HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016-09-14 CPC Packet1\i'ater
ENE IIRTNPLA CE OF MIMNESOTA
AGENDA
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Council Chambers, 216 Fourth Street North
September 14th, 2016
REGULAR MEETING 7:00 P.M.
I. CALL TO ORDER
II. ROLL CALL
III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
1. Possible approval of minutes of August 10th, 2016 regular meeting minutes
IV. OPEN FORUM - The Open Forum is a portion of the Commission meeting to address subjects
which are not a part of the meeting agenda. The Chairperson may reply at the time of the
statement of 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.
V. PUBLIC HEARINGS - The Chairperson opens the hearing and will ask city staff to provide
background on the proposed item. The Chairperson will ask for comments from the applicant,
after which the Chairperson will then ask if there is anyone else who wishes to comment.
Members of the public who wish to speak will be given 5 minutes and will be requested to step
forward to the podium and must state their name and address. At the conclusion of all public
testimony the Commission will close the public hearing and will deliberate and take action on
the proposed item.
2. Case No. 2016-31: Consideration of a Variance to exceed maximum structural coverage in
the RB two family district for the property located at 1305 St 2nd Street South. Bernard and
Mary Ellen Peltier, property owners.
3. Case No. 2016-32: Consideration of a Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Zoning
Amendment (Map) for the property located at the northeast corner of Manning Ave N and
Highway 36. Ryan Companies, owner representative. Crescent Development LLC,
property owner.
4. Case No. 2016-34: Consideration for a Variance to the wetland buffer setback to construct a
residential swimming pool on the property located at 3527 Eben Way. Kevin and Melissa
Mueller, property owner.
5. Case No. 2016-35: Consideration of an amendment to a Special Use Permit for restaurant
expansion at property located at 243 Main Street South. Mark Hanson, property owner.
6. Case No. 2016-36: Consideration of a Variance to construct in the Front Yard Setback area
on the property located at 209 Wilkins Street East. Mark Moelter, property owner.
VI. NEW BUSINESS
1. Planning Committees Representation
VII. STAFF UPDATES/FOR YOUR INFORMATION
2. Backflow Preventers Inquiry
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
THE 1I11TNYLACE OF MINNESOTA
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
August 10, 2016
REGULAR MEETING 7:00 P.M.
Chairman Kocon called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
Present: Chairman Kocon, Commissioners Collins, Fletcher, Hade, and Kelly; Councilmember
Menikheim
Absent: Commissioners Hansen, Lauer and Siess
Staff: City Planner Wittman
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Possible approval of July 13, 2016 meeting minutes
Motion by Commissioner Hade, seconded by Commissioner Collins, to approve the July 13, 2016 meeting
minutes. Motion passed 5-0.
OPEN FORUM
Mike Robinson, Elephant Walk Bed & Breakfast, spoke about VRBO issues and provided a list of
lodging establishments that are operating without permits and without paying lodging tax.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Case No. 2016-28 Variances to City Code Section 31-521, Slope Regulations, for the construction of a
new residence to be located at 1010 3rd Avenue. Croix Companies, LLC, property owner.
City Planner Wittman explained that in May, 2016, the City approved an administrative lot split which
allowed for four previously -platted lots to be combined and split into three lots. The owner's intent is
to build a new single family residence on each parcel. In June, 2016, the property owner submitted an
application to the Heritage Preservation Commission for review and approval of a new single family
residence proposed for the most southerly lot in the new lot configuration. The home would be a 2.5
story structure, with a tuck -under garage. The garage would be set into the existing hillside and the
lands around the house were proposed to be graded to accommodate for more positive drainage around
this structure, as well as adjacent properties. At the time of building permit submittal a topographic
survey was submitted and it was discovered the property contained steep slopes. The property owner
was advised a variance would be required or a new site plan would need to be submitted. The property
owner is seeking a variance to allow for land distributing activities to occur on/in a steep slope, to
include cutting into the hillside for the installation of a foundation for a single family residence as well
as grading of the land surrounding the structure. She stated that one concern was received from
Planning Commission August 10, 2016
neighbor Mary Uppgren about the loss of trees. Staff finds practical difficulty exists and recommends
approval with three conditions.
John Sharkey, applicant, added that he doesn't plan to blast any of the underlying bedrock that is
suspected to be about six feet down; he will be building on grade.
Commissioner Fletcher asked if consideration was given to building the home elsewhere on the lot to
minimize the digging into the hill. Mr. Sharkey responded that there could be a driveway slope issue
and no matter where they place the house they will need a variance.
Chairman Kocon pointed out the neighbor's concern about tree removal. Mr. Sharkey stated he has
made a tree plan with Ms. Uppgren and he will be removing three trees for safety purposes when
digging, and replanting five.
Chairman Kocon opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. The public hearing was
closed.
Motion by Commissioner Fletcher, seconded by Commissioner Collins, to approve Case No. 2016-28,
variances to City Code Section 31-521, Slope Regulations, for the construction of a new residence to be
located at 1010 3rd Avenue, with the three conditions recommended by staff. All in favor, 5-0.
Case No. 2016-29 Variance to City Code Section 31-305, RA one -family district maximum lot coverage
for the property located at 1095 Creekside Crossing. Jim and Julie Ligday, property owners.
City Planner Wittman reviewed the request. Jim and Julie Ligday would like to construct a 960 square
foot pool and deck area. However, the existing improvements on the lot nearly total the maximum
allowable coverage for the RA — One Family Residential District. Therefore, the property owners are
seeking a 935 square foot variance to the 30% maximum square foot coverage for the installation of a
pool and appurtenances. Staff finds practical difficulty has not been established. Given the impact to
the Brown's Creek watershed and the fact that the property presents no uniqueness and the actions are
a result of the property owner, staff recommends denial.
Chairman Kocon confirmed with Ms. Wittman that in 2002, the same permeable surface ordinance
was in place.
Ms. Wittman explained that Brown's Creek and its tributaries are designated as a trout stream habitat.
The groundwater sensitive recharge area surrounds Brown's Creek and tributaries allowing the water
to remain at a cooler level necessary for trout habitat.
Julie Ligday, property owner, said that their neighbors are all in favor of the pool. The size of the pool
was reduced to try to meet guidelines but it is still over the maximum allowed. Drain tile, downspouts
and rain gardens were installed to contain runoff. She pointed out there is a lot of impervious surface
being created in surrounding new developments. Asked by Chairman Kocon, Ms. Ligday stated that
after purchasing the home, they added 800 square feet to the home and added the concrete patio. She
was surprised to find out about the impervious surface coverage restrictions when submitting the
application for the pool. She pointed out that in other developments, neighborhood green space is
viewed as part of the total permeable surface.
Page 2 of 4
Planning Commission August 10, 2016
Chairman Kocon asked Ms. Wittman to address the fact that this is not a PUD and one homeowner
cannot count another's property as permeable surface. City Planner Wittman explained that in existing
developments, property owners must account for surface coverage on their own property. In new
developments, surface coverage is looked at at the time of development, not post -construction.
Chairman Kocon opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. Chairman Kocon closed
the public hearing.
Commissioner Fletcher stated that she understands the desire for the pool but feels it is not justified.
Chairman Kocon stated that the property owners might have had a pool but they chose to add a big
patio and an addition to the house, using up the allowable surface coverage.
Motion by Commissioner Collins, seconded by Commissioner Fletcher, to deny Case No. 2016-29,
variance to City Code Section 31-305, RA one -family district maximum lot coverage for the property
located at 1095 Creekside Crossing. Motion passed 5-0.
Case No. 2016-30 Zoning Text Amendment pertaining to Temporary Family Health Care Dwellings.
City of Stillwater, applicant.
City Planner Wittman reviewed a draft ordinance opting out of Minnesota Statute 462.3593 which
permits and regulates temporary family healthcare dwellings. The Council is expected to have the
second reading of the ordinance next week and is seeking a recommendation from the Commission.
Chairman Kocon remarked that in the right location, the temporary dwellings may make sense.
However he would not like to see them in his neighbor's driveway.
Councilmember Menikheim stated he was initially in favor of allowing the dwellings but has since
recognized concerns. If the City opts out now, it could still consider an ordinance later.
Commissioner Kelly said that under the statute, the City would still be able to set some controls. Ms.
Wittman said the statute as written is pretty wide open regarding what is allowed. Commissioner Hade
suggested the City should opt out and if it is determined that something like this is needed, the City
could enact its own ordinance.
Chairman Kocon opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. The public hearing was
closed.
Motion by Commissioner Fletcher, seconded by Commissioner Hade, to find that temporary healthcare
dwellings are not a good fit for Stillwater and recommend that the City opt out. Before calling the motion,
Chairman Kocon asked that the wording be changed to "not necessarily a good fit for Stillwater" which
would leave open the possibility of allowing and regulating the dwellings in the future. Commissioners
Fletcher and Hade accepted the amendment to the motion. Motion passed 5-0.
Commissioner Kelly commented that he would like to see the issue revisited, as he sees a lot of elderly
clients who express the desire to remain in their homes.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
Page 3 of 4
Planning Commission August 10, 2016
There was no unfinished business.
NEW BUSINESS
There was no new business.
STAFF UPDATES
Asked by Chairman Kocon about appeals, City Planner Wittman reported that the Swedish Church
appealed the Planning Commission's decision and will go to the City Council on September 6.
Ms. Wittman reported that a new part time administrative assistant has been hired and a zoning
administrator will be hired soon.
Commissioner Kelly asked about annual backflow preventer inspection supposedly being required by
a new law. City Planner Wittman advised she would discuss with the Building Official, email the
Commissioners and place as an update in the September packet.
ADJOURNMENT
Motion by Commissioner Fletcher, seconded by Commissioner Collins, to adjourn the meeting at 8:03
p.m. All in favor, 5-0.
Respectfully Submitted,
Julie Kink
Recording Secretary
Page 4 of 4
PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING DATE: September 14, 2016 CASE NO.: 2016-31
APPLICANT: Bernard (Bernie) and Mary Ellen Peltier, property owners
REQUEST: Consideration of 6% variance to the 25% maximum structural coverage
for the residential property located at 1305 2nd Street South
ZONING: RB: Two Family COMP PLAN DISTRICT: LMDR: Low/Medium Density
PREPARED BY: Abbi Jo Wittman, City Planner
REQUEST
Bernie and Mary Ellen Peltier are proposing the installation of a 624 square foot, 24' X 26'
detached garage on their property located at 1305 2nd Street South. The additional
structural coverage proposed exceeds the 25% maximum structural coverage. If approved,
the total structural coverage on this 6,150 square foot lot would be 31 %.
APPLICABLE REGULATIONS AND ANALYSIS
The purpose of the variance is to "...allow variation from the strict application of the terms
of the zoning code where the literal enforcement...would cause practical difficulties for the
landowner." In addition to the requirements, below, Section 31-208 indicates
"[n]onconforming uses or neighboring lands, structures or buildings in the same district or
other districts may not be considered grounds for issuance of a variance" and "...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 31-208 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.
The applicant must demonstrate that:
The variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of this chapter.
The general purpose and intent of the Zoning Code is to regulate and restrict use of
land for the protection of public health, safety and welfare. The purpose of the
maximum lot coverage is to maintain open, unencumbered space to regulate
massing proportionality and to provide for adequate infiltration in the historic
residential neighborhood which lack modern stormwater drainage and treatment
facilities.
Although the applicant is proposing an increase to the total structure coverage, as
well as to the other impervious surface coverage with the installation of a new
driveway, the other impervious surface coverage total will be approximately 860
square feet which represents roughly 14% of the total lot coverage. Thus, the total
lot coverage (structural and other impervious combined) would be approximately
45 %. This is not only below the total lot coverage of 50 % (25 % structural and 25%
other impervious surface) but will also continue to allow for sufficient drainage on
the property, keeping with the purpose and intent of the structural coverage
provisions.
The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan.
There are no application elements in conflict with the comprehensive plan.
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 property has never had a garage. The property owners are proposing an
average sized, two -car garage with a side -entry service door. Based on the average
vehicle lengths and widths, below, the distance between the two vehicles will be 3.5-
4.5' with 4' on each side of the garage door to the garage door walls. Excluding 3' of
accessible space between vehicles and the overhead door, between 6.4' and 8.25'
would remain in the depth of the garage.
Vehicle1
Average Length
Average Width
Compact
177" /
14.75'
69" /
5.75'
Mid -Sized Sedan
190" /
15.83'
72" /
6'
SUV
208" /
17.33'
79" /
6.58'
Pickup Truck
222" /
18.5'
80" /
6.6'
Average
16.60
6.23
While there is a small shed on the property, this improvement would be removed in
order to accommodate the new garage. The excess space between the vehicles and
https://www.reference.com/vehicles/width-length-average-car-9eb7b00283fblbd8 and
http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview/id/144173.html
Case No. 2016-31
CPC: September 14, 2016
Page 2 of 4
the far wall is designed to accommodate household maintenance items, such as a
lawn mower and other garden supplies currently found in the garden shed.
The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property and that are not
created by the landowner; and
This property is smaller than the minimum 7,500 square foot lot and, according to
City Building Permit records, the existing structural coverage has remained
consistent during the existing owner's occupancy.
The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality.
The applicant indicates the granting of the variance will not alter the essential
character of the locality but that it will be enhanced as currently the property owner
must park outside. Additionally the property owner notes most properties adjacent
to this property have a detached garage in the rear yard, some of them significantly
larger than what is currently proposed.
ALTERNATIVES
The Planning Commission has the following options:
1. Make findings practical difficulties do exist for the property owner and approve a
6%variance to the 25% Maximum Lot Coverage - Buildings [City Code Section 31-
308(b)(1)] for the construction of a 624 square foot detached garage to be located at
1305 2nd Street South, with or without conditions.
The Planning Commission may impose conditions in the granting of a variance. A
condition must be directly related to and must bear a rough proportionality to the
impact created by the variance.
If the Commission were to find practical difficulties do exist for the property owner,
staff would recommend the following conditions:
a. Plans shall be substantially similar to those on file with the Community
Development Department's Case No. 2016-31.
b. A building permit shall be reviewed and approved prior to the construction of a
garage.
c. The garage will have similar color and materials as the residence.
d. As per City Code Section 31-510, Off-street parking and loading, the driveway must
be surfaced in concrete or asphalt as per City Code section 33-5 standards.
e. Major exterior modifications to the variance permit request shall be reviewed by
the Planning Commission as per Section 31-204, Subd. 7.
2. Make the findings practical difficulties have not been established and deny the
variance.
3. Table the application and request additional information.
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION
Case No. 2016-31
CPC: September 14, 2016
Page 3 of 4
On the basis the application is in harmony and intent of the zoning ordinance, consistent
with the comprehensive plan and the applicant has established practical difficulty, staff
recommends conditional approval of a 6%variance to the 25% Maximum Lot Coverage -
Buildings [City Code Section 31-308(b)(1)] for the construction of a 624 square foot detached
garage to be located at 1305 2nd Street South,.
ATTACHMENTS
Site Location Map
Narrative Request
Site Plan
Floor Plans (3 pages)
Garage Facade Renderings (3 pages)
Case No. 2016-31
CPC: September 14, 2016
Page 4 of 4
-.
In 111!111 2..P A3t'.',FAA Wlr•... ..,.: ?: <4Is.Mil l.:6611111 -1111111111111M[ - a.
+---
:,
`��
Rji11water
9p A
The
Birthplace
of Minnesota
111117
BII�
,`...
s Y
1111T1rtl IF
E3
_ _, Pi
r ....
4 f
1305 2nd Street South
Site Location
- �� •
--
��
`'�
_
Q r
49 Subject Property
Parcel Boundaries
r,- Municipal Boundary
d
4.
N T
r
I
"i
i W r�
0 105 210
420
{
-
•c
_
Et
Feet
R-
.'
,..f,l
+Tj p'I CI SI RZ
l — ill
rr
ail
.' _
,.
General Site Location
F--
ii
I
!
d
l� ._..
1 1
�..+ r
_ r r
,STREE,. .L/w':~ €ASTRSH
~ ,,'`'-gat 1.. t
..
f yi
`♦♦�
....'i
a
ri.
_ ;
1 1,
/1//
-- S-�
J)_,t2LecQ ol--jorck
cve
� .0_
?)1%--4*-c-A, 0-6 (-Lou-ei
MARSH STREET
5E0OND STREET SOUTH
60'-0"
NORTH
PELTIER GARAGE
1305 2ND STREET SOUTH
STILLWATER, MN
SITE PLAN
1 /16"=1'-0"
3'-0"
EAST PROPERTY LINE
240"
3'-0"
0
i0
N
✓
r
✓
✓
f
✓
r
✓
r
r
T.O. SLAB
0'-0"
4" SLOPED GONG. SLAB
ON COMPACTED BASE
REINF. w/ 6x6-11.14xW1.4 WWM
w/ 10"xl0"d THICKENED SLAB
w/ (2) #4 CONT. T $ B
NOTE:
DIMENSIONS ARE TO THE
OUTSIDE FACE OF THE
1/2" WALL SHEATHING AND
6" GMU CURB
6"x 8"d G.M.U. CURB w/
1/2" DIA. A.B. @ 48" O.G.
TYP. (4) SIDES -
4'-0"
T.O. SLAB
- 0'-2 "— ff
1
16'-0"
✓
✓
r
.✓
✓
24'-0"
4'-0"
PELTIER GARAGE
1305 2ND STREET SOUTH
STI LLWATER, MN
NORTH
SLAB PLAN
3/16" PER 1'-0"
PROPERTY LINE
1-
O
A2
8/16/16
0
c)
EAST PROPERTY LINE
0
cD
N
0
24'-0" 3'-0"
306)6
1/2" O.S.B. SHEATHING ON
2"x6" STUDS @ I6" O.G. MAX
TIT. (4) SIDES
NOTE:
DIMENSIONS ARE TO THE
OUTSIDE PAGE OF THE
1/2" WALL SHEATHING AND
6" GMU CURB
..S -O" xlb''-0" O.H.D. _
4'-0"
16'-0"
4'-0"
24'-0"
(--NORTH
PELTIER GARAGE
1305 2ND STREET SOUTH
STILLWATER, MN
FLOOR PLAN
3/16" PER 1'-0"
SOUTH PROPERTY LINE
A3
8/16/16
1'-0"
24'-0" L i 1'-0"
EAST PROPERTY LINE
U
O
kr
(2) 1 3/4"xll
I/4"d LVL HEADER
0
24'-0"
(-NORTH
PELTIER GARAGE
1305 2ND STREET SOUTH
STILLWATER, MN
ROOF PLAN
3/16" PER 1'-0"
SOUTH PROPERTY LINE
A4
8/16/16
ROOF CONSTRUCTION
ASPHALT SHINGLES ON
BUILDING PAPER ON
15 LB ASPHALT FELT w/
56" ICE 4 WATER @ EAVES
ON 1/2" O.S.B. ON
ROOF TRUSSES @ 24" O.G.
ALUM. FASCIA,
SOFFIT AND CONT.
DRIP EDGE
1-
CONT. VENTED RIDGE GAP
12
24'-0" OUTSIDE OF SHEATHING TO OUTSIDE OF SHEATHING
--TYP. WALL CONSTRUCTION
VINYL SIDING ON
BUILDING PAPER ON
1/2" O.S.B. _,H'LATHING ON
2x6" STUDS 16" O.G.
CONT. TRTD. 2x6
SILL. It ON CONT.
SILL. SEAL IN/ 1/2"
DIA. A.B. c 48"
6 "x8 "d CMU
(2) #4 GONT. a
PELTIER GARAGE
1305 2ND STREET SOUTH
STILLWATER, MN
GARAGE SECTION
3/8" PER 1'-0"
A5
8/16/16
VINYL SIDING
S' O"xlb'-O" O.H.D.
WEST ELEVATION
3'-O"x5'-8" O.H.D.
PELTIER GARAGE
1305 2ND STREET SOUTH
STILLWATER, MN
NORTH ELEVATION
GARAGE ELEVATIONS
3/16" PER 1'-0"
A6
8/16/16
EAST ELEVATION
VINYL SIDING
SOUTH ELEVATION
PELTIER GARAGE
1305 2ND STREET SOUTH
STILLWATER, MN
GARAGE ELEVATIONS
3/16" PER 1'-0"
A7
8/16/16
tI 1 Iwater
THE BIRTHPLACE OF MINNESOIA
Planning Commission
MEETING DATE: September 14, 2016 CASE NO.: 2016-32
APPLICANT: Mark Schoening, Sr VP of Development
Ryan Companies US, Inc
LANDOWNER: Dennis Trooien, Chief Mgr
Crescent Development, LLC
LOCATION: 12054 60th St N
REQUEST:
AUTHOR:
Comp Plan Amendment
Rezoning
Bill Turnblad, Community Development Director
This case is not ready yet for its public hearing. So, please open and continue the hearing until
October 12, 2016.
PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING DATE: September 14, 2016 CASE NO.: 2016-34
APPLICANT: Kevin and Melissa Mueller, property owners
REQUEST:
Consideration of 53' variance to the 100' wetland buffer setback for the
installation of a pool and pool appurtenances to be located at 3527 Eben
Way
ZONING: TR: Traditional Res. COMP PLAN DISTRICT: LMDR: Low/Medium Density
PREPARED BY: Abbi Jo Wittman, City Planner
REQUEST
Kevin and Melissa Mueller are requesting approval of a 53' variance to the 100' wetland
buffer setback for the construction of a pool and pool appurtenances to be located at 3527
Eben Way. The property owners are proposing to locate the pool50' from the wetland
where the pool deck is proposed to be located 47' from the wetland. The proposed
improvements, including the pool equipment, is located out of the established wetland
conservation easement area.
APPLICABLE BACKGROUND
In January of this year the applicants inquired as to whether a pool could be installed in the
rear yard of this property. This inquiry came before the City prior to the Muellers
purchasing of the property. Staff advised the Muellers a pool could be installed so long as
it was not located within the conservation easement area, and that it had to maintain a 50
foot buffer from the wetland. However, the buffer setback was increased by the Brown's
Creek Watershed District to 100 feet, which was missed by the staff person.
APPLICABLE REGULATIONS AND ANALYSIS
The purpose of the variance is to "...allow variation from the strict application of the terms
of the zoning code where the literal enforcement...would cause practical difficulties for the
landowner." In addition to the requirements, below, Section 31-208 indicates
"[n]onconforming uses or neighboring lands, structures or buildings in the same district or
other districts may not be considered grounds for issuance of a variance" and "...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 31-208 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.
The applicant must demonstrate that:
The variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of this chapter.
The general purpose and intent of the Zoning Code is to regulate and restrict use of
land for the protection of public health, safety and welfare. The purpose of the
wetland setback is to maintain open, unencumbered space for adequate natural
infiltration. The property owners are maintaining nearly one half of the setback
area. Moreover, they are maintaining nearly all of the 50 foot buffer required when
the house was built on the property.
The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan.
There are no application elements in conflict with the comprehensive plan.
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;
Although the applicant is proposing to construct a pool and pool appurtenances
within the setback area, all of the properties in the neighborhood were developed
when the wetland buffer was only 50 feet. The increase to 100 feet occurred well
after homes were occupied so this additional 50' of buffer area is still being used by
everyone as a standard rear yard which has been sodded and mowed, devoid of any
native plant life found in wetland area. So, while maintaining the pre -development
wetland setback as well as the existing conservation easement makes sense, it also
makes sense to allow the after -the -fact extra 50 feet to be used for rear yard
improvements.
The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property and that are not
created by the landowner; and
While there is a wetland on the property, and an associated conservation easement,
the property owners were not aware of the additional 50' setback at time of purchase
- though they specifically inquired about the construction of a pool in the rear yard
area.
Case No. 2016-34
CPC: September 14, 2016
Page 2 of 3
The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality.
The rear yard of this property is sodded and natural, undisturbed vegetation is
present further to the south. Not only will the undisturbed vegetation remain but a
50' setback will be preserved between the pool and the wetland. While 3' of the
pool decking is proposed to be located at a distance of 47' from the wetland, there
impervious surface to the south and the east of the pool.
ALTERNATIVES
The Planning Commission has the following options:
1. Make findings that practical difficulties do exist for the property owner and approve
a 53' variance to the 100' wetland setback for the construction of an in -ground
swimming pool and pool appurtenances at 3527 Eben Way, with or without
conditions.
The Planning Commission may impose conditions in the granting of a variance. A
condition must be directly related to and must bear a rough proportionality to the
impact created by the variance.
If the Commission were to find practical difficulties do exist for the property owner,
staff would recommend the following conditions:
a. Plans shall be substantially similar to those on file with the Community
Development Department's Case No. 2016-34.
b. A building permit shall be reviewed and approved prior to the construction of
the pool..
c. Major exterior modifications to the variance permit request shall be reviewed by
the Planning Commission as per Section 31-204, Subd. 7.
2. Make the findings practical difficulties have not been established and deny the
variance.
3. Table the application and request additional information.
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION
On the basis the application is in harmony and intent of the zoning ordinance, consistent
with the comprehensive plan and the applicant has established practical difficulty, staff
recommends conditional approval 53' variance to the 100' wetland setback for the
construction of a in -ground swimming pool and pool appurtenances at 3527 Eben Way,
with or without conditions.
ATTACHMENTS
Site Location Map
Narrative Request (6 pages)
Exhibits (A-F, 13 pages)
Case No. 2016-34
CPC: September 14, 2016
Page 3 of 3
0
The Birthplace of Minnesota
3527 Eben Way
Site Location
61 Subject Property
Parcel Boundaries
.,.� Municipal Boundary
160
320
General Site Location
640
Feet
August 18, 2016
Stillwater Planning Commission
c/o Abbi Wittman, Stillwater City Planner
awittman@ci.stillwater.mn.us
Stillwater City Hall
216 4th Street N
Stillwater, MN 55082
Re: Request for Variance from Wetland Setback to Build Residential,
Backyard Swimming Pool at 3527 Eben Way
Dear Planning Commissioners:
This letter is submitted in support of our request to build a residential swimming
pool in our backyard, which requires a variance from the wetland setback regulation that
was imposed after the residence was built. The backyard of our house contains a
sufficient size grassy lawn in which to build a pool, and the very back edge of the lawn
backs up to a free growing area containing tall grasses, trees and a small pond
("Wetland"). While our lot extends far back into that free growing area, we are not
seeking to build in that area. Rather, we are only seeking to build a pool on the portion of
our property that is sodded, mowed, and used as a typical backyard.
By way of background, Melissa works as a clinical nurse specialist for Health
East. Kevin is a prosecutor with the Washington County Attorney's Office. We have
two daughters, Avery (5) and Gwen (1). We are excited to be expecting our third child
this spring. We also have additional family in Stillwater and other parts of Washington
County, including both sets of our parents, Melissa's younger sister, Kevin's older
brothers, and our 8 nieces and nephews. We have always envisioned our pool to be a
gathering area for our family.
As detailed below, before we purchased our house this spring, we inquired with
and received written confirmation from the City that we would be able to build a
backyard swimming pool. Putting aside that honoring the City's prior representations is
the right thing to do, the Commission should grant the variance requested because it has
wide support and satisfies all requirements.
Reasons for Variance Requested: We are requesting that the Commission grant
this variance because:
(i) the City granted approval, including in writing, for our request to build a
residential pool before our family purchased our new house, and it is fair for the City to
honor those representations;
(ii) our request is supported by everyone with whom we have communicated,
specifically including our neighbors on both sides of our house, the Liberty on the Lake
1
HOA, and the City; and
(iii) our request satisfies all requirements of the variance application.
I. Granting the Variance Requested is the Fair and Just Action to Take.
Until April 2016, our family lived on the other side of the Liberty neighborhood
in a residence with a smaller backyard. We love Stillwater and wanted to stay in our
neighborhood, but had been searching for a different lot that was large enough to build a
pool. In January 2016, our new house —approximately 4 blocks away from where we
lived at the time —went on the market. It appeared to be the perfect house for a pool, as
the backyard was large enough and the neighbors next door immediately to the east (3521
Eben Way, Stillwater, MN 55082, which also backs up to the same free growing area),
have a pool in their backyard. We contacted the Liberty HOA, which indicated support
for the pool, as long as it is done tastefully to the approval of the appropriate Liberty
HOA subcommittee.
In an abundance of caution, however, we reached out to the City —before even
making an offer on our new house —to confirm that the City would permit us to build a
pool in the backyard. After contacting the City, we were directed to speak with a
representative who was specifically tasked with issuing building permits for residential
swimming pools. In our discussion with the City, we specifically noted the existence of
the free growing area to the south of the property, and sought assurances that the City
would permit us to build a pool in the backyard. That City representative gave verbal
approval, stating that we simply could not build our pool in the area at the back of our
sodded lawn that constitutes the "conservation easement," which is apparently intended
to be a buffer between the resident's lawn and the wetland area.
Again, in an abundance of caution, because we were specifically purchasing this
property to be able to build a pool, we made sure to obtain that representation from the
City in writing. On January 29, 2016, the City sent us written confirmation via email
stating, "yes, you can put a pool in the backyard as long as it does not enter the
conservation easement" and attaching a copy of the property survey. That email is
attached as Exhibit A, and the property survey is attached as Exhibit B.
After receiving that confirmation from the City, we made an offer on our new
house and had a signed purchase agreement within days. In the next few months, we de -
cluttered our old house, put it on the market, sold our old house, packed up and moved to
our new home a few blocks away. After moving in to our new home, we sought bids
from pool companies, and then heard from the City for the first time that it was necessary
to go through the variance process because of a wetland setback requirement.
The City has informed us that it supports our request for a variance for a number
of reasons. Given the circumstances, we are asking that the Planning Commission take
the fair and just action of granting the variance, which honors the City's prior
representations.
2
II. The Variance Request Has Wide Support.
Our neighbors, including the two families who live right next door on either side
of our home, support the variance request. Jim and Sarah Parks, live right next door to
the east of our home at 3521 Eben Way. The Parks have a pool in their backyard and
support our request for a variance to build a pool, as set forth in the letter attached as
Exhibit C. The Planning Commission previously issued a variance such that the Parks
could build their own pool. John and Carol Hustad live right next door to the west of our
home at 3533 Eben Way. The Hustads support our request for a variance to build a pool,
as set forth in the letter attached as Exhibit D. And given the free growing area
immediately to the south of our backyard, there is no residence on the south side of our
property that could be affected by the proposed variance. We have even discussed this
matter with several other neighbors, all of whom have uniformly indicated they support
our request, including both neighbors who live directly across the street from us —Jon
and Melinda North at 3532 Eben Way, and Shane and Sherry Gydesen at 3526 Eben
Way.
Next, the Liberty HOA subcommittee (the Architectural Review Committee,
referred to as "the ARC") also monitors and regulates building requests in the
neighborhood to ensure that the character of the neighborhood is preserved. While
approval by the Liberty HOA (including the ARC) is not required by the Commission to
issue a variance, we have even reached out to the Liberty HOA, and by extension, the
ARC, regarding this matter. As referenced above, the Liberty HOA supports our request
to build a pool in our backyard, and any final plans submitted to the City in conjunction
with our application for a building permit —should a variance be issued —would have the
full and final approval of the Liberty HOA (including the ARC).
Finally, per my communications with the Stillwater City Planner Abbi Wittman
and the Stillwater Community Development Director Bill Turnblad, the City supports our
request for a variance for a number of reasons, including for example inconsistencies
with the zoning regulations, the support shown for the variance, and the City's prior
representations to our family. We will defer to City Planner Wittman's presentation and
report in that regard.
III. The Variance Request Satisfies All Three Requirements.
Variances are appropriate and specifically permitted to grant relief from a wetland
setback. See Stillwater City Code §§ 31-208 (variance); 59-1 (wetlands variance).
The Commission should grant a variance because: (i) "practical difficulties" exist;
(ii) the variance is in harmony with the general intent and purpose of the chapter; and (iii)
the variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan.
3
A. "Practical Difficulties" Exist.
First, the variance should be granted because the proposed use of a residential
backyard to build a swimming pool is reasonable. As noted above, our very next door
neighbors to the east (Jim and Sarah Parks) have a backyard swimming pool, even though
their property also backs up to the very same free growing area. The Planning
Commission previously granted the Parks permission via a variance to build their
backyard swimming pool. Moreover, recently a different neighbor down the street (655
Newman Trail) was granted permission via a variance to build a residential swimming
pool on a property that technically did not have a backyard. Further, there are 10+
residential swimming pools in our neighborhood alone, and several of those pools are on
lots adjacent to wooded or free growing areas, including our very next door neighbor.
Second, the variance should be granted because the need for a variance is due to
circumstances unique to the property that we did not create. The property is unique in
that while our backyard contains a sufficient size grassy lawn in which to build a pool,
the very back edge of the lawn backs up to a free growing area containing tall grasses,
trees and a small pond. While our lot extends far back into that free growing area, we are
not seeking to build in that area (entitled "Wetland" on the survey attached as Exhibit B).
Rather, we are only seeking to build on the portion of our property that is sodded,
mowed, and used as a typical backyard.
Further, because we are not asking that the Commission do anything other than
honor the City's prior representations, if the Commission so chooses, we will agree with
and abide by a further restriction that prevents us from building in the "Conservation
Easement," the buffer adjacent to the wetland, which is also part of our lawn, even
though the setback regulations went into effect after the neighborhood lots were built. A
site plan demonstrating our proposed use and placement of the swimming pool is
attached as Exhibit E. As can be seen in Exhibit E, our planned placement of the pool is
significantly set back from the "Wetland" area, and even lies outside of the
"Conservation Easement."
Third, the variance should be granted because our proposed use —a residential
swimming pool placed in the grassy area of our backyard lawn —would not alter the
essential character of the neighborhood. As explained above, many houses in our
neighborhood have residential swimming pools. Additionally, the Liberty HOA supports
our request to build a pool in our backyard, and, should a variance be granted, any final
plans submitted to the City as attached to a request for a building permit will have the full
and final approval of the Liberty HOA (including the ARC).
B. The Variance is in Harmony with the General Purpose and Intent of
this Chapter, and is Consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
The general purpose of environmental regulations such as the setback requirement
at issue is to ensure that residents do not seek to encroach upon or adversely affect certain
wildlife areas. But here, our requested use of part of our backyard lawn for a residential
4
pool would not encroach upon or adversely affect the free growing area on the south end
of our property.
As referenced above, while our lot extends far back into that free growing area,
we are not seeking to build in the wetland area. Rather, we are only seeking to build on
the portion of our property that is sodded, mowed, and used as a typical backyard.
Additionally, because we are willing to be further restricted from building any pool
structure in the conservation easement, the buffer between the wetland and the rest of our
backyard lawn will remain, thus ensuring the wetland is not adversely affected by the
proposed variance. See Proposed Site Plan at Exhibit E.
Finally, practically speaking, strict application of the setback at issue would
render our backyard completely useless. For example, the City prepared and provided us
with a copy of an additional bird's eye view of our neighborhood that demonstrates the
location of our immediate neighbor's pool and the suggested 100-foot wetland setback.
That document is attached as Exhibit F. In that document, the white cross -hatching
represents the area within the 100-foot wetland setback line. As can be seen, the area that
falls within the 100-foot setback takes up nearly the entire backyard of our neighbor's to
the east (right) that were previously granted a variance to build a pool. The same 100-
foot setback area constitutes our entire backyard and even a portion of our home
including our living room. (The Proposed Site Plan attached as Exhibit E demonstrates
the same.) The same 100-setback area constitutes the entire backyard of our immediate
neighbor to the west (left) and more than half of their home. Finally, the same 100-foot
setback area constitutes all of the yard and house of our neighbors one house to the west
(left).
Technically speaking, the wetland setback is intended to constitute an area of free
growing wilderness in which not even a sodded lawn is permitted. To truly comply with
the 100-foot setback requirement, our family would need to tear down the portion of our
house that falls within the setback area (living room), remove all items and sod that are in
our backyard, and let our entire backyard grow completely wild. (That interpretation of
the setback requirement would be completely contrary to the City's requirement that
residents appropriately mow and maintain their lawn.) And while it sounds crazy, for the
same reasons, to truly comply with the same setback requirement, our two neighbors to
the east would have to tear down their houses, which fall within the same setback area.
Thus, the true intent of the setback requirement cannot be satisfied.
Accordingly, as applied to our property, the setback requirement simply makes no
sense. This is exactly the type of situation that is appropriate for the Planning
Commission to step in and take action. Rather than trying to endorse a technical setback
requirement that makes no sense as applied, the Commission should grant the variance
requested and permit our family to use our backyard in a reasonable manner.
Specific Variance Language Requested: A variance from the wetland setback,
100 foot required, 100 foot proposed, for the construction of a swimming pool, within the
wetland setback area.
5
Further Restrictions that the Planning Commission May Consider Imposing:
The homeowners are prohibited from building any pool structure within the "Wetland"
portion of their property. The homeowners are further prohibited from building any pool
structure, aside from fencing, on the "Conservation Easement" portion of their property,
which acts as a buffer between the "Wetland" and the rest of the homeowner's backyard
lawn.
Proposed Site Plan: A site plan demonstrating our proposed use and placement
of the swimming pool is attached as Exhibit E. As can be seen in Exhibit E, our planned
placement of the pool is significantly set back from the "Wetland" area, and even falls
outside of the "Conservation Easement."
For the foregoing reasons, and those set forth in the City's report, we respectfully
request that the Planning Commission grant the variance requested.
Sincerely
Kevin and Melissa Mueller
3527 Eben Way
Stillwater, MN 55082
(612) 913-1293
6
Exhibit A
M Gmail
survey and info about conservation easement
Maureen Geier <mgeier@ci.stillwater.mn.us> Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 1:35 PM
To: "muellermelissa.m@gmail.com" <muellermelissa.m@gmail.com>
Melissa — yes, you can put a pool in the backyard as long as it does not enter the conservation easement.
Page one is the survey which was scanned at a high resolution for clarity. Call me if you can't get it opened
or printed.
Page 2 shows where the conservation easement boundaries are.
I also sent these documents to Performance Pool. GOOD LUCK!!
Maureen Geier
Building Inspections Department
City of Stillwater
216 4th St. N., Stillwater MN 55082
651-430-8823, fax 651-430-8810
From: CDCopier@ci.stillwater.mn.us [mailto:CDCopier@ci.stillwater.mn.us]
Sent: Friday, January 29, 2016 1:27 PM
To: Maureen Geier <mgeier@ci.stillwater.mn.us>
Subject: Attached Image
1402_001.pdf
11996K
Exhibit B
AS -BUILT
SURVEY
SURVEY FOR:
American Classic Homes
P.O.Box 4143
Moats, AMPN 55033
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
Lot3, Block 1, LIBERTY ON THE LAKE 2ND ADDITION,
*cording the Plat on file and of record in the office of the
County Recorder, Washimerlct County, Minnesotai
\
4 'f
3
0°
olz, Fteernan, Dupay & Associates, Inc
qt _ LAND SuRVEY11vv . kAND PLANK•
11,315 NORTHOCSTERN AVERtE • 510...q+ L Mifty)TA 55f0I2
(e5r, 4.39-se
NOTES
• DENGTES 1/ 2 INGa •REBAP WON UMENT.
FOUND (MARKED WITH A F,LASTC-CAP.
1N3CR1BtO 'WEBER `BLS 1204.i').• UNLESS
S9OWN OTHERWISE.
Dr
DENOTES_ URH.L HOLE IN CONC. SIDEWALK
DENOTES A5—BUILT DRAINAGE DIRECTION
DENOTES AS--SOiLT ELEVATION
F
DENOTE!, C1itSTNG OMIND 'SPOT ELEVATV .
(+'R,OR '0 ANY EONSTPLICROW,I
EiVA'MONS ARf NG* WAX 5E0.--CCU$. 1929 AAi
IDeNtliES ORE"N SPACE AS PER WESTWOOO PROKtS46NAL.
SER CES INC
C,RIENTA?I3N OE '!11S (TEARING SYSTEM IS BA-D
:1N TftE Fri:ORDED PLAT OF LIBERT( ON THE LANE ,.•
A.001Itl0N
2
1roc7vA{JJ
I try _' FrCC+t
HEREEiY crPTWY THAT THIS Su4►6Y. fet.AH 1,1N REDe7Ra MAs -
PREPARED 9Y ME OR IfNVER MY AN;ECT SkATEAVISION.'MD fb4AT I
A t1U4.' L1CkHStb LANC 51JRYtw•Yoii 1J1lt 1 Ti4E kmis • Qr Tit VA
or MI l+jt�1n,A
DA�i1 t. LI
nM L^'MYJ.
,tSSiRAT
lNNMIeA cis -micro/
1L OFFECLAL r OP:JU D THIS MAP ARE MTh P SEALED
/A
ThfloO N292
Exhibit C
Stillwater Planning Commission
216 4th Street N
Stillwater, MN 55082
Re: Kevin and Melissa Mueller Proposed Swimming Pool
My wife Sarah and I are the next door neighbors to Kevin and Melissa Mueller and their children
and we would welcome and support that they be able to install an in -ground outdoor pool in their
backyard. We also have an in -ground pool which was approved by the Liberty on the Lake
Board; the City of Stillwater; and the Stillwater Planning Commission which was installed in the
summer of 2004. It has been a wonderful addition to our home and enjoyed by our four sons
while growing up in the community along with their many friends and our friends over the past
12 years. It is still being enjoyed today by our now adult children and our grandchildren. The
pool has had no ill effect to the wetland area directly behind our home and pool area. We
welcome any of you to feel free to stop by our home and walk to the backyard where the pool is
located to see for yourself that the setting is indeed ideal for a pool and that the landscaping with
the wetland adjacent to it is peaceful and very beautiful. Just to add that there are many other
pools in the neighborhood therefore, another pool would not alter the character of the
neighborhood.
James and Sarah Parks
3521 Eben Way
Stillwater, MN 55082
Exhibit D
John and Carol Hustad
3533 Eben Way
Stillwater, MN 55082
August 10, 2016
Stillwater Planning Commission
216 4th Street North
Stillwater, MN 55082
RE: Letter in Support of Variance/3527 Eben Way - Mueller Family
To Whom It May Concern,
We live next door to the Mueller family on Eben Way in Liberty on the Lake. We understand that they
have applied for a variance which would allow them to build a swimming pool in their backyard. We are
writing this letter in support of their application.
We support the grant of a variance for the .following reasons: (i) a backyard, residential swimming pool is
an appropriate use of a backyard in our neighborhood; (ii) there are many pools in our neighborhood, and
another one would not negatively impact the character of the neighborhood; and (iii) a backyard pool
wouldn't affect the wetland area.
In addition, the previous owners of the Mueller property indicated to us that their lot had been graded for
a swimming pool, but they had not gotten around to building it.
Please let us know if there is anything else we can do to support your grant of a variance for the Mueller's
pool.
Warm regards,
1'
JohryC_:. Hustad
Carol W. Hustad
Exhibit E
PROPERTY LINE
EASEMENT LINE
BUILDING SETBACK LINE
NOUSE
PROPERTY LINE
EASEMENT UNE
BUILDING SETBACK LINE
FD
100 WETLAND SETBACK LINE
/ND irnL_
ESSEh7c'Iy'-
/ tl
M01.23)(40
j/1 S.F. INN 11P r�
NT
501 WETLAND SETBACK LINE
CalSERVATICS1
POOL EQUIPMENT LOCATION
WETLAND EDGE
NORT4
Exhibit F
3527 Eben Way
Pool Variance
Light green area is
conservation easement
(Open space required by
Shoreland PUD)
Pool apron
Orange line is edge of previous
50 foot wetland buffer
White crosshatched area
is 100 foot wide wetland buffer
Dashed blue line is edge
of drainage easement.
PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING DATE: September 14, 2016 CASE NO.: 2016-35
APPLICANT: Mark Hanson, manager and representation of ESL LLC, property owner
REQUEST: Consideration of an amendment to a Special Use Permit for the expansion of
Marx Restaurant located at 243 Main Street South
ZONING: Commercial Business District COMP PLAN DISTRICT: Downtown Mixed Use
PREPARED BY: Abbi Jo Wittman, City Planner
REQUEST
Mark Hanson, representing Marx Restaurant, is requesting an amendment to Special Use
Permit 2006-4 to allow for the expansion of the restaurant into the second story of the building.
PROPOSAL DETAILS
The restaurant project will include the 948 square foot expansion of the business to the second
story of the building. Currently there are four apartments; two of the rental units are proposed
to be removed and converted to restaurant and bar use.
SPECIAL USE PERMIT REGULATIONS AND ANALYSIS
Section 31-207 indicates in approving a Special Use Permit, it must be determined by the
Planning Commission that:
The proposed structure or use conforms to the requirements and the intent of this [zoning]
chapter, and of the comprehensive plan, relevant area plans and other lawful regulations. Any
additional conditions necessary for the public interest have been imposed and use/structure
will not constitute a nuisance or be detrimental to the public welfare of the community.
The use is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The project assists the City in meeting the
Local Economy Policy "to encourage downtown as a relocation destination for successful businesses".
The zoning chapter requirements applicable to this amended SUP request include:
Off -Street Parking and Loading: The restaurant expansion project is responsible for
mitigating the increased parking demand generated by the new space.
CPC Case No. 2016-35
September 14, 2016
Page 1 of 3
jijwater
THE B I R 1 H P L A C€ ®F MINNESOIA
The 948 square feet of additional restaurant space requires 71 parking spaces (943 square
feet, less 10%, divided by 120 square feet). However, there are two apartments proposed to
be retrofitted; each of these apartments is credited with a single parking space. Therefore,
the property owner would be required to mitigate 5 parking spaces. The Downtown
Parking Commission will review this expansion at their meeting on September 15th.
ALTERNATIVES
A. Approval If the Planning Commission finds the proposal to be consistent with the
provisions of the SUP process, should move to approve the SUP with the
following conditions of approval:
1. All original conditions of approval of SUP Case No. 2006-4, and subsequent
amendments, shall remain in effect.
2. A parking mitigation plan must be approved by the Downtown Parking
Commission to satisfy the off-street parking requirements. If the plan includes a
fee -in -lieu, the fee shall be paid upon receipt of City invoice. Failure to pay charges
within 30 days will be certified for collection with the real estate taxes with the real
estate taxes in October of each year. The applicant waives any and all procedural
and substantive objections to the purchase requirement including, but not limited
to, a claim that the City lacked authority to impose and collect the fees as a
condition of approval of this permit. The applicant agrees to reimburse the City for
all costs incurred by the City in defense of enforcement of this permit including this
provision.
a. Any conditions attached to the parking mitigation plan approved by the
Downtown Parking Commission are incorporated by reference into this
Special Use Permit.
3. All existing and future trash receptacles shall be stored inside the building, or in a
designated waste storage area, at all times with the exception of the day of trash
collection.
4. A Design Review permit shall be submitted and approved by the Heritage Preservation
Commission for any exterior alterations, and signage.
5. A building permit shall be reviewed and approved prior to structural alterations.
6. Major exterior modifications to the variance permit request shall be reviewed by the
Planning Commission as per Section 31-204, Subd. 7.
B. Table If the Planning Commission finds that the application is not complete enough to
make a decision, it could continue the review for additional information.
1 1 space for each 120 square feet of restaurant; 948 square foot addition = 7.9 spaces.
CPC Case No. 2016-35
September 14, 2016
Page 2 of 3
C. Denial
If the Planning Commission finds the proposal is not consistent with the
provisions of the SUP regulations, the Commission should deny the application.
The Commission should indicate a reason for the denial.
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION
Staff finds that with certain conditions of approval the proposed restaurant and bar expansion
are in conformance to the SUP provisions. Therefore, staff makes the recommendation the
Commission grant conditional approval of Case No. 2016-35 with the conditions outlined
above.
ATTACHMENTS
Site Location Map
Floor Plans (5 pages)
CPC Case No. 2016-35
September 14, 2016
Page 3 of 3
0
The Birthplace of Minnesota
243 Main Street South
Site Location
43 Subject Property
Parcel Boundaries
-6,- Municipal Boundary
105
210
General Site Location
420
Feet
>
O
;TING
re r IQF
d 4 5 B 7 6 I 10 11 I 12 , I 13 14 15 16 17 I 18 19 20 21 I 22 23 24 25 26 I 27 I 28 Z9 38 31 I
NEW 1HR FIRE RESISTIVE
WALL CONSTRUCTION
NEW WALL CONSTRUCTION
EXISTING 1HR FIRE RESISTIVE
- - WALL CONSTRUCTION - ASSUMED /
CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY
EXISTING WALL CONSTRUCTION
EXISTING WALL CONSTRUCTION -
TO BE DEMOLISHED
WALL SCHEDULE
PATIO BELOW
SEATING
f •.17Bl1sq L..-.
94,57 sq fl
TREND'S. 11•
DN.
9R-71/8"(+-)
TREADS - 11'
i5y122y.R
SEATING
4998 sgft
7 1
COATS
22.86 sq fl
):,XISTIND RAMS
Cable railing with wood lattice,
ROOF DECK
24" I 24'
.. "� TENANT
SSee Exi�riAd nEmergency LLightting Systems
1
Nolo
EXISTING HALL
NEWAPAIZT14 5kidr
PRIVACY DOOR
4%YIT.H1Gh1AGF f FMFRCVFNCY 1 J13NTINr}
See Exit and Emergency Lighting Systems
Nolo.
EXISTING STAIR
EXISTING APARTMENT UNIT
EXI5TINP I M40ONG
NOTE TO 91111 111NR pyag&
See stair section for note regarding
minimum stairway ceiling height.
RA1>4ue or faun hondraie In worm
necessary.
FLOOR PLAN - CODE REVIEW
SCALE:1/4" = 1'-0"
I
STORAGE
69..55 sq ft
EXISTING
HALL
EXISTING APARTMENT UNIT
I8OTE Tn 9UII.17Ii11s3FFIDI8L
Existing vestibule Moors do nal meet
ADA required minimum maneuvering
civilian.. at doors.
Changes to the vesllble and stair to
meal requirmenls is considered to be
structurally impracticable
10
{
EXISTING
STORAGE
12
13
IGI, UNIT ^u1GNAGE• 1
ikala9ENGY I.10»N9
Sea Lcul wld.Emadyeney
Lighting Systems Nine
' CNE HQ{/R F1'T0 RA1
NN,t,¢I ,PARTMENTHALL.
PRIVAC'/ 000ri
FYT FNAGF(
E6 ExilonC?ue nn
envy
Sea Exit and Emergency
Lighting Systems Note.
EXISTING SHAFT
\ Verify cansbuclion and
report to architect,
EXISTING
STRUCTURF
I14
BUILDING CODE REVIEW
T-Bone Speakeasy, Bar and Restaurant
Address 239 Main Street South, Stillwater, MN 55082
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Inferior Renovation of a portion of a second floor of an existing bullring for use as a Bar and Restaurant
The main level of the building is an existing bar and restaurant. The Upper Level of the building is a currently
a lour unit Multi -Family Residential use. The Upper Level proposed use will be split between two existing
apartments and the new T-Bone Bar and Restaurant.
PROJECT SIZE
r.Lpprra Be, Jim Reslo ant 948 Gross SF
BUILDING FOOTPRINT 2,992 Gross SF
BUILDING HEIGHT 2 Stories
CONSTRUCTION TYPE
Type 1119
SPRINKLER
T-Bone Bar and Restaurant Fully Sprinkled
USE AND OCCUPANCY CLASSIFICATION
Primary Use Kitchen+Dining - Assembly Group A-2 Non -Separated
Occupancy
OCCUPANCY AREAS AND OCCUPANT LOAD CALCULATIONS
AREA LOAD FACT LOAD
Seating Areas
178.11 SF
+ 4742 SF
= 228.09 SF / 15 SF / Occupant 15.21 Occupants
Booth 47.42 SF 6 Seats / Occupants
Bar Seating 24,00 SF 6 Seats / Occupants
Bar Work Area 94.57 SF / 299 SF / Occupant " 0.47 Occupants
Host 15.42 SF / 15 SF / Occupant v 1.03 Occupants
Bench 6,01 SF 1.00 Occupants
Storage 68.95 SF / 300 SF / Occupant 0.23 Occupants
Coats 22,86 SF 0.00 Occupants
Lavatory 69.19 SF 0.00 Occupants
Circulation 271.30 SF 0.00 Occupants
TOTAL 541.29 SF
TOTAL 29,94 Occupants
FIRE -RESISTANCE RATING REQUIREMENTS FOR BUILDING ELEMENTS (hours)
Type 1118
Structural frame 0
Bearing walls
Exterior 2
Interior 0
Nonbearing walls and partitions
Exterior
Nonbeafing walls and partitions
Interior 0
Floor construction
Including supporting beams and joists 0
Root construction
Including supporting beam. and joists 0
REQUIRED SEPARATION OF OCCUPANCIES
Non Separated Occupancy - None required
MEANS OF EGRESS
Number of Exits required 2
Number of Exits Provided 2
EGGRESS WIDTH
Required Actual
30 Occupants X 0,15 = 4.5" inches 72 inchee
PLUMBING SYSTEMS
MINIMUM NUMBER OF REQUIRED PLUMBING FIXTURES
WATER CLOSETS LAVATORIES DRINKING SERV. SINK
REQUIRED REQUIRED FOUNTSREO. REQUIRED
Male Female Male Female
1 per 40=1 1per 40=1 1per 75=1 1per 75=1 NA 1
PROVIDED PROVIDED PROVIDED
1 Unisex with 1 Water Closet and 1 Lavatory g1
BUIDING CODE REVIEW
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"
15 I 16 17 I 1B 19 20
21
I
22
GENERAL
A0.10 COVER SHEET I CODE REVIEW
ARCHITECTURAL I PLANS
A1.10 MAIN LEVEL+ DEMO PLANS
A1.20 INTERIOR PLAN I RCP
ENLARGED PLANS
A2.10 ENLARGED PLANS / SCHEDULES
SCHEDULES
A3.10 SCHEDULES
NOTES
A4.10 NOTES
PROJE;CTARCHITECT
RALPH RAPSON &
ASSOCIATES, INC.
2429 341h Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN 55406
T/ (612))3339561
W / .rapsenarchiteclsmom
E / Into@rapsonarchilecls.com
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS
PLAN. SPECIFICATION, OR
REPORT WAS PREPARED BY
ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT
SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A
DULY REGISTERED ARCHITECT
UNDER THE LAWS OF THE
STATE OF MINNESOTA,
7
NAME: T/10MA$ 118100011
MN REGISTRATIONN.0. 19397
DATE: XX/YY/2016
STRUCTURAL ENGINEER
DAVID B. MORRIS, P.A.
6940 Ticonderoga Trail
Eden Prairie, MN 55346
T/ (952)934-0351
E / dbmpe@ gweslolltce,nel
0Y5EY4
MA
FUSION 5151180
(dark llunsnl'i l>.rnm%:ne,
241 South 2nd SIr001
Stillwater, MN 55082
651419.8333
W�i) -0
C
0 10 2
U N `
N I])
N
MJ 0./YEAR
City Permits 07/ 21/2016
Dale Printed
Time
7/21/2016
12:23 AM
DRAWN T.RAPSON
This document is copyright O
Ralph Rapsan 8 Associates, Inc.
L1re sing rnimuremanta slUIL lw1
be ahl1lnid by scaling. Verify al'
dimensions prior la construction.
Immediately report discrepancies
to the Architect If In doubt 868.
This document shall be reed in
conjunction with associated
models, specifications and
related consultant's documents.
SHEET
COVER SHEET I
A26 SHEET INDEX C/ODEREVIEW
0.1 SCALE: 1' = 1'-0" (l()• 1 O
24 I 25 ',♦g 27 I 28 I 29 I 30 I 31
cc
0
O
u
EXISTING
STRUCTURF
2 I I I 13 10! T 1
NEW 1HR FIRE RESISTIVE
WALL CONSTRUCTION
NEW WALL CONSTRUCTION
EXISTING 1HR FIRE RESISTIVE
WALL CONSTRUCTION -ASSUMED/
CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY
EXISTING WALL CONSTRUCTION
EXISTING WALL CONSTRUCTION •
TO BE DEMOLISHED
WALL SCHEDULE
E g5.rJt LI APARTMENT UNrr
1 'IEXISTINO NON -BEARING
W'JOD,WALLFRAMING-
▪ Vp41FTANO REPORT TO
1 ARCHITECT
E128T1N0 BRICK WALL OF
STRUCTURE -VERIFY AND
REPORT TO ARCHITECT
ms' 11j¢.2114r1CO FLOOR dIHgT�
rl
WOOD CEILING AND WOOD I
L - _R901 STRUCTURE - VERIFY 1�4,.-7 I I
AND REPORT TO ARCHITECT I L� _ _ - L- -_
Li_
10
11
I❑II
II
J.1
EXISTING APARTMENT UNIT.
-. EXI$TWo&1Q.WOOD FLOOR30I9T8
WOOD CEILG AND WOOD
[ ROOF STRUCTUREIN-VERIFY
AND REPORT TO ARCHITECT
-- J
EX16T1N€i NOFFBEARBNE
WOO WALL FRAMING -
VERIFY AND REPORT TO
ARCHITECT
EO BRICK WALL OF
NEICE011S1T1B0 RG
r OTR%4GTURE- VERIFY AND
r.. - ... - _I REPC}RT TO ARCHITECT
T
. II -
I I
I
ll II 1
9 I
/
II /
L
r
PIS.SI ILE FLUE L0CATNDH
RNIO REPORT TO:AR(HITEC
7
I 1
II
II
II
J
PLUMRI g r mix LOCATIQN -
VERIFY ARO REPORT FG ARCHITECT
p
I 11
II
VEr19FY EXISTING $FIAFT
USBANI}cGRSTRucTmN
I ii143 REPORT TO ARCHITECT
EXISTING --
SHAFT
EXISTING ACCESS PANELS - -
MART LAUNDRY
EXISTING
FYI (.) DRYER VENT
HALL
EXISTING APARTMENT UNIT
FLOOR PLAN — DEMOLITION
SCALE:1/4" = 1'-0"
11_ -1
FXISTING
STORAGE
EXISTING APARTMENT UNIT
15 16 1 17 1 18 19
EXISTING
STRUCTURE
A1S
WAIT
PERSON
3
COMPART.
SINK
ENTRY HALL
21 1 22 I 23 I 24 25 26 29 30 31 I
gm-
.„_EXIST.WIMDOWS \ EXIST-WIMDOWS 1
Wr NEW TRIM W/ NEW TRIM
EXPOSE
EXISTING BRICK
FLUSH HEADER —in
NEW HEADERS
Contact architect and engineer when
641 ceiling is open for inspection - Typ.
`W3 RESTAURANT / BAR
BAR TOP CASED OPENING'-., A
SECRET ENTRY '°
New
el speakeasy '-
n
try. /7777'
CONCEALED
\\ \ PASS THROUGH-
\ c. , EXPOSE EXIST ti' �{
5REOK IN j0ST
•
EXISTING
STRUCTURE
WOOD WALL CAP -
A2.10 \ —
NEW DROPPED
HEADER
HEADER
ENTRY HALL
WOOD ❑ a°`ROD +SHELF
COUNTERTOP
DN.
9R-71/81(+-)
TREADS 11"
11R.- 71/13' ( 6 • I
EXIST, WIMDOWS
W/ NEW TRIM
PROVIDE SOLID WOOD
BLOCKING FORARTWORR_
TYP, - VERIFY LOCATIONS
WITH OWNER
LAVATORY
SACK HALL —
STORAGE
TENANT
2 6^.z 107
30/2
�EXISTING�
SHAFT
EXISTING
HALL,
EXISTING APARTMENT UNIT EXISTING APARTMENT UNIT
FLOOR PLAN — PROPOSED
NEW RESTAURANT
SERVICE AND ACCESS
--BELOW
New door for patron access and
food service.
L—_-_J L—"----
1^1
SCALE:1/4" = 1'-0"
I 10 I 11 1 12 I 13 IA 15 1 16 17 18 19 I 20 1
DN.
19R- (+-)
TREADS -
EXIST
HALL
EXISTING
STORAGE
L 1
NEW WASHER
LOCATION
NEW UTILITY
\ SINK
\ EXISTING
`\, \ STRUCTURE
PROJECT ARCHITECT
RALPH RAPSON &
ASSOCIATES, INC.
2429 34th Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN 55406
T/ (612)333-9561
W / www,rapsonarchileciscom
E / info@rapsonarchilecls.com
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS
PLAN, SPECIFICATION. OR
REPORT WAS PREPARED BY
ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT
SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A
DULY REGISTERED ARCHITECT
UNDER THE LAWS OF THE
STATE OF MINNESOTA.
NAME: 1'/ 0MAS RAPSON
MN REGISTRATION NO.: 19397
DATE: XX/YY/2016
STRUCTURAL ENGINEER
DAVID B. MORRIS, P.A.
6940 Ticonderoga Trail
Eden Prairie, MN 55346
T/ (952) 934-0351
E / dbmpe@ gweslollice,nel
irwNLlk
(A►R�a
FUSION 611,rK❑
.84,h Hansel Oae.- 313'
2,11 Soul h led Sheol
Slillwnles 61NI 55082
651-6384 033
PROJECT
0 .- co
CO
Al 0 m
W . B D
City Permits 07/ 21/2016
Dale Printed
Time
7/21/2016
12:23 AM
DRAWN T, RAPSON
This document is copyright
Ralph Rapson 8 Associates, Inc
DoowIhg lrleasumlltfda 'hall a 1
be ahlwIted by scaling, verify II
dimensions prior to canslruclion.
Immediately report discrepancies
to the Architect. If In doubt esk.
This document shall be read in
conjunction with associated
models, speu1calions and
related consultant's documents.
SHEET
MAIN LEVEL + DEMO
PLANS
A1.1()
23
I24
26 1 27 28
30
O
E
1 5 6 7 I
R2 2' RECESSED LED LIGHT FIXTURE
A R2D 2' DIRECTIONAL RECESSED LED LIGHT FIXTURE
O R4 4' RECESSED LED LIGHT FIXTURE
O R6 6' RECESSED LED LIGHT FIXTURE
O C1 SURFACE MOUNT CEILING LED LIGHT FIXTURE
4C2 SURFACE MOUNT CEILING LED LIGHT FIXTURE
LI RECESSED CEILING FAN
FI SURFACE MOUNT FLUORESCENT LIGHT FIXTURE
1,l l EXIT SIGN AND EMERGENCY LIGHTING
q) THERMOSTAT
LIGHT FIXTURE SCHEDULE
A al'
1 SL
SL
H SL C
SL
ESL
N21SL
N2 [(7 147� R2
ai' 2'. .ir
CONCEALED LIQHTNI1 X r'-
' IN LIQUOR CAB, 33t _l
�..t
r
\\<\•.
EO.
NIGHT
LIGHT
LIGHTING CIRCUIT
SWITCHES
r
E
kE
I
R2
NNIGHF '�" '— ---1' O
o C I
CURTAIN ROD
F141
9 1 10 I
12
�-� CURTAIN ROD
3-1
QC1
WOOD -BOTTOM
OF BEAM
,, FACE OF SOFFIT
141
' FACE OF SOFFIT
D . 1.2D41 R2Ui5 119x+k'
Ea), ,L ED_ EQ-1.
SI-
6'FIN. it,
FI
LIE
rr
17
IL
A, REFLECTED CEILING PLAN — MAIN LEVEL
< SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"
1 4 1 2 I 3 I 4 I 5 I 6 T I 9 I 10 I 11 I 12 ] 13 I 14 I 15 1
16
17
EXISTING
STRUCTURE
19 20 I 21 I 22
NEW 1HR FIRE RESISTIVE
WALL CONSTRUCTION
/'////// NEW WALL CONSTRUCTION
r
23
EXISTING 1HR FIRE RESISTIVE
WALL CONSTRUCTION - ASSUMED/
CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY
EXISTING WALL CONSTRUCTION
- EXISTING WALL CONSTRUCTION
- TO BE DEMOLISHED
WALL SCHEDULE
SEATING
d
FURNISHING PLAN
SCALE: 1/4" =
BBB
SEATING
SEATING
COATS
EXISTING HALL
EXISTING APARTMENT UNIT
25 I 26
I27 .tv 30 31 I
I_...
SEATING
TENANT
LAUNDRY
LAVATORY
STORAGE
EXISTING APARTMENT UNIT
is .11
EXISTING
HALL
EXISTING
BALL
EXISTING
STORAGE
LOW TABLES
\ 12 low tables with sealing for 22
BOO
\Seating for 6.
\
3N1WhiLE3
3 NO Whin aM seating for B
DAR STC9C71
6 barstools
EXISTING
STRUCTURE
PROJECT ARCHITECT
RALPH RAPSON &
ASSOCIATES, INC.
2429 34th Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN 5540E
T/ (812)333-4561
W / www.rapsonarchllocIs cool
E / inlo@rapsonerchilecla.com
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS
PLAN. SPECIFICATION. OR
REPORT WAS PREPARED BY
ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT
SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A
DULY REGISTERED ARCHITECT
UNDER THE LAWS OF THE
STATE OF MINNESOTA,
NAME: TFIOMAS RAPSON
MN REGISTRATION NO: 19397
DATE: XX/YY/2016
STRUCTURAL ENGINEER
DAVID B. MORRIS, RA.
6940 Ticonderoga Trail
Eden Prairie, MN 55346
T / (952) 934-0351
EI dbmpe9 gweslollice.nel
IVANER
MAR.§
F IJ 5l O N II I R I'R-fr
Mork I- 0,soil tra„w+_o,o
741 Sou11, 2nd. Slraaf
511IIwaler, MN 55082
851-4.22.8132
PROJECT
^
v,
C
^` c
W co
o
O
CU O }
LL C
A iCOUN
COco
w c
CO
-
CO CD
ON- rn
O
MN 55082
(0
L_
O
0)
M./ D./YEAR
City Permits 07/ 21/2016
Dale Printed
Time
7/21/2016
12:23 AM
DRAWN T, RAPSON
This document is copyright 0
Ralph Rapson 8 Associates, Inc.
ONe/Ng nleaeeeemelgs ah5N Awl
be 981atned by scaling. Verify al
dimensions prior to construction.
Immediately report discrepancies
to the Architect. If in doubt 888
This document shall be read In
conjunction with associated
models, specifications and
related consultant's documents.
SHEET
INTERIOR PLAN
RCP
A1. 0
17 I 18 I 19 I 20 I 21
24
25
26
27
29
31
3
1 2 13 I 1 g 1 1 7 1 1 1 10 1 I 12 1
14
I 15 16
17
20
23
I
23
1
24
1 27 28 29 30 31
PROJECT ARCHITECT
O
x
)E'er r1)' '
PXST
ENT 3
VEST
L) '
3115' 0J 3/j'.
Ni EXISTING STAIR SECTION
lc)" SCALE: 1/4" = 1-0"
NORTH
SOUTH
INTERIOR ELEVATIONS
SCALE:1/2" = 1'-0"
1 1 2 1 3 1
EXISTING STAIRWAY
EXIST
HALL
/66.1 lit'
EXIST APARTMENT/
NEW SPEAKEASY
GYPSUM BOARD•
PAINTED
TILE BULLNOSE
TRIM
GYPSUM BOARD -
PAINTED
ar
4'JL 11S'
WEST
i
Y•8151.7Y
NOSE
91AjlY.+Bk hoart nelghl doaa nvl rrraet.lh2Btt�tlly{r!
R'-1" c412.0 r EaaP18¢ST, COr11faOGr eninya6G9.019
atrucMsl IN1lclknkiy 4L9faglklnct tlld Boor
i881m1119 8811 lumrl 19 lho It 5I161B6L
GYPSUM BOARD -
PA)NTEIt
GYPSUM BOARD-
®� PAINTED
- TILE BULLNOSE TRIM
GYPS!
PAINT
TILE B
TRIM
1
rili
—
- 4
fl— —.11117
OM
Wei)
ki
62
.1.1 .1. rL_�1mam
,.i 1 --r-T-
—I- .I.... L _ _.
'L
>mmmmmrilmm
�IllI
�t
own
EAST
M BOARD-
D
ULLNOSE
7 I 6 10 I 11 12 13
�THRE5H.
r
ENLARGED LAVATORY PLAN
SCALE:1/2" = 1'-0"
(4
P
tti
n
C
RESTAURANT AREA
412'
42
R 'r
BEARING WALL
ti
CURTAIN ROD le
ROO SHELF
COATS
WOOD COUNTER
1/2"
—STEEL CURTAIN ROD
WOOD WALL CAP
HEADER
! f BAN. NAP. DISP
--- PAPER TOWEL DISPESER E
LAVATORY A1.
{� NEW ACCESSIBLE WALL SINK
MIRROR
„--» GRAB BAR
EXISTING PLUMBING STACK
NEW FLOOR MOUNTED
WATER CLOSET _ NAPKIN
SAN. NAPKIN DISP,
f�r
---11P.ADER
— CURTAIN ROD
BEARING WALL TENANT LAUNDRY
R'+Es 1iF
STORAGE
RALPH RAPSON &
ASSOCIATES, INC.
2429 34th Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN 55406
T/ (612)333-1561
W / www.rapsonarchilecls com
E / inlo@rapsonarchllecls.com
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS
PLAN. SPECIFICATION. OR
REPORT WAS PREPARED BY
ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT
SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A
MAX REGISTEiEEDI ARCHITECT
5NDPR THE LAWS OF THE
STATE OF MINNESOTA,
7
NAME: T/IOMAS RAPSON
MN REGISTRATION NO. 19397
DATE: XX/YY/2016
STRUCTURAL ENGINEER
DAVID B. MORRIS, P.A.
6940 Ticonderoga Trail
Eden Prairie, MN 55346
T / (952) 934-0351
E/ dbmpe@gweslallice,nel
OWIR10.
MAR,
ELISION 0lsTl[7J
Mark Hantr_n rAirwO/10/
741 South 21,d Street
Fjalhxatm, MN 55092
891.4 1-8133
PROJECT
O N
N
O
MN 55082
0
rq
B)
O)
O r. C O
O
$ N C „ CO
> 1 .13O ID g o Cnoq
— -
0 a m N
MJ D./YEAR
City Permits 07/ 21/2016
Dale Printed
Time
7/21/2016
12:23 AM
DRAWN
T. RAPSON
This dorsment is capyraglll4)
Ralph Rapson 8 Associates, Inc.
Dlawl6l2 rnluo/llanpr Is alwi Ilol
be obtained by scaling. Very all
dimensions prior to conslruclion.
Immediately report discrepancies
to the Architect If in doubt Batt.
This document shall be reed In
conjunction with associated
models, specifications and
related consultant's documents.
SHEET
ENLARGED PLANS/
SCHEDULES
112.10
14 I 15 I 16 I 17
18 I 19
I
20 21 I 22 I
23 I 24 I 25 26 1
27
28
29
3 AI 1 a 1 11 10 I 12 13
14 1 15
16 17
I 18 15 20 21 1 22 1 23
24
25 26
27
26 29 30 I31 I
3
1z
NO.
ROOM
WALL
MATERIAL I FINISH
WAINSCOT
MATERIAL I HEIGHT I FINISH
BASE
MA4FF0AL IHEJ®111 FI1151'1
FLOOR
MATERIAL I FINISH
CEILING
MATERIAL I FINISH
MAIN LEVEL
VESTIBULE
EXIST GYP BRD INA
NA INA INA.
EXIST INA INA
EXIST. CONC. I POUSH AND SEAL
EXIST. GYP BRD. I NA
STAIR
STAIRWAY
EXIST. GYP. BRO I NA.
III
N.A INA. I NA.
EXIST, INA I NA.
EXIST VINYLE TREADS I RISERS
WI METAL NOSING I N.A.
EAST GYP BRD. INA
UPPER LEVEL
ENTRY HALL
GYP. BRD IPAINT
III
TBD
WOOD I TBD I STAIN
NEW LOOSELAID FLOORING
OVER EXI511FI3 AVP 131I PRE -
FIN.
GYP BRD IPAWT
(1)
.rc15111.43 Hel s
x •. 1
,1':
N.A IeLA•INA.
EXIST I11A IST A:
FN_I'AL'F
c.:F41GYP . BRD.I NA
U1
WAND RL_.TAI1RAF41
5,, r..3 I
1•: 11•8I i+
TB13
Wn001 T11111)TAIRI
LOOSE LAID JRCS011101113ElIr i
}Y,v. lAlal PA8I1
111
1AACK ma
I IIIL,
..A.IRI.AINA.
DUMMY TILE ITs0I ILA
WARR., 'TILE Lei INA
ODA CA
I11
LAVATORY
n'rP. fin()I r.,UN1
a ER OLEOS'1121 R.
COP-. RLE COVE)J211i1 A.
DER
rrP_IE(12_)•0NIr
IN
...
arP. MD. IhMNI
1OD
MOD( TEO( _TAIEI
LO:u IA10 FtOCt10h) II•REYpI.
11YR_ ann. IPAMIT
111
1.An rS
,A. errRD.1 PUNT
ran
Y.0OI Too Is IA4I
Lcwut LAIOLL:are110 IPRI==IN
rdP. OD 1PAW1
,11
541T1-411.L
OYP. ORO.I PAINT
MA,111A 1NA.
AMl11 EXIST HALL I TBD I WATCH
EOPIT. 14W, I N.A.
41P. BAD 'PANT
wAiONY
(ARP RRO 111u)IT
;HT, I NA,1 ,T1
MR. III.F a`.OVP 1121I NA
E'ER. PILE INA, DI.
DTP. EMIRI PANT
L11
110k50!
DTP. ORl110 MITT
u.A.111A.1 NA,
WGX)plTBO kraal
E03dr. 1303+1E
L,y?' 8D irdeNt
I11
o Q1 ROOM FINISH SCHEDULE
3.1Q1 SCALE: 1/4" = 10"
n.
O
f
O
a
DOOR
TYPE I PING•' I COLON
lEAF'WE
FRAME
TYPE I FlNSH I COLOR
FRAME SIZE
HARDWARE RATING
GROUP
HARDWARE GROUPS
f EMA )1H,e
(1) PATCH AND/OR PAINT AS NECESSARY
(2) SEE CERAMIC TILE SCHEDULE
(4) WASHABLE PAINT
(5) BULL NOSE TOP COURSE
(6) COVE 11LE BASE
(3) AVF TILES - ASSUMED ASBESTOS VINYL
FLOORING TILES - SEE ENCAPSULATION
NOTE
NOTES
PJrlst. slam4150GN1 MXIST. I
EXIST INT. ENTRY DOOR I Eg0T. 1E345T
WOOD DULL LIGH 11 F111, 511
IVXBB.
TOT xnm
171
METAL I EXIST_, EU3'T
NO CHINO!,
METAL I PM1111111
NA.
NA
ETD] 111
11A.
HA.
I HR,
rtIST, v1AAF GLASS WITH STORM
:a• X SIT
1n
M]CIM4NE
NA.
Cal
Hsi tleiNC,E
PIG G)NNGE
N]CliAME
a c0C r00E
NDC)WNFIE
1tO c eiNcit
Np1W10O
MO CNANGE
oc1W,6E
ND CI NNDE
NA
11H1.
NOCIIAND8
STOLID CORE''rv.ORASH 11•I11NT 1(II
M3CINFd3E
NO CRANIA
NODFNsw31F
EIVINGL
a x e0'
1:)
al{toL.LPAIRIT I 1 LW 141
T.DO
f.ILM1UOREV:GCE MUM IP.mNIT I Ill
:0610 GORE V•DOO R 1sH 1 PAIN 1.(11
LOLY71:0R6 ,MOOD Put I' PANEL L STMFI ( I I) (1)
2O1.10 COnE 0021P RAT P0,TIS;L 12TA1N I ID
SOWS CORE WOOD FEAT PANEL 1 S17JI1i 04
kV I'
4)
1-e1((7)
3k'Ae7
I2)
10 no- 1h
MARC
METAL I PAINT I T.(9,D. It1
AICPACIPAIIITIT.RD.
(-t
MEM )IPAIr1rlR,RD (')
O4EIALIPAIrITI Uits. (el
MOD' RTARl N I)
Tab
TD.D
t.b.G
T.D.D
.1.011TMVOT4 WER4pa. IS1AIN 1111
1EL LISAw11431 111
GTNNH it
NA.
CASE/IMOD OPENING I STAII4I III
GOOD CQBE M1: E51 I015 AINj'.I5I
RAT Pas1415 PAIN t Jr)
SEEDRAW1Ix35 42)
.tLE10AW8A1G -rl
11 DOOR SCHEDULE
3.1 SCALE:1/4" =
MVO( 5TA1N f 4)1
Y.CCU 1 STAIN 111)
WOOD' STAIN rut)
t LLD
TB
TD0
NA
NA,
NA,
NO
ITEM I FINISH
MODEL I NO OR SKU
SIZE
MANUFACTURER
WA1
PIVOT MIRROR I METAL FRAME (1)I CLEAR GLASS
TO BE APPROVED (1)
2'-6' X3'-0' (VERIFY)
121
WA2
PAPER TOWEL DISPENSERS I(1)
WALL MOUNTED
TBD
L31
WA3
SOAP DISPENSER I (1)
TO BE APPROVED
TBD
(31
WA4
TRASH CAN I (1)
TO BE APPROVED
TBD
(31
WASHROOM ACCESSORIES SCHEDULE
SCALE: 1:45.22
1 EXISTING DOOR -REFIT OMTHACEESIBLE LEVER•
Classroom Lock with °Waldo laver locked and unlocked by
M'!, InuW Myer Aw.,11 1e1at
2 ACCESIBLE LEVER- Classroom security lock with key In
either aver locks or unlocks outside lever CLOSER.
3 ACCESIBLE LEVER 5lareroum lock with outside lever fixed.
Eaorca W say ^ivy Maria Yraa always aa6200 CLOSER
4 ACCESIBLE LEVER -Passage arch with bath levers BIAsys
unlocked
5
6
ACCESIBLE LEVER -Exit lock with blank plots oval >.
Inside laver always unlocked. CLOSER
ACCESSIBLE LEVER LATCH - Classroom lock with oualde
Near locked and Week.' by key. Inside lever ahoy.
urbcked CLOSER
ACCESSIBLE LEVER LATCH - Classroom lock web outside
lever bread end unlocked by key. Indda lever always
unlocked, CLOSER
ACCESSIBLE LEVER LATCH • BelNbedroom privacy lock
with push-button lockkg Can be opened from Waldo wkh a
vat atnm111w• Tian has 41 NATI kkre 4e01 IT
bsgon. CLOSER
9 ACCESSIBLE LEVER LATCH- Classroom lock with outside
aver Locked and unlocked by key. Inside lever always
unlocked
REMARKS
(1) FINISH TO BE DETERMINED
(2) PROVIDED BY OWNER INSTALLED BY CONTRACTOR
(3) PROVIDED BY OWNER
(1) TO BE SELECTED
(2) DOORWAY SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM,
OPENING OF 32' WITH TIC DOOR OF
DEGREES-0. A15R WBEFWEE111}
THE DOOR AND THE OPPOSITE STOI
131 SECRET D:GIR-E4RDA01R TP30EFl
DISAPEAR INTO OTHER WALL FIMSI-
T.B.D
(4) OWNER AND CONTRACTOR TO REVI
APPROVE FRAME TYPES
NO
ITEM I FINISH
MODEL I NO. OR SKU
SIZE
MANUFACTURER
Pt
nee OOMLE WALLM1tUur:1LS L4001GRT 1Wsk1E ISl
TO BE APPROVED
AMERICAN STANDARD
P2
ACCESSIBLE SINK FAUCETS I TBD
TO BE APPROVED
AMERICAN STANDARD
P3
NEW ACCISSIBE FLOOR MOUNTED WATER CLOSET I WHTE(3)
TO BE APPROVED
AMERICAN STANDARD
P4
NEW ACCESSIBLE PIPE COVER I WHITE
TO BE APPROVED
TRUBRO (1)
PS
WATER CLOSET SEAT I BLACK (2)
PS
UllUTY SINK FAUCET- REUSE EXISTING
firs
NEW PLOW SINS- RE•UIE E0Ia?1001
Al
3
PLUMBING FIXTURE SCHEDULE
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"
REMARKS
(1) OR EQUAL
(2) NOTE SEAT COLOR
(3) SINK AIO WC COLOR TO WATCH
NO
ITEM I FINISH
MODEL I
MANUFACTURER
REMARKS
TCI
SURFACE MOUNTED TOILET TISSUE DISPENSERS I(2)
TBD
TBD
(I) SEE INTERIOR ELEVATION FOR SIZES
(2) FINISH TO BE DETERMINED
TnD
SURFACEMOIl1ED SANITARY NAPKIN DISPOSAL I(2)
TBD
TBD
TC)
(....AN BAB: TIN :F'ONR[EIED„1
T80
TBD
TC4
SURFACE MOUNTED SANITARY NAPKIN DISPENSER I(2)
TBD
TBD
TOILET COMPARTMENT ACCESSORIES SCHEDULE
,111.9 SCALE:1/4" =
SEALING ASBESTOS VINYL FLOORING (AVF)
OPTION 1 - Encapsulation WM a sealant
Sealant - Vinyl flooring sealant
Safety Measures - Use a full face respirator, gloves and any other recommended personal
protective equipment
Surface Preparation - Sweep and clean floors of debris, dual, dirt or anything stuck to the file
that may prevent the sealant from adhering, then mop and lel the floor dry before applying the
sealant
Installation - Install per manufacturer's instructions and safety measures
Work Environment -Provide proper ventilation and lay down the sealer per the manufacturer's
instructions.
Application- Let dry far as long as recommended by the epoxy manufacturer. Apply a second
coat of epoxy and let dry
Finish - Leave flooring as is, or put down loose laid flooring making sure not to chip the tiles
in the process.
OPTION 2- Encapsulation with a 2-part epoxy process
Sealant - Use epoxy kit for asbestos vinyl 1cadng.
Safety Measures - Use personal protective equipment as described above
Surface Preparation - Clean the floor thoroughly as described above
Installation - Install per manufacturer's instructions and safety measures.
Work Environment -Provide proper ventilation and lay down the epoxy per the manufacturers
instructions
Application - Let dry for as long as recommended by the epoxy manufacturer. Apply a second
coat of epoxy and let dry
Finish - Leave flooring as is, or put down loose laid flooring making sure not to chip the ales
in the process.
SEALING ASBESTOS VINYL FLOORING (AVF)
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"
PROJECT ARCHITECT
RALPH RAPSON &
ASSOCIATES, INC.
2429 34th Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN 55406
T / (612) 333-4581
W / www,rapsonarehltecls.com
E / Into(grapsonarchtlecls,com
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS
PLAN. SPECIFICATION, OR
REPORT WAS PREPARED BY
ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT
SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A
DULY REGISTERED ARCHITECT
UNDER THE LAWS OF THE
STATE OF MINNESOTA
7
NAME r/11)01AB NAPSON
4121NE(ISTRATION NO. 15351
DATE: )0/YY/2016
sm71,1 LAME 110111)7FR
DAVID B. MORRIS, P.A.
6940 Ticonderoga Trail
Eden Prairie, MN 55346
T/ (952) 6340351
E / dbmpe(0 gweslofflce net
OWNER
MA
FUSION BUST
Mark Hansen Owner/Cral
241 Surd 2nd 50e1t
Stillwater, MN 55082
651-30-8333
PROJECT
O N
a
6)
0
MJ D./YEAR
City PenNb 07/ 21/2016
Dale Pdnled
The
DRAWN
7/21/201B
12:23 AM
T, R/IPSON
This document is copyrghl
Ralph Rapson & Associates, Inc.
Drawing measurements shal not
be obtained by scaling. Verify all
dimensions prior to construction.
Immediately roped dlsnn1L+nr:RT
II111m Arclnit-L if tit dwm1 a1E5
11114 ,]ocomnlTl shell be reed AI
osnlunollan.wllh gyaocs'led
models, specifications and
related consultant's documents
SHEET
SCHEDULES
A3.1()
—1 1 12 13 I
D 4 1 7 4 4 10 11 12 13 14 1
15
I 18
17
18 18 I 20 I 21 I 22 I 23 24 I 25 1 28
I 27 2R I 9 I 30 31 I
1 11 1 7 a 9 10 11 12 I
14
17 l
21
23 I 24 I 25 I 26 I 27
28 I 29 1 30 1 31
O
O
17
U
1 1 2 3 I l I 1 6 1) 1
GENERAL NOTES:
1.. ALL WORK SHALL BE PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH
THE CURRENTLY ADOPTED EDITION OF THE
INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE (IBC), THE CURRENT
STATE ADMINISTRATIVE CODE AND LOCAL BUILDING
CODES AS ADMINISTERED BY THE LOCAL GOVERNING
BUILDING OFFICIALS.
2. THE STRUCTURAL DESIGN FOR THE PROJECT SHALL BE
DONE BY A QUALIFIED STRUCTURAL ENGINEER AT THE
DIRECTION OF AND AS APPROVED BY THE
ARCHITECT/DESIGNER AND OWNER, THE STRUCTURAL
ENGINEER SHALL REFER TO THE ARCHITECTURAL
DRAWINGS FOR INFORMATION RELATED TO THE
LOCATIONS FOR ELEMENTS AND THE LAYOUT OF THE
BUILDING AS DESIGNED. THE STRUCTURAL ENGINEER
SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PRODUCING THE NECESSARY
DOCUMENTATION TO OBTAIN THE REQUIRED APPROVALS
AND PERMITS FOR CONSTRUCTION.
3. THE HVAC SYSTEMS FOR THE PROJECT SHALL BE AS
DESIGNED AND BUILT BY THE MECHANICAL CONTRACTOR
AT THE DIRECTION OF AND AS APPROVED BY THE
ARCHITECT/DESIGNER AND OWNER. THE MECHANICAL
CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO THE ARCHITECTURAL
DRAWINGS FOR INFORMATION RELATED TO THE DESIGN
AND CONSTRUCTION OF THE HVAC SYSTEMS. THE
MECHANICAL CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO THE
ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS FOR THE LOCATIONS OF FIRE -
RATED ASSEMBLIES AND COORDINATE FIRE AND SMOKE
DAMPERS AS REQUIRED FOR PENETRATING THE FIRE
RATED CONSTRUCTION. THE MECHANICAL CONTRACTOR
SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR SUBMITTING THE NECESSARY
DOCUMENTATION FOR APPROVAL AND OBTAINING THE
REQUIRED APPROVALS AND PERMITS FOR CONSTRUCTION.
4, THE ELECTRICAL SYSTEMS FOR THE PROJECT SHALL BE
AS DESIGNED AND BUILT BY THE ELECTRICAL
CONTRACTOR AT THE DIRECTION OF AND AS APPROVED
BY THE ARCHITECT/DESIGNER AND OWNER. THE
ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO THE
ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS FOR THE LOCATIONS OF
LIGHTING DEVICES, SWITCHING LOCATIONS AND
EQUIPMENT LOCATIONS. THE ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR
SHALL REFER TO THE LIGHTING SCHEDULE FOR A
DESCRIPTION FO THE LIGHTING DEVICES SELECTED, AS
WELL AS LIGHTING DEVICES TO BE SELECTED BY THE
CONTRACTOR AND APPROVED BY THE
ARCHITECT/DESIGNER AND OWNER. THE LAYOUT OF THE
POWER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM AND ELECTRICAL DEVICE
LOCATIONS (EXCEPT WHERE SPECIFIC DEVICES AR SHOWN
ON THE ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS) SHALL BE THE
RESPONSIBILITY OF THE ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR WITH
THE APPROVAL OF THE ARCHITECT/DESIGNER, OWNER
AND LOCAL GOVERNING CODES. THE ELECTRICAL
CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR SUBMITTING
THE NECESSARY DOCUMENTATION FOR APPROVAL AND
OBTAINING THE REQUIRED APPROVALS AND PERMITS FOR
CONSTRUCTION.
5. THE PLUMBING SYSTEMS FOR THE PROJECT SHALL BE AS
DESIGNED AND BUILT BY THE PLUMBING CONTRACTOR AT
THE DIRECTION OF AND AS APPROVED BY THE
ARCHITECT/DESIGNER AND OWNER. THE PLUMBING
CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO THE ARCHITECTURAL
DRAWINGS FOR THE LOCATIONS OF FIXTURES, DEVICES
AND EQUIPMENT ALONG WITH ACCOMPANYING
INFORMATION RELATED TO THE DESIGN AND
CONSTRUCTION OF THE PLUMBING SYSTEMS. THE
PLUMBING CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO THE PLUMBING
SCHEDULE FOR A DESCRIPTION OF THE FIXTURES AND
DEVICES SELECTED, AS WELL AS PLUMBING. FIXTURES TO
BE SELECTED BY THE CONTRACTOR AND APPROVED BY
THE ARCHITECT/DESIGNER AND OWNER. THE PLUMBING
CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR SUBMITTING
THE NECESSARY DOCUMENTATION FOR APPROVAL AND
OBTAINING THE REQUIRED APPROVALS AND PERMITS FOR
CONSTRUCTION.
6. THE SPRINLER SYSTEMS FOR THE PROJECT SHALL BE AS
DESIGNED AND BUILT BY THE SPRINKLER CONTRACTOR AT
THE DIRECTION OF AND AS APPROVED BY THE
ARCHITECT/DESIGNER AND OWNER. THE SPRINKLER
CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO THE ARCHITECTURAL
DRAVINGS FOR INFORMATION RELATED TO THE DESIGN
AND CONSTRUCTION OF THE SPRINLER SYSTEMS. THE
SPRIKLER CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR
SUBMITTING THE NECESSARY DOCUMENTATION FOR
APPROVAL AND OBTAINING THE REQUIRED APPROVALS
AND PERMITS FOR CONSTRUCTION.
All
GENERAL NOTES
7. THE AUDIONISUAL, COMMUNICATIONS AND SECURITY
SYSTEM(S) SHALL BE AS DESIGNED AND BUILT BY THE
LOW -VOLTAGE CONTRACTOR AT THE DIRECTION OF AND
AS APPROVED BY THE ARCHITECT/DESIGNER AND OWNER.
THE LOW -VOLTAGE CONTRACTOR(S) SHALL REFER TO THE
ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS FOR INFORMATION RELATED
TO THE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF THESE SYSTEMS,
THE LOW -VOLTAGE CONTRACTOR(S) SHALL BE
RESPONSIBLE FOR SUBMITTING THE NECESSARY
DOCUMENTATION FOR APPROVAL AND OBTAINING THE
REQUIRED APPROVALS AND PERMITS FOR CONSTRUCTION.
6, THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR IS TO VERIFY ALL
DIMENSIONS AND CONDITIONS IN THE FIELD AND SHALL
NOTIFY THE ARCHITECT/DESIGNER IMMEDIATELY IN
WRITING OF ANY DISCREPANCIES WITH THE CONTRACT
DOCUMENTS OR EXISTING CONSTRUCTION AND SITE
CONDITIONS.
4.1
SCALE:1/4" =
I12 I 13 1 14
I15 I
EXIT AND EMERGENCY LIGHTING SYSTEMS
APPUCABLE CODES
OSHA Code of Federal Regulations
NFPA 70- National Electric Code
NFPA 101 - Life Safety Code
International Fire Code
NFPA 1997
Standard Fire Prevention Code 1999
ILLUMINATION OF MEANS OF EGRESS
Illumination of means of egress shall be provided for designated stairs, aisles, corndors, ramps, and passageways leading
to an exit.
Illumination of means of egress shall be continuous during the time mat the cundporrs or occupancy require That the
sans of egress be available for use. Artificial Lighting shall be employed of such planet and for such periods of time as
required to maintain the illumination to the minimum lootcande (WOK!) values required.
The floors of means of egress shall be illuminated at all points including angles and intersections of corridors and
passageways, stairways, landings of stairs, and exit doors to values of not less than 1 lootcande (10 Ix) measured at the
goer. Exception: In assembly occupancies, the illumination of the floors of exit access shall be nal less than 1/5 lootcande
(21x) during periods of performances or projections involving direcled light_
Any required illumination shall be so arranged that the failure of any single Lighting unit, such as the burring out of an
electric bulb, will not leave any area in darkness.
EMERGENCY UGHTING
NON -INTERRUPTION OF ILLUMINATION
Where maintenance of illumination depanda ups. Changing/fens one energy source to another, there shell be no
appreciable interruption of INuntinetion during Meehan/mown. Where emergency Lighting is provided by a prime mover -
operated electric generator, a delay Neer mare Order to ucarah shall be permitted.
PERFORMANCE OF SYSTEM
Emarcteeoy [Bianih0on %he1) be pt0vlded taro petit. al' 172 Mull on Ihn Want of Were of normal Lighting Emergency
Lighting feallees ehofi be arranged to pr0vrdningal Illmnhteilnn Ilwta i15 W% Ihan on mans el 1 i0meenlae (101x) and
4 mir1mam et any Point or .1 saotcandle. 11 be meeetireed along'llw path d ogre.. m goer level humiliation revels may
d n11ele to .9 faalcande (81X) ovmegr and 3 minimum el ehy paint d .06Tonleande (.810 ai the end Mint emergency
Lighting ilme dut®b5n. Amexrnum 15 m0nlmum elluminrtepn 4nlfaemlly rail el 4010 1 sltsil not be exoear 0 4
The alnorgency Lighting oyslenrehall bs so arranged as to provide the required Ilheintna&an auloma0r-011y in llie event of
any interruption of normal. Ughhnu,, aaeh 09 any failure of pudic utility or other oulslds .1enldbol pxwyr ewply, npmeng of
a olecui1 htvele r ar haul, of clef men6d salts), including accidental opening of a 08lch'foltrolling narmel lighting
laoelltiaes
Emergency generators used to provide power to emergency Lighting systems shall be installed, tested, and maintained in
accordance with NFPA 110, Emergency and Standby Power Systems.
Battery -operated emergency lights shall use only reliable types of rechargeable batteries provided with suitable facilities
far maintaining them in properly charged condition. Batteries used in such lights or units shall be approved for their
intended use end shall comply with NFPA 70, National Electrical Code.®
The emergency Lighting system shall be either continuously in operation or capable of repeated automatic operation
without manual intervention.
MARKING OF MEANS OF EGRESS
GENERAL
Exits shall be marked by an approved sign readily visible From any direction of exit access.
Exception: Main exterior exit doors that obviously and clearly are identifiable as exits.
Access to exits shall be marked by approved readily visible signs in all cases where the aid or way to reach it is not
readily apparent to the occupants. Sign placement shall be such that no point in the exit access is more than 100 9 (30 m)
from the nearest visible sign.
Where Ono, proximity esl signs one e0ioolloslly 1egLdred, fist signet shall b. {diked near thu Mira revel Or addlhanCO Ihose
..piss required roe dooretr emndorel Riess spne 6.11 hr elzed and ,!unto etbd in as required Tho bottom oIlha sign
010111 Lin net{leso lhare B tn. (152 and rid mural3rmr 6 Its 110.2 pre) oboe/alma floor. For exit down, the sign end be
mounted 5h 1ne dad W egace i to thin door v:1h Ilse rlsseel edge of 0i. Wen within 4 in.(10,2utr1 olprs dour Remo.
Every Win required shag On so leaded and of such size distinctive color mel deaigr as la Int eew)Ny-0Nide end shall
preside eosl oat with do, aeons, rnhan0r Areesh or other signs. No de a1Marre. furnishings Ce aglapreserrl ihW Impair
veriaillty of an exit sign shall be permlpad nor shall Mere be any brightly 18un .68.8 Sign (for egret then exit purposes),
dloplwd,_ o1 object in or near llw RIM of via1G6 of the required exit sign of such a chmaater as to on detaxx ...iron from
the exit sign
W11sm Omar proamely egress palls mallonel ie.r9gored, a gated and approved floor prostrate egrets path marking system
that it IolarntrNy 111mrgrrmed ,hell be enotegud wiirn 8 in. (20.3CM) Of the Floor, The syatenl shrill provide a visible
risiine ken atllldpeld. of Ir.no10ong the deaignolod axe gscesa and ahol be eraenlleY/ ce ent.ue, except as
lMarruplod 55 ntaarwltye. h0N#ys coal ... fir Ohre ouch wehlt..heel fealuree. Trio system shell operate continuously
etc at any tme the Brig Lie elarlte sysrwe Is dseyaaed EPna bohyetbls, duration, and Condlealy of operation of the
syirem 1hae b al rggsired.
SIZE OF SIGNS
Exlerrra(1 Ipdmlrralod morns tern redahol have the ward 'EXIT' or other eppro5nole swllblng m 50amlyteggk letters not
less then 0 in, (15.2 oil} high vette the prineiplg sVeltee of letters not less Brae arc m, 11,9 cml wslds. The ewrd'EXIT' shall
have LMlere at el wrdn n5lkaq 9ree12le 15 rim) estepathe letter 'I' and IBS mailemron spacing 6aluoen 1111tme shall be not
less t8880 01$In. (1 cm); Signs larger then d1a lerililnnm established in thin peragrnph titeal neve letter widen, strokes, and
spacing in proportion Ie thole Height
In10malfy alumin0od aigne required by 5•10.1 and 5-10.4.1.1 shell have the word 'EXIT' or other appropriate wording in
letters legible9961 a distaste of etleast 100 n (30 m) under all normal and emergency Lighting conditions (30 fc and 1 fc,
retrrettNdy). 1nlernafiy IINNnlnated signs ehse be Noted in accordance with UL 924.
ILLUMINATION OF SIGNS
Every sign required shall be suitably illuminated by a reliable light source. Externally and internally illuminated sign. shall
be visible in both the normal and emergency Lighting mode.
Externally illuminated signs shall be illuminated by not less than 5 footcandles (541x) and shall employ a contrast ratio of
not less then 0.5.
SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS - DIRECTIONAL SIGNS
A sign reading 'EXIT' or a similar designation with a directional indicator shoving the direction of travel shall be placed in
every location where the direction of travel to reach the nearest exit is not apparent_ Directional signs shall be listed.
SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS - SPECIAL SIGNS
My 1e5m, pesoage. or home. IhM A neither an exit nor a way of exit access and that is so located or arranged that it is
beery 10 m mlolohon for tinestl shell. Identified by a sign reading 'NO EXIT: Such sign shall have the word 'NO' in
In.prs tin. (6 cm) high Mt elroka width of 3/8 in. (1 cm) and the ward EXIT in letters 1 in. (2,5 cm) high, with the word
EXIT baleWtlm ward NO.
Exception: Approved existing signs.
OPERATING FEATURES, GEN. REQUIREMENTS
Paella. Tending of Emergency lighting Equipment A functional test shall be conducted on every required emergency
'Lighting system ✓W OP -day rnlenols fora minimum of 30 seconds. An annual test shall be conducted for the 112 hour
duration of the roll. Wilton recede of visual inspections and tests shall be kept by the owner for inspection by the
aedherily hnWngltlnldclioh.
Exception: Self-testing/self-diagnostic, battery -operated emergency Lighting egdpme0t thetweternohrdly performs a
minimum 30-second test and diagnostic routine at least once every 30 days and indicates ratitires M a status indicator
shall be exempt from the 30-day functional test provided a visual inspection is performed 1631?dey i1aarVals
EXIT AND EMERGENCY LIGHTING NOTES
SCALE:1/4" = 1'-0"
RALPH RAPSON &
ASSOCIATES, INC.
2429 341h Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN 55406
T/ (612)333-1561
W r 0ewscrapanoera08enH.cunr
E/ in fob rapsonarchilecls,com
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS
PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR
REPORT WAS PREPARED BY
ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT
SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A
DULY REGISTERED ARCHITECT
UNDER THE LAWS OF THE
STATE OF MINNESOTA-
NAME, T%l0/AA8 RAPS0
MNREGISTRATION 180.. 19217
DATE XX/YY/2016
511IUSQT1R/a.la"NGINFar ,
DAVID B. MORRIS, P.A.
6940 Ticonderoga Trail
Eden Prairie, MN 55346
T/ (952)934-0351
E / dbmpe@gwestoffice.nel
OWNER
MAR:'
FUSION B I S r 10Ti
trim. rhnnean 0a,nnnl:ear
241 South 2nd Street
Stillwater, PAN 55082
651-0309333
PROJECT
v /
N
W
rn
N
M./ D./YEAR
City Pemyls 07/ 21/2016
Date Printed
Time
7/21/2016
12:23 AM
DRAWN
RAPSON
This document is copyright
Ralph Rapson & Associates, Inc.
Drawing measurements shah not
be obtained by scaling. Verify all
dimensions prior to construction -
Immediately report discrepancies
to the Architect If In doubt 858.
This document shall be read in
conjunction with assorialed
models, specifications and
akd mneneico s daeuinerne•.
SHEET
NOTES
AA4.1()
10
17
18
19
20
21
27 I 23
24 I 25 I 26 I 27 I 26: I 29 I 30 I 31
PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING DATE:
APPLICANT:
REQUEST:
ZONING: RB, Two
PREPARED BY:
September 14, 2016 CASE NO.: 2016-36
Mark Moelter, property owner
Consideration of 7' variance to the 20' Front Yard Setback [City Code
Section 31-308(b)(1)] to continue to allow a second story, vertical
expansion of a non -conforming residence located at 209 Wilkins Street
East.
-Family Res. COMP PLAN DISTRICT: LMDR: Low/Medium Density
Abbi Jo Wittman, City Planner
REQUEST
Mark Moelter is
requesting approval of
a 7' variance to the 20'
Front Yard Setback for
the vertical expansion
of the existing home
located at 209 Wilkins
Street East. The
expansion has
partially occurred, as
shown to the right;
this request comes to
the Planning
Commission after the
work had been started
and the City issued a
Stop Work order.
APPLICABLE BACKGROUND
In late May, 2014, the Stillwater Building Department received a request from Rob
Becker, Black Duck Restoration, to demolish the structure located at 209 Wilkins Street
East. Planning staff prepared the attached Demolition Determination form and
scheduled a site visit for May 29, 2014; Building Official Shilts and City Planner
Wittman attended the site visit. Based on the site visit and historical research, it was
determined the structure was a historic resource and Heritage Preservation
Commission demolition request would need to be made in order to proceed with
consideration of the demolition.
On May 18, 2015, City Planner Wittman discussed with Mr. Joe Bush the requirements
for consideration of demolition and advised, if a HPC demolition request was not
submitted, the property could be rehabilitated as well as additions could be made so
long as they were in compliance with the demolition regulations as well as the RB-Two
Family Residential zoning district regulations. Staff followed up with an email which
outlined the zoning district regulations.
On October 28, 2015, the City issued a building permit to Mark Moelter for the
rehabilitation of the residence as well as an addition to the east side of the home. The
proposed addition, rehabilitation plan and site survey was shown to be in compliance
with the zoning code regulations and demolition section of the City Code. Copies of the
plan drawings are attached. The original permit application included Mr. Joe Bush as
the contractor. However, Mr. Bush was not a licensed contractor at the time. The
homeowner obtained permit on October 29, 2015.
On November 6, 2016, the City building department conducted a footings inspection. A
foundation inspection was later conducted on January 29, 2016.
On February 11, 2016, the homeowner contacted the building department and
requested transfer of permit into Bush's name. Due to the permit having been issued,
and previous questions regarding Bush's license, the City denied the transfer and kept
the permit in Moelter's name; department notes, attached hereto, indicate:
"The homeowner pulled the permit for this project and on 2/1/2016 has
requested that General Contractor Joe Bush, of Custom Homes by JP Bush LLC,
MN Residential Bldg Contractor #BC702623, be allowed to run this project. This
contractor will be the homeowner's representative for this project and the
homeowner remains the permit holder."
Based on inquiries from the Heritage Preservation Commission, City Planner Wittman
conducted a site visit during the week of July 11, 2016. It was determined the project
had worked significantly outside the scope of work originally permitted and that
actions were done without an approved plan change request from the Building
Department and, therefore, in violation of the Building Code. On July 14, 2016,
Wittman notified building department staff and a stop work order was placed on the
property on that day.
Case No. 2016-36
CPC: September 14, 2016
Page 2 of 5
On July 20, 2016, Joe Bush delivered to the Building Department a new set of drawings
for the changes to the construction project.
It was determined that:
■ Based on the change in the roofline, the project was in violation of the City Code
Section 34-3, No building or structure may be demolished without obtaining a
demolition permit. An application for a demolition permit must be filed with the city
building official.
■ The project was directly in violation of City Code Section 22-7, Subd. 5(7), "the
Heritage Preservation Commission must also assume responsibility for the design review
of any dwelling house hereafter proposed for construction on now existing vacant lots or
on lots that become vacant by reason of demolition or destruction of existing structures
within the Neighborhood Conservation District (NCD)".
■ Lastly, it was also determined that the extension of the second story was also in
violation as it was located within the Front Yard Setback area, found in City
Code Section 31-308(b)(1).
Upon phone call from the property owner, on August 4, 2016, City staff advised the
property owner of the violations as well as the necessary applications to submit for City
Planning and Heritage Preservation Commission review and consideration.
APPLICABLE REGULATIONS AND ANALYSIS
The purpose of the variance is to "...allow variation from the strict application of the terms
of the zoning code where the literal enforcement...would cause practical difficulties for the
landowner." In addition to the requirements, below, Section 31-208 indicates
"[n]onconforming uses or neighboring lands, structures or buildings in the same district or
other districts may not be considered grounds for issuance of a variance" and "...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 31-208 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.
The applicant must demonstrate that:
The variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of this chapter.
The general purpose and intent of the Zoning Code is to regulate and restrict use of
land for the protection of public health, safety and welfare. The purpose of the Front
Yard Setback area is to maintain open, unoccupied and uniform space for aesthetic
Case No. 2016-36
CPC: September 14, 2016
Page 3 of 5
and environmental benefits. The variance request comes before the Commission
after indication adding a second story to the structure was desirable. As the existing
footprint is not being altered, the proposal is in harmony with the general purposes
and intent of the zoning code.
The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan.
The Comprehensive Plan identifies the following applicable to this request:
• Retain the unique and/or historic character of existing residential neighborhoods
(Chapter 4, Housing - Objective)
■ Incorporate into decisions the designed historic contexts as the official overview of
the history and development of the City of Stillwater (Chapter 5, Historic Resources —
Program)
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 property owner proposes to utilize the property as a two-story single family
residence but the vertical expansion of the structure is not permitted in the 20' Front
Yard Setback area.
The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property and that are not
created by the landowner; and
The actions were a result of the owner and/or the owner's representative.
The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality.
The unpermitted alterations have changed the essential character of the
neighborhood as the historic house is no longer present on this site. The essential
character of new construction is determined by the Heritage Preservation
Commission when new construction occurs in the Neighborhood Conservation
District.
ALTERNATIVES
The Planning Commission has the following options:
1. Make findings practical difficulties do exist for the property owner and approve a 7'
variance to the 20' Front Yard Setback [City Code Section 31-308(b)(1)] to continue to
allow a second story, vertical expansion of a non -conforming residences located at
209 Wilkins Street East, with or without conditions.
Case No. 2016-36
CPC: September 14, 2016
Page 4 of 5
The Planning Commission may impose conditions in the granting of a variance. A
condition must be directly related to and must bear a rough proportionality to the
impact created by the variance.
If the Commission were to find practical difficulties do exist for the property owner,
staff would recommend the following conditions:
a. Plans shall be substantially similar to those on file with the Community
Development Department's Case No. 2016-36.
b. An amended building permit shall be reviewed and approved prior to the
construction of the residence.
c. The submittal of amended materials will include a timeline for completion of the
project.
d. Major exterior modifications to the variance permit request shall be reviewed by
the Planning Commission as per Section 31-204, Subd. 7.
2. Make the findings practical difficulties have not been established and deny the
variance.
3. Table the application and request additional information.
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION
On the basis the plight of the application is due to circumstances created by the landowner
and that the essential character of the neighborhood has already been altered, staff
recommends denial of the application.
ATTACHMENTS
Site Location Map
Certificate of Survey
Originally Approved Building Permit (5 pages)
July, 2016 Building Permit Submittal (3 pages)
Case No. 2016-36
CPC: September 14, 2016
Page 5 of 5
WEST WILKINS STRE
0
The Birthplace of Minnesota
209 Wilkins Street East
Site Location
ZI Subject Parcel
Municipal Boundary
Parcel Boundaries
105
210
420
Feet
General Site Location
D
11
Nig
L..-..-..••1..•••..•=..•=.... ..••.._.!
£4RQr.LS
09
09
®y
0
— 99'99 3.EC.LL.00N
i.. e 6;m...z.
UNO/,/:3 S
W
0
3
0
I.
1) C ofIlen C �-s a n� f/A9
RiocvmtAj 1L40 Ai ece'vpep
-
REVISIONS TO PPRO
MUST BE SUBMITT
APPROVAL BV BLOG
SMOKE DETECTORS RED
ON EACH LEVEL, IN E,
Eaci SLEEPNG IN ' '�r1 OU
CO ALARMS REQUIRE
STATE STATUTE TO BE
10 FT. OF ALL SLEEPING
CITY OF STILLWATER
216 NORTH 4TH STREET
STILLWATER, MN 55082-
(651) 430-8825 FAX: (651) 430-8810
PERMIT NO.: 2015-01293
DATE ISSUED: 10/29/2015
ADDRESS
PIN
LEGAL DESC
PERMIT TYPE
PROPERTY TYPE
CONSTRUCTION TYPE
VALUATION
209 WILKINS ST E
2103020430099
CARLI & SCHULENBURG'S ADD
LOT 006 BLOCK 009
BUILDING
RESIDENTIAL - OTHER THAN NEW CONST.
ADDITION
$ 69,586.00
NOTE: *THE HOMEOWNER PULLED THE PERMIT FOR THIS PROJECT AND ON 2/11/16 HAS REQUESTED THAT GENERAL
CONTRACTOR JOE BUSH, OF CUSTOM HOMES BY JP BUSH LLC, MN RESIDENTIAL BLDG CONTRACTOR # BC702623, BE ALLOWED
TO RUN THIS PROJECT. THIS CONTRACTOR WILL BE THE HOMEOWNERS REPRESENTATIVE FOR THIS PROJECT AND THE
HOMEOWNER REMAINS THE PERMIT HOLDER.*
BEDROOM ADDITION AND INTERIOR REMODEL.
MNSBC SECTION R315.3 CARBON MONOXIDE ALARMS CARBON MONOXIDE ALARMS SHALL BE INSTALLED OUTSIDE OF EACH
SEPARATE SLEEPING AREA IN THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY OF THE BEDROOMS IN EXISTING DWELLINGS WITHIN WHICH
FUEL -FIRED APPLICANCES EXIST AND IN EXISTING DWELLINGS THAT HAVE AN ATTACHED GARAGE.
ALL DISTURBED SOIL MUST BE SEEDED WITHIN 7 DAYS
APPLICANT
MOELTER, MARK A
209 WILKINS ST E
STILLWATER, MN 55082-
(651) 238-2905
OWNER
MOELTER, MARK A
209 WILKINS ST E
STILLWATER, MN 55082-
AGREEMENT AND SWORN STATEMENT
I hereby certify that I have read and examined this application
and know the same to be true and correct. All provisions of
laws and ordinances governing this type of work will be
complied with whether specified herein or not. The granting
of a permit does not presume to give authority to violate or
cancel the provisions of any other state or local law regulating
construction or the performance of construction.
This permit becomes null and void if construction
authorized is not commenced within 180 days, or if
construction is suspended for a period of 180 days at any time
after work is commenced.
PERMIT FEE
PLAN REVIEW
STATE SURCHARGE (BLDG)
LICENSE VERIFICATION
TOTAL
Payment(s)
CREDIT CARD
CHECK
CHECK
3322 100546
0000
0000
B IIIIIIII II III IIIIIII II
783.75
509.44
34.79
5.00
1,332.98
1,332.98
5.00
-5.00
Signature of Applicant Date
SEPARATE PERMITS REQUIRED FOR WORK OTHER THAN DESCRIBED ABOVE.
B
i
II
i
i
i
i
i
i
* 3 0 1 5- 0 1 2 9 3*
City of Stillwater
Inspections List Report
Permit # From: 2015-01293 To: 2015-01293
Permit Type: All Property Type: All Construction Type: All
Inspector: All Status: Pass/Fail/No Status
Include Notes: Yes
Permit # Site Address Applicant
Inspection Type Status Sched Date Time Insp Actual Date Insp
2015-01293 209 WILKINS ST E MOELTER, MARK A
FOOTING Pass 11/06/2015 11:59 AM CITY 11/06/2015 JON2
Addition
FOUNDATION Pass 01/29/2016 02:30 PM CITY 01/29/2016 JON2
ROUGH -IN ELECTRICAL Open
ROUGH -IN PLUMBING Open
ROUGH -IN MECH Open
GAS LINE TAG Open
FRAMING Open 07/14/2016 CIND
Stop work notice posted on 7/14/16. Structure is not in compliance with approved plans submitted/approved in
October 2015.
FRAMING REINSPECTION
Open CIND
Original failed on 7/14/2016. History:
Stop work notice posted on 7/14/16. Structure is not in compliance with approved plans submitted/approved in
October 2015.
INSULATION Open
SHEETROCK
FINAL ELECTRICAL
FINAL PLUMBING
FINAL MECH
SMOKE & CO DETECTORS
FINAL BUILDING
Open
Open
Open
Open
Open
Open
8/11/2016 Page 1 of 2
Permit # Site Address Applicant
Inspection Type Status Sched Date Time Insp Actual Date Insp
8/11/2016 Page 2 of 2
RECEIVED
JUL 2 0 2016
CITY OF STILLWAl ER
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
Dear Building Official,
Attached is a current copy of blue prints for address:
209 Wilkins Street
Stillwater MN, 55082
Please contact me with any questions (651) 775 4222
Sincerely,
Joe Bush
7/20/16
/14,44ergl&--
-13 enzAp_____o-ify
12. - Jfifs4
25 a
les--E-ft /
_
/640,21-1, io v//64/A45
,5r/a (ekJ4 re E.
JP127‘2D14. p I
-E1-
471
/tiaterh 1-4
1924I ecr
Zo ),04
67/ 11W Aree,
P6-
liwater
THE BIRTH P L A TE OF MINNFSOIA
PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING DATE: September 14, 2016
REGARDING: Planning Committees Representation
PREPARED BY: Abbi Jo Wittman, City Planner
Downtown Planning
As the Commission should remember, the Community Development is in the process of
updating the Comprehensive Plan Chapter focusing on Downtown Stillwater. As the
Commission will be the lead Commission for the update of this chapter, as well as the entire
Comprehensive Plan, representation to the Downtown Plan planning committee is important.
Vice Chairman Hansen has elected to serve as an alternate for Commissioner Hade.
Short Term Rentals
The City has retained a consultant to assist us with the analysis of alternatives for the regulation
of short term rentals within the City of Stillwater. A stakeholders meeting will be held on
Tuesday, September 27 at 7:00 pm in the Council Chambers. Staff is seeking attendance from
one member of the Commission for representation.
Misc.
As many commissioners have seen, winter time proves to be a heavy planning season; the 2016-
2017 winter will not be an exception. In addition to the other committees noted in this memo,
from time to time staff will send direct invites to specific Commissioners to be a part of a
committee or working group. Generally these invites will go out to someone who has
expressed an interest, may have specialized skills, and/ or many have been thought to
contribute to the planning project in a unique way.
PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING DATE: September 14, 2016
REGARDING: Backflow Preventers
PREPARED BY: Abbi Jo Wittman, City Planner
At your last regularly -scheduled meeting, Commissioner Kelly inquired about backflow
preventers and State requirements for residential testing. Please see the attached as well as
http://www.dli.mn.gov/CCLD/PlumbingBackflow.asp. This information has been provided
to me from the City's Building Official, Cindy Shilts.
It is my understanding these regulations have been in place for greater than one year.
However, it may just be that there are companies out there who have become certified to test
and are now seeking business in Stillwater. If additional inquiries arise, please contact the
Construction Codes and Licensing Davison (CCLD) directly at (651) 284-5067.
ItFACT SHEET: BACKFLOW EVI S
2015.MINNESOTA PLUMBING CODE
Adak Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry
REQUIREMENTS
Refer to the 2015 Minnesota Plumbing Code Parts 603.5.23 through 603.5.23.4
for details about the backflow prevention requirements discussed in this fact sheet.
Devices that need to be tested
The 2015 Minnesota Plumbing Code requires that all
testable backflow devices be tested upon installation and
at least annually thereafter by a certified backflow assembly
tester.Testable devices include:
• Reduced pressure principal backflow preventers and
reduced pressure principle fire protection backflow
preventers,
• Double check backflow prevention assemblies and
double check fire protection backflow prevention
assemblies,
• Pressure vacuum breaker assembly devices,
• Reduced pressure detector fire protection backflow
prevention assemblies,
• Double check detector fire protection backflow
prevention assemblies, and
• Spill resistant vacuum breakers.
Installing the device
• A licensed plumber must perform the installation of a
backflow prevention device.
• The public water supplier must be notified within
30 days following installation of the device on a
community public water system.
• A plumbing permit must be obtained from the
administrative authority prior to installation.
Testing and maintenance
• The backflow device must be tested upon initial
installation and at least annually thereafter.
• Test results must be submitted to the administrative
authority and to the community public water supplier
within 30 days of testing.
Applicability
• Reduced pressure (RPZ) devices have had testing
requirements for many years. New and existing RPZ
installations must be tested annually.
• The testing requirements for testable non-RPZ devices
became effective for installations made on or after
Jan. 23, 2016.
Tester qualifications
Testing of backflow prevention devices requires certification
to ASSE Standard 5110. Testing of reduced pressure
principal devices (RPZs) requires an additional certification
by the commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Labor
and Industry.
RESPONSIBILITIES
Responsibility of the municipality
The municipality is responsible for notifying owners of
backflow devices of the need for initial and annual testing
of backflow devices.This can be done through the plumber
when the plumbing permit is issued. It may be helpful for
the municipality to prepare an information sheet to provide
to the plumber at time of the plumbing permit application.
As a condition of the permit, the plumber informs the
device owner of the requirements.
Responsibility of the owner
The owner of the backflow prevention device is responsible
for making sure the backflow device is tested upon
installation and at least annually thereafter. The owner is
responsible for arranging for a backflow device tester to test
devices at least annually.
Responsibility of the plumbing contractor
The plumbing contractor is responsible for informing the
building owner of the need to have their backflow devices
tested upon installation and at least annually thereafter.
Responsibility of the backflow tester
• The backflow device tester is responsible for testing the
backflow device and tagging it with the testing date,
tester signature and backflow certification number.
• Written records of testing and maintenance must
be maintained and submitted to the administrative
authority and the community public water supplier
within 30 days following the test.
Construction Codes and Licensing Division • www.dli.mn.gov/ccld/plumbing.asp • (651) 284-5067