zoning - The property is zoned BP-O, Business Park - Office. 2. Verify Allowable Use a. Allowable use table does not explicitly list "firearms range" or "gun range" or "shooting range". b. The allowable use table lists "amusement and recreational establishments" as allowed with a Special Use Permit in the BP-0 District. i. Is a firearms range substantially similar to a "recreational" establishment? 1. The footnote in the allowable use table for "amusement and recreational establishments" says: "such as armories, assembly halls, bowling alleys, dancehalls, pool and billiard parlors, skating rinks, and other social, sport or recreational centers operated as a business, provided the place or building in which it is operated is sufficiently sound insulated to effectively confine the noise to the premises". So, what is recreation, commercial recreation, or a recreational center? 2. Section 31-101, Subd 30, of the Zoning Code says "commercial recreation means bowling alley, cart track, jump center, golf, pool hall, vehicle racing or amusement, dancehall, skiing, Mn Shooting Academy Appeal August 26, 2015 Page 3 tavern, theater, firearms range and similar uses". Firearms range is by definition "commercial recreation". 3. Since a firearms range is by definition commercial recreation, and, "amusement and recreational establishments" are allowed by SUP in the BP-0 Zoning District. Therefore, a firearms range is allowed by SUP in the BP-0 Zoning District. II. Jurisdiction Issue During Council deliberation a question of City jurisdiction arose. The State and Federal Governments both have laws and rules regulating a firearms range. Do their regulations prevent the City from enforcing conditions that may be attached to a City issued Special Use Permit, or that are found for example in the City nuisance ordinance? Many land uses are regulated by multiple jurisdictions. A few examples are beer brewing, cemeteries, construction on shoreland, restaurants, hanging banners of Main Street, size of motors on some lakes. But, unless there is specific language in State or Federal laws or rules to the contrary, a City can regulate those uses. In the case of firearms ranges, State Statute 87A regulates the use. 87A.08, Subd 1 states "to the extent consistent with this chapter, a local unit of government with zoning authority jurisdiction over a shooting range may enforce its applicable ordinances and permits". So, the statute does not preempt City ordinances or (special use) permits from being enforced. Conditions in any Special Use Permit, for example, simply have to be "consistent" with statute. Of the 14 conditions that are found in the staff report and Planning Commission recommendation, there are no apparent inconsistencies and the City of Stillwater would have the authority to enforce them. For reference purposes those conditions are reproduced here: 1. No greater than 14 firing lanes shall be permitted. Five of the firing lanes shall be made available for rental to community service personnel and community education activities. 2. Use and operation of the firearms range must abide by all State and Federal regulations. 3. The Amusement and Recreational Establishment portion of the building shall not be in operation between the hours of 10:00 pm and 7:00 am. 4. The establishment must have at least one adult employee or adult supervisory volunteer in the premises during all hours of operation. 5. Soundproofing specifications shall be submitted with the building permit application. Mn Shooting Academy Appeal August 26, 2015 Page 4 6. The Establishment shall install appropriate and sufficient soundproofing to be in compliance with City Code Section 38-3, Noise Control and Regulation, for sound levels outside of the establishment, including but not limited to the sound produced from air handling and mechanical equipment. 7. A total of 35 additional parking spaces shall be created onsite. A permeable surface parking area and suitable base found satisfactory to the City Engineer shall be utilized for all new parking and drive areas. 8. A grading plan shall be reviewed by the City Engineering Department and a Brown's Creek Watershed District permit shall be obtained prior to the installation of the additional parking spaces. 9. Upon the sale to MN Shooting Academy and prior to the release of necessary building permits, a 15' trail easement shall be dedicated to the City of Stillwater along the eastern property boundary for future trail connection between Curve Crest Boulevard and Highway 36. 10. Conditions of a HPC issued Design Permit shall be incorporated into this Special Use Permit by reference. 11. Plans and the use will need to be approved by the engineering, fire and building officials before the issuance of a building permit. 12. All changes to the approved plans will need to be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director. Any major changes will need to go to the Planning Commission for review and approval. CONCLUSION This memo was intended to provide the City Council with additional information on two of the stated reasons for tabling this case. If the Council has additional questions, please feel free to contact Bill Turnblad at bturnblad@ci.stillwater.mn.us. I will try to find answers to your inquiries prior to the next Council meeting. bt CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: August 18, 2015 CASE NO.: 2015-15 Planning Commission: July 8, 2015 APPLICANT: Paul Simonet, property owner, representing MN Shooting Academy REQUEST: Request for a Special Use Permit and associated Variances for an Amusement and Recreational Establishment to be located in the existing structure located at 2159 Curve Crest Boulevard ZONING: BP-O: Business Park - Office COMP PLAN DISTRICT: Commercial PREPARED BY: Abbi Jo Wittman, City Planner BACKGROUND At the July 8 Planning Commission meeting, the Commission held a public hearing regarding a request made by Paul Simonet, representing MN Shooting Academy, for a Special Use Permit (SUP) for an indoor target practice range to be located at 2159 Curve Crest Boulevard. In addition to the specially -permitted use, MN Shooting Academy is proposing retail sales, a lounge and vending area, warehousing space as well as space for administrative offices. In order to grant the SUP, certain variances were being requested as well. During the hearing the Commission took public testimony from the applicant, MN Shooting Academy representatives and members of the public; a copy of the Commission's minutes are attached for the Council's review. After the public hearing the Commission discussed the unique and special character of this proposed use and the associated variances. The Commission's discussion including making the findings practical difficulty existed for the variance to increase by 4,040 square feet the Amusement and Recreational Establishment portion of the structure. The Commission could not make positive findings to support the requested off-street parking variance or the impervious surface coverage variance, as other reasonable alternatives exist. The Commission determined the proposed gun range use conforms to the requirements and the intent of this chapter, and of the comprehensive plan, relevant area plans and other lawful regulations; they added condition necessary to protect the public interest; and with the conditions, believe the use will not constitute a nuisance or be detrimental to the public welfare of the community. In a 5-3-1 vote, with Commissioners Fletcher, Middleton and Siess voting nay, the Commission approved the Special Use Permit and 4,040 square foot variance to the Amusement and Recreational Establishment standards. Commission Kelly abstained due to a conflict of interest. APPEAL Within ten days of the Commission's decision, the City received two appeal letters from Melissa Douglas and Ann Kocksiek. A copy of those letters as well as the City Code1 pertaining to appeals is attached for your review. Ms. Douglas indicates a shooting range is not an allowed use in the zoning district and that the Commission's approval therefore constitutes a use variance, which the City Code does not allow. She further states the approval of this use permit would significantly limit local zoning authority over the shooting range, citing MN State Statute 87A and the National Rifle Association's (NRA) Range Source Book. Lastly she indicated the required use and variance findings cannot be made for the request. City staff has obtained the NRA Range Source Book and City Attorney Magnuson has drafted a memo addressing Ms. Douglas's concerns; he letter is attached for the Council's review. Ms. Kochsiek encourages the City to consider a sound study of the proposed use, specifically the air exchange system. Additionally she questions the impact of the use to the traffic at Washington Avenue and Curve Crest Boulevard. Lastly she has indicated no classroom use has been proposed for the site. The letter indicates the City should converse with other municipalities who have approved similar uses. APPLICATION REVISION AND PUBLIC COMMENT As an appeal is made, the Council must hold a de novo public hearing meaning the application is reviewed as a brand new application. The public hearing was advertised in the Stillwater Gazette on August 7, 2015. Additionally, all property owners within 350' were noticed of the date and time of the hearing. The applicant has submitted a revised plan set that includes the following: • 795 square feet of classroom space has been added. This was created with the reduction of interior warehousing spaces. City Code Section 31-217 Council 8/ 18/ 2015 (Case No. 2015-15) 2159 Curve Crest Boulevard Page 2 of 10 • A total of 14 firing lanes has been proposed instead of the previous 12. However, the square footage of the area to be used for the firing lanes is no larger than that proposed for the original 12 lanes. • The reconfiguration of the interior spaces necessitates a total of 84 parking spaces. However, only 49 parking spaces are being met onsite. o Consequently, the applicant's proof of parking area proposed is located within a greenspace area. The increased off-street parking developed on this site would increase the impervious surface coverage variance. Public comment has been received by Anne Siess. Ms. Siess suggests the City Council consider the development of an ordinance specifically addressing the use and sale of guns within Stillwater. She has included a gun range ordinance from the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota, for the Council's reference. SPECIFIC REQUEST The applicant is requesting a Special Use Permit for an Amusement and Recreational Establishment for an indoor target practice range, with accessory uses to include retail sales, a lounge and vending area, classroom and warehousing space as well as space for administrative offices. Educational classrooms as well as the Amusement and Recreational Establishment are uses that are permitted by Special Use Permit. The other proposed uses of the proeprty are uses permitted by right. The request necessitates the following variances: 1. A 4,040 square foot variance to City Code Section 31-515.1.1 that permits an Amusement and Recreational Establishment to occupy no more than 3,000 square feet, whereas the proposed firing lanes area is 7,040 square feet; and 2. A 35 off-street parking stall variance to City Code Section 31-510.1(c), Number of parking spaces required which requires the facility to have 84 spaces, but only provides 49 spaces and 3. A 19% variance to the 60% maximum (impervious) lot coverage requirement as identified in City Code Section 31-320(c), since the total lot coverage would be 79% and only 60% is allowed. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS AND REGULATIONS Section 31-325 indicates Amusement and Recreational Establishments (including other social, sport or recreational centers) and Educational Institutions in the Business Park - Office District require a Special Use Permit. The Code further indicates the use must conform to the provisions found in Section 31-515.1: 1. The establishment may occupy no more than 3,000 square feet. Council 8/ 18/ 2015 (Case No. 2015-15) 2159 Curve Crest Boulevard Page 3 of 10 2. (The establishment must operate in compliance with the noise standards as specified in City Code Chapter 38, Section 38-3. (a) The establishment shall be considered a "commercial" use pursuant to City Code Chapter 38, Section 38-3, Subdivision 4. (b) Not only shall the establishment meet the specified noise standards at its respective property lines, but the noise standards shall also apply to receiving uses in abutting tenant spaces within a multiple tenant, if the establishment is located in such a building. 3. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the establishment, a qualified professional shall certify that the establishment will, under normal operating conditions, meet the noise standards specified in City Code Chapter 38, Section 38-3. 4. The amusement or recreational activities offered by the establishment must operate exclusively indoors. 5. The establishment must have at least one adult employee or adult supervisory volunteer in the premises during all hours of operation. Section 31-208, Variances, indicates the Planning Commission may grant variances, 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. o The general purpose and intent of the Zoning Code is to regulate and restrict use of land for the protection of public health, safety and welfare. ■ The purpose of Section 31-325 limitations to the maximum size of the establishment is to help ensure the development of the office park into office space. • The purpose of Section 31-510 is to ensure that a property provides sufficient on -site parking spaces to accommodate its needs and not create a burden on the neighborhood through on -street parking. • The purpose of Section 31-320(c) is to ensure adequate drainage is met onsite and open space area is preserved. o The general purpose and intent of the Zoning Code may be met if certain conditions of approval are met. 2. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan. No application elements are contradictory to the Comprehensive Plan. 3. The applicant for the variance establishes that there are practical difficulties in complying with this chapter. "Practical difficulties," as use in connection with the granting of a variance, means that all of the following must be found to apply: • 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 use of the property for a Council 8/ 18/ 2015 (Case No. 2015-15) 2159 Curve Crest Boulevard Page 4 of 10 Amusement and Recreational Establishment, with appropriate parking and onsite infiltration, is reasonable. • The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property and that are not created by the landowner; and The unique circumstance of the property are the boundaries of the property, the size of the existing structure on the property and the existing parking and drive areas. a. The proposed 4,040 square foot variance for the Amusement and Recreational Establishment helps support the business's desire to have a portion of the 14 lanes dedicated to be reserved for community service endeavors. The uniqueness exists in this large space can accommodate for the increase Establishment area, providing a service to local law enforcement practice and community safety education, wholly within the existing structure's footprint. b. The property owner is not able to create additional parking next to this existing parking and drive area without a reduction in open space and infringement on the neighboring properties. The property's current improvements already provide less open space than the Code requires for office park development. Adding parking spaces would reduce that even further. • The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. The essential character of the neighborhood will not be altered with the additional 4,040 square feet of Establishment space, as the entire Amusement and Recreational Establishment is wholly located within the building. Also, if the additional parking area is developed in a fashion where drainage may occur onsite, the essential character of the locality will not be affected. Section 31-208 further indicates: • Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. • A previous variance must not be considered to have set a precedent for the granting of further variances. Each case must be considered on its merits. Section 31-207 establishes the review standards for Special Use Permits: The proposed structure or use conforms to the requirements and the intent of this chapter, and of the comprehensive plan, relevant area plans and other lawful regulations. The proposed use is allowed within the subject zoning district, if it is found compatible with surrounding uses. In review of the request with City staff, the following item was determined to be an item of concern: • Parking: The property currently contains 49 parking spaces but is required to meet 84 parking spaces onsite. The applicant has shown proof of parking for an Council 8/ 18/ 2015 (Case No. 2015-15) 2159 Curve Crest Boulevard Page 5 of 10 additional 36 spaces. However, the installation of this parking would necessitate a variance to the maximum impervious surface coverage requirement. o As there is no off-street parking in this area, the installation of 35 parking spaces should be required. If installed with a permeable surfacing material, the need for a variance to the impervious surface coverage would not be necessary. • Impervious Surface Coverage and Drainage: The applicant is not proposing to change the landscaping, impervious surface coverage or drainage to the site. However, if the applicant was to increase the parking area with a material that would allow for infiltration, the surface coverage would necessitate a variance. o To offset the increase in impervious surface coverage, City Engineering Department staff indicated the new parking area could be constructed with permeable asphalt. This would maintain the required impervious surface coverage, allowing for all parking to be met onsite and no variance would be required for the parking. Maintenance of the permeable asphalt would be required. • Noise: As indicated in the code, the specified noise standards must be met at its respective property lines, but the noise standards shall also apply to receiving uses in abutting tenant spaces within a multiple tenant, if the establishment is located in such a building. While no specifications sheet for the exact construction has been submitted, the proposed indoor range will be a vendor - designed system that is constructed by Action Target. The system will include wall and ceiling baffles (which will include acoustics within them), sound abatement within the firing area to reduce echo as well as a ballistic trap to catch the bullets. o The applicant has submitted sound inspection test records from Action Target designed and constructed facilities. As submitted, those facilities demonstrate the dBA levels, at the time a shot was fired, would be less than the City of Stillwater's maximum decibels of 70 dBA during the day. Furthermore, the dBA rating inside the gun shop (outside of the firing area) was also less than the maximum decibel levels allowed by City Code. Council 8/ 18/ 2015 (Case No. 2015-15) 2159 Curve Crest Boulevard Page 6 of 10 Land Use Districts Day (8:00 a.m.-10:00 L10 Standard p.m.) L50 Standard Night C10:00 p.m.-8:00 L10 Standard a.m.) L50 Standard Residential 65 dBA 60 dBA 55 dBA 50 dBA Commercial 70 dBA 65 dBA 70 dBA 65 dBA Industrial 80 dBA 75 dBA 80 dBA 75 dBA o According to the NRA Range Source Book, the following address acceptable, discretionary and unacceptable noise levels: 3.03..1 As a general guide, the following categories were developed by the NRA based on field and text book work: {1) Unacceptable: If the sound level exceeds 90 dB(A) for 1 hour out or 24 or exceeds 85 do(A) for 8 hours out of 24 and the receiver is less than 1f4 mile from the sound source. (2) Discretionary: Normally Acceptable, if the level exceeds 80 dB(A) for 8 hours out of 24 or if there are "loud" impulsive sounds (referring to sonic booms, artillery, etc.) on site and the distance from the property boundary and the receiver is one mile or more. {3) Discretionary: Normally acceptable if the level does not exceed 75 dR(A) at the property boundary more than 6 hours out of 24 hours and distance from the boundary line and the receiver is over-1/2 mile. {4) Acceptable: If the sound levels at the receiver do not exceed 65 dB(A) more than 8 hours out of 24 or activities do not extend into the nighttime hours of 10 p.m. through 7 a.m. Active shooting is to take place during the daytime hours of 7 a.m. to 10 p.m., with curtailed, but not necessarily discontinued activities during evening hours of 7 p.m. to10 p.m. Shooting activities should not continue into nighttime hours, between 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. unless needed for mandatory low light training by law enforcement personnel. o With this in mind, the acceptable noise level, of 65 dB(A), is in conformance with the City's noise standards. o State Statute 87A indicated "[a]llowable noise levels for the operation of a shooting range are the levels determined by replacing the steady state noise L10 and L50 state standards for each period of time within each noise area's classification with a single standard for impulsive noise that is two dB(A)lower than that of the L10 level for steady state noise." Minnesota Rules, parts 7030.0010 to 7030.0080, are also attached for Council's review. ■ City staff has reached out to the MPCA's Noise Program staff for determination of an indoor firing range classification and noise level allowances. Council 8/ 18/ 2015 (Case No. 2015-15) 2159 Curve Crest Boulevard Page 7 of 10 • Exterior changes: Section 31-319 of the Stillwater City Code requires that the Heritage Preservation Commission (HPC) conduct a design review on exterior changes, signage and waste receptacle. The applicant is aware exterior changes to the structure, including new exterior signage, will be required to obtain a Design Permit prior to the issuance of applicable Sign Permits. Comprehensive Plan Chapter 7, Local Economy, indicates a program to "encourage a mix of employment...and retail and service activities in the West Business Park area." The proposed uses are not contradictory to the Comprehensive Plan. This use is consistent with the Future Land Use Map identifying this property as having commercial use in 2030. Any additional conditions necessary for the public interest have been imposed or use and/or structure will not constitute a nuisance or be detrimental to the public welfare of the community. The proposed Amusement and Recreational Establishment will not be nuisance or be detrimental to the public welfare of the community if conditions addressing the concerns, above, are met. ALTERNATIVES AND RECOMMENDATION The Council has the following options: 1. Variances a. Make findings practical difficulty has been established and approve, with or without conditions: a 4,040 square foot variances to City Code Section 31-515.1.1 provision the Amusement and Recreational Establishment; a 26 parking stall variance to City Code Section 31-510.1(c), Number of parking spaces required; and an 19% variance to the 60% maximum (impervious) lot coverage requirement as identified in City Code Section 31-320(c). a. Make findings practical difficulty has not been established and determine any or all of the proposed variances and deny the variance(s). 2. Special Use Permit a. Make findings the proposed use conforms to the provisions for issuance of a Special Use permit and approve the Special Use Permit with or without conditions. If the Commission would like to approve the Case No. 2015-15 with conditions, staff would recommend the following: i. No greater than 14 firing lanes shall be permitted. Five of the firing lanes shall be made available for rental to community service personnel and community education activities. Council 8/ 18/ 2015 (Case No. 2015-15) 2159 Curve Crest Boulevard Page 8 of 10 ii. The Amusement and Recreational Establishment portion of the building shall not be in operation between the hours of 10:00 pm and 7:00 am. iii. The establishment must have at least one adult employee or adult supervisory volunteer in the premises during all hours of operation. iv. Soundproofing specifications shall be submitted with the building permit application. v. The Establishment shall install appropriate and sufficient soundproofing to be in compliance with City Code Section 38-3, Noise Control and Regulation, for sound levels outside of the establishment, including but not limited to the sound produced from air handling and mechanical equipment. vi. A total of 35 additional parking spaces shall be created onsite. A permeable surface parking area and suitable base found satisfactory to the City Engineer shall be utilized for all new parking and drive areas. vii. A grading plan shall be reviewed by the City Engineering Department and a Brown's Creek Watershed District permit shall be obtained prior to the installation of the additional parking spaces. viii. Upon the sale to MN Shooting Academy and prior to the release of necessary building permits, a 15' trail easement shall be dedicated to the City of Stillwater along the eastern property boundary for future trail connection between Curve Crest Boulevard and Highway 36. ix. Conditions of a HPC issued Design Permit shall be incorporated into this Special Use Permit by reference. x. Plans and the use will need to be approved by the engineering, fire and building officials before the issuance of a building permit. xi. All changes to the approved plans will need to be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director. Any major changes will need to go to the Planning Commission for review and approval. b. Determine that the proposed commercial Amusement and Recreational Establishment is not consistent with the Special Use Permit provisions or the Comprehensive Plan and deny the Special Use Permit. c. Table the application requesting more information be brought back before the Council at their September 1, 2015 meeting. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION Council 8/ 18/ 2015 (Case No. 2015-15) 2159 Curve Crest Boulevard Page 9 of 10 The applicant has demonstrated that, if certain conditions are met, the proposed use conforms to the requirements and the intent of the zoning code, the comprehensive plan, relevant area plans and other lawful regulations and that the use will not constitute a nuisance or be detrimental to the public welfare of the community. Furthermore, the unique size of the building allows for a greater than 3,000 square foot Amusement and Recreational Establishment to be located wholly within the existing building, a 4,040 square foot variance to the maximum Amusement and Recreational Establishment size is reasonable and provided the use, and all associated uses including mechanical equipment, complies with all noise regulations in effect, practical difficulty has been established. Therefore, staff would recommend approval of a Special Use Permit for a 7,040 square foot indoor firing range, an Amusement and Recreational Establishment, with associated classroom spaces to be used for an educational institution should be granted approval. The applicant has not demonstrated practical difficulty exists for the 35 off-street parking stall variance nor the 19% impervious surface coverage variance as other reasonable alternatives exist. Therefore, staff recommends denial of these two variances. ATTACHMENTS Memorandum, City Attorney Magnuson Appeal Information City Code Section 31-217 Appeal Letter and Attachment, Melissa Douglas Appeal Letter, Ann Kocksiek Applicant Revised Plan set (3 pages) Public Comment, Anne Siess MPCA Noise Pollution Control Planning Commission July 8, 2015, Minutes Planning Commission staff report Site Location Map Original Application Submission Narrative Request (2 pages) Plan set (3 pages) Ballistic Walls and Baffles Specifications (5 pages) Noise Exposure Assessment & Abatement Strategies Narrative (1 page) Safety Baffle Cutsheet (2 pages) Wall Baffle Cutsheet (2 pages) Action Target Sound Inspection Reports (3 pages) Council 8/ 18/ 2015 (Case No. 2015-15) 2159 Curve Crest Boulevard Page 10 of 10 MAGNUSON LAW FIRM LICENSED IN MINNESOTA AND WISCONSIN THE GRAND GARAGE 324 MAIN STREET SOUTH • SUITE #260 • STILLWATER, MN 55082-5165 TELEPHONE: (651) 439-9464 • FACSIMILE: (651) 439-5641 W W W. MAGNUSONLA W FIRM.COM DAVID T. MAGNUSON AMANDA K. DREW DTMAGNUSON@MAGNUSONLAWFIRM.COM AKDREW@MAGNUSONLAWFIRM.COM MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor, City Council, and Staff FROM: David T. Magnuson DATE: August 5, 2015 RE: Shooting Range Zoning Appeal The Appeal filed by Melisa Douglas alleges it would violate State Law and our City Code that to grant a Special Use Permit for an indoor shooting range in the BP-0 Zoning District because indoor shooting ranges are not an allowed or permitted Use in the BP-0 Zoning District. The allegation is that a "use" variance cannot be granted. The appeal would be well founded, except for a special provision in the City Code found at Sec. 31-515.1. "Sec. 31-515.1. Amusement and recreational establishments in the BP-0 District. The City of Stillwater finds that "amusement and recreational establishments" (such as armories, assembly halls, Bowling alleys, dance halls, pools and billiard parlors, skating rinks and other social, sport or recreational centers) are uses that under certain circumstances fit compatibly with other uses in the BP-O, Business Park Office Zoning District. Consequently, such uses shall be allowed by Special Use Permit " and 2(a) of that Section mandates that the establishment "shall" be a commercial use for the purpose of noise control. The listing of uses in this Section is not intended to limit the uses permitted by Special Use Permit. Instead, the list is illustrative of a type of use. It is amusement and recreational establishments that are permitted by SUP and the ordinance provides examples of the uses with the introductory clause that uses "such as" those on the list are also permitted (emphasis added). Similarly, Sec. 31-101 Sub. 30 of our City Code defines "Commercial Recreation" to include bowling alleys, skating rinks, dancehalls, pool halls, the same uses illustrated by Section 31-515.1. Sec. 31.101 Sub. 30 also notes that the list is illustrative and not limiting, by the phrase that included in the list are "tavern, theater, firearm range and similar uses" (emphasis added). Therefore, since a shooting range is a commercial amusement and recreational use, it can be permitted by Special Use Permit in the BP-0 Zoning District. Page 2 August 5, 2015 Metro re: Shooting Range Zoning Appeal The Code goes on the establish certain standards for these uses, but what is important for this analysis is that the proposed use is allowed as a Special Use in the BP-0 Zoning District. Therefore, it is legally permitted to consider variances associated with square footage, parking requirements and impervious lot coverage requirements, the variances requested in this application. Further, Courts will examine the denial of a Special Use Permit more closely than the denial of a variance, because a Special Use is one permitted by the Ordinance and the issue is simply whether the standards have been met. A variance may be granted only under a 5 part test established by the 201 1 State Legislation. A variance may, but is not required to be granted when an applicant has "practical difficulties" with the regulations. Practical difficulties means: property owners propose to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the ordinance, the problem is due to circumstances unique to the property and not created by the landowners, and the variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. Lastly, the variance must be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and be in harmony with the purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance. Finally, the Appeal cites a state law that grants certain rights to shooting ranges once they arc lawfully established and operated pursuant to the November 1999 revised addition of the National Rifle Association Range Source Book: A Guide to Planning and Construction. While it is true that this law, enacted in Minnesota in 2005. grants certain protection to shooting ranges, the law does not control the process for granting a zoning permit for the use nor should it be a basis, standing alone, for denial. Respectfully Submitted. David T. Magnuson Stillwater City Attorn Stillwater, MN Code of Ordinances about:blank DIVISION 5. - APPEALS Sec. 31-217. - Appeals. An applicant or any other interested person, dissatisfied with any action taken under the provisions of this chapter, may appeal the action and decision, as follows: (a) Where to file appeal. Appeals shall be filed with the office of the community development director as follows: (1) Appeals from a decision of the community development director or any other administrative official, in taking any of the action authorized by this chapter, must be filed at the office of the community development director. (2) The clerk shall set the appeal for hearing on the agenda for a regular meeting of the city council not less than 15 days or more than 45 days after the date of filing the appeal. (b) Procedure for appeals. Appeals procedure shall be as follows: (1) All appeals shall be made in writing and shall state the reasons for the appeal. The appeal, accompanied by the appropriate fee, must be received by the community development director or the city clerk not later than ten calendar days following the date of action from which the appeal is being taken, unless otherwise specified in this Section 31-217. (2) The community development director must place the appeal on the agenda of the appropriate commission at its next regular meeting. (3) Appeals from the decision of the planning commission or heritage preservation commission in taking any actions authorized by this title must be filed at the office of the city clerk. (4) Once filed, appeals may be withdrawn only at a public hearing and with the approval of the hearing board. (c) Stay, pending appeal. The receipt of a written appeal will stay all action and put in abeyance all approvals or permits which may have been granted, pending the effective date of the decision of the board hearing the appeal. (d) Hearing on appeal. Hearings on appeal shall be as follows: (1) Appeals will be scheduled for hearing at the earliest regular meeting of the hearing board. (2) All appeal hearings will be de novo. (3) All appeal public hearings will be conducted consistent with procedures set forth by ordinance. 1 of 1 7/20/2015 3:09 PM July 17, 2015 City of Stillwater Community Development Department 216 North Fourth Street Stillwater, MN 55082 Attention: Abbi Wittman, City Planner Bill Turnblad, Community Development Director JUL 1 7 2015 Community Development Dopamine Dear Mayor Kozlowski, Councilmember Junker, Councilmember Menikheim, Councilmember Polehna, Councilmember Weidner, City Administrator McCarty, Mr. Turnblad and Ms. Wittman: I respectfully appeal for consideration by the City Council the July 8, 2015 decision by the Stillwater Planning Commission to grant a Special Use Permit and Variances to Paul Simonet for Minnesota Shooting Academy, Case Number 2015-15. The applicants requested a Special Use Permit and Variances to convert an existing furniture showroom to an indoor shooting range. By their nature, shooting ranges may impose negative impacts upon adjoining land owners, nearby residents and the broader community including noise, lead pollution, depressed property values and even potentially physical harm. The issues surrounding this case deserve further public hearing and thorough and transparent discussion with the City Council. Sufficient information was not provided to the Planning Commission to allow full evaluation of the proposal. The basis for my appeal is as follows: 1. A shooting range is not an allowed use in the zoning district. Under the Stillwater City Code Section 31-101(30), firearms ranges are specifically defined as a commercial recreation use: Commercial recreation means bowling alley, cart track, jump center, golf, pool hall, vehicle racing or amusement, dancehall, skiing, skating, tavern, theater, firearms range and similar uses. [Emphasis added.] The property lies within the Business Park Office (BP-0) District. Commercial recreation uses are not allowed as a permitted or special use in the zoning district per Section 31-320(b)(1) and Section 31-325. The application was instead processed as an Amusement and Recreational Establishment. Amusement and Recreational Establishments are listed separately in Section 31-325 and are not interchangeable with Commercial Recreation uses. The definition of Amusement and Recreational Establishments includes a distinct subset of uses from the broader Commercial Recreation definition but does not include firearm ranges. Appeal of Case 2015-15 Paul Simonet/Minnesota Shooting Academy Special Use Permit and Variances Amusement and Recreational Establishments are allowed as a special use in the BP-0 District. Section 31-207 of the Stillwater Code states that special uses "may be suitable only in certain zoning districts" because they are "of such unique and special character." Special uses are not allowed by right but only if certain required findings can be made. The zoning ordinance also limits Amusement and Recreational Establishments in the BP-0 District to 3,000 square feet in size "provided the place or building in which it is operated is sufficiently sound insulated to effectively confine the noise to the premises." The intent of the zoning ordinance is clearly to allow small, specific uses without significant, noise impacts to adjacent properties. A shooting range in a 28,000 square foot building cannot be reasonably interpreted to fall within these parameters. 2. The requested variance to allow a shooting range in the BP-0 district is a use variance. Use variances are not allowed by state law or city code. To allow a shooting range even under the incorrect categorization as an Amusement and Recreation Establishment, the applicants required a variance to the maximum 3,000-square-foot size for Amusement and Recreation Establishments in the BP-0 zoning district. As stated on the City's website: The variance procedure is designed to permit minor adjustment to the zoning regulations where there are special or extraordinary circumstances applying to a parcel of land or building that prevent the property from being used to the extent intended by the zoning. Special circumstances may include factors such as the size, shape, topography, vegetation, wetlands or other unique characteristics of the land. The applicants' request is effectively a use variance — using the variance process to allow a use otherwise not permitted in a specific zoning district. Use variances are not permitted under Minnesota State law or Stillwater City Code Section 31-208(b): 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. In addition, the variance application states the size of Amusement and Recreational use to be just over 7,000 square feet, including only the shooting lanes in the size calculation. The subject building is at least 26,000 square feet in size (though described as over 28,000 square feet in the original 1995 development approval). The primary use of the entire building will be a shooting range, not just the shooting lanes. The proposed retail, offices, lounge, vending area and restrooms are accessory and ancillary to the primary use as a shooting range, not independent or separate of the shooting range. The description of the shooting range as just over 7,000 square feet minimizes the discrepancy between the size of the proposed use (26,000+ square feet) and the size of Amusement and Recreational Establishments (3,000 square feet) permitted in the zoning district. 2 Appeal of Case 2015-15 Paul Simonet/Minnesota Shooting Academy Special Use Permit and Variances 3. State statutes significantly limit local zoning authority over shooting ranges. State statutes are less strict than city standards, allowing more noise, allowing expansion by right and In 2005, the Minnesota Legislature adopted a statute that appears to greatly limit local zoning authority over shooting ranges (Minnesota Statutes 87A Shooting Ranges, attached). This statute initially directed the Commissioner of the Department of Natural Resources to develop statewide performance standards for shooting ranges through a public rule -making process. In the interim, shooting range performance standards were defined as the 1999 revised edition of the National Rifle Association's (NRA) Range Source Book. The Minnesota Legislature amended the statute in 2012 to adopt the 1999 NRA Range Source Book as the permanent state-wide standards for shooting ranges. This statute limits local authority over shooting ranges especially relating to noise standards, hours of operation, expansion, resolving complaints, permit enforcement and closure. For example, noise standards in the state statute allow more noise than city requirements. The statute also allows expansion of shooting ranges by right if in compliance with the state-wide performance standards. Closure of shooting ranges may only be accomplished by a court determination. Information on the applicability of this statute to the Paul Simonet/Minnesota Shooting Academy application, including a City Attorney opinion, was not included in the Planning Commission packet or presented at the Planning Commission meeting. 4. The required special use and variance findings cannot be made for this request. Sections 31-207(d) and 31-208(d) of the Stillwater City Code state that all required findings must be made based on evidence in the public record before approving a special use permit and any variances.. These findings include that the proposed use conforms to the requirements and intents of the zoning ordinance. The proposed Commercial Recreation use is not an allowed use in this zoning district. Other findings require that conditions be imposed to protect the public interest and public welfare. The Planning Commission did impose conditions of approval but the ability to implement and enforce these conditions appears to be significantly limited by state statute especially as it relates to noise, expansion and addressing nuisances. The potential for lead pollution, especially indoor air pollution, from the shooting range and related health impacts were not discussed or evaluated in the Planning Commission materials. A variance to the impervious surface standard and/or landscape standard is not in the public interest as it detrimentally impacts water quality, storm water runoff volume, community aesthetics and buffering of adjacent land uses. Finally, neither variance request meets the practical difficulty standard defined in Minnesota State Statutes and the Stillwater City Code: "Practical difficulties," as used 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; 3 Appeal of Case 2015-15 Paul Simonet/Minnesota Shooting Academy Special Use Permit and Variances (ii) The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property and that are not created by the landowner; and (iii) The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. The proposed Commercial Recreation use is not allowed in the BP-0 zoning district. The requested variances do not relate to any unique property characteristics but are solely created by the landowner's desire to use the property as a shooting range. When addressing the variance findings, the applicants' own project narrative acknowledges that the need for the variance "is related to the use of the property, not circumstamces unique to the property." I appreciate your consideration of this appeal and ask that you reverse the Planning Commission's decision to grant a special use permit and variances for Paul Simonet/Minnesota Shooting Academy. I request that this appeal be considered at the next available City Council meeting on July 28, 2015 to facilitate prompt resolution of this matter. Respectfully, Melissa Douglas, Resident Attachment: Minnesota Statute Chapter 87A, Shooting Ranges 4 1 87A.01 DEFINITIONS. MINNESOTA STATUTES 2014 87A.03 CHAPTER 87A SHOOTING RANGES 87A.02 SHOOTING RANGE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS; BEST PRACTICES. 87A.03 COMPLIANT RANGES; AUTHORIZED ACTIVITIES. 87A.04 MITIGATION AREA. 87A.05 NOISE STANDARDS. 87A.06 NUISANCE ACTIONS; COMPLIANCE WITH SHOOTING RANGE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS. 87A.07 CLOSURE OF SHOOTING RANGES. 87A.08 APPLICABILITY OF OTHER LAWS. 87A.09 PUBLIC SHOOTING RANGES; ACCESSIBILITY. 87A.10 TRAP SHOOTING SPORTS FACILITY GRANTS. 87A.001 MS 2006 [Renumbered 15.001] 87A.01 DEFINITIONS. Subdivision 1. Applicability. The definitions in this section apply to sections 87A.01 to 87A.08. Subd. 2. Person. "Person" means an individual, association, proprietorship, partnership, corporation, club, political subdivision, or other legal entity. Subd. 3. Shooting range or range. "Shooting range" or "range" means an area or facility designated or operated primarily for the use of firearms, as defined in section 97A.015, subdivision 19, or archery, and includes shooting preserves as described in section 97A.115 or any other Minnesota law. Subd. 4. Shooting range performance standards. "Shooting range performance standards" means the best practices for shooting range performance standards identified in section 87A.02. Subd. 5. Local unit of government. "Local unit of government" means a home rule charter or statutory city, county, town, or other political subdivision. History: 2005 c 105 s 1; 2012 c 277 art 1 s 16 87A.02 SHOOTING RANGE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS; BEST PRACTICES. Subdivision 1. [Repealed, 2012 c 277 art 1 s 91] Subd. 2. Best practices. For purposes of this chapter, the November 1999 revised edition of the National Rifle Association's Range Source Book: A Guide to Planning and Construction shall serve as best practices for shooting range performance standards. History: 2005 c 105 s 2; 2012 c 277 art 1 s 17 87A.03 COMPLIANT RANGES; AUTHORIZED ACTIVITIES. Subdivision 1. Authorized activities. A shooting range that operates in compliance with the shooting range performance standards must be permitted to do all of the following within its geographic boundaries, under the same or different ownership or occupancy, if done in accordance with shooting range performance standards: (1) operate the range and conduct activities involving the discharge of firearms; Copyright c© 2014 by the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved. 87A.03 MINNESOTA STATUTES 2014 2 (2) expand or increase its membership or opportunities for public participation related to the primary activity as a shooting range; (3) make those repairs or improvements desirable to meet or exceed requirements of shooting range performance standards; (4) increase events and activities related to the primary activity as a shooting range; (5) conduct shooting activities and discharge firearms daily between 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. A local unit of government with zoning jurisdiction over a shooting range may extend the hours of operation by the issuance of a special or conditional use permit; and (6) acquire additional lands to be used for buffer zones or noise mitigation efforts or to otherwise comply with this chapter. Subd. 2. Nonconforming use. A shooting range that is a nonconforming use shall be allowed to conduct additional shooting activities within the range's lawful property boundaries as of the date the range became a nonconforming use, provided the shooting range remains in compliance with noise and shooting range performance standards under this chapter. Subd. 3. Compliance with other law. Nothing in this section exempts any newly constructed or remodeled building on a shooting range from compliance with fire safety, disability accessibility, elevator safety, bleacher safety, or other provisions of the State Building Code that have mandatory statewide ap- plication. History: 2005 c 56 s 1; 2005 c 105 s 3 87A.04 MITIGATION AREA. (a) Except for those uses, developments, and structures in existence or for which approval has been granted by October 1, 2005, or as provided in paragraph (b), no change in use, new development, or con- struction of a structure shall be approved for any portion of property within 750 feet of the perimeter property line of an outdoor shooting range if the change in use, development, or construction would cause an outdoor shooting range in compliance with this chapter to become out of compliance. (b) A change in use, new development, or construction of a structure subject to this section may be approved if the person seeking the approval or, at the discretion of the governing body, the approving authority agrees to provide any mitigation required to keep the range in compliance with this chapter. The person requesting an approval subject to this section is responsible for providing documentation if no mitigation is required under this section. Failure to provide the documentation or any mitigation required under this section exempts the range from being found out of compliance with the shooting range per- formance and noise standards of this chapter with regard to the property responsible for the mitigation if the failure to provide the documentation or required mitigation is the sole basis for the range being out of compliance with the shooting range performance standards. Any action brought by the owner of the property against the range is subject to section 87A.06. With the permission of the range operator, any mitigation required under this section may be provided on the range property. History: 2005 c 105 s 4 Copyright © 2014 by the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved. 3 87A.05 NOISE STANDARDS. MINNESOTA STATUTES 2014 87A.08 Allowable noise levels for the operation of a shooting range are the levels determined by replacing the steady state noise L10 and L50 state standards for each period of time within each noise area's classification with a single Leq(h) standard for impulsive noise that is two dBA lower than that of the L10 level for steady state noise. The noise level shall be measured outside of the range property at the location of the receiver's activity according to Minnesota Rules, parts 7030.0010 to 7030.0080, as in effect on May 28, 2005. For purposes of this section, "Leq(h)" means the energy level that is equivalent to a steady state level that contains the same amount of sound energy as the time varying sound level for a 60-minute time period. History: 2005 c 105 s 5 87A.06 NUISANCE ACTIONS; COMPLIANCE WITH SHOOTING RANGE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS. A person who owns, operates, or uses a shooting range in this state that is in compliance with shooting range performance standards is not subject to any nuisance action for damages or equitable relief based on noise or other matters regulated by the shooting range performance standards. This section does not prohibit other actions. History: 2005 c 105 s 6 87A.07 CLOSURE OF SHOOTING RANGES. Subdivision 1. Closure. Except as otherwise provided in sections 87A.01 to 87A.08, a shooting range that is in compliance with shooting range performance standards and the requirements of sections 87A.01 to 87A.08 shall not be forced to permanently close or permanently cease any activity related to the primary use of the shooting range unless the range or activity is found to be a clear and immediate safety hazard by a court of competent jurisdiction. In any action brought to compel the permanent closure of any range in compliance with shooting range performance standards and this chapter, or to permanently cease any activity related to the primary use of the shooting range, there is a rebuttable presumption that the range or activity is not a clear and immediate safety hazard. If the shooting range provides evidence that the cause of a proven safety hazard can be mitigated so as to eliminate the safety hazard, the court shall not order the permanent closure of the range, or permanent ceasing of the activity found to be a clear and immediate safety hazard, unless the range operator fails to implement the necessary mitigation to remove the safety hazard by the date that is determined reasonable by the court. Subd. 2. Preliminary injunctions. Nothing in this section prohibits a court from granting a preliminary injunction against any activity determined to be a probable clear and immediate safety hazard, or against any individual determined to be the probable cause of an alleged clear and immediate safety hazard, pending the final determination of the existence of the safety hazard. Subd. 3. Permanent injunctions. A court may grant a permanent injunction only against a particular activity or person instead of permanently closing the range unless the court finds that the remaining op- erations also pose a safety hazard under this section. History: 2005 c 105 s 7 87A.08 APPLICABILITY OF OTHER LAWS. Subdivision 1. Public safety laws; zoning. (a) Nothing in this chapter prohibits enforcement of any federal law. To the extent consistent with this chapter, other state laws regarding the health, safety, and Copyright © 2014 by the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved. 87A.08 MINNESOTA STATUTES 2014 4 welfare of the public may be enforced. To the extent consistent with this chapter, a local unit of government with zoning authority jurisdiction over a shooting range may enforce its applicable ordinances and permits. Nothing in this chapter shall supersede more restrictive regulation of days and hours of operation imposed by the terms and conditions of ordinances and permits that are in effect on May 28, 2005. (b) If the operator of the shooting range shows evidence that the range can be brought into compliance with the applicable state law, local ordinance, or permit, the range may not be permanently closed unless the range operator fails to bring the range into compliance with the applicable law, ordinance, or permit under this section by the date that the court determines reasonable. Nothing in this section prohibits a court from granting a preliminary injunction against any activity determined to be a violation of a law, ordinance, or permit under this section or against any individual determined to be causing an alleged violation, pending the final determination of the existence of the violation. Subd. 2. Permanent injunctions. A court may grant a permanent injunction only against a particular activity or person instead of permanently closing the range unless the court finds that the remaining op- erations also create a violation under this section. History: 2005 c 105 s 8 87A.09 PUBLIC SHOOTING RANGES; ACCESSIBILITY. (a) A publicly owned or managed shooting range located in the seven -county metropolitan area that is funded in whole or part with public funds must be available at least twice during the spring and twice during the summer for use by participants in a Minnesota Department of Natural Resources firearms safety instruction course under section 97B.015. The shooting range must be available during hours reasonable for youth participants. The range operator may charge a fee to cover any costs directly incurred from use required under this section, but may not charge a fee to offset costs for general maintenance and operation of the facility. (b) This section does not apply to cities of the first class or a shooting range located on the same premises as a correctional or detention facility that holds or incarcerates offenders. History: 2012 c 277 art 1 s 18 87A.10 TRAP SHOOTING SPORTS FACILITY GRANTS. The commissioner of natural resources shall administer a program to provide cost -share grants to local recreational shooting clubs for up to 50 percent of the costs of developing or rehabilitating trap shooting sports facilities for public use. A facility rehabilitated or developed with a grant under this section must be open to the general public at reasonable times and for a reasonable fee on a walk-in basis. The commissioner shall give preference to projects that will provide the most opportunities for youth. History: 2014 c 290 s 13; 2014 c 312 art 13 s 18 Copyright © 2014 by the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved. Fes, eived July 20, 2015 City of Stillwater 216 4th Street N Stillwater, MN 55082 Case #2015-15 Dear Planning Commission and Council Members, JUL 9 0 2015 Community Development Department I am a Stillwater resident and I would like to appeal the decision made by the Stillwater Planning Commission on July 8th, 2015 for approval of the variances for the MN Shooting Academy. The proposed location is 2159 Curve Crest Boulevard. . I strongly recommend a further sound study of the possible MN Shooting Academy It was not made clear by the Planning Commission on July 8th that the outside noise from any air exchangers or equipment would pass the decibel rating. They seemed to concentrate solely on the gun and range sound when the large outdoor equipment will be much louder. City Planner Wittman vacillated for what the actual rating was. The tests were also conducted by staff of Action Target one with a Radio Shack Handheld meter. Is there training needed to use these meters, along with testing of the equipment? Wouldn't an outside source for testing be required for confirmation? I would also suggest a conversation with the cities that these current facilities are located in. I am also greatly concerned about the added traffic at the intersection of Curve Crest Blvd. and Washington . I am a frequent patron of Brine's, ABC Lumber, Abrahmson's Nursery, Simonet's, Herberger's & yes, Haskell's as well. I have seen accidents and so many close calls leaving these locations that it has actually kept me away during certain hours of the business day. May I suggest a study of this area prior to final approval as everyone seemed to agree this needs to be addressed without change of ownership. Finally, I see no classrooms in the plans. If this is truly an academy and presents itself as a gun safety and teaching facility I would suggest that would need to be done in a classroom. You will find my $50.00 enclosed for this petition. Please consider more study prior to this approval. egards, Ann. ICochsiek 2151 Oak Glen Trail Stillwater, MN 55082 dun & Ana Kochsiek 2151 Oak Oa rn l St► atei; MN 55052 • Curve Cre O215g Curve Crest Blvd SITE Abrahamson Nurseries PROJECT DIRECTORY OWNER XXX XXX XXX CONTACT: XXX PHONE: XXX CELL: XXX EMAIL: XXX CONTRACTOR: xxx XXX XXX CONTACT: XXX PHONE: XXX CELL: XXX FAX: XXX EMAIL: XXX ARCHITECT ARCHNET INC. 333 NORTH MAIN STREET SUITE 201 STILLWATER, MN 55082 CONTACT: MICHAEL F. DIEM PHONE: 65 I-430-0606 CELL: 65 I -27 1-7289 FAX: 65 I-430-24 14 EMAIL: mike@archnetusa.com STRUCTURAL ENGINEER DUFFY ENGINEERING 350 HIGHWAY 10 SOUTH ST. CLOUD, MINNESOTA 56304 CONTACT: RYAN SEAVERT 0: (320) 259-6575 F: (320) 259-6991 EMAIL: SeavertR@DuffyEng.com WEBSITE: DUFFYENG.COM LOCATION MAP Curve Crest Blvd Fob Target Fror is Lifl Bridge • Bering Company TGwer DrIN i, St t4 DRAWING INDEX SHEET# SHEET NAME GENERAL TO TITLE SKEET ARCHITECTURAL D I DEMO PLAN Al .0 FLOOR PLAN * SCHEDULES STRUCTURAL XXX XXX MN SHOOTING ACADEMY 2159 Curve Crest Boulevard, Stillwater, MN ■ CLASSROOM 795 SQ.FT. 3 PARKING STALLS PER CLASSROOM + I PER/ INSTRUCTOR = 8 RETAIL SPACE 7,500 SQ.FT. I PARKING STALLS PER 200 = 38 LOUNGE VENDING 740 SQ.FT. I PARKING STALLS PER 200 = 4 'B' OCCUPANCY GUN RANGE 7,040 SQ.FT. 14 SHOOTERS AND 6 INSTRUCTORS = 20 WAREHOUSE / STORAGE 5,383 SQ.FT. I PARKING STALLS PER 1000 = G EMPLOYEES ONLY I ,924 SQ.FT. 8 EMPLOYEES TOTAL PARKING STALLS REQUIRED = 84 CURVE CREST BLVD. 26,700 SQ. FT. 49 EXISTING PARKING STALLS + 36 PROOF OF PARKING STALLS = 85 PARKING STALLS NOTE SITE PLAN IS FOR REFERENCE ONLY, ALL EXISTING SITE IONDITIONS TO REMAIN , NO NEW ADDITIONAL SITE WORK GREEN SPACE PRELIMINARY CALCULATION: 100,877 SF SITE 21,236 SF GREEN (21 %) WITH INCREASED PARKING OSITE PLAT 1" = 40'-0" GENERAL NOTES CODE DATA MN Shooting Academy Code Data Location Current Building Code Project Description June 16,2015 Occupancy Classification, Chapter 3 Section 303.1.1 exception Type of Construction (existing) Table 601 Separation at indoor gun range Occupant load, Table 1004.1.2 (For exiting purposes only) Exits: Table 1015.1, 1015.2.1 Locking, Section 1008.1.9 Panic/Fire exit hardware Exit signage Section 1011.1 Emergency Lighting at means of egress, 1006.3 Accessible exterior route, MN 1341 Slope not steeper than 1:20 Accessible parking, (2015 MN Chapter 1341 adopted 1/14/15) Accessible plumbing fixtures MN Plumbing fixtures, Table 2902.1 Stillwater, Minnesota 2015 MN State Building Code adopts 2012 IBC with amendments (effective 6/2/15); unless noted otherwise, IBC sections refer to 2012 IBC 2015 MN Accessibility Code was effective 1/14/15 Remodel space within existing building Group B offices to remain, Assembly space less than 50 occupants-B occupancy (lounge/vending), Retail space Group M, warehouse/storage Group 5-2, indoor gun range 5-1 occupancy (18 occupants) with hazardous materials within allowable quantity per control area Type II-B sprinklered existing with additional protective construction at indoor gun range Provide walls equivalent to 2-hour fire rating and additional protective construction at indoor gun range Retail M occupancy 7,500 sf/30 sf per occupant = 250, Group B offices 1,925 sf/100 = 19, Lounge/vending 740 sf/15 = 49, Gun range actual 18 occupants, Warehouse/storage 6,570 sf/300 = 22 Provide 1 exit at indoor gun range, 18 occupants (1 exit allowed for max occupant load of 29), existing exterior exits 1/3 diagonal apart at warehouse/storage and retail areas, provide exit through storage area at new hall Egress doors shall be readily openable from egress side with use of key or special knowledge; indoor gun range may require special security measures Existing fire exit hardware on exterior exit doors to remain, verify with Fire Marshal Verify at existing exterior doors to remain, provide at all locations where path of egress is not immediately visible Verify at existing exterior landings of exterior doors Verify existing accessible route from accessible surface parking to main entrance Verify existing accessible parking spaces & signage, see exception for access aisle signage located in path of travel Existing to remain (1 women, 1 men) Existing to remain: women (3 toilets, 3 lays), men (2 toilets, 1 urinal, 3 lays I . IF ANY DISCREPANCIES EXIST BETWEEN ARCHITECTURAL, STRUCTURAL OR CIVIL DRAWINGS, CONSULT WITH ARCHITECT BEFORE COMMENCING WITH CONSTRUCTION. 2. DO NOT SCALE DRAWINGS, IF ADDITIONAL DIMENSIONS ARE REQUIRED CONTACT ARCHITECT. 3. GENERAL CONTRACTOR TO SUPPLY A FULL SET OF PLANS TO THE SUBS * SHOP SUPPLIERS. 4. GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE TO FIELD VERIFY ALL EXISTING CONDITIONS $ DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO COMMENCING WITH WORK AND TO NOTIFY ARCHITECT IMMEDIATELY OF ANY DISCREPANCIES. 5. GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY AND INSURE ALL UTILITIES ARE LOCATED IN FIELD AND COORDINATE AS NECESSARY WITH NEW WORK. 6. GENERAL CONTRACTOR AND ALL SUB -CONTRACTORS SHALL PERFORM WORK IN CONFORMANCE WITH ALL APPLICABLE BUILDING CODES AND LAWS. 7. NOTIFY ARCHITECT OF ANY DISCREPANCIES BETWEEN SPECIFICATIONS, PLANS AND NOTES. CONTRACTOR SHALL BE HELD TO COMPLY WITH THE MORE STRINGENT REQUIREMENTS. 8. GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE COORDINATION OF ALL MECHANICAL, ELECTRICAL, PLUMBING, HVAC, FIREPROTECTION, AND STRUCTURE CONSTRUCTION AND SHALL COMPLY WITH ALL APPLICABLE CODES AS INDICATED. 9. REQUIRED MEANS OF EGRESS AND SECURITY TO SPACE SHALL BE MAINTAINED DURING CONSTRUCTION. 10. GENERAL CONTRACTOR TO NOTE CONSTRUCTION TIME LINE OF PROJECT AND THAT CONSTRUCTION MAY START IN WINTER. GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHOULD PLAN ACCORDINGLY FOR WINTER CONDITIONS. 1 I . GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE * INSTALL ALL NECESSARY BLOCKING, SHIMS $ BACKING FOR FIXTURES, EQUIPMENT, AND ACCESSORIES RELATED TO THE SCOPE OF WORK. 12. CONTRACTOR SHALL CALL FIRE INSPECTOR AT ELECTRIC R.I. TO CONFIRM LOCATION OF EXIT SIGNS AND EMERGENCY LIGHTING. EMERGENCY LIGHTING IS REQUIRED AT ALL EXIT DOORS. EXIT AND DIRECTIONAL SIGNAGE SHALL BE INSTALLED AT EVERY REQUIRED EXIT DOORWAY, INTERSECTION OF CORRIDORS AND AT OTHER SUCH LOCATIONS AND INTERVALS AS NECESSARY TO CLEARLY INDICATE THE DIRECTION OF EGRESS. 1 3. FIRE EXTINGUISHER TO BE A MINIMUM 2A I OBC, RATED WALL MTD. AT A HEIGHT TO MEET ADA CODES WITH SIGNAGE. 14. CONTRACTOR SHALL FURNISH/INSTALL FIRE EXTINGUISHERS AND F.E. WALL SIGNAGE COMPLIANT WITH CODES. ALL F.E.'S SHALL BE TAGGED, CURRENTLY DATED, EFFECTIVE FOR ONE-YEAR. FINAL QUANTITIES OF FIRE EXTINGUISHERS ARE SUBJECT TO CODES AND/OR LOCAL FIRE MARSHAL DIRECTIONS/REQUIREMENTS. 1 5. SPRINKLER INSTALLING CONTRACTOR MUST OBTAIN A FIRE SPRINKLER PERMIT FOR FIRE SPRINKLER WORK PRIOR TO SYSTEM INSTALLATION. CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS AND CALCULATIONS MUST BE PROVIDED BY THE SPRINKLER INSTALLER FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL. 16. IT IS THE SPRINKLER SUB -CONTRACTORS RESPONSIBILITY TO DESIGN THE SPRINKLER SYSTEM TO ALL AREAS INCLUDING CONCEALED SPACES AND TO FIT WITHIN THE ROOF STRUCTURE AND AVOID LIGHT FIXTURES, FANS MECHANICAL DUCT IN THE SPACES WITH EXPOSED STRUCTURE. AS HIGH AND TIGHT TO THE DECK AS POSSIBLE. 17. SUBMIT ALL COLOR SAMPLES TO OWNER AND ARCHITECT FOR APPROVAL PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. ALLOW AMPLE TIME FOR SELECTIONS AND APPROVALS. 18. DESIGN -BUILD SUB -CONTRACTORS ARE TO VERIFY THAT ALL APPLICABLE WORK IS IN THEIR SCOPE OF WORK AND THEREFORE IN THEIR RESPECTIVE BID. IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE DESIGN -BUILD SUB -CONTRACTOR TO COORDINATE THIS WITH OTHER SELECTED DESIGN -BUILD SUB -CONTRACTORS. �rll'Iil1ll�il�ll�lr ly I+ IIIII� L" H-1 111 11111111111111111111 I III1111111111111111 1111111111111 111 111 1111 1111 1111 1111 I I I I I III 1111 11111111111111111111 111 11111111111111111111 1111111 iii 1111i 111111111 11111111111111111111 I!I 111 111111111111 111111111111 11111 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I I 11111111111111111111 I I I I I I I I I I I I 111 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I11111111111111111111 11 111111111111111111111111111111111111111 111111111111111111111111111111111111111 li strE I 1I 11 1 1 111111 1 l 1 1 1 1 1 111 1111111 NOTE ELEVATION IS FOR REFERENCE ONLY, NO NEW WORK EXISTING ELEVATION 1 3/32" = 1'-0" ARCHNET u S a architecture • interiors sustainable design 333 N Main St. Ste. 201 Stillwater, MN 55082 651-430-0606 archnetusa.com MN SHOOTING ACADEMY 2159 Curve Crest Boulevard, Stillwater, MN Revisions Item REV.1 Date 8-11-15 Registration Information I hereby certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision, and that I am a duly Licensed Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota Printed Name MICHAEL F. DIEM Signature DATE License # 8-11-15 16844 Sheet Information TITLE SHEET Project No : 15-111 Sheet Size : 24" x 36" Drawn By : CAL Checked By : RT Date : 8-11-15 Drawing No : TO 111 ;t 2015 ARCHNET, Inc. KEY ODEMO PLAN 3/32" = 1 '-0" DEMO WALL AND DOOR AI.0 —1 — — II II I I I I I I I I u n I I I I I I I I u IL L [IV Ci \\ Ci \ \\ \\ - - \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ (G) ii t ‘71- u — I ==�1 =ll= I I LJ-J r L 1 I � C - - - 1 EXISTING WALL TO BE DEMO EXISTING WALL TO REMAIN NEW WALL (A\ ARCHNET u S a architecture • interiors sustainable design 333 N Main St. Ste. 201 Stillwater, MN 55082 651-430-0606 archnetusa.com MN SHOOTING ACADEMY 2159 Curve Crest Boulevard, Stillwater, MN Revisions Item /1 REV .1 Date 8-11-15 Registration Information I hereby certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision, and that I am a duly Licensed Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota Printed Name MICHAEL F. DIEM Signature DATE License # 8-11-15 16844 Sheet Information DEMO SHEET Project No : 15-111 Sheet Size : 24" x 36" Drawn By : CAL Checked By : RT Date : 8-11-15 Drawing No : Di :2015 ARCHNET, Inc. D ELEC. 112 21' - 0" CLASSROOM 116 1OFLOOR PLAN 3/32" = 1 '-0" EXISTING BAR JOIST BEARING 118'-0" STORAGE 111 h BREAK ROOM WAREHOUSE 113 110 115 1 SECTION 1/8 = 1 0 107 WOM 104 MEN 105 OFFICE 108 GUN SMITH (OFFICE) 109 STORAGE DOCK I12'-0" RETAIL SPACE 101 8'-0" N 1 LANE I RANGE LANE2 LANE 3 1 N N N LANE 4 LANE 5 1 G 103 LANE 6 I I LANE 7 I BULLET CATCHER AREA 1 JI SAFETY CORRIDOR A o -_ I b LANE 8 L E9 LANE 10 I v m LANE I I LANE 12 LANE 13 O - LANE 14 1 - EXISTING BAR JOIST BEARING 116'-0" - NOTE WALL AND CEILING STEEL PANELS FOR BULLET RICOCHET PREVENTION BY OTHERS NEW STEEL BEAMS SEE STRUCT. NEW 12" CMU CORE FILLED, SEE STRUCT. FOR REINFORCING PROVIDE NEW FOOTING AS REQUIRED SEE STRUCT. Ep) T.O.W. idu 122'-0" FLOOR PLAN 100' - 0" �I 12" CMU CORE FILLED, SEE STRUCT. FOR REINFORCING OINTERIOR WALL TYPES 1 =1-0 SEE SCHEDULE SEE SCHEDULE 2" FI HOLLOW MTL. FRAME OFRAME TYPES 1/4" = 1'-0" SEE SChED. SEE SCHED. A NON -INSULATED H.M. DOOR DOOR TYPES 1/4" = 1'-0" HARDWARE LEGEND GROUP 1 INTERIOR LATCH SET, BUTTS AS REQ'D I EA CLOSER I EA DOOR STOP I EA LATCH SET 2A) 102 AIR LOCK 102 (5) NEW BOLLARDS LOUNGE VENDING [71 NOTES: I . DOOR AND ROOM FINISH SCHEDULE ARE FOR REFERENCE ONLY VERIFY ALL FINISHES WITH OWNER 2.NOTE: ALL HARDWARE GROUPS ARE FOR REFERNCE ONLY VERIFY ALL HARDWARE WITH OWNER Number NAME WALL FINISH N KEY EXISTING WALL TO BE DEMO EXISTING WALL TO REMAIN NEW WALL ROOM FINISH SCHEDULE FLOOR FINISH BASE CEILING FINISH CEILING HEIGHT COMMENTS 100 VESTIBULE 101 RETAIL SPACE 102 AIR LOCK 103 GUN RANGE 104 WOMEN 105 MEN 106 OFFICE 107 OFFICE 108 OFFICE 109 GUN SMITH (OFFICE) I 1 0 BREAK ROOM 11 STORAGE I 1 2 ELEC. 113 WAREHOUSE 114 STORAGE 115 CLASSROOM 116 CLASSROOM 117 CORRIDOR DOOR # FROM ROOM: NAME HEIGHT DOOR SCHEDULE WIDTH DOOR TYPE FRAME TYPE HDWR GROUP COMMENTS 102 RETAIL SPACE 7' - 0" 3' - 0" A F I I 1 02A AIR LOCK 7' - 0" 3' - 0" A F I I 114 RETAIL SPACE 7' - 0" 3' - 0" A F I I 1 15 CLASSROOM 7' - 0" 2' - 1 0" I 1 E. CLASSROOM 7' - 0" 2' - 1 0" I 17 WAREHOUSE 7' - 0" 2' - 10" ARCHNET u S a architecture • interiors sustainable design 333 N Main St. Ste. 201 Stillwater, MN 55082 651-430-0606 archnetusa.com MN SHOOTING ACADEMY 2159 Curve Crest Boulevard, Stillwater, MN Revisions Item REV.1 Date 8-11-15 Registration Information I hereby certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision, and that I am a duly Licensed Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota Printed Name MICHAEL F. DIEM Signature �l- DATE License # 8-11-15 16844 Sheet Information FLOOR PLAN Project No : 15-111 Sheet Size : 24" x 36" Drawing No : Drawn By : CAL Checked By : RT A1.0 Date : 8-11-15 (�2015 ARCHNET, Inc. C Abbi Wittman From: A. Sundberg Siess <afsundberg@yahoo.com> Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 12:04 PM To: Abbi Wittman; Bill Turnblad Cc: Anne Siess Subject: Case 2015-15 Abbi, Please share this with the council for Case 2015-15. ************** Stillwater City Council, I am a current member of the Stillwater Planning Commission; this is the second case regarding guns during my tenure. Part of the difficulty in assessing these cases is Stillwater's lack of ordinance regarding guns. Due to lack of ordinance, the city is left to compare the use/regulation to that of other businesses that are arguably ironic. I urge you to read the minutes of case 2011-25 where the request to sell guns to customers out of a residence was compared to a hair salon. The case before you tonight is lumped into an entertainment use, which is comparable to a roller rink, bowling alley, etc. A gun to a shampoo bottle/roller skate is like apple to orange. My hope is for the city to thoughtfully plan the use/sale of guns with wise ordinances that are fair/reasonable to all parties and promote safety. Pasted below is an indoor gun range ordinance for Chanhassen, Minnesota for your consideration. Respectfully, Anne Siess 170 Interlachen Way Court, Stillwater • Sec. 20-298.5. - Gun range, indoor. (1) (2) (3) (4) The gun range shall not be located on any lot adjacent to an existing residential district. The gun range when established shall not be located within 1,000 lineal feet, measured from building to building, of an establishment licensed to dispense intoxicating or nonintoxicating liquor. Indoor gun ranges shall not sell or dispense intoxicating liquors, nor shall they be in a building which contains a business that sells or dispenses nonintoxicating or intoxicating liquors. The use, occupancy and construction of the building shall conform to the Minnesota State Building Code. The building and method of operation shall comply with M.S. ch. 87A. i (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (12) The building and method of operation shall conform to the applicable Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Environmental Protection Agency, and OSHA standards for indoor ventilation, emission into the atmosphere, indoor sound levels, lead containment and outside noise standards. The design and construction of the gun range shall completely confine all ammunition rounds within the building and in a controlled manner. The design and construction of the gun range shall be certified by a registered engineer in the State of Minnesota. The certified plans shall include the specifications and construction of the bullet trap(s), ceilings, exterior and interior walls and floors. The certified plans shall state what type and caliber of ammunition the range is designed to totally confine. No ammunition shall be used in the range that exceeds the certified design and construction specifications of the gun range. Firearms shall not be stored on the premises when the range is closed for business, unless they are stored in an acceptable gun safe or other secure locking device. On -site supervision shall be supplied at all times by an adult who is an experienced range operator. The range operator shall be responsible for the conduct of their place of business and the conditions of safety and order in the place of business and on the premises. Each range shall have a clear and concise safety plan. The plan must be signed, published, and reviewed at specific intervals and distributed to all range users to study and use. The range operator shall provide and maintain proof of liability insurance which shall require the insurer notify the city manager in writing of cancellation of the policy, a change in the limit of the policy, and/or a change in policy ownership. Said policy shall be available for inspection by the city manager and/or his/her assigns at all times. 2 (13) (14) (15) (16) (17) On -site instruction shall be given only by firearms instructors certified within the prior five years by an organization or government entity that has been approved by the Minnesota Department of Public Safety. Current certificates for firearms instructors shall be on display in a conspicuous location in the premises and available for public inspection. An outside security plan for the general grounds shall be submitted to the city for review and approval. The transport of firearms on the premises, to the premises, and from the premises shall conform to state law. Minors shall not be allowed in the range unless accompanied by an adult at all times. This provision shall not be interpreted to prohibit minors from participating in a firearm safety class which is supervised by an adult instructor. In the industrial office park district, retail sales and rental shall be limited to gun -related material and equipment with a maximum display area of 20 percent of the floor area. In multi -tenant buildings, the gun range shall be soundproofed to prevent the sound from being heard by persons in adjoining units. (Ord. No. 527, § 2, 8-22-11) 3 1 CHAPTER 7030 MINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY NOISE POLLUTION CONTROL GENERALLY 7030.0010 INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE. 7030.0020 DEFINITIONS. 7030.0030 NOISE CONTROL REQUIREMENT. 7030.0040 NOISE STANDARDS. 7030.0050 NOISE AREA CLASSIFICATION. 7030.0060 MEASUREMENT METHODOLOGY. 7030.0070 SOUND ATTENUATION MEASUREMENT METHODOLOGY. 7030.0080 VARIANCE. MOTOR VEHICLE NOISE LIMITS 7030.1000 DEFINITION. 7030.1010 PROHIBITIONS. 7030.1020 SCOPE. 7030.1030 EXCEPTIONS. 7030.1040 NOISE LIMIT FOR VEHICLES OVER 10,000 POUNDS. 7030.1050 MOTOR VEHICLE NOISE LIMITS FOR MOTORCYCLES. 7030.1060 NOISE LIMITS FOR OTHER VEHICLES. GENERALLY 7030.0010 INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE. For the purpose of chapter 7030, American National Standards Institute, Specification for Sound Level Meters, S1.4-1983 is incorporated by reference. This publication is available from the American National Standards Institute, 1430 Broadway, New York, N.Y. 10018 and can be found at: the offices of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, 1935 West County Road B-2, Roseville, Minnesota 55113; the Government Documents Section, Room 409, Wilson Library, University of Minnesota, 309 19th Avenue South, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55454; and the State of Minnesota Law Library, 25 Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd., Saint Paul, Minnesota 55155. This document is not subject to frequent change. The Federal Highway Administration publication, Sound Procedures for Measuring Highway Noise: Final Report, FHWA-DP-45-1R (August 1981) is incorporated by reference. This publication is available from the United States Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, 1000 North Globe Road, Arlington, Virginia 22201 and can be found at: the offices of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, 1935 West County Road B-2, Roseville, Minnesota 55113; the Government Documents Section, Room 409, Wilson Library, University of Minnesota, 309 19th Avenue South, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55454; and the State of Minnesota Law Library, 25 Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd., Saint Paul, Minnesota 55155. This document is not subject to frequent change. Copyright ©2003 by the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved. 7030.0030 NOISE POLLUTION CONTROL 2 Statutory Authority: MS s 116.07 History: 11 SR 43; 18 SR 614 Published Electronically: December 12, 2003 7030.0020 DEFINITIONS. Subpart 1. Application. The terms used in this chapter have the meanings given them in this part. Subp. 2. A -weighted. "A -weighted" means a specific weighting of the sound pressure level for the purpose of determining the human response to sound. The specific weighting characteristics and tolerances are those given in American National Standards Institute S1.4-1983, section 5.1. Subp. 3. Daytime. "Daytime" means those hours from 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Subp. 4. dB(A). "dB(A)" means a unit of sound level expressed in decibels (dB) and A -weighted. Subp. 5. Decibel. "Decibel" means a unit of sound pressure level, abbreviated as dB. Subp. 6. Impulsive noise. "Impulsive noise" means either a single sound pressure peak (with either a rise time less than 200 milliseconds or total duration less than 200 milliseconds) or multiple sound pressure peaks (with either rise times less than 200 milliseconds or total duration less than 200 milliseconds) spaced at least by 200 millisecond pauses. Subp. 7. L10. "L10" means the sound level, expressed in dB(A), which is exceeded ten percent of the time for a one hour survey, as measured by test procedures approved by the commissioner. Subp. 8. L50. "L50" means the sound level, expressed in dB(A), which is exceeded 50 percent of the time for a one hour survey, as measured by test procedures approved by the commissioner. Subp. 9. Municipality. "Municipality" means a county; a city; a town; a regional planning and development commission established under Minnesota Statutes, chapter 473; the metropolitan council; or other governmental subdivision of the state responsible by law for controlling or restricting land use within its jurisdiction. Subp. 10. Nighttime. "Nighttime" means those hours from 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. Subp. 11. Person. "Person" means any human being, any municipality or other governmental or political subdivision or other public depai tiiient or agency, any public or private corporation, any partnership, firm, association, or other organization, any receiver, trustee, assignee, agency, legal entity, other than a court of law, or any legal representative of any of the foregoing, but does not include the agency. Subp. 12. Sound pressure level. "Sound pressure level", in decibels, means 20 times the logarithm to the base 10 of the ratio of the pressure to the reference pressure. The reference pressure shall be 20 micronewtons per square meter. Statutory Authority: MS s 116.07 History: 11 SR 43; L 1987 c 186 s 15; 18 SR 614 Published Electronically: December 12, 2003 7030.0030 NOISE CONTROL REQUIREMENT. No person may violate the standards established in part 7030.0040, unless exempted by Minnesota Statutes, section 116.07, subdivision 2a. Any municipality having authority to regulate land use shall take Copyright ©2003 by the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved. 3 NOISE POLLUTION CONTROL 7030.0050 all reasonable measures within its jurisdiction to prevent the establishment of land use activities listed in noise area classification (NAC) 1, 2, or 3 in any location where the standards established in part 7030.0040 will be violated immediately upon establishment of the land use. Statutory Authority: MS s 116.07 History: 11 SR 43; 18 SR 614 Published Electronically: December 12, 2003 7030.0040 NOISE STANDARDS. Subpart 1. Scope. These standards describe the limiting levels of sound established on the basis of present knowledge for the preservation of public health and welfare. These standards are consistent with speech, sleep, annoyance, and hearing conservation requirements for receivers within areas grouped according to land activities by the noise area classification (NAC) system established in part 7030.0050. However, these standards do not, by themselves, identify the limiting levels of impulsive noise needed for the preservation of public health and welfare. Noise standards in subpart 2 apply to all sources. Subp. 2. Noise standards. Noise Area Classification Daytime Nighttime L50 L10 L50 L10 1 60 65 50 55 2 65 70 65 70 3 75 80 75 80 Statutory Authority: MS s 116.07 History: 11 SR 43; 18 SR 614 Published Electronically: December 12, 2003 7030.0050 NOISE AREA CLASSIFICATION. Subpart 1. Applicability.The noise area classification is based on the land use activity at the location of the receiver and determines the noise standards applicable to that land use activity unless an exception is applied under subpart 3. Subp. 2. Noise area classifications. The noise area classifications and the activities included in each classification are listed below: Noise Area Classification Land Use Activities 1 Household Units (includes farm houses) Copyright ©2003 by the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved. 7030.0050 NOISE POLLUTION CONTROL 4 2 Group quarters Residential hotels Mobile home parks or courts Transient lodging Other residential Motion picture production Medical and other health services Correctional institutions Educational services Religious activities Cultural activities and nature exhibitions Entertainment assembly Camping and picnicking areas (designated) Resorts and group camps Other cultural, entertainment, and recreational activities. Railroad terminals (passenger) Railroad terminals (passenger and freight) Rapid rail transit and street railway passenger tell finals Bus passenger terminals (intercity) Bus passenger terminals (local) Bus passenger terminals (intercity and local) Other motor vehicle transportation Airport and flying field terminals (passenger) Airport and flying field terminals (passenger and freight) Marine terminals (passenger) Marine terminals (passenger and freight) Automobile parking Telegraph message centers Transportation services and arrangements Wholesale trade Retail trade — building materials, hardware, and farm equipment Retail trade — general merchandise Retail trade — food Retail trade — automotive, marine craft, aircraft, and accessories Copyright ©2003 by the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved. 5 NOISE POLLUTION CONTROL 7030.0050 3 Retail trade — apparel and accessories Retail trade — furniture, home furnishings, and equipment Retail trade — eating and drinking Other retail trade Finance, insurance, and real estate services Personal services Business services Repair services Legal services Other professional services Contract construction services Governmental services (except correctional institutions) Miscellaneous services (except religious activities) Public assembly (except entertainment assembly and race tracks) Amusements (except fairgrounds and amusement parks) Recreational activities (except designated camping and picnicking areas) Parks. Food and kindred products — manufacturing Textile mill products — manufacturing Apparel and other finished products made from fabrics, leather, and similar materials — manufacturing Lumber and wood products (except furniture) — manufacturing Furniture and fixtures — manufacturing Paper and allied products — manufacturing Printing, publishing, and allied industries Chemicals and allied products — manufacturing Petroleum refining and related industries Rubber and miscellaneous plastic products — manufacturing Stone, clay, and glass products — manufacturing Primary metal industries Fabricated metal products — manufacturing Professional, scientific, and controlling instruments; photographic and optical goods; watches and clocks — manufacturing Miscellaneous manufacturing (except motion picture production) Copyright ©2003 by the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved. 7030.0050 NOISE POLLUTION CONTROL 6 Railroad, rapid transit, and street railway transportation (except passenger terminals) Motor vehicle transportation (except passenger terminals) Aircraft transportation (except passenger terminals) Marine craft transportation (except passenger and freight terminals) Highway and street right-of-way Communication (except telegraph message centers) Utilities Other transportation, communication, and utilities (except transportation services and arrangements) Race tracks Fairgrounds and amusement parks Agricultural Agricultural and related activities Forestry activities and related services (including commercial forest land, timber production, and other related activities) Fishing activities and related services Mining activities and related services Other resource production and extraction All other activities not otherwise listed. 4 Undeveloped and unused land area (excluding noncommercial forest development) Noncommercial forest development Water areas Vacant floor area Under construction Other undeveloped land and water areas. Subp. 3. Exceptions. The noise area classification for a land use may be changed in the following ways if the applicable conditions are met. A. The daytime standards for noise area classification 1 shall be applied to noise area classification 1 during the nighttime if the land use activity does not include overnight lodging. B. The standards for a building in a noise area classification 2 shall be applied to a building in a noise area classification 1 if the following conditions are met: (1) the building is constructed in such a way that the exterior to interior sound level attenuation is at least 30 dB(A); (2) the building has year-round climate control; and (3) the building has no areas or accommodations that are intended for outdoor activities. Copyright ©2003 by the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved. 7 NOISE POLLUTION CONTROL 7030.0060 C. The standards for a building in a noise area classification 3 a noise area classification 1 if the following conditions are met: (1) the building is constructed in such a way that the attenuation is at least 40 dB(A); (2) the building has year-round climate control; and shall be applied to a building in exterior to interior sound level (3) the building has no areas or accommodations that are D. The standards for a building in a noise area classification 3 a noise area classification 2 if the following conditions are met: (1) the building is constructed in such a way that the attenuation is at least 30 dB(A); (2) the building has year-round climate control; and (3) the building has no areas or accommodations that are Statutory Authority: MS s 116.07 History: 11 SR 43; 18 SR 614 Published Electronically: December 12, 2003 7030.0060 MEASUREMENT METHODOLOGY. intended for outdoor activities. shall be applied to a building in exterior to interior sound level intended for outdoor activities. Subpart 1. Measurement location. Measurement of sound must be made at or within the applicable NAC at the point of human activity which is nearest to the noise source. All measurements shall be made outdoors. Subp. 2. Equipment specifications. All sound level measuring devices must meet Type 0, I, II, or S specifications under American National Standards Institute S1.4-1983. Subp. 3. Calibration. All sound level measuring devices must, at a minimum, be externally field calibrated before and after monitoring using a calibration device of known frequency and sound pressure level. Subp. 4. Measurement procedures. The following procedures must be used to obtain representative sound level measurements: A. Measurements must be made at least three feet off the ground or surface and away from natural or artificial structures which would prevent an accurate measurement. B. Measurements must be made using the A -weighting and fast response characteristics of the sound measuring device as specified in American National Standards Institute S 1.4-1983. C. Measurements must not be made in sustained winds or in precipitation which results in a difference of less than ten decibels between the background noise level and the noise source being measured. D. Measurements must be made using a microphone which is protected from ambient conditions which would prevent an accurate measurement. Subp. 5. Data documentation. A summary sheet for all sound level measurements shall be completed and signed by the person making the measurements. At a minimum, the summary sheet shall include: Copyright ©2003 by the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved. 7030.0080 NOISE POLLUTION CONTROL 8 A. date; B. time; C. location; D. noise source; E. wind speed and direction; F. temperature; G. humidity; H. make, model, and serial number of measuring equipment; I. field calibration results; J. monitored levels; and K. site sketch indicating noise source, measurement location, directions, distances, and obstructions. Statutory Authority: MS s 116.07 History: 11 SR 43; 17 SR 1279; 18 SR 614 Published Electronically: December 12, 2003 7030.0070 SOUND ATTENUATION MEASUREMENT METHODOLOGY. Subpart 1. Purpose. Sound level measurements made for assessing sound attenuation as specified in part 7030.0050, subpart 3, item B, C, or D, shall be made according to the requirements of this part. Subp. 2. Equipment. The equipment shall meet the requirements specified in part 7030.0060, subpart 2. Subp. 3. Calibration. The equipment must meet the calibration requirements specified in part 7030.0060, subpart 3. Subp. 4. Measurement procedure. The measurement procedure described in FHWA-DP-45-1R, section 8 must be used for determination of the sound attenuation. Subp. 5. Equivalent methods. Methods equivalent to those described in subpart 4 may be used provided they are approved by the commissioner of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. The commissioner shall approve an alternative method if the commissioner finds that the method will produce representative data and results which are as reliable as the methods specified in subpart 4. Statutory Authority: MS s 116.07 History: 11 SR 43; L 1987 c 186 s 15; 18 SR 614 Published Electronically: December 12, 2003 7030.0080 VARIANCE. If, upon written application of the responsible person, the agency finds that by reason of exceptional circumstances strict conformity with any provisions of any noise rule would cause undue hardship, would be unreasonable, impractical, or not feasible under the circumstances, the agency may permit a variance upon Copyright ©2003 by the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved. 9 NOISE POLLUTION CONTROL 7030.1010 the conditions and within the time limitations as it may prescribe for the prevention, control, or abatement of noise pollution in harmony with the intent of the state and any applicable federal laws. Statutory Authority: MS s 116.07 History: 11 SR 43; 18 SR 614 Published Electronically: December 12, 2003 MOTOR VEHICLE NOISE LIMITS 7030.1000 DEFINITION. "Motor vehicle" means any self-propelled vehicle not operated exclusively upon railroad tracks and any vehicle propelled or drawn by a self-propelled vehicle and includes vehicles known as trackless trolleys which are propelled by electric power obtained from overhead trolley wires but not operated upon rails, except snowmobiles. Statutory Authority: MS s 116.07 History: 18 SR 614 Published Electronically: December 12, 2003 7030.1010 PROHIBITIONS. Subpart 1. Operation of vehicle. No person shall operate either a motor vehicle or combination of vehicles of a type subject to registration pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, chapter 168 at any time or under any condition of grade, load, acceleration, or deceleration in such a manner as to exceed the noise limits contained herein for the category of motor vehicle and speed limits specified, when tested with a measurement procedure approved by the commissioner. Subp. 2. Sale of vehicle. No person shall sell or offer for sale a new motor vehicle or combination of vehicles of a type subject to registration pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, chapter 168 which when maintained according to the manufacturer's specifications would exceed the noise limits contained herein for the category of motor vehicle and speed limits specified, when tested with a measurement procedure approved by the commissioner. Subp. 3. Modification of vehicle. No person shall modify a motor vehicle or combination of vehicles of a type subject to registration pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, chapter 168 in a manner which will amplify or increase the noise emitted by the vehicle, above the noise limits contained herein for the category of motor vehicle and speed limits specified, when tested with a measurement procedure approved by the commissioner. No person shall operate a motor vehicle so modified. Subp. 4. Sale of parts. No person shall sell or offer for sale replacement or additional parts for a motor vehicle or combination of vehicles of a type subject to registration pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, chapter 168 which when installed in the vehicle will amplify or increase the noise emitted by the vehicle, above the noise limits contained herein for the category of motor vehicle and speed limits specified, when tested with a measurement procedure approved by the commissioner. No person shall operate a motor vehicle incorporating such parts. Copyright ©2003 by the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved. 7030.1040 NOISE POLLUTION CONTROL 10 Statutory Authority: MS s 116.07 History: L 1987 c 186 s 15; 18 SR 614 Published Electronically: December 12, 2003 7030.1020 SCOPE. This chapter applies to the total noise from a vehicle or combination of vehicles of a type subject to registration pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, chapter 168 and shall not be construed as limiting or precluding the enforcement of any other provision of law relating to motor vehicle exhaust noise. Statutory Authority: MS s 116.07 History: 18 SR 614 Published Electronically: December 12, 2003 7030.1030 EXCEPTIONS. Vehicles under parts 7030.1050 and 7030.1060 are allowed to exceed the noise limits contained herein when performing acceleration maneuvers for safety purposes. Statutory Authority: MS s 116.07 History: 18 SR 614 Published Electronically: December 12, 2003 7030.1040 NOISE LIMIT FOR VEHICLES OVER 10,000 POUNDS. Motor vehicle noise limits for vehicles with a manufacturer's gross vehicle weight rating of more than 10,000 pounds and any combination of vehicles towed by such motor vehicle. Sound Level in dBA 100 90 80 10 60 A. Q-N. ® ' N.-NJ N, _?z�\. I I 1 1 2 3 , 5 '99f00 2 .a arc Faet From the Center.. . 1091000 A. Speed limits greater than 35 mph. B. Speed limits equal to or less than 35 mph and stationary run-up tests (for vehicles with governed engines). For stationary run-up tests on all -paved surfaces, add 2 dBA. Copyright ©2003 by the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved. 11 NOISE POLLUTION CONTROL 7030.1060 C. Speed limits equal to or less than 35 mph and stationary run-up tests (for vehicles with governed engines), for vehicles manufactured on or after January 1, 1978. For stationary run-up tests on all -paved surfaces, add 2 dBA. D. Speed limits equal to or less than 35 mph and stationary run-up tests (for vehicles with governed engines), for vehicles manufactured on or after January 1, 1982. For stationary run-up tests on all -paved surfaces, add 2 dBA. Statutory Authority: MS s 116.07 History: 18 SR 614 Published Electronically: December 12, 2003 7030.1050 MOTOR VEHICLE NOISE LIMITS FOR MOTORCYCLES. 1975. Sound Level in dBA 100 90 80 70 60 1 A 1 1 1 B ._v1 i 9 9 0 2 3 4 56789100 2 3 4 567891000 Distance in Feet From the Center of the Lane of Travel A. For vehicles manufactured before January 1, 1975. B. Speed limits greater than 35 mph for vehicles manufactured on or after January 1, 1975. C. Speed limits equal to or less than 35 mph for vehicles manufactured on or after January 1, Statutory Authority: MS s 116.07 History: 18 SR 614 Published Electronically: December 12, 2003 7030.1060 NOISE LIMITS FOR OTHER VEHICLES. Motor vehicle noise limits for any other motor vehicle not included under parts 7030.1040 and 7030.1050 and any combination of vehicles towed by such motor vehicle. Copyright ©2003 by the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved. 7030.1060 NOISE POLLUTION CONTROL 12 Sound Level in dBA 100 90 11 80 I 01 11111 III 11.II '4. MOWILIMIMLMM NNME "ME!!! • Mrirr■ilM 60 !II In NMINIMMIFMME- �I1=WM. 10 2 3 4 56789100 2 3 4 567891000 Distance n Feet .antero„ . - From .._ Lane of Travel Statutory Authority: MS s 116.07 History: 18 SR 614 Published Electronically: December 12, 2003 Copyright ©2003 by the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved. ate THE 1I1TN►LACE OF MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES July 8, 2015 REGULAR MEETING 7:00 P.M. Chairman Kocon called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. Present: Chairman Kocon, Commissioners Collins, Fletcher, Hade, Hansen, Kelly, Lauer, Middleton, Siess, Council Representative Junker Absent: None Staff: City Planner Wittman, Community Development Director Turnblad APPROVAL OF MINUTES Possible approval of June 10, 2015 meeting minutes Commissioner Hansen pointed out the minutes should be corrected to reflect that Chairman Kocon called the meeting to order. Motion by Commissioner Hansen, seconded by Commissioner Fletcher, to approve the June 10, 2015 meeting minutes as corrected. All in favor, 9-0. OPEN FORUM There were no public comments. PUBLIC HEARINGS Case No. 2015-15. Special Use Permit and associated variances for Minnesota Shooting Academy to redesign the existing building into an amusement and recreational establishment, located at 2159 Curve Crest Boulevard. Mark Kamas, MN Shooting Academy, applicant and Paul Simonet, owner. City Planner Wittman explained that the applicant is requesting a Special Use Permit for an indoor target practice range to be located in the existing Simonet Furniture building. The use would require: 1) a 4,040 square foot variance to the maximum 3,000 square feet allowed for a Commercial Recreational Establishment; 2) a 26-stall parking variance; and 3) an 18% variance to the 60% maximum impervious lot coverage allowed by City Code. In addition to the specially -permitted use, MN Shooting Academy is proposing retail sales, a lounge and vending area, warehouse space and space for administrative offices, which are all permitted uses. The application included information about sound baffling and test records from similar facilities which indicate decibel levels will be compliant with City noise ordinance provisions. Staff recommends approval of the 4,040 square foot variance, as practical difficulty and uniqueness of circumstance have been established, and approval of the Special Use Permit with conditions. Planning Commission July 8, 2015 Chairman Kocon asked what recourse the City has if dba thresholds are exceeded. City Planner Wittman said the establishment would be under noise ordinance regulations as well as State statute provisions allowing for temporary closures and injunctions against the business if it violates noise standards. Chairman Kocon asked what kind of maintenance is done on a permeable surface. City Planner Wittman said an underground tank system needs to be vacuumed out. Barry Schalkle, representing the applicant, noted there are very strict OSHA requirements for handling lead. When air goes out of the building it is filtered, so it is cleaner than when it is drawn in. Regarding the proposed conditions, 14 lanes are now proposed, rather than 12; the additional 2 lanes will be used for law enforcement. Square footage would remain the same. Roger Tomten, Archnet, project architect, addressed the proposed condition about parking. The majority of parking stalls required relate to the retail component of the space. Recognizing this use will be less popular than other types of retail uses, they would like to use the "proof of need for parking" approach, using the existing spaces and agreeing to provide more parking at a later date if it is warranted. To address sound concerns, the building has 12" thick masonry walls. A concrete box will be constructed within the building with 12" thick concrete walls with a concrete cap. The sound will be encapsulated within the first shell of concrete. Regarding the proposed condition about the trail easement, Mr. Schalkle noted if they are the only business on the block, it doesn't make sense. City Planner Wittman replied that the easement would be on the Washington Avenue side to install future pedestrian improvements, in conjunction with the City's Master Trail Plan. Commissioner Fletcher asked about public safety. Mark Kamas, applicant, replied that State safety laws govern handling of firearms outside the building. Good business practices must be used such as not bringing in uncased weapons. There will be a safety officer present at all times to ensure compliance. Commissioner Collins asked about hours of operation. Mr. Schalkle replied the hours would be Monday through Friday 10 a.m. - 9 p.m., closing earlier on Saturday and Sunday. Commissioner Lauer asked how the law enforcement lanes will be allocated. Mr. Kamas replied they are working with other agencies to design the law enforcement lanes. If not used by law enforcement, those lanes would be open to members. Commissioner Siess asked if this is a common type of location for a shooting range. Mr. Kamas replied that usually, you see ranges in industrial parks, but they are trying to be more mainstream to be more like other entertainment/sports establishments. Commissioner Middleton asked what percentage would be used by members versus law enforcement. Mr. Kamas replied that police usually shoot on off -hours, either early in the morning or late at night. There would be special hours for police. There is a lot of interest because the law enforcement agencies have a hard time finding places to shoot. Page 2 of 18 Planning Commission July 8, 2015 Commissioner Fletcher asked if there are restrictions on type of firearms that can be discharged in the facility. Mr. Kamas replied it is more the type of ammunition than the firearms themselves. Mr. Schalkle noted that education is an important part of the proposal. In addition to firearms safety, there will be safety classes focusing on general home safety and protection when in public. Commissioner Fletcher asked about compliance requirements for federal regulations. Mr. Kamas replied the facility must be evaluated by OSHA, EPA and ATF regularly and in random checks. Commissioner Collins asked if only one set of doors can be open at a time. Mr. Kamas replied that is correct. Chairman Kocon opened the public hearing. Diane Dietz, 2221 Oak Ridge Road, Stillwater, expressed concerns about adding to the existing noise from traffic. The establishment will bring a potential nuisance to the area because there is no other shooting range on this side of the metro area. If the business is not viable, what will happen to the building? She also is concerned about its impacts on nearby Stillwater Veterinary Clinic and Stillwater Medical Group. She is concerned about the proposed lounge and whether it will sell liquor, about the loss of green space and devaluation of property. She urged the Commission to deny the proposal. Brian Naughton, 1457 Case Avenue, St. Paul, who is in the medical field with clients throughout the metro area, spoke to some of the economic and societal benefits of a shooting range. Shooting sports retailers provide a variety of firearms designed for all shooters. Compared to skiing, biking and skateboarding, shooting is not limited to the physically trained athlete. Safety training and education make shooting sports quite safe. There is a much greater risk from motor vehicles. The Minnesota Shooting Academy has conveyed its long range plans for a program to ensure all members and guests are trained in safe gun handling. Neighborhood and community relations will also be part of their long range plan. He presented figures confirming the economic benefits of shooting ranges. He is VP of the Minnesota Second Amendment Association. He urged the Commission to approve the proposal. David Kalinoff, Woodbury, said he grew up in Stillwater. He is a full time police officer and an avid participant in shooting sports. An indoor range is a safe and clean place to shoot. He has taught his wife and children firearms safety. The educational benefits for the public are great. The classes also teach legal concepts involved in handling firearms. George Riley, Upper 36th Street North, Oakdale, spoke in support of Mr. Schalkle and Mr. Kamas as ethical longstanding community service leaders and knowledgeable instructors with a wide range of experience. He feels the proposal is well thought-out. Carrie Brockman, 5995 Oren Avenue, Stillwater, noted her CPA office has had a number of clients express concerns to her that the proposal will detrimentally affect their businesses. She expressed concerns about noise from air blowers located on the roof, how emergency personnel would get into the facility, and how much more traffic will be generated. Traffic on that corner is heavy already. Don Slinger, 4620 Lake Elmo Avenue North, Lake Elmo, retired training and planning coordinator for the DNR, stated it is hard to find individuals qualified to work in the conservation field who are knowledgeable about firearms. It is difficult to find ranges where re -certification can be obtained. Page 3 of 18 Planning Commission July 8, 2015 Brian Simonet, 79 Maryknoll Drive, Stillwater, one of the many owners of Simonet Furniture, refuted a statement made previously about the relationship between the ownership of Simonet Furniture and the current lessee. Tiffany Britz, 13991 60th Street Court North, Stillwater, a certified NRA firearms instructor, said having an indoor range in Stillwater would be great, but she feels it is not a good location due to the noise and traffic it would generate. There will be a woman -owned firearms range located in the area soon that is in the final stages, in which she has an interest. Paul Simonet, owner of Simonet Furniture and Carpet Company, stated they have been trying to sell the building since 2009 when the store went out of business. After lowering the price in the last year and a half, they have finally seen some interest. The furniture store never had a problem with fire trucks getting into the parking lot. He has been hearing a lot of misinformation. He owns a gun and goes to shooting ranges. They teach a lot about safety. As for traffic, signal lights are needed at that intersection. Traffic has always been a problem there. Greg Clark, 3701 Oakgreen Avenue, Baytown, asked about plans for the rest of the building, if there are sprinklers for the firing range, and if the ventilation system will be on the ground or the rooftop. The unit is about the size of a semi trailer and runs at 80 DBA. If more lanes are added, and another ventilation unit would be added, where would it be installed? Chairman Kocon closed the public hearing. City Planner Wittman replied that the exchange system would be required to follow the noise ordinance, 70 dba from 8:00 a.m. - 10:00 p.m., 65 dba at night from 10:00 p.m. - 8:00 a.m. A larger range would require an amendment to the Special Use Permit. If the range were doubled in size, another variance would be required as well. Everyone within 350 feet would be noticed. She believes the building code would require sprinklers. The applicants would work with the Building Department to ensure compliant fire suppression. Commissioner Kelly stated he has a conflict and won't participate in the discussion or vote. Chairman Kocon said he is not a big gun fan, but the discussion is about meeting ordinances and restrictions. It's a business decision. He views the proposal as viable with the 11 stated conditions. Commissioner Fletcher said she is not against guns but other cities have had significant discussion before approving indoor shooting ranges. She is concerned there is not an ordinance in place to specifically address indoor shooting ranges. Because there is not a restriction on the type of firearms used, she interprets to mean this facility will allow high powered automatic weapons. She feels there should be more discussion as a City before allowing the use. Commissioner Collins stated he lives just a couple blocks away from the site. He doesn't believe there will be an adverse effect on traffic. He does not own a gun but went to a gun range the other day to familiarize himself. It wasn't as loud as he thought it would be, inside or outside. The proprietors have not had an incident since it opened in 2003. He is passionate about education and is in favor of firearms education. This facility could be a good thing for the community Commissioner Lauer stated that, as Chairman Kocon said, it is a business decision. If guns were taken out of the equation, the public safety aspect probably turns in the other direction when considering the Page 4 of 18 Planning Commission July 8, 2015 education. Those who shoot at a gun range are responsible gun owners. Noise is the biggest issue for him. It seems as if it can be addressed if requirements are not met. He is comfortable with the proposal. Commissioner Siess stated she has gun safety certification but feels this is not a proper location for this type of business. She feels it will alter the essential character of the neighborhood and she cannot support the proposal. Commissioner Middleton commented he too is concerned about the noise which could be very unnerving. He cannot support the request. Commissioner Hansen noted he is generally in favor of granting the request but he would not feel comfortable letting the applicant do parking mitigation later. It sounds as if parking should be addressed now. Chairman Kocon reminded the Commission that he too would like the parking addressed now. Commissioner Hansen pointed out the future comprehensive plan includes retail use for this area, but there are many other uses. There are other industrially zoned properties that are closer to residential neighborhoods with similar traffic issues. City Planner Wittman confirmed there is quite a mix of uses, for instance a clinic in an industrial zone, retail in office zone. It has a future land use designation of commercial. Motion by Chairman Kocon, seconded by Commissioner Hade, to approve Case No. 2015-15, a Special Use Permit and a 4,040 square foot variance for Minnesota Shooting Academy, located at 2159 Curve Crest Boulevard, with the following conditions: a. No greater than 14 firing lanes shall be permitted. A minimum of five of the firing lanes shall be made available for rental to community service personnel and community education activities. b. The establishment must have at least one adult employee or adult supervisory volunteer in the premises during all hours of operation. c. Soundproofing specifications shall be submitted with the building permit application. d. The establishment shall install appropriate and sufficient soundproofing to be in compliance with City Code Section 38-3, Noise Control and Regulation, for sound levels outside of the establishment. e. A total of 26 parking spaces shall be created onsite. A permeable surface parking area and suitable base found satisfactory to the City Engineer shall be utilized for all new parking and drive areas. f. A grading plan shall be reviewed by the City engineering Depai tiuent and a Brown's Creek Watershed District permit shall be obtained prior to the installation of the additional parking spaces. g. Upon the sale to Minnesota Shooting Academy and prior to the release of necessary building permits, a 15' trail easement shall be dedicated to the City along the eastern property boundary for future trail connection between Curve Crest Boulevard and Highway 36. h. Conditions of a HPC-issued Design Permit shall be incorporated into this Special Use Permit by reference. i. Plans and the use will need to be approved by the engineering, fire and building officials before the issuance of a building permit. j. All changes to the approved plans will need to be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director. Any major changes will need to go to the Planning Commission for review and approval. k. Quarterly maintenance of the permeable pavement and documentation of maintenance shall be submitted to the City quarterly. Motion passed 5-3, with Commissioners Fletcher, Middleton and Siess voting nay and Commissioner Kelly abstaining. Page 5 of 18 Planning Commission July 8, 2015 Asked by Commissioner Hade, City Planner Wittman acknowledged that any interested party or Commissioner may appeal the decision to the City Council. Case No. 2015-16. Special Use Permit for construction of a detached garage and accessory dwelling unit, located at 912 5th Street South. Eileen Gibson and Larry Wheeler, owners. City Planner Wittman explained that the applicants have applied for a Special Use Permit for an Accessory Dwelling Unit to be located above a two -car garage that they plan to build. The property owner adjacent who shares the driveway has expressed concerns about adding a dwelling unit, the potential for access to be blocked during or after construction, and potential drainage issues. Staff recommends approval with conditions which address the neighbor's concerns. Eileen Gibson and Larry Wheeler, applicants, stated they are custom home builders who specialize in traditional homes. They want to adhere to the requirements, do a good job and enhance the property. The home is currently vacant. Commissioner Lauer asked if the applicants have spoken with the adjacent landowner. Mr. Wheeler said he was not part of the easement agreement 34 years ago. He would prefer to separate the driveways if that is the desire of the Commission and the neighbor. Chairman Kocon opened the public hearing. David Harrison, 920 5th Street South, who shares the driveway with the applicant, stated he sees the carriage house as a rental property with double the traffic and the people. The driveway has a 10% grade so the water will erode it more. It gets very icy in the winter. Chairman Kocon closed the public hearing. Commissioner Hansen pointed out it is refreshing to address a Special Use Permit that doesn't require a variance. He supports the proposal. Commissioner Middleton said he has a minor concern about the neighbor's conflict, but it appears Mr. Wheeler is amenable to resolving it. He supports the request. Commissioner Collins noted that the site plan looks good. He favors approval. Motion by Commissioner Collins, seconded by Commissioner Middleton, to approve Case No. 2015-16, a Special Use Permit for construction of a detached garage and accessory dwelling unit, located at 912 5th Street South, with the following conditions: a. The shared driveway shall not be blocked at any point during construction. b. The shared driveway shall be kept free and clear of debris during construction. c. A grading plan shall be submitted and approved by the City Engineering Depai tiiient and a grading escrow, in an amount deemed sufficient by the Engineering Department for the new construction shall be submitted. d. To the greatest extent possible, drainage on the south side of the garage shall be retained onsite. e. The maximum size of the Accessory Dwelling Unit shall be 800 square feet. f. A Design Permit shall be obtained from the Heritage Preservation Commission prior to the submittal of a building permit. Page 6 of 18 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE: July 8, 2015 CASE NO.: 2015-15 APPLICANT: Paul Simonet, property owner, representing MN Shooting Academy REQUEST: Request for a Special Use Permit and associated Variances for a Commercial Amusement and Recreational Establishment to be located in the existing structure located at 2159 Curve Crest Boulevard ZONING: BP-O: Business Park Office COMP PLAN DISTRICT: Commercial PREPARED BY: Abbi Jo Wittman, City Planner REQUEST The applicant is requesting a Special Use Permit for an Amusement and Recreational Establishment to be located in the existing Simonet Furniture building at 2159 Curve Crest Boulevard. The use would be an indoor target practice range and would necessitate the following: 1. A 4,040 square foot variances to City Code Section 31-515.1.1 provision the Commercial Recreational Establishment may occupy no more than 3,000 square feet; and 2. A 26 parking stall variance to City Code Section 31-510.1(c), Number of parking spaces required; or 3. An 18% variance to the 60% maximum (impervious) lot coverage requirement as identified in City Code Section 31-320(c). In addition to the specially -permitted use, MN Shooting Academy is proposing retail sales, a lounge and vending area, warehousing space as well as space for administrative offices. These uses are permitted by right. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS AND REGULATIONS Section 31-325 indicates Amusement and Recreational Establishments (including other social, sport or recreational centers) in the Business Park - Office District require a Special Use Permit. The Code further indicates the use must conform to the provisions found in Section 31-515.1: 1. The establishment may occupy no more than 3,000 square feet. 2. (The establishment must operate in compliance with the noise standards as specified in City Code Chapter 38, Section 38-3. (a) The establishment shall be considered a "commercial" use pursuant to City Code Chapter 38, Section 38-3, Subdivision 4. (b) Not only shall the establishment meet the specified noise standards at its respective property lines, but the noise standards shall also apply to receiving uses in abutting tenant spaces within a multiple tenant, if the establishment is located in such a building. 3. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the establishment, a qualified professional shall certify that the establishment will, under normal operating conditions, meet the noise standards specified in City Code Chapter 38, Section 38-3. 4. The amusement or recreational activities offered by the establishment must operate exclusively indoors. 5. The establishment must have at least one adult employee or adult supervisory volunteer in the premises during all hours of operation. Section 31-208, Variances, indicates the Planning Commission may grant a variance, but only when all of the following conditions are found: 1. The variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of this chapter. o The general purpose and intent of the Zoning Code is to regulate and restrict use of land for the protection of public health, safety and welfare. • The purpose of Section 31-325 limitations to the maximum size of the establishment is to ensure the development of the office park into office space. • The purpose of Section 31-510 is to ensure that a property provides sufficient on -site parking spaces to accommodate its needs and not create a burden on the neighborhood through on -street parking. • The purpose of Section 31-320(c) is to ensure adequate drainage and open space area is preserved. o The general purpose and intent of the Zoning Code may be met if certain conditions of approval are met. 2. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan. No application elements are contradictory to the Comprehensive Plan. 3. The applicant for the variance establishes that there are practical difficulties in complying with this chapter. "Practical difficulties," as use in connection with the granting of a variance, means that all of the following must be found to apply: • 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 CPC 7/8/2015 (Case No. 2015-15) 2159 Curve Crest Boulevard Page 2 of 6 permitted by other official controls; the use of the property for a Commercial Recreation and Amusement Establishment, with appropriate parking and onsite infiltration, is reasonable. • The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property and that are not created by the landowner; and The unique circumstance of the property are the boundaries of the property, the size of the structure on the property and the existing parking and drive areas. a. The proposed 4,040 square foot variance for the Recreational and Amusement Establishment helps support the business's desire to have 42% of the 12 lanes dedicated to be reserved for community service endeavors. The uniqueness exists in this large space can accommodate for the increase Establishment area, providing a service to local law enforcement practice and community safety education, wholly within the existing structure's footprint. b. The property owner is not able to create additional parking next to this existing parking and drive area without a reduction in open space and infringement on the neighboring properties. • The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. The essential character of the neighborhood will not be altered with the additional 4,040 square feet of Establishment space, nor the additional parking area. Section 31-208 further indicates: • Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. • A previous variance must not be considered to have set a precedent for the granting of further variances. Each case must be considered on its merits. Section 31-207 establishes the review standards for Special Use Permits: The proposed structure or use conforms to the requirements and the intent of this chapter, and of the comprehensive plan, relevant area plans and other lawful regulations. The proposed use is allowed within the subject zoning district, if it is found compatible with surrounding uses. In review of the request with City staff, the following item was determined to be an item of concern: • Parking: The property currently contains 49 parking spaces but is required to meet 75 parking spaces onsite. The applicant has shown proof of parking for an additional 28 spaces. However, the installation of this parking would necessitate a variance to the maximum impervious surface coverage requirement. o As there is no off-street parking in this area, the installation of 26 parking spaces should be required. If installed with a permeable surfacing CPC 7/8/2015 (Case No. 2015-15) 2159 Curve Crest Boulevard Page 3 of 6 material, then the need for a variance to the impervious surface coverage will not be necessary. • Impervious Surface Coverage and Drainage: The applicant is not proposing to change the landscaping, impervious surface coverage or drainage to the site. However, if the applicant was to increase the parking area, the surface coverage would necessitate a variance. o To offset the increase in impervious surface coverage, City Engineering Department staff indicate the new parking area could be constructed with permeable asphalt. This would maintain the required impervious surface coverage, allowing for all parking to be met onsite and no variance would be required for the parking. • Noise: As indicated in the code, the specified noise standards must be met at its respective property lines, but the noise standards shall also apply to receiving uses in abutting tenant spaces within a multiple tenant, if the establishment is located in such a building. While no specifications sheet for the exact construction has been submitted, the proposed indoor range will be a vendor - designed system that is constructed by Action Target. The system will include wall and ceiling baffles (which will include acoustics within them), sound abatement within the firing area to reduce echo as well as a ballistic trap to catch the bullets. o The applicant has submitted sound inspection test records from three Action Target designed and constructed facilities which indicate decibel noise levels on the property, outside the building and on adjacent parcels to be meet the threshold of the City of Stillwater's maximum decibels of 70 db during the day and 65 db at night. • Exterior changes: Section 31-319 of the Stillwater City Code requires that the Heritage Preservation Commission (HPC) conduct a design review on exterior changes, signage and waste receptacle. The applicant is aware exterior changes to the structure, including new exterior signage, will be required to obtain a Design Permit prior to the issuance of applicable Sign Permits. Comprehensive Plan Chapter 7, Local Economy, indicates a program to "encourage a mix of employment...and retail and service activities in the West Business Park area." The proposed uses are not contradictory to the Comprehensive Plan. This use is consistent with the Future Land Use Map identifying this property as having commercial use in 2030. Any additional conditions necessary for the public interest have been imposed or use and/or structure will not constitute a nuisance or be detrimental to the public welfare of the community. CPC 7/8/2015 (Case No. 2015-15) 2159 Curve Crest Boulevard Page 4 of 6 The proposed Commercial Recreational and Amusement Establishment will not be nuisance or be detrimental to the public welfare of the community if conditions addressing the concerns, above, are met. ALTERNATIVES AND RECOMMENDATION The Commission has the following options: 1. Variances a. Approve, with or without conditions, a 4,040 square foot variances to City Code Section 31-515.1.1 provision the Commercial Recreational Establishment, a 26 parking stall variance to City Code Section 31-510.1(c), Number of parking spaces required and an 18% variance to the 60% maximum (impervious) lot coverage requirement as identified in City Code Section 31-320(c). a. Determine any or all of the proposed variances have not established practical difficulty and deny the variance. 2. Special Use Permit a. Approve the Special Use Permits with or without conditions. If the Commission would like to approve the Case No. 2015-15 with conditions, staff would recommend the following: i. No greater than 12 firing lanes shall be permitted. Five of the firing lanes shall be made available for rental to community service personnel and community education activities. ii. The establishment must have at least one adult employee or adult supervisory volunteer in the premises during all hours of operation. iii. Soundproofing specifications shall be submitted with the building permit application. iv. The Establishment shall install appropriate and sufficient soundproofing to be in compliance with City Code Section 38-3, Noise Control and Regulation, for sound levels outside of the establishment. v. A total of 26 parking spaces shall be created onsite. A permeable surfaceparking area and suitable base found satisfactory to the City Engineer shall be utilized for all new parking and drive areas. vi. A grading plan shall be reviewed by the City Engineering Department and a Brown's Creek Watershed District permit shall be obtained prior to the installation of the additional parking spaces. vii. Upon the sale to MN Shooting Academy and prior to the release of necessary building permits, a 15' trail easement shall be dedicated CPC 7/8/2015 (Case No. 2015-15) 2159 Curve Crest Boulevard Page 5 of 6 to the City of Stillwater along the eastern property boundary for future trail connection between Curve Crest Boulevard and Highway 36. viii. Conditions of a HPC issued Design Permit shall be incorporated into this Special Use Permit by reference. ix. Plans and the use will need to be approved by the engineering, fire and building officials before the issuance of a building permit. x. All changes to the approved plans will need to be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director. Any major changes will need to go to the Planning Commission for review and approval. b. Determine that the proposed commercial Recreational and Amusement Establishment is not consistent with the Special Use Permit provisions or the Comprehensive Plan and deny the Special Use Permit. c. Table the application requesting more information be brought back before the Commission at their August 12, 2015 meeting. Staff recommends the Commission move to grant a 4,040 square foot variance to the 3,000 square foot maximum provision of City Code Section 31-515.1.1 as practical difficulty has been established and move to approve the Special Use Permit for the Commercial and Recreational Establishment to be located at 2159 Curve Crest Boulevard. ATTACHMENTS Site Location Map Narrative Request (2 pages) Plan set (3 pages) Ballistic Walls and Baffles Specifications (5 pages) Noise Exposure Assessment & Abatement Strategies Narrative (1 page) Safety Baffle Cutsheet (2 pages) Wall Baffle Cutsheet (2 pages) Action Target Sound Inspection Reports (3 pages) CPC 7/8/2015 (Case No. 2015-15) 2159 Curve Crest Boulevard Page 6 of 6 1401, 1420 ah r T ..."\--.„. I lwa t er ..\,.., \ 1 J e.� 4 s Y�'r�� a i'r The Birthplace of Minnesota WAINNW 2159 Curve Crest Boulevard 1150 + _- lir " Jam'. _ 40 1500 Subject Proeprty Parcel Boundaries ...'" Municipal Boundary / 1674 , O I .55 1 4-" CO v.; 41, Q t/ ®tS � 1� a ..: x .. - 1754 — 2020 0 180 360 720 Feet I. — 54.$' r �, , i9251' 01 ti / r1-. a4 i 9 e ` General Site Location CURVE CREST BOUL VARD LJ —a---••�, . � y •.. , a � 2225 150 00 0 CVD 0 s i=o �0, s 9 7 ; 1 q 9-A 000 y ea 9, w^ . ; 18 e p aai I` p : ? pii 9'1a �a0a nw 1 2000 a, _ _ �� — 21,00 TOWER DRIVE o ' a O f c% �" - U ) s es: O � ®® - 41 '\♦ �i � NM .�_ � . �e 5' 19 1�1901 2 _].94P 25'F_ r _•14IC Stillwater Planning Commission Our proposal is to retro-fit the old Simonets Furniture building into an outdoor sporting goods retailer and range similar to (Cabela's and Gander Mountain) the building is approximately 26,000 square feet. It is located on the corner of Washington Avenue. The building will include approximately 7500 sq feet of retail space which will include (sales counter, display cases, waiting lounges, commercial sales area) The first level will also host restrooms, lounge, training rooms and 2 offices, gunsmith room and warehouse area. The south side of the building would include a two range bays will be divided up into an public range with 7 state of the art shooting lanes, and a separate 6 lanes for use of private members and law enforcement. The actual shooting range length would be 75 feet. There would also be a bullet trap area, The Rubber Berm Trap's design allows for collection of spent rounds for salvage or recycling. The trap may be cleaned at anytime and requires no rear access for cleaning or service. The trap typically requires cleaning between 80,000 to 100,000 spent rounds per lane. Exceeding the recommended cleaning time can result in excessive bullet fragmentation and adhesion. The range walls would be made of 8-inch thick solid concrete. The ceiling would have AR300 steel baffles that act as a ceiling barrier and sound dampening. The bullet trap and firing range components would be constructed by Action Target, a national fabricator of law enforcement grade firing ranges. The range area is required to be constructed in accordance with federal, state and local building codes. Recycling happening in two steps; the bass cartridges will be recycled by Metro Metals Recycling in St Paul, MN and the spent lead will be recycled by Metro Metals Recycling, Eau Claire, WI Training will be a large part of the day to day operations. With over 1 million firearms sold in 2014, we would like to ensure the citizens that live in and around the twin cities as well as western Wisconsin have the best possible training available to them. Guardian Tactical Solutions will head all our training classes. Our classes range from introductory to firearms, basic firearms course and higher level conceal and carry courses. As of today we have 10 NRA certified instructors. There will be a training room and range times set aside for Law Enforcement qualifications and training. Sound abatement is a critical concern of the comfort level of our customer both inside and outside the range. The applicant assured city staff the building materials would not allow audible noises to be heard from adjacent businesses. The applicant will be including additional sound proofing measures so the decibel level would be reduced to less than that of a passing vehicle to the while standing in the parking lot. We do this thought construction of the range wall leaving a sound barrier between the existing building wall and the internal range walls. We will also using sound proofing wall panels and ceiling panels. Mark Kamas MN Shooting Academy MN Shooting Academy June 17, 2015 Project Narrative Request for Variance Special Use Permit Project Use: MN Shooting Academy, LLC proposes to purchase the existing 27,000 sf 1-story Type II-B (non-combustible sprinklered) building located on Curve Crest Boulevard. No new exterior modifications or additions are proposed. Planned internal remodeling shall be for purposes of providing a practice target range and associated retail and back -of -house functions. As per requirements for request for a variance to the Special Use Permit (City Code Section 31- 515.1 Amusement and recreational establishments, non -compliant item 1- limit of 3,000 sf, compliant with items 2 through 5), we have noted the following: 1. The variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of this chapter. (It is understood that an indoor target practice range is an allowed use under Commercial Entertainment). Recreational sport shooting, both individually and league. 2. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan. (It is understood that this use is consistent with the comprehensive plan for BP-0 district). 3. The applicant for the variance establishes that there are practical difficulties in complying with this chapter. "Practical difficulties," as used in connection with the granting of a variance, means that all of the following must be found to apply. a. 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. (MN Shooting Academy proposed square footage for the indoor gun range is 7,000 sf; however, local zoning only permits 3,000 sf for commercial entertainment use. Our square footage is greater than allowed for the following reasons: i. The entertainment area proper is considered to be from the staging area to the firing line; all human activity is prohibited forward of the firing line. ii. The shooting gallery is divided into 12 lanes; 5 of these lanes (Approximate 7,000 square footage) shall be reserved at specified times and dates for community service, not commercial entertainment. Community services could include law enforcement practice and community safety education. b. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property and that are not created by the landowner, and (N/A, The plight of the circumstances is related to the use of the property, not circumstances unique to the property). c. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. (The proposed remodel/use is internal only. Additionally, the proposed gun range use is an accessory use, as it only occupies approximately X of the total building area). MN Shooting Academy June 17, 2015 Narrative for required parking Project Use: MN Shooting Academy proposes to purchase the existing 27,000 sf 1-story Type II- B (non-combustible sprinklered) building located on Curve Crest Boulevard. Planned internal remodeling shall be for purposes of providing a practice target range and associated retail and back -of -house functions. MN Shooting Academy proposes no parking lot expansion or remodeling to the existing parking lot. Our experience has shown that the existing 49 parking spaces will be more than adequate to meet our customers' needs. It is not our desire or our intent to under -park this facility. We have enclosed a check for $525 should the planning commission determine additional parking be installed. Please see sheet T1 for graphic analysis of parking requirements (as per city off- street parking ordinance 31-510). Should the planning commission determine that additional parking must be installed, a variance will be required for green space. Providing 77 stalls will result in an overall green space of 22% (less than 40% required for this district). The check submitted could be used for a variance for either parking stall reduction or green space reduction. • Curve Cre O-215g Curve Crest Blvd SITE Abrahamson Nurseries PROJECT DIRECTORY OWNER XXX XXX XXX CONTACT: XXX PHONE: XXX CELL: XXX EMAIL: XXX CONTRACTOR: xxx XXX XXX CONTACT: XXX PHONE: XXX CELL: XXX FAX: XXX EMAIL: XXX ARCHITECT ARCHNET INC. 333 NORTH MAIN STREET SUITE 201 STILLWATER, MN 55082 CONTACT: MICHAEL F. DIEM PHONE: 65 I-430-0606 CELL: 65 I -27 1-7289 FAX: 65 I-430-24 14 EMAIL: mike@archnetusa.com STRUCTURAL ENGINEER DUFFY ENGINEERING 350 HIGHWAY 10 SOUTH ST. CLOUD, MINNESOTA 56304 CONTACT: RYAN SEAVERT 0: (320) 259-6575 F: (320) 259-6991 EMAIL: SeavertR@DuffyEng.com WEBSITE: DUFFYENG.COM LOCATION MAP Curve Crest Blvd Fob Target Fronts Lifl Bridge Bering Company TGwer Dr IN i, St t4 DRAWING INDEX SHEET# SHEET NAME GENERAL TO TITLE SKEET ARCHITECTURAL D I DEMO PLAN Al .0 FLOOR PLAN * SCHEDULES STRUCTURAL XXX XXX MN SHOOTING ACADEMY 2159 Curve Crest Boulevard, Stillwater, MN n-0- 13 28 PROOF OF PARKING STALLS I I5'-2" d CURVE CREST BLVD. RETAIL SPACE LOUNGE VENDING 'B' OCCUPANCY GUN RANGE 7,500 SQ.FT. I PARKING STALLS PER 200 = 38 740 SQ.FT. I PARKING STALLS PER 200 = 4 7,040 SQ.FT. 12 SHOOTERS AND 6 INSTRUCTORS = 18 WAREHOUSE / STORAGE 6,570 SQ.FT. I PARKING STALLS PER 1000 = 7 EMPLOYEES ONLY I ,924 SQ.FT. 8 EMPLOYEES TOTAL PARKING STALLS REQUIRED = 75 13 21 26,700 SQ. FT. 49 EXISTING PARKING STALLS + 28 PROOF OF PARKING STALLS = 77 PARKING STALLS 23 93' - 2" 27 m I NOTE SITE PLAN IS FOR REFERENCE ONLY, ALL EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS TO REMAIN , NO NEW ADDITIONAL SITE WORK GREEN SPACE PRELIMINARY CALCULATION: 100,877 SF SITE 22,636 SF GREEN (22%) WITH INCREASED SITE PLAN PARKING 1" = 40'-0" WASHINGTON AVE. N GENERAL NOTES CODE DATA MN Shooting Academy Code Data Location Current Building Code Project Description June 16,2015 Occupancy Classification, Chapter 3 Section 303.1.1 exception Type of Construction (existing) Table 601 Separation at indoor gun range Occupant load, Table 1004.1.2 (For exiting purposes only) Exits: Table 1015.1, 1015.2.1 Locking, Section 1008.1.9 Panic/Fire exit hardware Exit signage Section 1011.1 Emergency Lighting at means of egress, 1006.3 Accessible exterior route, MN 1341 Slope not steeper than 1:20 Accessible parking, (2015 MN Chapter 1341 adopted 1/14/15) Accessible plumbing fixtures MN Plumbing fixtures, Table 2902.1 Stillwater, Minnesota 2015 MN State Building Code adopts 2012 IBC with amendments (effective 6/2/15); unless noted otherwise, IBC sections refer to 2012 IBC 2015 MN Accessibility Code was effective 1/14/15 Remodel space within existing building Group B offices to remain, Assembly space less than 50 occupants-B occupancy (lounge/vending), Retail space Group M, warehouse/storage Group 5-2, indoor gun range S-1 occupancy (18 occupants) with hazardous materials within allowable quantity per control area Type II-B sprinklered existing with additional protective construction at indoor gun range Provide walls equivalent to 2-hour fire rating and additional protective construction at indoor gun range Retail M occupancy 7,500 sf/30 sf per occupant = 250, Group B offices 1,925 sf/100 = 19, Lounge/vending 740 sf/15 = 49, Gun range actual 18 occupants, Warehouse/storage 6,570 sf/300 = 22 Provide 1 exit at indoor gun range, 18 occupants (1 exit allowed for max occupant load of 29), existing exterior exits 1/3 diagonal apart at warehouse/storage and retail areas, provide exit through storage area at new hall Egress doors shall be readily openable from egress side with use of key or special knowledge; indoor gun range may require special security measures Existing fire exit hardware on exterior exit doors to remain, verify with Fire Marshal Verify at existing exterior doors to remain, provide at all locations where path of egress is not immediately visible Verify at existing exterior landings of exterior doors Verify existing accessible route from accessible surface parking to main entrance Verify existing accessible parking spaces & signage, see exception for access aisle signage located in path of travel Existing to remain (1 women, 1 men) Existing to remain: women (3 toilets, 3 lays), men (2 toilets, 1 urinal, 3 lays I . IF ANY DISCREPANCIES EXIST BETWEEN ARCHITECTURAL, STRUCTURAL OR CIVIL DRAWINGS, CONSULT WITH ARCHITECT BEFORE COMMENCING WITH CONSTRUCTION. 2. DO NOT SCALE DRAWINGS, IF ADDITIONAL DIMENSIONS ARE REQUIRED CONTACT ARCHITECT. 3. GENERAL CONTRACTOR TO SUPPLY A FULL SET OF PLANS TO THE SUBS * SHOP SUPPLIERS. 4. GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE TO FIELD VERIFY ALL EXISTING CONDITIONS $ DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO COMMENCING WITH WORK AND TO NOTIFY ARCHITECT IMMEDIATELY OF ANY DISCREPANCIES. 5. GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY AND INSURE ALL UTILITIES ARE LOCATED IN FIELD AND COORDINATE AS NECESSARY WITH NEW WORK. 6. GENERAL CONTRACTOR AND ALL SUB -CONTRACTORS SHALL PERFORM WORK IN CONFORMANCE WITH ALL APPLICABLE BUILDING CODES AND LAWS. 7. NOTIFY ARCHITECT OF ANY DISCREPANCIES BETWEEN SPECIFICATIONS, PLANS AND NOTES. CONTRACTOR SHALL BE HELD TO COMPLY WITH THE MORE STRINGENT REQUIREMENTS. 8. GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE COORDINATION OF ALL MECHANICAL, ELECTRICAL, PLUMBING, HVAC, FIREPROTECTION, AND STRUCTURE CONSTRUCTION AND SHALL COMPLY WITH ALL APPLICABLE CODES AS INDICATED. 9. REQUIRED MEANS OF EGRESS AND SECURITY TO SPACE SHALL BE MAINTAINED DURING CONSTRUCTION. 10. GENERAL CONTRACTOR TO NOTE CONSTRUCTION TIME LINE OF PROJECT AND THAT CONSTRUCTION MAY START IN WINTER. GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHOULD PLAN ACCORDINGLY FOR WINTER CONDITIONS. 1 I . GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE * INSTALL ALL NECESSARY BLOCKING, SHIMS $ BACKING FOR FIXTURES, EQUIPMENT, AND ACCESSORIES RELATED TO THE SCOPE OF WORK. 12. CONTRACTOR SHALL CALL FIRE INSPECTOR AT ELECTRIC R.I. TO CONFIRM LOCATION OF EXIT SIGNS AND EMERGENCY LIGHTING. EMERGENCY LIGHTING IS REQUIRED AT ALL EXIT DOORS. EXIT AND DIRECTIONAL SIGNAGE SHALL BE INSTALLED AT EVERY REQUIRED EXIT DOORWAY, INTERSECTION OF CORRIDORS AND AT OTHER SUCH LOCATIONS AND INTERVALS AS NECESSARY TO CLEARLY INDICATE THE DIRECTION OF EGRESS. 1 3. FIRE EXTINGUISHER TO BE A MINIMUM 2A I OBC, RATED WALL MTD. AT A HEIGHT TO MEET ADA CODES WITH SIGNAGE. 14. CONTRACTOR SHALL FURNISH/INSTALL FIRE EXTINGUISHERS AND F.E. WALL SIGNAGE COMPLIANT WITH CODES. ALL F.E.'S SHALL BE TAGGED, CURRENTLY DATED, EFFECTIVE FOR ONE-YEAR. FINAL QUANTITIES OF FIRE EXTINGUISHERS ARE SUBJECT TO CODES AND/OR LOCAL FIRE MARSHAL DIRECTIONS/REQUIREMENTS. 1 5. SPRINKLER INSTALLING CONTRACTOR MUST OBTAIN A FIRE SPRINKLER PERMIT FOR FIRE SPRINKLER WORK PRIOR TO SYSTEM INSTALLATION. CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS AND CALCULATIONS MUST BE PROVIDED BY THE SPRINKLER INSTALLER FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL. 1 6. IT IS THE SPRINKLER SUB -CONTRACTORS RESPONSIBILITY TO DESIGN THE SPRINKLER SYSTEM TO ALL AREAS INCLUDING CONCEALED SPACES AND TO FIT WITHIN THE ROOF STRUCTURE AND AVOID LIGHT FIXTURES, FANS MECHANICAL DUCT IN THE SPACES WITH EXPOSED STRUCTURE. AS HIGH AND TIGHT TO THE DECK AS POSSIBLE. 17. SUBMIT ALL COLOR SAMPLES TO OWNER AND ARCHITECT FOR APPROVAL PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. ALLOW AMPLE TIME FOR SELECTIONS AND APPROVALS. 18. DESIGN -BUILD SUB -CONTRACTORS ARE TO VERIFY THAT ALL APPLICABLE WORK IS IN THEIR SCOPE OF WORK AND THEREFORE IN THEIR RESPECTIVE BID. IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE DESIGN -BUILD SUB -CONTRACTOR TO COORDINATE THIS WITH OTHER SELECTED DESIGN -BUILD SUB -CONTRACTORS. �rll'�il�Il�i1�ll�lr ly I+ IIIII� L" H� 111 11111111111111111111 I III1111111111111111 1111111111111 111 111 1111 1111 1111 1111 I I I I I III 1111 11111111111111111111 111 11111111111111111111 1111111 iii 1111i 111111111 11111111111111111111 I!I 111 111111111111 111111111111 11111 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I I 11111111111111111111 I I I I I I I I I I I I 111 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I11111111111111111111 11 111111111111111111111111111111111111111 111111111111111111111111111111111111111 li strE I 1I 11 1 1 111111 1 l 1 1 1 1 1 111 1111111 NOTE ELEVATION IS FOR REFERENCE ONLY, NO NEW WORK EXISTING ELEVATION 1 3/32" = 1'-0" ARCHNET u S a architecture • interiors sustainable design 333 N Main St. Ste. 201 Stillwater, MN 55082 651-430-0606 archnetusa.com MN SHOOTING ACADEMY 2159 Curve Crest Boulevard, Stillwater, MN Revisions Item Date Registration Information I hereby certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision, and that I am a duly Licensed Architect under the laws of the State of Owner Printed Name MICHAEL F. DIEM Signature DATE License # 6-16-15 Project Status Sheet Information TITLE SHEET Project No : 15-111 Sheet Size : 24" x 36" Drawn By : CAL Checked By : RT Date : 6-16-15 C;2015 ARCHNET, Inc. Drawing No : TO 111 KEY ODEMO PLAN 3/32" = 1 '-0" 6 AI.0 I I I I I I I I u n I I I I J L L 7 r - - - - I I I I I I I I u IL L (G) ii t ‘71- u — I ==�1 =ll= I I 17 L 1 C — — — 1 EXISTING WALL TO BE DEMO EXISTING WALL TO REMAIN NEW WALL I � ARCHNET u S a architecture • interiors sustainable design 333 N Main St. Ste. 201 Stillwater, MN 55082 651-430-0606 archnetusa.com MN SHOOTING ACADEMY 2159 Curve Crest Boulevard, Stillwater, MN Revisions Item Date Registration Information I hereby certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision, and that I am a duly Licensed Architect under the laws of the State of Owner Printed Name MICHAEL F. DIEM Signature DATE License # 6-16-15 Project Status Sheet Information DEMO SHEET Project No : 15-111 Drawing No : Sheet Size : 24" x 36" Drawn By : CAL Checked By : RT D 1 Date : 6-16-15 C 2015 ARCHNET, Inc. KEY STORAGE 111 ELEC. 112 OFLOOR PLAN 3/32" = 1'-0" EXISTING BAR JOIST BEARING 118'-0" BREAK ROOM cir7 110 WAREHOUSE 113 05) WOM 104 W W W OFFICE 106 OFFICE 107 MEN 105 OFFICE 108 GUN SMITH (OFFICE) 109 22' - 0" r 75' - 0" RETAIL SPACE 101 15'-0" 8'-0" 1 STOFIAGE 1 4 DOCK \\ LANE I N RANGE LANE 2 LANE 3 G LANE 4 103 LANE ,, ,\__7 ` ,\__.., \.- BULLET CATCHER AREA -I -pS \,_\-`. \ _\__\-\_\_`� _.\_\ �� \_\_\- \-\\` _,.\_- SAFETY CORRIDOR A O LANE 6 LANE 7 LANE 8 LANE 9 LANE 10 LANE I I IN LANE 12 (4) EXISTING BAR JOIST BEARING 116'-0" - Ep) /\\/\/\/\/\/\--/\/\/\/\/\/,/\_1 \\/\/\/\/\ ©SECTION 1/8" = 1 0 NOTE WALL AND CEILING STEEL PANELS FOR BULLET RICOCHET PREVENTION BY OTHERS NEW STEEL BEAMS SEE STRUCT. NEW I 2" CMU CORE FILLED, SEE STRUCT. FOR REINFORCING PROVIDE NEW FOOTING AS REQUIRED SEE STRUCT. F 122'-0" A. FLOOR PLAN 100'-0" 1 2" CMU CORE FILLED, SEE STRUCT. FOR REINFORCING `1 1" WALL TYPES 1 =1-0 SEE SCHEDULE SEE SCHEDULE 2" FI HOLLOW MTL. FRAME ®FRAME TYPES 1/4" = 1'-0" SEE SCHED. SEE SCHED. A NON -INSULATED H.M. DOOR DOOR TYPES 1/4" = 1'-0" HARDWARE LEGEND GROUP 1 INTERIOR LATCH SET, BUTTS AS REQ'D I EA CLOSER I EA DOOR STOP I EA LATCH SET \\ \\ • \ AIR LOCK 102 4 - (5) NEW BOLLARDS VESTIBULE 100 LOUNGE VENDING NOTES: I . DOOR AND ROOM FINISH SCHEDULE ARE FOR REFERENCE ONLY VERIFY ALL FINISHES WITH OWNER 2.NOTE: ALL HARDWARE GROUPS ARE FOR REFERNCE ONLY VERIFY ALL HARDWARE WITH OWNER 4 C==-� EXISTING WALL TO BE DEMO EXISTING WALL TO REMAIN NEW WALL (5) N 1/\ ROOM FINISH SCHEDULE Number NAME WALL FINISH FLOOR FINISH BASE CEILING FINISH CEILING HEIGHT COMMENTS 100 VESTIBULE 101 RETAIL SPACE 102 AIR LOCK 103 GUN RANGE 104 WOMEN 105 MEN 106 OFFICE 107 OFFICE 108 OFFICE 109 GUN SMITH (OFFICE) 110 BREAK ROOM 1 1 STORAGE I 1 2 ELEC. 113 WAREHOUSE 114 STORAGE DOOR SCHEDULE DOOR # FROM ROOM: NAME HEIGHT FRAME WIDTH DOOR TYPE 1 TYPE HDWR GROUP COMMENTS 102 IO2A RETAIL SPACE AIR LOCK 7'-0" 3'-0" A 7'-0" 3'-0" A FI FI 114 RETAIL SPACE 7'-0" 3'-0" A FI ARCHNET u S a architecture • interiors sustainable design 333 N Main St. Ste. 201 Stillwater, MN 55082 651-430-0606 archnetusa.com MN SHOOTING ACADEMY 2159 Curve Crest Boulevard, Stillwater, MN Revisions Item Date Registration Information I hereby certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision, and that I am a duly Licensed Architect under the laws of the State of Owner Printed Name MICHAEL F. DIEM Signature DATE License # 6-16-15 Project Status Sheet Information FLOOR PLAN Project No : 15-111 Drawing No : Sheet Size : 24" x 36" Drawn By : CAL Checked By : RT A1.0 Date : 6-16-15 C;2015 ARCHNET, Inc. Ballistic & Acoustic Ballistic Rubber Protection and Acoustic Systems The primary purpose of ballistic protection in a range is to help prevent injury and protect property from damage. Traditional ballistic systems are designed to simply redirect misfires and ricochets, not necessarily to stop their path and contain them. Range Systems ProTactTM ballistic protection systems provide a safer range environment by eliminating these hazards with full encapsulation of errant rounds and ricochets. Our proprietary ballistic rubber allows us to create the safest, cleanest and quietest ranges in the industry today. Here are some of the ballistic protection products where we use our ProTact systems: • Baffles • Safety Ceiling • Ballistic Sidewall Protection • Shooting Lane Dividers • Free -Standing Ballistic Shields • Acoustic Systems Baffles Range Systems has a variety of baffle designs and options to suit your needs. The baffles on a range must be matched with the capabilities of the ammunition being fired on the range. While we have several levels of ballistic protection, with our proprietary ballistic rubber, we not only can provide you the safest shooting environment possible, but also improve the overall appearance of your range. Whether you train from a fixed firing line or advance downrange, Range Systems baffle systems can be installed in a "no -blue sky" configuration so errant rounds cannot escape the perimeters of the range. Our baffles also protect downrange lights, columns, utilities or any type of protuberance that is in the line of fire. Simply put, Range Systems has the widest range of baffle options in the industry allowing you to choose both your level of protection and safety. Sidewall Systems ProTactsTM Ballistic Sidewall System is ideal for tactical training, close range fire, angled fire, and any environment where shooters advance downrange. Our ballistic Sidewall System eliminates the potential hazard of ricochets and splatter from bullets impacting the sidewalls of the range. This allows you to not only advance down range, but have 270° range of fire, shoot cross lane as well as engage multiple targets at once. • Tactical Training • Angled Fire • Close Range Fire • Shoot Cross Lane Ceiling System One of the most critical areas in a range where a misdirected shot could compromise personnel safety is the area from the firing line extending to twelve feet downrange. Range Systems ProTactsTM ballistic rubber ceiling system reduces the risk of injury of a vertically misdirected shot by stopping the path of the round and safely containing it. Acoustic Systems There are many hazards on a shooting range, and one of the most overlooked is the noise. Obviously you have the noise of the guns firing, but also noise from bullet impact and reverberations. An effective noise control measure for firing ranges is ballistic rubber. Unlike steel and plywood ranges, ranges with ballistic rubber nearly eliminate bullet impact noise. In addition, our Acoustic Dura-PanelTM rubber with channeled exterior reduces reverberation as well. Noise is absorbed as the channels disrupt sound wave patterns so they quickly dissipate resulting in a noise reduction. Acoustic Dura-Panel has a Noise Reduction Coefficient (NRC) rating of 0.65. When used as a component of a ballistic containment system, Acoustic Dura- Panel will capture and encapsulate bullets and fragments, prevent ricochet from trajectory angles as shallow as 12 degrees from the rubber surface, and reduce airborne lead particles. Noise exposure assessment and abatement strategies for a indoor firing range. Exposure to impulse noise is common during the firing of weapons at indoor firing ranges. The aims of this study were to characterize the impulse noise environment at a law enforcement firing range; document the insufficiencies found at the range from a health and safety standpoint; and provide noise abatement recommendations to reduce the overall health hazard to the auditory system. Ten shooters conducted a typical live -fire exercise using three different weapons --the Beretta.40 caliber pistol, the Remington.308 caliber rifle, and the M4.223 caliber rifle. Measurements were obtained at 12 different positions throughout the firing range and adjacent areas using dosimeters and sound level meters. Personal and area measurements were recorded to a digital audio tape (DAT) recorder for further spectral analysis. Peak pressure levels inside the firing range reached 163 decibels (dB) in peak pressure. Equivalent sound levels ranged from 78 decibels, A -weighted (dBA), in office area adjacent to the range to 122 dBA inside the range. Noise reductions from wall structures ranged from 29-44 dB. Noise abatement strategies ranged from simple noise control measures to elaborate design modifications to eliminate structural -borne sounds using acoustical treatments. Acoustical treatment of exposed walls, overhead baffles, safety ceilings, shooting stalls, and the range floor changes the surfaces from reflective to absorptive and significantly reduces the noise level in the range. These acoustical applications are specifically designed to absorb the loud reverberation of indoor gunfire, decrease the sound level within the range, and reduce noise transmission outside of the range. INDOOR RANGES ; U.S. PATENT # 5822936 J SAFETY BAFFLESTM In addition to keeping fired bullets from exiting the range, baffles offer protection for overhead lights, pipes, ventilation ducts, and other structures. A critical safety concern on any indoor range is making sure bullets cannot escape to the outside. Using an innovative combination of steel, wood, and acoustical tile, Action Target Safety Baffles provide ballistic protection, sound abatement, and a polished, professional appearance. "ACTION ‘if ITARGETT T WWW.ACTIONTARGET.COM ® PO BOX 636 ® PROVO, UT 84603 ® P 801.377.8033 ® F 801.377.8096 To ensure you get exactly what you need for your specific range requirements, Action Target Safety Baffles come in four levels of protection. LEVEL 1: Baffles are made of 10-gauge steel and will deflect and contain most standard handgun rounds fired at an angle of at least 45 degrees from perpendicular. Some damage to the steel plate may occur. Repeated rounds impacting in the same area may breach the baffle. LEVEL 2: Baffles are made of 1/4" mild steel and will deflect and contain standard handgun rounds fired at an angle of at least 45 degrees from perpendicular with little or no damage to the steel plate. Baffle will also deflect and contain standard handgun rounds fired at a perpendicular angle with some potential damage to the steel plate. Performance Characteristics LEVEL 3: Baffles are made of 1/4" AR steel and will deflect and contain standard handgun rounds fired at a perpendicular angle with no damage to the steel plate. Baffle will also deflect and contain high power rounds (.223 and .308) fired at an angle of at least 45 degrees from perpendicular. Some damage to the steel plate may occur. LEVEL 4: Baffles are made of 3/8" AR steel and will deflect and contain standard handgun rounds fired at a perpendicular angle with no damage to the steel plate. Baffle will also deflect and contain high power rounds (.223 and .308) fired at a perpendicular angle. High power rounds fired at a perpendicular angle will cause damage to the steel plate. Repeated high power rounds fired at a perpendicular angle impacting in the same area may breach the baffle. ® Nearly impenetrable barrier ® Protect lighting, ventilation, and other utilities and equipment ® Help control acoustics and other sound issues ® Match the grade of baffles to the scope of the range be it handguns or rifles. ® Fixed firing line baffles: calculate line of sight from standing, kneeling, and prone positions ® Tactical movement baffles: entire ceiling must be completely protected - not just certain areas ® Baffles are different than deflectors WWW.ACTIONTARGET.COM ® PO BOX 636 ® PROVO, UT 84603 ® P 801.377.8033 ® F 801.377.8096 i\ACTION TARGET. INDOOR RANGES WALL BAFFLE Complete ballistic containment that will safely direct ricochet and splatter away from the shooter. Available in handgun and rifle rated configurations. Action Target's Wall Baffle system is designed to keep errant rounds safely contained within the shooting range while not damaging the structure of the building. Wall Baffles are available in configurations capable of containing both handgun and standard rifle calibers (5.56, 7.62, etc.). "ACTION ‘if ITARGETT T WWW.ACTIONTARGET.COM • PO BOX 636 • PROVO, UT 84603 • P 801.377.8033 • F 801.377.8096 All impact surfaces on the Wall Baffles are made of through hardened AR500 steel. The joint system provides an overlapping and continuous barrier eliminating any gaps through which rounds may escape. The overlapping joint design also allows wall baffles to be modular to fit any range. Wall Baffle panels are available in 1/4" and 3/8" thicknesses depending on the range requirements. In order to contain impacts from rifle calibers at various angles (including perpendicular shots), 3/8" steel must be used. All steel panels are cut on computer controlled, high - definition plasma cutters and are prepped and painted to meet SP-6 specifications. No flame cutting of any type is used. Standard Accessories Optional Accessories Mounting Requirements Height Width Thickness • Plywood • Acoustic paneling • Rubber covering • Various acoustic tiling options • CMU / Concrete wall / drywall / plywood styuds / self supporting wall • 4' to 40' • Unlimited • 2" to 8" WWW.ACTIONTARGET.COM • PO BOX 636 • PROVO, UT 84603 • P 801.377.8033 • F 801.377.8096 i\ACTION TARGET. Shooting Range Sound Test Action Target conducted a test on Saturday December 7, 2002 to determine the level of sound emitting from an uninsulated indoor range. We used the facilities of Rangemasters of Utah located at: 712 West 1300 North Springville, UT 84663. The range is a standard 25 yard fixed position commercial range with a Total Containment Trap, 9 rows of overhead baffles (7 with fascia), and shooting stalls. The walls are solid grout CMU block. Above the baffles is a wood truss assembly with standard roof construction and no insulation. This range is located in a light industrial area. There is one City access road to the north about 200' that has moderate traffic. Other roads in the area are south of the range with very little traffic. We took our sound measurements moving away from the building to the west through an open lot. The next building to the west is 500' away. The lane we used for our testing in the range was just inside the western wall shooting to the north. The equipment used for this test was a Larson -Davis hand held meter, model DSP80 (see attached spec sheet). In order to produce the worst case scenario we used a 50 caliber BMG rifle. The rounds fired were TTI Armory FMJ Ball 647 gr. (see attached spec sheet). All shots were fired from the 25 yard line. The test was conducted from six positions outside the range. At each distance three measurements were taken; ambient sound, normal conversation, and peek levels with a single shot fired in the range. The results are as follows: Distance Ambient db Conversation db Shot Fired db 10' 50 75.2 84.3 Traffic 55 100' 50 74.9 71.9 200' 50 72 66.9 300 47 72.6 59.2 400 45.5 71.5 54.3 450 43.5 72.5 56.9 The reading from 450' when the shot was fired increased slightly from the reading at 400'. We believe this was due to reverberation off the building to the west. This test was conducted by employees of Action Target namely; Layne Ashby, Ernie John, Justin Briggs, and Jarom Xochimitl. Sincerely, Layne Ashby Action Target, Inc. Shooting Range Sound Test Action Target conducted a test on Friday April 18, 2008 to determine the level of sound emitting from an insulated indoor range. This test was conducted on the shooting range listed: Get Some Guns 6651 S. State Street Murray, UT 84107 The range is a standard 25 yard fixed position commercial range with a Total Containment Trap, 9 rows of overhead baffles (7 with fascia), and shooting stalls. The walls are solid grout CMU block. Above the baffles is a steel truss assembly with standard roof construction and fiberglass insulation. This range is equipped with sound absorbing panels with a .95 NRC rating to reduce reverberation time. This range is located in a commercial area. State Street is west of the range about 20' and has heavy traffic. Other roads in the area are on all sides of the range with little traffic. We took our sound measurements moving away from the building to the north, west and east through the parking lots. The closest buildings to the range are: North Sam's Club 500+' away South Commercial strip center 25' away West Commercial strip center 100' away East Residential homes 70' away There were 4 shooters in lanes in the south bay of the range just inside the southern wall shooting to the east. The shooters were shooting 9mm and 40 cal handguns. The equipment used for this test was a RadioShack digital hand held meter. Sound levels were measured in the A -weighting scale with frequencies from 500 to 10,000 Hz. The test was conducted from five positions outside the range and readings at the shooting line in the range. At each distance three measurements were taken; ambient sound, traffic, and peek levels with shots fired in the range. The results are as follows: Distance Ambient db Traffic db Shot Fired db In the range 79 107 In the Gun store 64 68 72 10' south 61 68 67 50' east 56 63 61 State St. sidewalk 53 64 54 200'north 54 63 55 The readings from 50' east and 10' south increased slightly from the other readings. We believe this was due to reverberation between the buildings. This test was conducted by Layne Ashby of Action Target with assistance from Skyler Wallin of Get Some Guns. Shooting Range Sound Test Action Target conducted a test on Friday May 2, 2008 to determine the level of sound emitting from a well insulated concrete tilt -up indoor range. This test was conducted on the shooting range listed: Whistling Pines Gun Club 1418 Woolsey Heights Colorado Springs, CO 80915 The range is a standard 25 yard fixed position commercial range with a Total Containment Trap, 9 rows of overhead baffles (7 with fascia), and shooting stalls. The walls are solid tilt -up concrete. Above the baffles is a steel truss assembly with standard roof construction and fiberglass insulation. This range is equipped with sound absorbing panels with a .95 NRC rating to reduce reverberation time. This range is located in an industrial area. Markshuffle Street is east of the range about 500' and Hwy 124 is South about 1000', both with heavy traffic. Other roads in the area are on all sides of the range with little traffic. We took our sound measurements moving away from the building to the north, south, west and east through the parking lots. The closest buildings to the range are: North Storage yard 300' away South Open field West Industrial offices 200' away East Industrial offices 200' away There were 6 shooters in lanes in the east bay of the range just inside the eastern wall shooting to the north. The shooters were shooting 9mm handguns. The equipment used for this test was a RadioShack digital hand held meter. Sound levels were measured in the A -weighting scale with frequencies from 500 to 10,000 Hz. The test was conducted from 10 positions outside the range and readings at the shooting line in the range. At each distance three measurements were taken; ambient sound, traffic, and peek levels with shots fired in the range. The results are as follows: Distance Ambient db Traffic db Shot Fired db In the range 76 102 In the Gun store 50 62 10' east 63 67 68 50' east 54 68 67 100' east 61 68 66 50' west 62 66 65 100' west 63 67 65 50'north 77 100'north 58 60 59 50' south 63 67 66 100' south 64 66 66 It was very windy the day of this test which made it very difficult to collect these reading. The wind gusts were much louder than the traffic or shots fired. The readings on the north side of the building were higher due to the HVAC equipment. The shots fired were nearly undetectable as we moved away from the range building. We believe this is due to the construction type and insulation of the building. This test was directed by Layne Ashby and conducted by Wayne Ashby of Action Target with assistance from Kevin Klesser of Whistling Pines Gun Club. Adicl ' \ i n-Po Abbi Wittman From: Kimberly Howard <meurlib_45@yahoo.com> Sent: Thursday, July 09, 2015 1:27 PM To: Abbi Wittman Subject: Re: Proposed Gun Range Hello Ms.Wittman, Thank you for your email. I appreciate your clarification of the issue for me. I don't receive the Stillwater Gazette, so I wasn't completely informed as to previous meetings or discussion. I only know what I read in the St. Paul newspaper yesterday,and what was relayed to me by my mother and other neighbors. I understand that Guardian Tactical Solutions approached the city of Stillwater with a proposal , but I still strongly disagree with the proposed site of this business with an indoor gun range. Thank you for time as well. Sincerely, Kimberly Howard On Thursday, July 9, 2015 11:42 AM, Abbi Wittman <awittman@ci.stillwater.mn.us> wrote: Hello Ms. Howard. Thank you for your phone call and email. I hope you can understand that this application was made to the City and this was not a business the City sought out. The property owner has a potential purchaser, MN Shooting Academy, and a portion of their business (the indoor range) necessitated the Special Use Permit and associated variance. This was an applicant -driven process. Your questions regarding 'why here' and not in a more rural area are not for the City to consider. The role of the City is to determine compliance of the application with the provisions of the zoning code, the city's Comprehensive Plan as well as any other factors that could pose a detriment to the public. While this is a high -traffic area, the recreational use and associated retail sales are consistent with the City's zoning code and the future land use map. Additionally, the applicant was able to establish to staff there will be sufficient sound proofing of the indoor range (within the existing building's footprint) so that the business will meet all applicable noise ordinance regulations. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the case, last night at 7:00 pm. Legal notice was made in the Stillwater Gazette (our newspaper of record) on June 26. Additionally, 10 days before the hearing every property owner within 350' was mailed a notice of the hearing. The nine -member commission voted to approve the Special Use Permit and one associated variance. The vote was 5-3 with Commissioner Kelly 1 abstaining from voting. That meeting was the opportunity for public input and the Commission did receive testimony from 10 individuals prior to deliberating and taking action. Please let me know if there is anything else I can assist you with regarding this application or the process for review and approval of land use matters in Stillwater. Thanks, Abbi T mia ter The Be 1hp".acc of M,nnesota Abbi Jo Wittman P: 651-430-8822 F: 651-430-8810 www.ci.stillwater.mn.us From: Kimberly Howard [mailto:meurlib_45@yahoo.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 08, 2015 10:35 PM To: Abbi Wittman Subject: Proposed Gun Range Dear Ms. Wittman, I am writing to express my concerns about the proposed indoor gun range at the Simonet Furniture Outlet Store in Stillwater. I was shocked to learn of this decision when reading story in the St. Paul Pioneer Press this evening. I do not understand why Guardian Tactical Solutions chose this site in such a high traffic area ? The proposed site is in close proximity to other businesses( including a liquor store, a sports arena), medical clinics, apartment complexes, and other residential properties. Further,if this proposal goes through, it will dramatically change the area for the worse.Why does an indoor gun range need to be located within the city limits ? Why not choose a site that is away from the city ? A more likely site, such as a rural area with less traffic would be less worrisome for the public. Although, my opinion will not change this course of action, I still wanted to express my grave concerns for such a proposal. Respectfully, I do hope that the Stillwater Planning Commission will give careful, thoughtful consideration about this matter. May I ask if there be an opportunity for the community to voice their opinion/concerns about this issue,before any final decision is made by the Stillwater Planning Commission ? Thank you for allowing me to share my thoughts. Sincerely, Kimberly Howard 2 iliwater H E 6 1 R 1 H P 1 ACE OF MINNESOTA CITY COUNCIL TO: Mayor & Council DATE: August 27, 2015 MEETING DATE: September 1, 2015 REQUEST: Consider approving agreement with Washington County for septic system services REPORT BY: Bill Turnblad, Community Development Director INTRODUCTION At the beginning of this year, a large number of properties were annexed into the City from the Township. Those properties are served by private on -site septic systems. Staff has contacted Washington County's Environmental Services Division to explore the possibility of managing those systems for the City. This is an arrangement that occurs in almost every jurisdiction in the County. The County is willing to provide the septic system inspection services in exchange for the revenues generated by the septic system permit fees. The City Council agreed that this arrangement makes sense and approved the first reading of an ordinance amendment to allow it to occur. SPECIFIC REQUEST To authorize the mayor to sign the attached agreement, staff is requesting the Council to: 1) Approve the second reading of the referenced ordinance amendment, and adopt it; and 2) To approve the attached resolution authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to sign the agreement. bt attachments: Ordinance & Resolution Agreement ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE STILLWATER CITY CODE SEC. 29-3 The City Council of the City of Stillwater does ordain: 1. Amending. The City Code is amended by adding Sec. 29-3 Subd. 4 to the City Code that will hereafter read as follows: "Subd. 4. Installation of Individual Sewage Disposal Systems. The construction and maintenance of individual subservice sewage disposal systems is performed by the Washington County Depat talent of Public Health and Environmental Services pursuant to an Agreement approved by the City Council on August, 18th, 2015." 2. Amending. The City Code is amended by adding Sec. 29-9 (a) to the City Code that will hereafter read as follows: "(a) Washington County's Subsurface Sewage Treatment System Regulations, as set forth in Ordinance No. 179 (Washington County Development Code Chapter 4) as in effect on August 18th, 2015 is hereby adopted by reference in its entirety, except as specifically modified by this Chapter." 3. Saving — In all other ways the City Code with remain in full force and effect. 4. Effective date. This ordinance will be in full force and effect from and after its passage and publication according to law. Adopted by the City Council the day of September, 2015. CITY OF STILLWATER Ted Kozlowski, Mayor ATTEST: Diane F. Ward, Clerk RESOLUTION APPROVING AGREEMENT WITH WASHINGTON COUNTY FOR SUBSURFACE SEWAGE TREATMENT SYSTEMS WHEREAS, the City of Stillwater wishes to contract with Washington County to perform subsurface sewage treatment system inspection services for all properties within the City that use private septic systems; and WHEREAS, the City has adopted the Washington County Subsurface Sewage Treatment System Ordinance and codified it within Chapter 29 of City Code; and WHEREAS, Washington County will provide the services in exchange for permit fees charged for those services. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Stillwater City Council hereby authorizes the Mayor and City Clerk to sign the Agreement for Subsurface Sewage Treatment System Inspection Services. Adopted by the Stillwater City Council this 1 ST day of September, 2015. Ted Kozlowski, Mayor ATTEST: Diane F. Ward, City Clerk Agreement for Subsurface Sewage Treatment System Inspection Services This agreement is made and entered into, by and between the County of Washington (hereinafter referred to as the County) and City of Stillwater (hereinafter referred to as the City). I. WITNESSETH WHEREAS, the City wishes to contract with the County to perform subsurface sewage treatment system (SSTS) inspection services within the City's boundaries; and WHEREAS, the City adopted the County's Subsurface Sewage Treatment System Regulations Ordinance #179 (Washington County Development Code Chapter 4), hereinafter SSTSRO, regulating subsurface sewage treatment systems, which applies to all areas of the City; and WHEREAS, the County agrees to provide subsurface sewage treatment system inspection services under the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth; and WHEREAS, this contract is authorized under Section 471.59 of the Minnesota Statutes. NOW THEREFORE, it is mutually agreed between the County and City as follows: II. SCOPE OF SERVICES County's Responsibilities 1. The County agrees to provide, through its Department of Public Health and Environment, subsurface sewage treatment system inspection services for the City. The County shall provide a Qualified Employee(s), as described in Minn. Rule 7083.1010 and 7083.0020 subp 17. 2. The standards of performance, method of providing subsurface sewage treatment system inspection services, and other matters incident to the performance of services under this Agreement, including personnel to be employed, shall be determined by the County. The City shall be notified in advance of any proposed changes in standards of performance or methods of providing services. 3. The County shall provide the necessary SSTS application review and sewage system plan approval as required by laws, regulations and ordinances, provide all job site inspections of projects under permit, and conduct special inspections as deemed necessary to ensure compliance with the SSTSRO. Services shall include clerical support incidental to the performance of this agreement. 1 4. The County shall provide and issue all sewage permits as required by the SSTSRO, existing laws or regulations and shall maintain records of all such permits. If the City requests a copy of a granted permit, the County shall provide a copy to the City within 5 (five) working days. 5. The County shall send a copy of the County's issuance of a certificate of compliance of the sewage system's completion to the City within 10 (ten) working days of the County granting the certificate. 6. In the event of a violation or threatened violation of the SSTSRO or sewage permit the County may pursue the administrative issuance of stop work orders on the installation of the septic system, and/or issue corrective orders, and/or issue notices of non-compliance. 7. The County shall advise the City if a misdemeanor citation is warranted for any violation of a sewage permit or SSTSRO. 8. The County may request appropriate actions or proceedings be brought by the City, to prevent, restrain, correct or abate violations or threatened violations of a sewage permit or SSTSRO. 9. The County will cooperate with the City's officials and/or employees in fulfilling its obligations under this Agreement. City's Responsibilities: 1. In areas not served by municipal sewer, the City shall not issue a building permit for new dwelling construction and/or for the addition of bedrooms until the County has issued a sewage permit for the new construction and/or addition of bedrooms. 2. The City shall act on all applications for special permits and SSTSRO variance requests. 3. Upon request from the County the City shall issue a stop work order on projects commencing construction prior to the issuance of a sewage permit. 4. The City is responsible for commencing appropriate actions or proceedings to prevent, restrain, correct or abate violations or threatened violations of a sewage permit or SSTSRO and shall represent the County during appeals of the administrative remedies issued by the County. 5. The City may issue misdemeanor citations for violations of the SSTSRO or sewage permit. 6. The City shall not issue a certificate of occupancy for new construction or the addition of bedrooms prior to receipt of the County's certificate of compliance. 2 7. The City, and its agents and employees, will cooperate and assist the County in the performance of this Agreement. 8. In the event of County SSTS Ordinance revision, the City may adopt a revised SSTS Ordinance which is consistent with or more restrictive than the County's revised SSTS Ordinance no more than 12 (twelve) months after the County revised SSTS Ordinance has been adopted. III. SCHEDULE OF FEES AND CHARGES 1. The County shall establish the schedule of fees for its subsurface sewage treatment system inspection services. The septic permit application and installation fees shall be in accordance with the fee schedule adopted annually by the Washington County Board of Commissioners. The County shall collect, receipt for, disburse, and maintain records for all fees and charges collected incident to the administration of subsurface sewage treatment system inspection and permit services contained herein. 2. Fees and charges shall be due and payable by the applicant upon issuance of the permit and will be collected by the County from the applicant for said permit. 3. The City agrees that in payment for the subsurface sewage treatment system inspection and permit services provided by the County that the County shall retain, out of the fees and charges collected incident to this service, an amount equal to one hundred percent (100%) of all SSTS permit fees. 4. The City shall not assume any liability for the direct payment of any salary, wage, or other compensation to any County employee performing subsurface sewage treatment system inspection services pursuant to this agreement. IV. GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS Data Privacy 1. All data collected, created, received, maintained, or disseminated for any purpose by the activities of the contractor, because of this agreement shall be governed by the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minnesota Statutes Chapter 13 (Act), as amended and the Rules implementing the Act now in force or as amended. The contractor is subject to the requirements of the Act and Rules and must comply with those requirements as if it is a governmental entity. The remedies contained in section 13.08 of the Act shall apply to the contractor. 3 Indemnity Clause 2. The City agrees it will defend, indemnify and hold harmless the County, its officers and employees against any and all liability, loss, costs, damages, and expenses which the County, its officers, or employees may hereafter sustain, incur, or be required to pay arising out of the negligent or willful acts or omissions of the City in the performance of this agreement.. Insurance 3. The Contractor agrees that in order to protect itself, as well as the County, under the indemnity provisions set forth above, it will at all times during the term of this Agreement, keep in force the following insurance protection in the limits specified: 1. Commercial General Liability/Professional Liability with contractual liability coverage in the amount of the County's tort liability limits set forth in Minnesota Statute 466.04 and as amended from time to time. 2. Automobile coverage in the amount of the County's tort liability limits set forth in Minnesota Statute 466.04 and as amended from time to time. 3. Worker's Compensation in statutory amount. (if applicable) Prior to the effective date of this Agreement, the Contractor/Vendor/Consultant will furnish the County with a current and valid proof of insurance certificate indicating insurance coverage in the amounts required by this agreement. This certificate of insurance shall be on file with the County throughout the term of the agreement. As a condition subsequent to this agreement, Contractor/Vendor/Consultant shall insure that the certificate of insurance provided to the County will at all times be current. The parties agree that failure by the Contractor/Vendor/Consultant to maintain a current certificate of insurance with the County shall be a substantial breach of the contract and payments on the contract shall be withheld by the County until a certificate of insurance showing current insurance coverage in amounts required by the contract is provided to the County. Any policy obtained and maintained under this clause shall provide that it shall not be cancelled, materially changed, or not renewed without thirty days notice thereof to the County. Records — Availability and Retention 4. Pursuant to Minnesota Statute 16C.05, Subd 5., the County/City agrees that the County/City, the State Auditor, or any of their duly authorized representatives at any time during normal business hours and as often as they may reasonably deem necessary, shall have access to and the right to examine, audit, excerpt, and transcribe any books, documents, papers, records, etc. which are pertinent to the accounting practices and procedures of the County/City and 4 involve transactions relating to this agreement. The County/City agrees to maintain these records for a period of six years from the date of termination of this Agreement and make available as requested. Nondiscrimination 5. The provisions of Minn. Stat. 181.59 and of any applicable ordinance relating to civil rights and discrimination shall be considered part of this Agreement as if fully set forth herein, and shall be part of any Agreement entered into by the parties with any contractor, subcontractor, or material suppliers. Merger and Modification 6. It is understood and agreed that the entire Agreement between the parties is contained here and that this agreement supersedes all oral agreements and negotiations between the parties relating to the subject matter. Any material alterations, variations, modifications, or waivers of provisions of this Agreement shall be valid only when they have been reduced to writing as an amendment and signed by the parties. Severability 7. Every section, provision or part of this Agreement is declared severable from every other section, provision or part thereof to the extent that if any sections, provision or part of this Agreement shall be held invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, it shall not invalidate any other section, provision or part thereof. V. TERM AND EFFECTIVE DATE 1. The effective date of this agreement shall be September 1, 2015, notwithstanding the date of the signatures below. 2. This agreement shall run until December 31, 2016, at which time it will automatically terminate unless it is renewed by official action of both the City and the County prior to the termination date. Notice of either the City's intent or the County's intent not to renew the agreement should be given to the other party ninety (90) days in advance of the December 31, 2016, termination date. 5 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City has caused this agreement to be signed by its Mayor and attested to by its Clerk, and the County of Washington, by order of its Board of County Commissioners, has caused this Agreement to be signed by its Board Chair and attested to by its County Administrator. City of Stillwater, Minnesota Washington County, Minnesota By: By: Mayor Chair, Board of Commissioners Date: Date: By: By: City Clerk County Administrator Approved as to Form: Assistant Washington County Attorney 6 August 13, 2015 STILLWATER TOWN BOARD MEETING Town Hall 7:00 P.M. PRESENT: Chairperson David Johnson, Supervisors Fred Brandt, Linda Countryman, Sheila -Marie Untiedt and Lee Busse, Clerk Kathy Schmoeckel, Planner Sherri Buss, Treasurer Marsha Olson, Chief of Police Steve Nelson and Park Manager Jackie Garafalo. 1. AGENDA - M/S/P Busse/Brandt moved to adopt the agenda as amended. (5 ayes) 2. TOWNSHIP LAND USE - Ann Terwedo and Don Theisen, Washington County, were present to discuss the County's role in land use issues. They are proposing that the Township take full responsibility for zoning issues with the exception of Shoreland, Mapping, Subdivision, Riverway, Mining, Floodplain and SSTS which the County will continue to have input. They are meeting with all Townships in the County to discuss this. The change can be done by resolution and no special legislation will be needed. They would continue to help with any technical issues that might come up. The consensus of the Board was to approve the resolution which will be signed at the next meeting. 3. STONEBRIDGE TRAIL - The Township had written to Washington County to outline some of the concerns of Stillwater Township residents with Stonebridge Trail, especially the intersections at Co. 11 and Co. 5 and at Co.5 and State 96. The County replied with a letter dated July 31, which will be placed on the website and sent to residents along Stonebridge Trail. 4. IMPROVEMENTS ALONG MANNING AVENUE - Don Theisen reported on what is planned along Manning Avenue. The round -about planned at Highway 96 will not be done this year. David Johnson suggested having a deputy sheriff directing traffic at that intersection during peak times. There will be a new turn lane at Mendel by the Gateway Trail Bridge. They will send the minutes from the pre -construction meeting to Engineer, Paul Pearson. 7:30 Public Hearing - 94th Street Vacation Neighbors Present: Thomas Polasik, 14420 94th St. N, Stillwater Dianne Polasik, same Robert Ranalla, 9596 Stonebridge Tr. N, Stillwater A public hearing was held to consider a request from Tom Polasik to vacate the existing right-of-way of 94th Street west of Otchipwe Trail North and within the plat of the Polasik Addition. The new right-of-way for 94th Street North is required for the Polasik Addition and will be dedicated to the Township with the Final Plat of the subdivision. Stillwater Town Board Mtg. — 8/13/15 Page 2 Planner Sherri Buss reviewed the issues involved. Our Attorney Soren Mattick and Engineer Paul Pearson have been working with the Polasik's surveyor to come up with the current set of documents. There were the following questions and comments: • Dianne Polasik - This vacation is holding up the County's consideration of their subdivision. They are anxious to get this done. Sherri Buss - Sherri discussed the subdivision process and vacation with Dennis O'Donnell at Washington County. The County has approved the subdivision and it is currently being reviewed by the County Surveyor. The street vacation is not holding up the subdivision approval. The Township needs to file the approved vacation with the County, but it is not holding up the process. There have been some issues with the legal description provided by the Polasik's Engineer that slowed the completion of the vacation documents. Soren Mattick's office will complete the documents that will be filed at the County for the street vacation. Sherri Buss will check with Dennis O'Donnell and Soren regarding any additional items needed from the Township to complete this subdivision and vacation. The public hearing was closed at 8:00 p.m. 5. CHIEF OF POLICE - a. Report given. There were 10 burning permits, one for buckthorn. There have been 65 permits so far this year. One dog was impounded which the owner claimed and paid the fee. b. Woodbury Days - This race will be held on Saturday and go through parts of Stillwater Township. All documents are in place. c. Retaining Wall on Stonebridge - Chief of Police Steve Nelson had pictures of a retaining wall that was put up within our right-of-way. The owner can either have it removed or sign an encroachment agreement. Members of the Board thought it seemed to be far enough back and unlikely to be a traffic hazard. The property owner should cover the costs of preparing the documents. M/S/P Countryman/Untiedt moved to authorize the attorney to draft an Encroachment Agreement to be signed by the homeowner and the homeowner would cover any costs involved in preparing the agreement. (4 ayes, Brandt nay) 6. PARK MANAGER - a. Disc Golf Course - The baskets had been vandalized and the Park Committee thought welding them in place would be better than getting locks. Jim Doriott will do the welding. Locks will be purchased for picnic tables. b. Township Picnic - The Park Committee has been working on the picnic which will be held on August 16th. c. Trails - The weeds will be treated by Valley Green. d. Town Hall Parking Lot - The lot has been striped. e. Otto Berg Park - New garbage lids have been installed. Bids have been requested for repair for the backstop for the ball field. f. Little Carnelian Park - A new surround for the port -a -potty should be installed. 7. EAGLE SCOUT PROJECT - McKinley Beane was present to discuss his rain garden project on 94th Street and Neal Avenue. The garden would be 30' by 13' with a wet Stillwater Town Board Mtg. — 8/13/15 Page 3 zone and two dry zones. He had pictures of the plants he is proposing and also had an estimated cost of $1,100. He had met with Jed Chestnut with the Watershed District to get his input. Tom Polasik suggested he apply to the Watershed District for cost sharing and suggested he add more pollinators. He expects the work will take two days. The property owner had asked if additional mulch was needed, would the Township be willing to add to it. The consensus was that the Township would be willing to add mulch as needed. McKinley will provide a follow-up report after the project has been completed. 8. MINUTES - M/S/P Untiedt/Busse moved to approve the July 9, 2015 Stillwater Town Board Meeting minutes as written. (5 ayes) 9. ATTORNEY - a. First Amendment to Agreement Between Washington County and The Township of Stillwater/Land Acquisition for Park Purposes - M/S/P Untiedt/Busse moved to authorize the Chair to sign the document. (5 ayes) 10. ENGINEER - a. Road Maintenance Bids - Specifications were discussed for letting out bids for Township road maintenance projects. There might also be some projects that we can work together with the City of Stillwater. The issue of timelines should be considered as well as cost. The contractor would need to ensure that they have appropriate equipment for the various projects. Work orders for the Park Manager should be addressed in the specifications. It might be a consideration to separate the snow plowing from other maintenance items. We would want to maintain the high level of quality that residents are used to. Other local contractors should be encouraged to submit a bid, including the City of Stillwater. Further discussion at the next meeting. b. Victory Pass - M/S/P Untiedt/Countryman moved to authorize the Chair to sign the escrow reduction for Victory Pass. (5 ayes) 11. TREASURER - a. Report given. The amounts for ditching and mowing seem high. Treasurer Marsha Olson will look at historical comparisons. b. Checks and Claims - Checks and Claims #42810 through #42832 were approved for payment. 12. PLANNER - a. 94th Street Vacation - M/S/P Untiedt/Brandt moved to authorize the Chair to sign the resolution regarding the 94th Street Vacation. (5 ayes) b. Raleigh Mine - Mike Raleigh, Sr., had made a request to store some material (ash from Anderson Windows) not related to the mine on the mine property. This is a use that is not permitted and they would need to amend their CUP to allow this on the site. They would also need to amend their Watershed Permit. c. Kennel License Ordinance - The zoning ordinance addresses an IUP for a commercial kennel but provides no process for a private kennel. An old ordinance calls for a CUP for any kennel. The ordinance should be cleaned up. Neighbors Stillwater Town Board Mtg. — 8/13/15 Page 4 within a certain distance should be given the opportunity to weigh in. The Planning Commission will look into this. d. Miscellaneous Zoning Items Update - The Planning Commission had looked at accessory structures and agreed with the Town Board recommendations. The proposed ordinance will be ready for the Town Board at the next meeting. With respect to Wind Energy Systems, the Planning Commission did not see a need to change our ordinance. Linda Countryman added the following statement: "Our current wind ordinance is nearly prohibitive to install a wind system even on 10 acres. Having more restrictive standards than the county for wind we do an injustice to the citizens who rely on our leadership to be proactive and visionary about the sustainability of our towns and (and cities). Whether citizens are already asking for wind systems now is not the issue. Standards need to be established before demand begins. The same goes for standards for future solar systems, water quality or water supply concerns on the horizon. In this case, I feel we are doing our citizens a disservice and am against maintaining the status quo with our current wind ordinance." A summary of the County's new Subsurface Sewage Treatment System ordinance will be in the next newsletter and on the website. 13. MASTER WATER SUPPLY PLAN - Lee Busse had attended a meeting to discuss this. We will need to create a Water Supply Plan for our Comprehensive Plan update. It is not clear what the participation for a community like Stillwater Township would be. 14. NEWSLETTER EDITOR/RECYCLING COORDINATOR - The two positions will be separated. Linda Countryman will check with Jackie Garafalo to see if she would be interested in working as the recycling coordinator. Jan Hayne had expressed an interest in working as newsletter editor. Sheila -Marie Untiedt will follow up with her. 15. TOWNSHIP CREDIT CARD - The Park Committee thought it would be useful to have a Township credit card to purchase various items. The Clerk will look into it. 14. Ground Water Meeting - David Johnson and Sheila -Marie Untiedt had attended a meeting in Hudson to discuss ground water issues. The next newsletter could have an article about forming an environmental work group. 15. ADJOURNMENT - The meeting was adjourned at 11:20 p.m. Clerk Chairperson Approved Washington 'County BOARD AGENDA SEPTEMBER 1, 2015 — 9:00 A.M. 1. 8:15 Personnel Committee Meeting 2. 9:00 Ro11 Call Pledge of Allegiance a Board of Commissioners Fran Miron, District 1 Ted Bearth, District 2 Gary Kriesel, Chair District 3 Karla Bigham, District 4 Lisa Weik, District 5 3. 9:00 Comments from the Public Visitors may share their comments or concerns on any issue that is a responsibilityorfunction of WashingtonCounlyGovernment, whether or not the issue is listed on this agenda. Persons who wish to address the Board must fill out a comment card before the meetingbegins and give it to the County Board secretaryorthe CountyAdministrator. The County Board Chair will askyou to come to the podium stateyour name and city ofresidence, and presentyour comments. Your comments must be addressed exclusively to the BoardChair and the full Board ofCommissioners Comments addressed to individual Board members will not be allowed. You are encouraged to limit your presentation to no more than five minutes. The Board Chair reserves the righttolimit anindividua1 presentationifitbecomes redundant, repetitive, overly argumentative, or ifit is not relevant to an issue that is part of Washington County's Responsibilities. 4. 9:10 Consent Calendar — Roll Call Vote 5. 9:10 Sheriff's Office — Dan Starry, Chief Deputy Resolution — Acceptance of Fundraiser Proceeds for the Washington County Sheriffs Office Explorers Program 6. 9:15 Public Works — Scott McBride, Metro District Engineer for Minnesota Department of Transportation and Cory Slagle, Assistant County Engineer A. Recognition of Partnership between Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDot) and Washington County to Transfer Jurisdiction of Trunk Highway 5 to Washington County — Scott McBride, Metro District Engineer for Minnesota Department of Transportation B. Resolution — Award Bid to Dresel Contracting, Inc. for Trunk Highway 61 and County Road 50 Turn Lane Project — Cory Slagle, Assistant County Engineer 7. 9:25 General Administration — Molly O'Rourke, County Administrator 8. 9:35 Commissioner Reports — Comments — Questions This period of time shall be used by the Commissioners to report to the full Board on committee activities, make comments on matters of interest and information, or raise questions to the staff This action is not intendel to result in substantive board action during this time. Any action necessary because of discussion will be scheduled for a future board meeting. 9. Board Correspondence 10. 9:50 Adjourn 11. 9:55-11:25 2016 Proposed Budget -Community Corrections — Tom Adkins, Director -Public Health & Environment — Lowell Johnson, Director -Library — Keith Ryskoski, Director 12. 11:30-12:15 Board Workshop with Administration —Karen Rose, Principal Consultant at Library Strategies; Stu Wilson, Coordinator/Consultant at Library Strategies; Mary McEathron, Executive Director at Rainbow Research; Amanuel Medhanie, Statistical Consultant at Parsimony Provide Updates on Three Community Forums and Survey as part of Countywide Library Strategic Planning Assistive listening devices are available for use In the County Board Room U vn nood necio_enra duo h lixatari, nr iann ,,na harrier nenep rail /a511 4 1n.Rnnb EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY / AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER WASHINGTON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS CONSENT CALENDAR * SEPTEMBER 1, 2015 The following items are presented for Board approval/adoption: DEPARTMENT/AGENCY ITEM Administration A. Approval of August 18, 2015 County Board Meeting minutes. Public Health & Environment Public Works Sheriff's Office B. Approval of amendment #3 to contract with John Kaul, d.b.a. Capitol Gains, Inc., for legislative liaison services. C. Approval of comments to the City of Hugo regarding their Local Water Management Plan and approve comment letter drafted on behalf of the Commissioners to be signed by the Board Chair. D. Approval of amendment to the Cottage Grove Ravine Land Exchange Agreement with the City of Cottage Grove extending the term of the agreement to December 31, 2022. E. Approval to enter into grant agreement with the Minnesota Department of Public Safety, Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management, to receive Fiscal Year 2015 funding through the Emergency Management Performance Grant Program. Consent Calendar items are generally defined as items of routine business, not requiring discussion, and approved in one vote. Commissioners may elect to pull a Consent Calendar item(s) for discussion and/or separate action. Assistive listening devices are available for use in the County Board Room If vnu nap"! assiclanrw Ann to dic-huuv nt lannnwnw harAwr fL+aew rail M5511 aqn Ann() EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY / AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER Summary of Proceedings Washington County Board of Commissioners August 18, 2015 Present were Commissioners Fran Miron, District 1; Commissioner Ted Bearth, District 2; Gary Kriesel, District 3. Karla Bigham, District 4; and Lisa Weik, District 5. Board Chair Kriesel presided. Commissioner Reports — Comments — Questions The Commissioners reported on the following items: - Commissioner Bigham — reported that she attended the annual Tree Trust Picnic through the Washington County Workforce Center on August 14th. She read a story to children at the Library Booth in the Cottage Grove Farmer's Market. She will be in Duluth for the Association of Minnesota Counties Strategic Planning meetings on August 20th and August 21 st; Commissioner Weik — reported that she attended the tour of the Oak Park Heights prison, to see the control room, and new jail security system. She reported that the National Association of Counties has a new tool box online that provides county -specific talking points regarding federal legislation; attended the Parent Aware awards event in Woodbury City Hall; provided updates on actions taken at the Gateway Corridor Commission meetings. The Woodbury Yellow Ribbon Network will be participating in Woodbury Days and the Minnesota State Fair. She presented awards to youth at the Annual Tree Trust Picnic, through the Washington County Workforce Center on August 14th; provided updates from an East Metro Strong meeting, and provided updates from a meeting at the Metropolitan Council Chambers; Commissioner Bearth — reported that he attended an Oak Marsh Home Owner's Association meeting on August 17th; attended the Annual Tree Trust Picnic through the Washington County Workforce Center on August 14th; provided updates from the Metropolitan Emergency Services Board meeting he attended on August 12th; Commissioner Miron — reported that he attended the Minnesota Inter -County Association meeting last week, regarding buffer legislation; attended a Farm Bureau meeting on August 17th. He reported that as Chair of the Regional Rail Authority, he received a letter from the Minnesota High Speed Rail Commission requesting that Washington County consider rejoining the commission; Commissioner Kriesel— reported that he attended the Stillwater Veterans Memorial Benefit Dinner Cruise along the St. Croix River on August 17th General Administration Approval of the following actions: - August 4, 2015 County Board Meeting Minutes; - Reappoint Wayne Moe, Scandia, to the Comfort Lake -Forest Lake Watershed District to a term expiring September 23, 2018; - Appoint Steve Ryan, Oakdale, to the Housing and Redevelopment Authority as a Public Assistance Housing Representative, to a partial term expiring December 31, 2016; - Molly O'Rourke, County Administrator provided updates to the 2016 Proposed Budget schedule; - Board Workshop to discuss 2016 Proposed Budgets for Property Records & Taxpayer Services and Public Works; - Board correspondence was received and placed on file. Information Technology - Approval of contract to purchase annual hardware and software licensing, maintenance and support for the county's IBM iSeries from TSG Server and Storage. Public Health & Environment - Approval to authorize the Department of Public Health & Environment to submit a comment letter to the Metropolitan Council regarding its Master Water Supply Plan. Public Works Approval of the following actions: - Contract with Equipment Installation and Service, Inc., to furnish and install Law Enforcement Center overhead doors, and authorize execution of the contract with Equipment Installation Service, Inc; - Board Workshop to review the draft 2035 Long -Term Comprehensive Plan for the Lake Elmo Airport; - Board Workshop to discuss proposed 2016 Counties Transit Improvement Board grant requests. A complete text of the Official Proceedings of the Washington County Board of Commissioners is available for public inspection at the Office of Administration, Washington County Government Center, 14949 62nd Street N., Stillwater, Minnesota. Irma van rv11 Washington County BOARD AGENDA AUGUST 25, 2015 — 9:00 A.M. Board of Commissioners Fran Miron, District 1 Ted Bearth, District 2 Gary Kriesel, Chair, District 3 Karla Bigham, District 4 Lisa Weik, District 5 1 9:00 Roll Call Pledge of Allegiance 2. 9:00 Comments from the Public Visitors may share their comments or concerns on any issue that is a responsibilityorfunction of Washington CountyGovernment, whether or not the issue is listed on this agenda. Persons who wish to address the Board must fill out a comment card before the meeting begins and give it to the County Boardsecretaryorthe County Administrator The County Board Chair will askyoutocome tothe podium, state your name and city of residence, and present your comments. Your comments must be addressed exclusiwly to the Board Chair and the full Board ofCommissioners. Comments addressed to individual Board members will not be allowed. You are encouraged to limit your presentation to no more than five minutes. The Board Chair reserves the rightto limit an individual presentation if it becomes redundant, repetitive, overly argumentative, or ifit is not relevant to an issue that is part of Washington County's Responsibilities. 3. 9:10 Consent Calendar — Roll Call Vote 4. 9:10 Public Works — Joe Gustafson, Traffic Engineer and Wayne Sandberg, Public Works Deputy Director A. Approval of Agreement with the City of Woodbury for Construction Cost Sharing for Traffic Signal Improvements and Construction of a Parallel Trail along County State Aid Highway 13 (Radio Drive) — Joe Gustafson, Traffic Engineer B. Approval of Contract with SEH for Traffic Signal Service for Traffic Signal Improvements — Joe Gustafson, Traffic Engineer C. Approval of Update to Policy #8001 for Cost Participation between Washington County and Other Agencies for Cooperative Highway Improvement Projects — Wayne Sandberg, County Engineer and Public Works Deputy Director 5. 9:35 General Administration — Molly O'Rourke, County Administrator Resolution — Approval of Establishment of a Scientific and Natural Area in Scandia by the Trust for Public Land and Minnesota Department of Natural Resources 6. 9:45 Commissioner Reports — Comments — Questions This period of time shall beused by the Commissioners to report to the full Board on committee activities, make comments on matters of interest and information, or raise questions to the staff. This action is not intended to result in substantive board action during this time. Any action necessary because of discussion will be scheduled for a future board meeting. 7. Board Correspondence 8. 10:00-10:30 — Executive (Closed) Session with Administration Discuss Labor Negotiation Strategies for Upcoming Negotiations 9. 10:35 Adjourn 10. 10:40-11:40 — 2016 Proposed Budget Workshop - Community Services — Dan Papin, Community Services Director - County Sheriffs Office — Bill Hutton, Sheriff 11. 11:45-12:10 — Board Workshop with Public Works — Joe Gustafson, Traffic Engineer Review County Policies and Procedures for Permitting Roadway Obstruction for Public Events Note: Tour of Law Enforcement Center at 12: 30 p.m. Assistive listening devices are available for use in the County Board Room If yell, naerr acdoraare MIA ia.,m,a„a harrier rtheaca raa laid till) Anne) EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY / AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER WASHINGTON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS CONSENT CALENDAR * AUGUST 25, 2015 The following items are presented for Board approval/adoption: DEPARTMENT/AGENCY Administration Accounting & Finance Public Health & Environment Public Works ITEM A. Approval of August 11, 2015 County Board Meeting minutes. B. Approval of resolution declaring intent to reimburse expenditures from the proceeds of tax exempt bonds to be issued by the county in 2016. C. Approval and execution by Board Chair and Administrator ofrecycling grant agreements with the Cities of Cottage Grove, Forest Lake, Hugo, Oakdale, Stillwater and Woodbury for distribution of curbside recycling funds. D. Approval of resolution authorizing final payment in the amount of $126,630.99 to Valley Paving, Inc. for the County State Aid Highway 4 paving project. E. Approval of contract with Stertil Koni Inc. to furnish and install vehicle lifts for the Public Works North Shop Project. Consent Calendar items are generally defined as items of routine business, not requiring discussion, and approved in one vote. Commissioners may elect to pull a Consent Calendar item(s) for discussion and/or separate action. Assistive listening devices are available for use In the County Board Room If vm. naafi accietan^a dhPJn di ahiliLcnr lanmuanr ha¢fAO1) 4111.finnn EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY / AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER