Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017-03-08 CPC Packetlllwater. THE BIRTHPLACE OF MINNESOTA AGENDA PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Council Chambers, 216 Fourth Street North March 8th, 2017 REGULAR MEETING 7:00 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Possible approval of January 11th, 2017 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 2017-02: Consideration of a Special Use Permit for the use of outdoor speakers for the property located at 324 Main Street South. Jeffrey B. Larson, JLB Companies, property owner, and Chris Goetzke, applicant. 3. Case 2017-03: Consideration of a draft Ordinance to regulate short term rentals. City of Stillwater, Applicant. 4. Case 2017-04: Consideration of a Variance for the demolition and redesign of the south side of the structure for the property located at 806 Main Street South. Craig Beemer, property owner. -Withdrawn 5. Case 2017-05: Consideration of a Variance to build an addition to the structure that will include living space and an attached garage to the property located at 1333 6th Street South. Michael and Charlene Markwardt, property owner. VI. NEW BUSINESS VII. STAFF UPDATES/FOR YOUR INFORMATION VIII. ADJOURNMENT THE 1I11TNYLACE OF MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES January 11, 2017 REGULAR MEETING 7:00 P.M. Chairman Kocon called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Present: Chairman Kocon, Commissioners Collins, Fletcher, Hansen and Lauer Absent: Commissioners Hade, Kelly and Siess; Councilmember Menikheim Staff: City Planner Wittman, Community Development Director Turnblad APPROVAL OF MINUTES Possible approval of December 14, 2016 meeting minutes Motion by Commissioner Lauer, seconded by Commissioner Collins, to approve the December 14, 2016 meeting minutes. Motion passed 2-0. Chairman Kocon, Commissioners Fletcher, and Hansen abstained. OPEN FORUM There were no public comments. PUBLIC HEARINGS Case No. 2016-40: Special Use Permit and Variances to develop a hotel with a restaurant and outside eating area, parking ramp and three-story office building on the property located at 232 Main Street North and including City -owned property at 251 Second Street North. Gartner Prop LLC, property owner and Anne Loff, Midnight Real Estate, LLC, applicant represented by HAF Group. City Planner Wittman reviewed the proceedings of the Commission's December 14, 2016 meeting at which the project was originally presented. At that time, the Commission requested more information from the developer regarding parking deck plans, traffic circulation and Mulberry Street access points, and the proposed drainage system. The Commission also asked for an escrow to cover some of the third party costs the City would incur in reviewing the development plans. She stated that since that meeting, the design has changed. The parking ramp as now proposed would have one-way internal circulation with two Mulberry accesses in and out on the second level and two Second Street accesses on the third level. The Downtown Parking Commission agreed on a mitigation plan for the 154 parking spaces required for the development. Except for the office building, the required parking could be accommodated on site. 35 spaces would be available to the public in the upper deck of the ramp. Parking mitigation for the office building would be accommodated in the nearby City ramp. Ms. Wittman also explained that the City's Traffic Safety Committee raised concern about adequate lane width for ingress and egress from the parking ramp, and about pedestrian sight lines. Staff recommends a comprehensive sign plan to address pedestrian safety concerns. The City is monitoring the Planning Commission January 11, 2017 Mulberry/Second intersection to see how safety can be improved such as reducing vegetation. Regarding storm water, the developer indicated they will be able to meet Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization requirements on site, but do not have a drainage plan yet due to costs. Once the use is approved, they will develop the drainage plan. Written concerns were submitted by Cameron Murray about cross -traffic with Stillwater Mills traffic coming out onto Mulberry, and by Don Ganje about Mulberry Street traffic as well as the design of the office building retaining wall along the east facade. The development team has responded that the facade will match the rest of the building and there will not be exposed concrete. With changes in the plans submitted by the developer since the December 14, 2016 meeting, staff recommends approval of the Special Use Permit and variances with 21 conditions. Commissioner Hansen asked how many on -street parking spaces would be eliminated to accommodate parking ramp entrances and exits. Ms. Wittman said four total. Commissioner Hansen asked about loading/unloading. Ms. Wittman explained the loading/unloading area is designed for both passenger loading/unloading and delivery vehicles. Staff has suggested the developer increase the size of loading/unloading area to discourage double parking. Commissioner Fletcher asked about the stormwater management plan. Ms. Wittman replied that the Middle St. Croix Watershed Management staff has been part of the planning process from the beginning. The developer has withdrawn the request for an impervious surface coverage variance and now thinks they will be able to manage stormwater on site. Mike Hoefler and Matt Coopet, H.A.F. Architects, stated they had reviewed the staff -recommended conditions and comments from the Heritage Preservation Commission and have adjusted the plans accordingly. They can agree to the 21 conditions. Commissioner Collins asked if the existing municipal lot has free public parking. Mr. Hoefler replied there are currently 20 open stalls, 11 leased stalls, and four spaces on Mulberry. Chairman Kocon commented that having three ingress/egress from three floors of the parking ramp seems excessive but he understands the rationale behind it. Commissioner Hansen said his main concern is that sight lines at the Mulberry/Second intersection are terrible. He wished the building could be pulled back to eliminate the need for the variance. Chairman Kocon opened the public hearing. Alson Toays, 350 Main Street North, Stillwater Mills #244, voiced concern about traffic on Mulberry Street. Delia Flynn, 350 Main Street North, Stillwater Mills #356, asked about left vs. right turns out of the proposed ramp. She stated that when exiting Stillwater Mills to go west on Mulberry, the hill can be difficult to navigate in winter. She is concerned about drivers exiting the proposed ramp trying to head up that hill. Ms. Wittman responded there has been discussion of one way in and out to reduce potential traffic conflicts. Dave Luth, 350 Main Street North, Stillwater Mills #246, said the Mulberry/Second intersection is terrible, like Russian Roulette every day. Page 2 of 8 Planning Commission January 11, 2017 John Uppgren, 270 North Main, Mulberry Point Antiques, explained his comments also represent his tenants, which four companies account for 54,000 square feet. They have never asked for City assistance or tax increment financing, they play by the rules and have had a good experience with City staff. They oppose the proposal due to three major concerns: 1) It is inconceivable that the City would gift property to a developer without a clear definition of what public good is being served. In 2001 when they remodeled, they approached the City about improving the surface parking lot. They spent $45,000 to improve the lot and have put another $30,000 in the pockets of the City as fees since 2003. He is surprised that suddenly that lot would be given to a developer, taking his own building out of compliance with parking requirements. 2) He is concerned about the project causing major disturbances in the ground water flow and storm water. All the structures are uphill from Johnny's TV and his building, which already have water in the basement. 3) A massive intrusion of cars and trucks will put an incredible burden on his buildings. He asked the Commission to reject the compromises, particularly the number of parking stalls. He feels it's unfair to give a lot away to the developer to build a private parking lot and an office building while taking parking away from him. Keith Rediske, 350 Main Street North, Stillwater Mills #210, asked about the entry/exit from the parking ramp and where hotel guests will park when registering. He is concerned about U-turns on Mulberry conflicting with the four garage doors for Stillwater Mills that are directly across Mulberry. He does not have a problem with the building itself. He would support the addition of another hotel but has real concerns about traffic congestion, especially because Second/Mulberry sight lines are already very poor. Dan Oberprillar, CPM Companies, representing the owner, said they are not expecting anything for free. Watershed District approval is very important to the developers. Occupancy for the 64-room boutique hotel is expected to be 68%, which he doesn't see as a large traffic impact. Placing the building at the property line is good urban planning but they realize they need to place the building back from intersections to improve sight lines. They are a boutique brand, owner operated, want to be a good neighbor and won't allow semi trucks to become a problem. They want to be a supportive partner in the business district and bring shoppers and patrons to Stillwater. Don Ganje, 350 Main Street North, Stillwater Mills #206, said he is very excited about the development in general but is concerned about the office building. He said the elevation as proposed looks like four stories on the eastern side due to slope, with a significantly high blank wall underneath three stories. He would like the developer to look at what they can do to bring down the mass of the building at least on the eastern side. At a minimum, the exits from the ramp should be right turn only. He feels the City should consider bump -outs on Mulberry, and request the developer to resubmit an entire landscape plan. He believes traffic on Mulberry, with all the entrances and exits, will be a mess. He suggested putting ramp exits off Commercial Street which obviously would involve buying the low buildings, but would lessen traffic conflicts. Jeff Bednar, SRF Consulting Group, representing the traffic impact study done by the developer, stated that the parking ramp exit on Mulberry is offset from the Stillwater Mills driveway so they are not directly across from each other. It would be physically possible for vehicles exiting the lower level of the ramp wanting to get onto the second level to make a U-turn. But the turn coming out of the second level to go to the lower level cannot be made so those vehicles will have to make a right turn out, drive to Main Street and around the block to get to the lower level. This will all be considered when developing a sign plan to direct motorists. During peak hour, 4:15-5:15 p.m., an estimated 172 vehicles will enter this conflict area. The study shows there will be adequate gaps in the flow to provide safe and reasonable access to and from the parking ramp. Page 3 of 8 Planning Commission January 11, 2017 Mr. Oberprillar clarified that they are not condoning a U-turn into the second level, it was just part of the traffic study to see what was possible. There will be a directional signage plan. Dennis Moline, 350 Main Street North, Stillwater Mills #348, said he hopes there will be a sight distance study done at Second and Mulberry and possibly a two way stop or three way stop there. Also, if headlights coming out of the ramp can't be screened on the hotel property, there may be an opportunity to screen them on the Stillwater Mills property. Steven Vogl, 350 Main Street North, Stillwater Mills #420, stated that the study didn't take into account how many cars are backed up on Mulberry trying to get onto Main Street. There is no place for cars to turn out if there are cars backed up. He is fully supportive of hotel proposal but has concerns over the height of the office building, setbacks, and traffic going in and out of the ramp. Mr. Hoefler responded it's anticipated that hotel guests will check in by 3 p.m. and stay parked in the ramp because it's a walkable downtown. The inspiration for the height of the office building was his Lolo building which is 30 feet high. He is proposing a 3 story, 35 foot building. The basement is not classified by code as a story because more than 50% of that lower level is buried. The height is 35 feet on the west side; the east side would be another 8-10 feet high. Ms. Wittman added that in the CBD Height Overlay district, Second Street properties are measured from the Second Street grade. Chairman Kocon closed the public hearing. Commissioner Lauer said he finds it refreshing that almost unanimously, everybody seems happy with the idea of a hotel, so the discussion comes down to parking, traffic flow and water. Commissioner Fletcher recognized it's not up to the Commission to debate how storm water will be managed, as long as sufficient management of storm water is a condition of approval. Commissioner Hansen and Chairman Kocon agreed. Commissioner Hansen asked the developer if consideration was given to putting the office building in a different location so more access could come from Second Street. Mr. Hoefler said they considered that but it was not feasible because of screening, fire access issues and windows on the south side of the office building. Chairman Kocon asked about the possibility of moving the office building 5' back to eliminate the need for the variance. He also said the issue of headlights needs to be addressed, as hotel guests will check in at all times of day. Commissioner Hansen commented he has three main issues. 1) He doesn't support the setback variance for the office building because he doesn't believe practical difficulty exists. 2) He is fundamentally opposed to removing free parking downtown. He does not agree with the Downtown Parking Commission recommendation. It doesn't make sense to do this project and then have to purchase permits for the ramp. 3) He doesn't think it will function very well for motorists trying to come in from the top of the hill and turn into the ramp. He likes the idea of a hotel, but feels there are too many issues with this plan to support it. Commissioner Collins said he likes the idea of a hotel but he opposes eliminating free public parking to construct a ramp where drivers will have to purchase tickets. Page 4 of 8 Planning Commission January 11, 2017 Commissioner Lauer commented he doesn't have a problem with it being pay parking. City Planner Wittman suggested the Commission may want to convey to the City Council that they like the concept of the hotel but have difficulty with the loss of public parking and are therefore passing the SUP decision -making responsibility on to the Council as a recommendation, rather than acting on the SUP at the Planning Commission level. Motion by Commissioner Hansen, seconded by Commissioner Fletcher, to approve the front yard setback variance for the hotel, and to approve the combined side yard variance for hotel, and to deny the five foot variance to front and exterior side yard setback for the office building, with Conditions #1, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 11 as recommended by staff. All in favor, 5-0. Motion by Commissioner Lauer, seconded by Commissioner Fletcher, to recommend that the City Council approve Case No. 2016-40, Special Use Permit (SUP) to develop a hotel with a restaurant and outside eating area, parking ramp and three-story office building on the property located at 232 Main Street North and including City -owned property at 251 Second Street North, with the 21 conditions recommended by staff. Motion passed 3-2, with Commissioners Collins and Hansen voting against. Case No. 2016-43: Zoning Map Amendment to include certain adjoining parcels in the Height Overlay District to zone them as "Bluffside" for the property located at 107 Third Street North. Trinity Lutheran Church, Eric Olson, property owner and Brown's Creek, LLC, Jon Whitcomb, applicant. City Planner Wittman explained that Browns Creek West LLC, represented by Jon Whitcomb, has submitted a two-part application for the City's consideration of: 1) The addition of three parcels to the Height Overlay District area. These three parcels are near the intersection of 3rd Street North and Myrtle Street West. The corner parcel is already in the Overlay District area and is zoned CBDBT, Central Business District (3 story-35 feet) Blufftop. 2) The consideration of all four parcels to be zoned as CBDB, Central Business District (4 story-45 feet) Bluffside. Ms. Wittman explained that the purpose of the overlay district is to preserve and enhance the essential character of the downtown by limiting structural height so that structures close to the river not rise above the height of structures farther from the river. Staff finds the public necessity and the general community welfare are not furthered with the amendment from the CBDBT, Central Business District Blufftop to the CBDB, Central Business District Bluffside. Additionally, as the proposed Zoning Map Amendment would allow for the development of a building that is another story greater than any adjacent property to the north, west, and south, the proposed amendment is not in general conformance with the principles, policies and land use designations set forth in the comprehensive plan. Staff finds that adding the three parcels to the district is consistent with the comprehensive plan, however, staff recommends that the Commission recommend denial of the request as a whole due to the requested zoning map amendment. She further stated that, though in favor of the pending land sale, current property owner Trinity Lutheran Church submitted comment that they were not in favor of the proposed map change. Jon Whitcomb, 12950 75th Street, Stillwater, explained that the church no longer owns the property, he is the owner. Compressing the building into a smaller area makes additional height necessary in order to develop the parcel properly. There are no site plans yet but this request would allow for development of the site. He feels that placing the greater height restriction on these three lots would negatively impact surrounding properties. Page 5 of 8 Planning Commission January 11, 2017 Chairman Kocon opened the public hearing. James Purcell, 2001 Hazel Court, challenged whether the Planning Commission's vision for the City is high rise buildings. He feels there is no rationale for allowing four stories on this site. Chairman Kocon closed the public hearing. Community Development Director Turnblad said there is no property zoned CBD that was not originally covered with the height overlay district. The three lots, when redeveloped for the parking ramp, were rezoned for CBD but staff forgot to include the height overlay so 25 feet is allowed without the height overlay. Motion by Commissioner Collins, seconded by Commissioner Fletcher, to recommend that the City Council deny Case No. 2016-43, Zoning Map Amendment to include certain adjoining parcels in the Height Overlay District zone for the property located at 107 Third Street North. All in favor, 5-0. Case No. 2016-46: Zoning Text Amendment to require site plan review of certain development projects in the Central Business District. City of Stillwater, applicant. Community Development Director Turnblad stated that current City Code does not require formal review when buildings downtown are converting from one use to another. However, these conversions can have a significant impact upon public infrastructure, especially for larger buildings. Therefore, the City Council directed Planning Department staff to develop a draft site plan review ordinance for larger building conversion projects in the downtown area. There are 22 properties downtown that are 20,000 square foot or larger, which would be the subject of the ordinance He reviewed the draft ordinance and proposed permit process. Chairman Kocon opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. The public hearing was closed. Motion by Commissioner Hansen, seconded by Commissioner Collins, to recommend that the City Council approve Case No. 2016-46, Zoning Text Amendment to require site plan review of certain development projects in the Central Business District, with the added condition that the Council consider granting approval authority to the Commission. Motion passed 5-0. Case No. 2016-49: Variance to the required length of a cul-de-sac for the property located at 1902 William Street North. Sterling Black, property owner and applicant. City Planner Wittman explained that in order to construct more than a single duplex on these (nearly) seven acres, the property owner is requesting a variance of 510' to allow for a 235' long cul-de-sac to be constructed off of the Hazel Street right-of-way. The new road would continue to intersect with Hazel Court approximately 875' from the intersection of Hazel Street and North Fifth Street. While a previous development plat, commonly referred to as Hazel Place Villas, was approved for the site in 2007, amendments to the original development plat failed to gain City approval in 2015. This was largely due to the Planning Commission's interpretation of the starting measurement point for the length of a cul-de-sac. The Planning Commission determined the measurement should start at the intersection of Hazel and North Fifth Street, as opposed to starting at the Hazel Street intersection, and therefore the development of 20 new single family parcels should not be permitted on this site. The Page 6 of 8 Planning Commission January 11, 2017 City Council upheld the decision made by the Planning Commission. The property owner proposes a new concept plan which would include the development of only seven single family lots and an 875' cul-de-sac, 235' of which is on the property owned by the applicant. Staff finds the variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the zoning code, is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, and that the property owner has established practical difficulty. Staff recommends conditional approval. Sterling Black, 188 View Road, Mahtomedi, applicant, stated that in 2007 a project was approved for 10 twin homes and that approval still exists. In 2015, he came back with a proposal for 19 units which generated concerns over density. That proposal was denied based on cul-de-sac length. In order to reduce density and fit with neighborhood desires, he cut 2/3 of the cul-de-sac and eliminated some infrastructure costs to make it work with fewer units. If tonight's proposal is denied, he could either 1) go forward with the 20 unit twin home project or 2) build a single family home or two. Chairman Kocon opened the public hearing. Brian Larson, 2008 Hazel Court, thanked the developer for coming back with an improved plan which goes a long way toward making it fit the neighborhood. He would support the proposal if it were developed as seven single family lots but he could not support duplexes, doubling the density. He feels the approval could be conditioned in a way to assure that it would be a single family development and attach that condition to the title so it will stay with the property. Ken Harycki, 2004 Hazel Court, thanked Mr. Black for listening to the neighbors' suggestions about the previous proposal. He would like to bind the property to be developed as seven single family homes with some sort of covenant on the title or some other mechanism. James Purcell, 2001 Hazel Court, reflected that the purpose behind a limitation on cul-de-sacs is public safety. With a 235' addition to the existing cul-de-sac, if there were 14 units, there would be a choke - point problem with emergency vehicles getting in. The property should be developed as single family homes. Tim Sinclair, 14411 Dellwood Road, said he enjoys the wild, but realizes there are development pressures. He is skeptical of the classic bait and switch where a developer comes in and gains approval and then switches the plan. He would support the seven single family proposal 100%. Pat Lockyear, 2001 Hazel Court, thanked Mr. Black for thinking that smaller is better and accommodating the neighbors. He would like the approval to go with the land. Sonja Larson, 2008 Hazel Court, said she supports her neighbors and is grateful to Mr. Black for making the proposal better. She supports having single family homes on the property and would like the approval to go with the title to to the property to ensure it will remain single family. Mary Harycki, 2004 Hazel Court, reminded the Commission that originally, the Planning Commission did not recommend approval of the first project, the 22 twin homes. She would love to see the property rezoned to RB 1. Debbie Sinclair, 14411 Dellwood Road, reported she was very happy to see Mr. Black's plans. Her only concern is that the proposal could change with the next person who owns the property. She feels it should be rezoned to single family to avoid any future issues. Page 7 of 8 Planning Commission January 11, 2017 Chairman Kocon closed the public hearing. Community Development Director Turnblad pointed out that staff is recommending approval with a condition that specifically says the plans that come in for development must be substantially similar to those on file for seven single family homes. It runs with the property. Commissioner Hansen stated that the property owner already has approval to put 10 duplexes on this property but he doesn't want to do that. He feels the current proposal is a much better plan. Chairman Kocon acknowledged that seven single family homes would have less impact than 14. Mr. Turnblad suggested the Commission could amend the recommended condition of approval to include the statement that the project shall contain no greater than seven single family lots. Motion by Commissioner Hansen, seconded by Commissioner Fletcher, to approve Case No. 2016-49, variance to the required length of a cul-de-sac for the property located at 1902 William Street North, amending the recommended condition of approval to state that "Plans shall be substantially similar to those on file with the Community Development Depaitment's Case No. 2016-49, and shall contain no greater than seven single family lots. " Motion passed 5-0. NEW BUSINESS There was no new business. STAFF UPDATES There were no staff updates. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Commissioner Hansen, seconded by Commissioner Fletcher, to adjourn the meeting at 10:25 p.m. All in favor, 5-0. Respectfully Submitted, Julie Kink Recording Secretary Page 8 of 8 � Water TNT 9 I R I H R L A C E OE MINNESOTA Planning Commission DATE: March 1, 2017 APPLICANT: Chris Goetzke OWNER: JBL Companies US Agent CASE NO.: 2017-02 REQUEST: Special Use Permit for exterior phonographs, paging systems, musical instruments, etc. that may disturb the peace and quiet of the public LOCATION: 324 Main Street South ZONING: CBD - Central Business District PUBLIC HEARING:March 8, 2017 PREPARED BY: Laura Chamberlain, Consulting Planner BACKGROUND The Tilted Tiki Restaurant would like to provide its patrons with pre-recorded and live music on their outdoor dining area through a new speaker. The pre-recorded music would occur daily from 11:00 am - 10:00 pm; live music would be performed in the summer months by a single musician with a guitar, scheduled during the summer for Thursdays - Saturdays, as well as summer holidays (Memorial Day, Fourth of July, and Labor Day) from 6:00 pm - 10:00 pm. "Exterior phonographs, paging systems, musical instruments, etc. that may disturb the peace and quiet of the public" are allowed in the CBD Zoning District by Special Use Permit. The property at 324 Main Street is a multi -tenant, multi -use commercial building, generally referred to as the Grand Garage. There are a number of previously approved Special Use Permits for 324 Main Street. The Tilted Tiki restaurant space was approved for a Special Use Permit for outdoor dining in 1999. The 1999 use permit was issued to Starbucks, but the use permit runs with the space and has been used continuously since then by restaurants for outdoor dining. The requested SUP for exterior speakers with 324 Main Street S Page 2 prerecorded and live music will only apply to the Tilted Tiki outdoor dining area, and will not impact already approved SUPs for other tenants of the Grand Garage. SPECIFIC REQUEST Chris Goetzke is requesting a Special Use Permit (SUP) for the Tilted Tiki Restaurant to provide pre-recorded and live music through an exterior speaker in their outdoor dining area at 324 Main Street South. EVALUATION OF REQUEST The Zoning Chapter of the City Code states that "exterior phonographs, paging systems, musical instruments, etc. that may disturb the peace and quiet of the public" are allowed by Special Use Permit in the CBD Zoning District.1 Since the Tilted Tiki site is zoned CBD, a Special Use Permit may be granted for pre-recorded and live music in their exterior dining area, as long as the following standards are satisfied:2 (1) The proposed use conforms to the requirements and the intent of the Zoning Ordinance, the Comprehensive Plan, and any relevant area plans. Zoning Ordinance Outside uses associated with restaurants and bars in the Central Business District are allowed with a Special Use Permit. This applies to both the serving of food and beverages outside as well as any music or entertainment that accompanies the use. The primary concern is balancing the volume of sound generated by this type of allowed land use with the desire for periods of quiet by residents downtown and in abutting neighborhoods. At the Tilted Tiki s location, the primary residential concerns are the various residential mixed use properties in the Central Business District, within one block on Main Street South. Being located in downtown, facing Main Street, these residential properties already experience a level of commercial noise. In an attempt to minimize the amount of additional sound, one speaker is being proposed, located as close to the building as possible, directed out towards Main Street. This can be seen in the site plan shown in the application. ' City Code Ch 31, Sec. 31-325 2 City Code Ch. 31, Sec. 31-207 324 Main Street S Page 3 Comprehensive Plan The Downtown Chapter of the City's Comprehensive Plan encourages a broad mix of uses downtown. Though not specifically stated, this includes a variety of dining and entertainment options. (2) Any additional conditions necessary for the public interest have been imposed. (3) Sound Projection and Volume As mentioned above, the primary concern is striking a balance between exterior music and quality of life for neighborhood residents. As with other SUPs for this type of use in the downtown, a condition should be attached that limits both the hours of the day and the volume of exterior music. The volume levels must abide by the limits established in the City's nuisance ordinance, City Code Section 38-3. The standard 10 pm end time for outdoor music with other SUP holders seems appropriate for the Tilted Tiki outdoor dining area, given its location on Main Street, and away from significant residential areas in the City. Miscellaneous All changes to the approved plans will need to be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director. Any major changes will need to go to the Planning Commission for review and approval. The use or structure will not constitute a nuisance or be detrimental to the public welfare of the community. Staff finds this criterion to be satisfied. ALTERNATIVES The Planning Commission has the following options: (1) Approve the Special Use Permit with the following conditions: (a) All changes to the approved plan and times shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director. Any major or permanent changes will need to go to the Planning Commission for review and approval. (b) Music volumes shall never exceed those specified in the City Nuisance, City Code Section 38-3. 324 Main Street S Page 4 (c) Pre-recorded exterior music shall be limited to times when customers dine on the patio. The hours that pre-recorded exterior music is permitted on those days are 11 am to 10 pm. (d) Live exterior music shall be limited to Thursdays, Fridays, Saturdays, and holidays between Memorial Day and Labor Day each year. The hours that live exterior music is permitted on those days are 6 pm to 10 pm (e) The approval of this Special Use Permit is for the use of those tenants at 324 Main Street South of the suites attached to the outside patio at the corner of Main Street South and Nelson Alley, generally referred to as the Tilted Tiki restaurant. This Special Use Permit shall not have an impact on existing Special Use Permits for tenants of other uses within the 324 Main Street South complex, nor shall this Special Use Permit be applied to other outdoor spaces on the property. (2) Deny the Special Use Permit. If the Planning Commission decides to deny the requests, findings of fact substantiating the denial must be provided. (3) Table the request for additional information. STAFF RECOMMENDATION City staff recommends approval with the conditions presented above. Attachments: Location map Neighborhood Air Photo Application Materials CC: Chris Goetzke 0 NA-7 1 ie ')' S 0 5. Stlli\aSL M O 4 § , ` i\S-C , The Birthplace of Minnesota W �- m e \,: Z - - < O e,:. % ' --. yr. OA O (P� o'At,- s�Nv 't 1 p,S-C GNE -ter a ® , PN 23 0 $ Ai k t, a N W fat/..�, S 324 Main Street South V ♦ (I) = 4 ?• Z;' '1 s • • 4 ` S� � CP , 0 c9 � Y S � N ° QN ✓.�Sp� K1e4 �! N`B�� 'A 0 As C. `SON S NE 5- !.r. —••—••- Municipal Boundary Parcel Boundaries 0 145 290 580 Feet om ti �°41 General Site Location jam{ a 0 0 Y �' c� \ ii Ii . <Y O /I � SCR �; ° t. T d ... �a , N O -_ . �� � 1 ; ` -. ` = a , 1g `o Tilted Tiki Patio Neighborhood Map PLANNING ADMINISTRATION APPLICATION FORM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY OF STILLWATER 216 NORTH FOURTH STREET STILLWATER MN 55062 SpeciaVConditional Use Permit Variance Resubdlvlsion Subdivision' Comprehensive Plan Amendment' ACTION REQUESTED Case No: (i 2 0I'r - 02 Date Filed: Base Fee: Technology Fee: $25313- Receipt No,: V-0- 2019 Zoning Amendment' Planning Unit Development * Certificate of Compliance Lot Line Adjustment "An escrow fee is also required to offset the costs of attorney and engineering fees. The fees for requested action are attached to thls application. The applicant Is responsible for the completeness and accuracy of all forms and supporting material submitted in connection with any application. All supporting material (I e., photos, sketches, etc.) submitted with application becomes the property of the City of Stillwater. Only one copy of supporting materials are required. However, any documents larger than 11 x 17 must be submitted In paper and In pdf format. Review the Checklist to the Planning Administration Application Form for the complete list of required Items that must be submitted. qnv incomplete aapllcatlon orsuo ortlno material will pause Your application to be Weasel by the City. Required - Applications will be rejected without a legal description, A legal description Is found on the deed to the property. Attach as an exhibit If necessary. After Planning Commission approvals, there Is a 10-day appeal period. Once the 10-day appeal period has ended, the applicant will receive a zoning use permit which must be signed and submitted to the City to obtain the required building permits. PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION Address of Pro;ect j`7' L{ it t. t't{hl S Assessor% Parcel No. c 030 (GEO Code) Complete Property Legal Description' ('Required - Applications will be rejec Ted without a toga pdescript1on) Tax descriptions and property descriptions from the county are not acceptable. Zcn:ng D strict Description of Protect AF,5 i -"U ' iti 1 krG tA'L w AV l GQ1NC- A/A/ ,r'qr,Pit-tot)>Qt 'dN/'A-it0, OVf- 4cf1 iC. 48(46 I hereby state the foregoing statements and all data, Information and evidence submitted herewith in all respects, to the best of my knowledge and belief, to be true and correct. / further certify 1 will comply with the permit if it is granted and used." Required If other than property owner Property Owner =j' :, I``k `...; , y 4 ��, i. { Representative , [ 14.P I S t scC7 Mom' rg Address 1 ".' ,1t- } t; )k` Mailing Address Sp - of At. v./ S i 5 5taoe — Z p f r.; :� I I ► I �f } City - State - Zip .S T 1 L C +��;`��-"111 ' & ? Telepbone Not, r) fv,'•',t,;," - (I) I 1 Telephone No. / S / -7 / /s- ,y Y'.i./IL , ;, Itl.� 1, t<� ',' .. ,,.'2 Email J A/ K? 1T 'r1i Tl-'1'7 % / .1 `J- Ernad Signs` (Signature is required) 1 a-H (�{' car t3 Signature _ ( s i,a1* NG;AE%1INISTRATION',r`os3+.1;vi AIar/it:c; APPLICATION 2013.DOCX June 13, 2013 S1gnatuf=`Is required) GRAND GARAGE Main Floor occr} RAM If nt-amap- r RAGE ,sa.. Amway. .1 1cJ Mein SvwI•$ w.tieMX55062 The Tilted Tiki, 324 Main St S Grand Garage Building, Suites 2,3,4 plus outside patio Location A - 10' artificial palm tree containing one speaker for outside music tucked back In corner. Music to be played at acceptable listening levels. Non offensive music to be played, IE, Jimmy Buffet or Hawaiian style easy listening. Replacing existing speaker that was used by former tenant. Summer time, live music to be used. Single musician with guitar for background easy listening (same style music),see attached photo of palm tree cf ectKe6 I 11 00 4m— 1 F OO fl\il;ve w\AIC l'r $cc,s�'3-1O m Location B - outdoor patio tables used by/obtained from former Luna Rossa restaurant, new blue ur-brellas to be used, see attached photo of tables Location C - new sign for archway, The Tilted Tiki with logo, see attached photo MI PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: March 3, 2017 TO: Planning Commission TOPIC: Short Term Home Rental Ordinance FROM: Bill Turnblad, Community Development Director INRODUCTION In August of last year the city council approved a contract with Hoisington Koegler Group, Inc. (HKGi) to assist the city with a study on short term home rentals (STHR). The consultant group conducted a survey and completed their research and study in September and city staff held a stakeholders meeting in October to share that research and discuss the issues associated with STHR. In November the planning commission reviewed the HKGi research and stakeholder comments and offered comments as well. In December the city council held a work session with the stakeholders to consider both the HKGi study (attached) as well as public and commission input to date, and decided to proceed with the development of an ordinance allowing STHR in the city in some form or another. In January of this year city staff brought an outline of potential ordinance elements to the council for more direction prior to developing the first draft of the ordinance. It is this first draft that is now scheduled to be considered by the planning commission on March 8, 2017. ORDINANCE ELEMENTS Six elements comprise the core of the proposed ordinance. 1. Definitions. There are four Short Term Home Rental types being considered. a. Type A - Hosted: The property owner or lessee of the property rents out a room, or couch perhaps, but is present (i.e. "hosts") while guests are in the home. Page 2 b. Type B - Unhosted: The property owners live in the home as their primary residence. When the home is rented for a weekend or other short term, the property owners are not present in the home. c. Type C - Dedicated Short Term Home Rental: The property owners do not live in the home as their primary residence. Perhaps they use it as a vacation home, but more than likely it is strictly an investment property. d. Type D - Bed & Breakfast: The definition and regulations for this type of STHR are already established in City Code, and are not proposed to be changed by this ordinance. 2. Licensing process. Each STHR type will have a separate process. The greater the potential impact on neighbors, the more review the neighbors will be afforded. a. Type A - Hosted STHR i. Administrative license 1. If performance standards are met and safety code items are certified as satisfied, staff issues a license. 2. License issued for three years. 3. There is no limit on the total number of Type A licenses allowed in the City. 4. If three substantiated complaints are received from neighbors or guests within a 12 month period, the license is revoked. The revocation can be appealed to the City Council. 5. No inspections required for a Type A license. b. Type B - Unhosted STHR i. Administrative license with neighborhood notification 1. When a license is requested for this type of STHR, staff would send out a notice to neighbors within 150 feet of the property. The notice would explain the license request and ask if the proposal raises any concerns. 2. If performance standards are met, the property passes a safety inspection, and no concerns are raised by neighbors, then staff issues a license valid for three years. 3. There would be a limit of 25 Type B licenses allowed in the City. 4. If concerns are raised by neighbors, staff schedules a hearing before the Planning Commission. a. If performance standards are met, a safety inspection is passed, but the neighbors still have concerns, then the Planning Commission could approve a one year provisional license, or deny the license. b. If there are no complaints during the provisional year, the license would automatically extend for two more years. Page 3 5. If three substantiated complaints are received from neighbors or guests within a 12 month period, the license is revoked. The revocation can be appealed to the City Council. c. Type C - Dedicated STHR i. Conditional Use Permit and license 1. This license review process would follow the process already established in City Code for Conditional and Special Use Permits. 2. A public hearing would be held before the Planning Commission. A notice of the hearing would be mailed to all property owners within 350 feet of the proposed non - homesteaded STHR. 3. If performance standards are met, and a safety inspection is passed, then the Planning Commission could approve the Conditional Use Permit. The Conditional Use Permit would run with the land but the property could not be operated as a STHR without a license as well. The license is issued to an owner, and does not run with the land. So, if the property changes hands, the new owner would need to make application for a new license. 4. With a valid Conditional Use Permit for a property, the property owner would make application for a Type C license. An inspection would be required prior to issuance of the license, or renewal of the license. 5. The Type C license is valid for three years. 6. If three substantiated complaints are received from neighbors or guests within a 12 month period, the licensee is revoked. The revocation can be appealed to the City Council. 7. There will be a limit of five Type C licenses allowed in the City. d. Type D - Bed & Breakfast i. A Special Use Permit process already exists in the Stillwater Zoning Code. No changes are proposed to that process. 3. Limit on number of licenses. No more than 25 Type B licenses would be allowed, nor would more than five Type C licenses be allowed. No limit on the number of Type A or Type D licenses. 4. Location of STHRs. STHRs can occur within any residential zoning district or within the CBD zoning district. 5. Lodging tax. Currently hotels and B&Bs within the City are required to pay a 3% lodging tax. All STHRs would also be required to pay this 3% tax. Page 4 6. Performance standards. In addition to the other requirements of this ordinance, the following performance standards would be applied to each license review. a. Parking. In residential zoning districts, all guest parking must be accommodated on improved surfaces on the premises. No on -street parking is allowed for guests. At a minimum, parking shall be provided at the following rate: 1. 1-2 bedroom unit, 1 space 2. 3 bedroom unit, 2 spaces 3. 4 and 4+ bedroom units, number of spaces equal to the number of bedrooms minus one. b. Length of guest stay. There is no mandated minimum length of stay. The maximum length of stay is 30 days, since more than that is by definition no longer a Short Term Home Rental. c. Number of guests. The maximum number of guests will be limited to two times the number of bedrooms plus one. d. Guest records. The licensee for Type B and C Short Term Rentals must keep a guest record including the name, address, phone number, and vehicle license plate information for all guests and must provide a report to the city upon 48 hours' notice. e. Guest disclosures. The licensee must disclose in writing to their guests the following rules and regulations, and must submit a copy of the disclosure to the city with the license application and renewal applications: 1. For Type B and C Short Term Home Rentals, the name, phone number and address of owner or managing agent/representative; 2. The maximum number of guests allowed at the property; 3. The maximum number of vehicles allowed at the property and where they are to be parked; 4. Property rules related to use of outdoor features, such as decks, patios, pools, grills, recreational fires, saunas and other recreational facilities; 5. City nuisance ordinances will be enforced by the Stillwater Police Department, including reduced noise levels between 10 PM and 8 AM. f. License number. The licensee must post their city license number on all print, poster or web advertisements. g. Proximity of assistance. For Type B and Type C Short Term Home Rentals, the property owner or a manager/representative must be located within 30 miles of the property. The community development department must be notified within 10 days of a change in the managing agent/representative or their contact information. The licensee must provide the name, address and phone number for the managing agent/representative to all property owners within 100 feet of the Page 5 property boundary. The licensee must notify neighboring properties within 10 days of a change in the managing agent/representation or contact information. h. Separation of Short Term Home Rental units. Type C and D Short Term Home Rentals must be separated by at least 900 feet (about three blocks) from other Type C and D Short Term Home Rentals, measured from lot line to lot line. i. Maximum rental days per year. Not enough discussion occurred on this standard for staff to know what the Council's preference is, or the community's. Perhaps no limit is set on Type A - Hosted. Perhaps a limit is set on Type B -Homesteaded. Perhaps no limit is set on Type C Non -homesteaded. If a fairly restrictive limit is set on Type C, it will likely disappear as a type because it is probably not a financially sustainable model as an investment or vacation property. Type D - B&B currently has no maximum established, nor is one proposed. j. Garbage. As required by City Code Chapter 30-1, Subd 5, all garbage must be kept in rubbish containers that are stored out of view of a public street. k. Signage. No signage is allowed on the property of a Type A, B or C Short Term Home Rental. Type D is allowed signage as regulated in Section 31-504 of this Chapter. 1. Linen laundry. [Language still being researched on appropriate linen laundering regulations.] m. Pest control. [Language still being researched on appropriate pest control regulations.] n. Ice cube makers. [Language still being researched on appropriate ice cube maker regulations.] ACTION REQUESTED Staff requests that the Planning Commission conduct a public hearing and consider the draft ordinance. ALTERNATIVES The following alternatives are available: 1. Recommend approval of the draft ordinance with or without changes. 2. Recommend denial of the draft ordinance. 3. Table consideration of the ordinance for completion of the inspection check list and the performance standards related to linens, pest control and ice cube makers. bt attachments: Draft Ordinance Study Focus Group Comments Short -Term Home Rental Ordinance March 3, 2017 Draft I. Definitions Amend City Code Chapter 31, Section 31-101 Definitions by adding the following: 119.1. Primary Resident, means a person living on a property where the property is the person's primary residence. 145.1. Short Term Home Rental code compliance verification form, is a document signed by a Type A Short Term Home Rental licensee certifying that the Short Term Home Rental complies with applicable building, health and life safety code provisions. 145.2. Short Term Home Rental, Type A (hosted short term rental), means a dwelling unit that is offered to transient guests for a period of less than 30 consecutive days, where a primary resident of the property is present while the transient guests are present. 145.3. Short Term Home Rental, Type B (unhosted short term rental), means a dwelling unit that is offered to transient guests for a period of less than 30 consecutive days, where the property serves as a person's primary residence but a primary resident of the property is not present while the transient guests are present. This Type B also includes Short Term Home Rental of any Accessory Dwelling Units, Duplexes or "mother-in-law" apartments. 145.4. Short Term Home Rental, Type C (dedicated short term rental) means a dwelling unit that is offered to transient guests for a period of less than 30 consecutive days, where the property does not serve as a person's primary residence 145.5. Short Term Home Rental, Type D (Bed & Breakfast) — see the definition of Bed & Breakfast in Paragraph 16 of this Definition Section 31-101. II. Short Term Home Rental Regulations. Amend City Code Chapter 31 by adding the following Section. Sec. 31-514.1. Short -Term Home Rental Regulations Subd. 1. Purpose. The purpose of this Section 31-514.1 is to allow Short Term Home Rentals where appropriate while mitigating impacts upon surrounding properties by implementing balanced regulations to protect the integrity of the city's neighborhoods as well as protect the general public health, safety and welfare. Subd. 2. License required. No property may be used for Type A, B or C Short Term Home Rental unless granted a license by the city. No property may be used for Type C Short Term Home Rental unless granted a Conditional Use Permit and a license by the city. No property may be used for Type D Short Term Home Rental (aka Bed & Breakfast) unless granted a Special Use Permit by the city pursuant to Section 31-504 of this Chapter. Page 2 March 3 Draft Subd. 3. License application. Any property owner (or property lessee for Type A or B rentals) desiring to undertake Short Term Home Rentals must apply to the community development department for a Short Term Home Rental License. A license must be approved prior to operating within the city. If the applicant is a lessee of the property, then the owner of the property must co-sign the license application. The license application request must be submitted on the form prescribed by the city and must include all the information requested on the application form. Subd. 4. License fee. The license application form must be accompanied by payment in full of the required license fee. The license fee amount will be as determined by the city council in the city fee schedule. Subd. 5. License issuance. The process for review and issuance of a license will vary depending upon the type of Short Term Home Rental as follows: A. Type A, Hosted Short Term Home Rentals. Type A Short Term Home Rentals are required to have an administratively issued license from the city. 1. A Type A Short Term Home Rental license or renewal license will be issued administratively only if: i. The licensee certifies on the application form that all applicable items found in this Section 31-514.1 are satisfied. That includes: a. Code compliance verification form as required in Subd. 8; b. Proper zoning as found in Subd. 6; and c. Performance standards as found in Subd. 7. ii. The applicant submits a site plan, drawn to scale, showing parking and driveways, all structures and outdoor recreational areas that guests will be allowed to use, including, but not limited to, deck/patio, barbeque grill, recreational fire, or sauna. iii. The applicant submits a floor plan, drawn to scale, of the home identifying which rooms will be used as transient guest bedrooms. 2. There shall be no change in the exterior appearance of the home or premises, or other visible evidence of the conduct of a Short Term Home Rental, except that additional on -site city code compliant parking may be provided. 3. The licensee must provide proof of sufficient and suitable property insurance at the time of license issuance, and must be able to confirm that the coverage remains in place within 24 hours of a city request for confirmation. 4. Licenses are non -transferable and shall expire upon change of ownership or lessee of the property. 5. A license constitutes a limited license granted to the applicant by the city and in no way creates a vested zoning right. 6. If three substantiated and relevant complaints are received from neighbors or guests within a 12 month period, the license shall be revoked. The revocation may be appealed to the city council pursuant to procedures established in Section 31-217 of this Chapter. Page 3 March 3 Draft 7. Licenses are valid for a period of three years. A renewal license must be applied for every three years. B. Type B — Unhosted Short Term Rental. Type B Short Term Home Rentals are required to have an administratively issued license from the city. However, unlike a Type A license, a Type B license also requires neighborhood notification. 1. A Type B Short Term Home Rental license will be issued administratively only if: i. The applicant submits a site plan, drawn to scale, showing parking and driveways, all structures and outdoor recreational areas that guests will be allowed to use, including, but not limited to, deck/patio, barbeque grill, recreational fire, or sauna. ii. The applicant submits a floor plan, drawn to scale, of the home identifying which rooms will be used as transient guest bedrooms. iii. The licensee certifies on the application form that all applicable items found in this Section 31-514.1 are satisfied. That includes: a. Proper zoning as found in Subd. 6 b. Performance standards as found in Subd. 7 c. Issuance of the license will not exceed the total number of licenses allowed in the city as established in Subd. 10 d. Proof of sufficient and suitable property insurance. iv. Notices have been mailed by the city to all homes within 150 feet of the applicant's property lines; and v. There are no objections received by the city within ten days of mailing the notices. a. If objections are received, then the license request must be considered by the planning commission. (1). The planning commission must hold a hearing, to which neighbors within 150 feet of the applicant's property lines are invited to offer comments. (2). After considering the license request and hearing comments from the neighbors, the planning commission may either approve a one year provisional license, with or without conditions, or deny the license request. (3). If there are no substantiated relevant complaints from neighbors or guests during the provisional year, the permit will automatically extend two more years. v. The property is inspected by city building and fire code inspectors and found to meet the residential code standards applicable to renting a home on a short term basis. The list of health and safety items that will be inspected for this purpose will be included amongst license application materials so that the property owner or lessee will know what items will be inspected prior to submitting the license application to the city. Page 4 March 3 Draft 2. The property passes the city health and safety code inspection (see Section 31-514.1, Subd. 9B), and the licensee certifies on the application form that all applicable items found in this Section 31-514.1 are satisfied. That includes: i. Proper zoning as found in Subd. 6 ii. Performance standards as found in Subd. 7 iii. Issuance of the license will not exceed the total number of licenses allowed in the city as found in Subd. 10 iv. Note that no neighborhood notification is required for a license renewal. 3. There shall be no change in the exterior appearance of the home or premises, or other visible evidence of the conduct of a Short Term Home Rental, except that additional on -site city code compliant parking may be provided. 4. The licensee must provide proof of sufficient and suitable property insurance at the time of license issuance, and must be able to confirm that the coverage remains in place within 24 hours of a city request for confirmation. 5. If three substantiated and relevant complaints are received from neighbors or guests within a 12 month period, the license shall be revoked. The revocation may be appealed to the city council pursuant to procedures established in Section 31-217 of this Chapter. 6. Licenses are non -transferable and shall expire upon change of ownership or lessee of the property. 7. A license constitutes a limited license granted to the applicant by the city and in no way creates a vested zoning right. 8. Licenses are valid for a period of three years. A renewal license must be applied for every three years. C. Type C — Dedicated Short Term Rental. Type C Short Term Home Rentals are required to have both a Conditional Use Permit and an administrative license issued by the city. 1. Conditional Use Permit. The application for the Conditional Use Permit to operate a Type C Short Term Home Rental must be filed with the city's community development department on the applicable form. The application will be reviewed according to the process established in Sections 31-204 and 31-207 of this Chapter. In addition, the following procedures, criteria and conditions shall also apply: i. The applicant must submit a site plan, drawn to scale, showing parking and driveways, all structures and outdoor recreational areas that guests will be allowed to use, including, but not limited to, deck/patio, barbeque grill, recreational fire, or sauna. ii. The applicant submits a floor plan, drawn to scale, of the home identifying which rooms will be used as transient guest bedrooms. iii. The Conditional Use Permit runs with the land and must be filed in the property's chain of title, but since a license is also required for a Page 5 March 3 Draft Type C Short Term Rental, possession of a Conditional Use Permit is not sufficient to operate. Any new owner desiring to operate a Type C Short Term Rental on property that has a Conditional Use Permit filed in the chain of title must also obtain a license from the city. iv. The Conditional Use Permit applicant must certify on the city application form that all applicable items found in this Section 31- 514.1 are satisfied. That includes: a. Proper zoning as found in Subd. 6 b. Performance standards as found in Subd. 7 c. Proof of sufficient and suitable property insurance. d. Approval of the Conditional Use Permit and its associated license will not exceed the total number of licenses allowed in the city as established in Subd. 10 v. The property must be inspected by city building and fire code inspectors and found to meet the residential code standards applicable to renting a home on a short term basis prior to holding the public hearing for the Conditional Use Permit. The list of health and safety items that will be inspected for this purpose will be included amongst license application materials so that the property owner will know what items will be inspected prior to submitting the license application to the city. 2. License. The application form for the license or renewal license must certify by the applicant that all applicable items found in this Section 31- 514.1 are satisfied. That includes: i. A Conditional Use Permit has been issued for the subject property and is still valid. ii. The property has been inspected no more than 60 days prior to submission of the license application by city building and fire code inspectors and found to meet the residential code standards applicable to renting a home on a short term basis. iii. Proper zoning as found in Subd. 6 iv. Performance standards as found in Subd. 7 v. Proof of sufficient and suitable property insurance. vi. Issuance of the license will not exceed the total number of licenses allowed in the city as established in Subd. 10 3. The license for a Type C Short Term Home Rental may only be issued to the owner of the property and is not transferable to a lessee or any other entity. 4. There shall be no change in the exterior appearance of the home or premises, or other visible evidence of the conduct of a Short Term Horne Rental, except that additional on -site city code compliant parking may be provided. 5. The licensee must provide proof of sufficient and suitable property insurance at the time of license issuance, and must be able to confirm that the coverage remains in place within 24 hours of a city request for confirmation. Page 6 March 3 Draft 6. Type C Short Term Home Rental licenses are valid for a period of three years. A renewal license must be applied for every three years. The Conditional Use Permit will not expire unless its use is discontinued as defined in Section 31-204, Subd 6 of this Chapter. 7. The Type C Short Term Home Rental license is not transferable and shall expire upon change of ownership of the property. 8. A license constitutes a limited license granted to the applicant by the city and in no way creates a vested zoning right. 9. If three substantiated and relevant complaints are received from neighbors or guests within a 12 month period, the license shall be revoked. The revocation may be appealed to the city council pursuant to procedures established in Section 31-217 of this Chapter. D. Type D — Bed & Breakfast. Type D Short Term Home Rentals are also known as Bed & Breakfasts and are required to have a Special Use Permit as regulated in Section 31-504 of this Chapter. Subd. 6. Zoning District. With an approved license from the City of Stillwater, Short Term Home Rentals are permitted in the following Zoning Districts: A. Residential Zoning Districts. Type A and B Short Term Home Rentals are allowed by city license in all Residential Zoning Districts. Type C Short Term Home Rentals are allowed by Conditional Use Permit in all Residential Zoning Districts. Type D Short Term Home Rentals (aka Bed & Breakfasts) are allowed by city license in the RCL Zoning District and by Special Use Permit in the RB and RCM Zoning Districts B. Commercial Zoning Districts. Type A, B and C Short Term Home Rentals are permitted by city license in the CBD Zoning District. Subd. 7. Performance standards. Type A, B and C Short Term Home Rentals shall be subject to the following performance standards. Type D Short Term Home Rentals shall be subject to the standards found in Section 31-504 of this Chapter. A. Parking. In residential zoning districts, all guest parking must be accommodated on improved surfaces on the premises. No on -street parking is allowed for guests. At a minimum, parking shall be provided at the following rate: 1. 1-2 bedroom unit, 1 space 2. 3 bedroom unit, 2 spaces 3. 4 and 4+ bedroom units, number of spaces equal to the number of bedrooms minus one. B. Length of guest stay. There is no mandated minimum length of stay. The maximum length of stay is 30 days, since more than that is by definition not a Short Term Home Rental property. C. Number of guests. The maximum number of guests will be limited to two times the number of bedrooms plus one. Page 7 March 3 Draft D. Guest records. The licensee for Type B and C Short Term Rentals must keep a guest record including the name, address, phone number, and vehicle license plate information for all guests and must provide a report to the city upon 48 hours' notice. E. Guest disclosures. The licensee must disclose in writing to their guests the following rules and regulations, and must submit a copy of the disclosure to the city with the license application and renewal applications: 1. For Type B and C Short Term Home Rentals, the name, phone number and address of the owner, operating lessee or managing agent/representative; 2. The maximum number of guests allowed at the property; 3. The maximum number of vehicles allowed at the property and where they are to be parked; 4. Property rules related to use of outdoor features, such as decks, patios, grills, recreational fires, saunas and other recreational facilities; 5. City nuisance ordinances will be enforced by the Stillwater Police Department, including reduced noise levels between 10 PM and 8 AM. F. License number. The licensee must post their city license number on all print, poster or web advertisements. G. Proximity of assistance. For Type B and Type C Short Term Home Rentals, the property owner, operating lessee or a manager/representative must be located within 30 miles of the property. The community development department must be notified within 10 days of a change in the managing agent/representative or their contact information. The licensee must provide the name, address and phone number for the licensee or managing agent/representative to all property owners within 100 feet of the property boundary. The licensee must notify neighboring properties within 10 days of a change in the managing agent/representation or contact information. H. Separation of Short Term Home Rental units. Type C and D Short Term Home Rentals must be separated by at least 900 feet (about three blocks) from other Type C and D Short Term Home Rentals, measured from lot line to lot line. I. Maximum rental days per year. Not enough discussion occurred on this standard for staff to know what the Council's preference is, or the community's. Perhaps no limit is set on Type A - Hosted. Perhaps a limit is set on Type B - Homesteaded. Perhaps no limit is set on Type C Non -homesteaded. If a fairly restrictive limit is set on Type C, it will likely disappear as a type because it is probably not a financially sustainable model as an investment or vacation property. Type D — B&B currently has no maximum established, nor is one proposed. J. Garbage. As required by City Code Chapter 30-1, Subd 5, all garbage must be kept in rubbish containers that are stored out of view of a public street. K. Signage. No signage is allowed on the property of a Type A, B or C Short Term Home Rental. Type D is allowed signage as regulated in Section 31-504 of this Chapter. Page 8 March 3 Draft L. Linen laundry. [Language still being researched on appropriate linen laundering regulations.] M. Pest control. [Language still being researched on appropriate pest control regulations.] N. Ice cube makers. [Language still being researched on appropriate regulate ice cube maker regulations.] Subd. 8. Code compliance verification form. Type A Short Term Home Rental licensees are responsible for assuring that life, safety and health code provisions found in City Code are adhered to. Therefore, a license for operation of a Type A Short Term Home Rental will only be issued if a certified code compliance verification form is submitted together with license application materials. The form will be found with the license application materials. Subd. 9. Required inspections. A. Type A Short Term Home Rentals 1. This type of Short Term Home Rental is not required to have an inspection prior to issuance of a license. 2. Upon receipt of a complaint, the city zoning administrator will contact the licensee and will subsequently determine whether a complaint inspection is required. B. Type B and C Short Term Home Rentals 1. These types of Short Term Home Rentals are required to have, and pass, a health and safety code inspection by city building and fire code staff prior to issuance of a license or renewal of the license. 2. The list of health and safety items that will be inspected for this purpose will be included amongst license application materials so that the licensee will know in advance what items will be inspected. 3. Upon receipt of a complaint, the city zoning administrator will contact the licensee and will subsequently determine whether a complaint inspection is required. C. Type D Short Term Home Rentals (aka Bed & Breakfast) 1. This type of Short Term Home Rental is required to have inspections as regulated by Section 31-504. Subd. 10. Limit on number of licenses. No more than a total of 25 licenses may be issued for Type B Short Term Home Rentals. No more than 5 licenses may be issued for Type C Short Term Home Rentals. There shall be no limit on the number of Type A or Type D Short Term Home Rental licenses. Subd. 11. Sales taxes. In addition to state sales tax, the licensee is required to pay the city lodging tax. A. The city lodging tax must be collected and paid either by the web based booking company that the Short Term Home Rental is listed on, or by the licensee directly to the city if the Short Term Home Rental does not use a web based booking service. Page 9 March 3 Draft B. The license application must supply information on any web based booking service(s) used for the licensed property. C. The licensee, or booking agent on their behalf, is required to pay the city lodging tax quarterly. Subd. 12. Enforcement. In the event of a violation or threatened violation of this ordinance, the city, in addition to other remedies, is entitled to seek Injunctive Relief or proceedings to prevent, restrain correct or abate such violations or threatened violations. The penalty for violation of this Section 31-514.1 shall be a Misdemeanor. III. Amend City Code Section 31-315, Allowable Uses in Residential Districts by adding: ALLOWABLE USES ZONING DISTRICTS A-P LR CTR RA TR CCR RB CR TH CTHR RCL RCM Bed & Breakfast (Type D Short Term Home Rental) SUP10 P11 SUP Short Term Home Rental; Type A and B P P PPPPP PPP P P Short Term Home Rental; Type C CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP P = Permitted use SUP = Use permitted with a Special Use Permit CUP = Use permitted with a Conditional Use Permit A = Accessory use Blank cell in table means that the use is NOT allowed. IV. Amend City Code Section 31-325, Allowable Uses in Non -Residential Districts by adding: ALLOWABLE USES ZONING DISTRICTS CA CBD VC BP-C BP-0 BP -I CRD PA PWFD PROS Short Term Home Rental, Type A, B, C P P = Permitted use SUP = Use permitted with a Special Use Permit CUP = Use permitted with a Conditional Use Permit PUD = Use permitted with a Planned Unit Development Permit A = Accessory use ACC = Allowed as an accessory improvement to an allowed use located on or adjacent to the site Blank cell in table means that the use is NOT allowed. Page 10 March 3 Draft TYPE A SHORT TERM HOME RENTAL CODE COMPLIANCE VERIFICATION FORM The City of Stillwater has developed this form for the use of all Type A, Hosted Short Term Home Rental licensees. The following minimum safety standards are not all -encompassing, but they are important for the protection of your lodging guests. Therefore, the city requires that you implement these safety guidelines at a minimum. Primary Exit: 1. At least one exit door with direct access to the outside, or to a protected corridor in the case of a condominium or apartment building, should be provided for each short term rental unit. 2. The exit door should be side hinged and not less than 3 feet wide by 6 feet 8 inches tall. 3. A landing should be provided on each side of the exterior exit door. The landing width should not be less than the width of the door and should be a minimum of 36 inches measured in the direction of travel. 4. The exit door should open from the inside without the use of a key, tool or special knowledge. 5. Handrails should be provided on at least one side of each continuous run of stairs. 6. Stairs and decks should be properly constructed and maintained. Emergency Escape and Rescue Openings: Basements and every sleeping room should have at least one operable window or door leading directly to a public street, alley or yard. Condominium and apartment buildings with three or more units that are protected by an operational sprinkler system are exempt from having emergency escape openings. Windows used as emergency sleeping room exits should have the following: 1. Window sill height should not be higher than 44 inches above the floor. 2. Minimum clear window opening of 5.7 square feet or 5 square feet if at ground level. 3. Minimum clear window opening height of 24 inches. 4. Minimum clear window opening width of 20 inches. 5. Windows should be operational from the inside of a sleeping room without the use of keys, tools or special knowledge. 6. Bars, grills and similar devices are not recommended over rescue openings. If present, they must open from the inside without the use of keys, tools or special knowledge. 7. Windows under decks should fully open and have a minimum 36 inch high direct path to a public street, public alley or yard. [Included grandfathered language here for homes built prior to adoption of the 2012 International Residential Code.] Smoke Alarms: 1. One listed 10 year battery smoke alarm is recommended inside and outside of each sleeping room and on each additional story of the residence, including the basement. 2. ANSI/UL 2034 listed CSA 6.19 carbon monoxide alarms should be installed in the general vicinity of each sleeping area. Page 11 March 3 Draft Fire Extinguishers: 1. A minimum of one portable, 5 pound type ABC fire extinguisher per floor should be provided and maintained per manufacturer's directions. 2. It is recommended that one fire extinguisher be placed visibly in the kitchen area. Electrical Outlets: GFCI breakers should be installed in bathrooms and on kitchen countertops. Hot Water: [Include current code language on restricting the water temperature at all fixtures to not more than 130 degrees Fahrenheit.] Tempered Glass: 1. Glass within 5 feet of a hot tub should be tempered. 2. Windows in wet or otherwise hazardous locations should be tempered. Guard Rails: Guard rails should be provided on any raised deck that is located 30 inches or more above grade level. In addition to the recommendations above, it is highly recommended that mechanical, electrical and plumbing professionals inspect the building systems to ensure that they are in good working order. Page 12 March 3 Draft As licensee of a Type A Short Term Home Rental, I acknowledge that my residence was not designed, constructed or inspected as a commercial lodging establishment. But, I do acknowledge that for the safety of my lodging guests, the foregoing residential code standards have been implemented in my Type A Short Term Home Rental. I, , owner / lessee (circle as appropriate) residing at (street address), (City), (State), hereby swear or affirm acknowledgement of the statements in this verification form. Property owner/lessee's name Property owner/lessee's signature Date STATE OF MINNESOTA SS COUNTY OF WASHINGTON ) On this day of , 20, before me, a Notary Public within and for said County, appeared , who did swear or affirm that this instrument was signed as a free act and deed. Notary Public TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT BACKGROUND Hoisington Koegler Group Inc. ©© ©n Creating Places that Enrich People's Lives MEMORANDUM Mayor Ted Kozlowski and Members of the Stillwater City Council Bill Turnblad, Community Development Director, City of Stillwater Jeff Miller, AICP, Consulting Planner Laura Chamberlain, AICP, Consulting Planner November 30, 2016 Short Term Home Rental Analysis and Ordinance Alternatives The proliferation of short term home rentals (STHR) has increased in the last several years, thanks to the popularity of online services and websites, such as Vacation Rental By Owner (VRBO) and AirBnB. These sites allow individual property owners to rent out their houses, condominiums, individual rooms, and vacation homes for these short term rental stays. Users of short term home rentals often enjoy the "neighborhood" or "residential" feel of their accommodations, which is typically less in cost than a traditional hotel or other lodging. The ability to rent out property for the short term also brings the benefit of supplemental income to the homeowner. Some of the cost savings are due to the lack of regulations, in the form of permits, zoning constraints, licenses, or taxes, which often apply to lodging uses but not residential uses. Many cities around the nation and within Minnesota have begun to look at regulations for short term home rentals. The City of Stillwater decided to undertake a study of this issue in part due to complaints from traditional bed and breakfast (B&B) owners. It can be difficult for B&B owners to compete with short term home rentals because they do not have to meet the same regulations as B&Bs in Stillwater. There have also been a few complaints about noise and parking issues from neighbors of short term home rental properties in Stillwater. In August of this year, the City Council selected Hoisington Koegler Group, Inc. (HKGi) to conduct a study regarding Short Term Home Rentals (STHR). This technical memo provides a summary of HKGi's research of other cities' approaches to STHRs, a summary of a community -wide questionnaire regarding STHRs in Stillwater, a summary of input received at the Oct. 101h stakeholders meeting Hoisington Koegler Group Inc. 123 North Third Street, Suite 100 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 (612) 338-0800 Fax (612) 338-6838 www.hkgi.com Short Term Home Rentals Study - November 30, 2016 focused on this topic, and a list of ordinance alternatives to consider as the City looks toward potential next steps for addressing STHRs. RESEARCH OF PEER CITIES 1) Some cities in Minnesota that have studied STHRs and decided to prohibit them in residential zoning districts. a) Burnsville, which cited the following reasons: • Vacation rentals bring strangers • People come and go at all times of the day and night • Customers are not residents, so they have no interest in maintaining the neighborhood • Noise • Trash • Transient nature of operation b) Bloomington c) Savage, which prohibited rental of homes in residential zones for any period less than 15 days and cited the following reasons: ■ Resident complaints • Commercial nature of the use in residential zones 2) Some cities in Minnesota that have decided to regulate STHRs. a) Eagan • STHRs allowed in owner -occupied residential units • Allowed in accessory dwelling units if the stay is more than 30 days b) Duluth • Developed separate STHR regulations for vacation homes vs. owner -occupied homes • "Vacation dwelling units" require an interim use permit, which expires after 6 years, and has a number of requirements including annual licensing • "Accessory home share" also requires a permit, but it is an administrative permit which is required annually 2 Short Term Home Rentals Study - November 30, 2016 • Both are types of STHRs are allowed within all residential districts of the city c) Prior Lake • Permitted with an annual permit and inspections • Owner and agent do not have to stay on premises during the stay, but they must be available 24 hours a day, within 30 minutes, during the stay • Standards such as parking, number of occupants, and length of stay are determined by site/building characteristics 3) Some cities in Minnesota that do not regulate STHRs. a) Chanhassen b) Chaska c) Minneapolis d) St. Louis Park e) White Bear Lake 4) The City of Saint Paul recently conducted an extensive STHR study. Their findings for cities in Minnesota have been attached as an exhibit. St. Paul is still considering the specific language to use for an STHR ordinance, but they developed the following goals based on their study: a) Develop a Zoning Code amendment to permit STHRs as an "incidental transient occupancy" and develop standards related to owner -occupied and non -owner -occupied units. b) Develop an ordinance amendment to fully regulate non -owner -occupied units for life safety concerns through the Fire Certificate of Occupancy program. c) Develop a mechanism to ensure tax collection is occurring, possibly via STHR host platforms, e.g. VRBO and AirBnB. d) Develop an ordinance amendment to license STHR host platforms, with specific requirements relating to reporting and compliance. e) Utilize complaints about STHRs to inform recommendations for future regulations. f) Educate city staff (police, fire, and inspectors) about the presence of STHR uses in neighborhoods and the potential for complaints 3 Short Term Home Rentals Study -November 30, 2016 COMMON ISSUES AMONG PEER CITIES 1) No definition of short term home rentals 2) Owner -occupied vs. non -owner -occupied rentals 3) Bring strangers into a neighborhood on a regular basis 4) Increased noise and activity in a neighborhood 5) Parking 6) Trash 7) May be seen as a commercial intrusion into residential neighborhoods 8) Buffering/screening for adjacent year-round residents 9) Not typically subject to licensing and inspections 10) Often do not pay local taxes as are required by B&Bs and hotels 11) Unfair competitive advantage 12) Affordable housing concerns, if affordable housing gets converted into STHRs BEST PRACTICES/APPROACHES AMONG PEER CITIES 1) Define short term home rental in ordinance (distinguish from other lodging types) 2) Differentiate between owner -occupied and non -owner -occupied home rental uses 3) Consider a short term home rental permit program 4) Consider where and how they could be allowed, e.g. permitted vs. conditional vs. interim use 5) Establish specific standards for short term home rentals, such as: a) Parking spaces — quantity and location b) Number of occupants c) Minimum number of days for each stay d) Inspection requirements e) Tax collection requirements — federal, state, local f) Owner on -premises vs. owner off -premises 4 Short Term Home Rentals Study -November 30, 2016 STAKEHOLDER MEETING RESULTS In order to get an in-depth perspective on different sides of this issue, city staff held a stakeholder engagement session on October 10, 2016. Stakeholders in attendance included owners of traditional B&Bs, people who currently operate STHRs out of their homes, Planning Commissioners, and other stakeholders representing neighborhood groups. Questions At the meeting, stakeholders raised as many questions as comments. This high level of inquiry indicates that it is beneficial that the city has decided to study this issue and is considering a range of ordinance options. Comments 1) Many stakeholders were concerned with the mechanics of having some type of lodging tax or fee system for STHRs. a) A lodging tax would be in the range of 3% (or less) added to the receipt and charged directly to the guest/customer: • Sometimes the websites will coordinate the lodging tax or they will allow the host to add it to their fees through the STHR websites • The City of Stillwater would need to consider how this taxis collected from hosts or the STHR websites b) Concerns that establishing a lodging tax would make the County Assessor re -categorize properties from residential to commercial, thereby impacting the owner's property taxes. Avoiding this reclassification was very important to the meeting participants. c) Questions of income taxes were also brought up: • Hosts that rent out their property for 14 collective days or less annually do not have to pay income taxes on the income they make from the rental • 15 days or more of rental needs to be reported on income taxes d) There may be some distinction needed between homestead (owner -occupied) STHRs and non -homestead (vacation home) STHRs. 2) Stakeholders also brought up concerns over the potential cost burden it would put on the City of Stillwater to establish regulations and then to enforce them. 3) Participants also indicated that more lodging options are needed in the city. 5 Short Term Home Rentals Study— November 30, 2016 COMMUNITY QUESTIONNAIRE RESULTS In order to get an idea of how the community -at -large feels about short term home rentals and their possible regulation, HKGi consultants worked with the city to develop a community questionnaire. The questionnaire was available online for a period of two weeks in late September and early October 2016. Within that time period, 639 individuals responded to the questionnaire. Q1: Do you think Stillwater's City Code should allow a homeowner to rent out their home (house, condominium, or room) for short term vacations or stays? a 16.65% Yes m No Yes 0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% 60.00% 70.00% 80.00% 90.00% Q2: Do you think a homeowner renting out their home (house, condominium, or room) for short stays should be required to live in the home to act as a host for the short term renters? Or should a homeowner be allowed to live elsewhere while renting out thei 1 0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% 60.00% 70.00% 80.00% 90.00% 100.00% va Homeowners required to live in the home during short term rental Homeowner allowed to live elsewhere during short term rental Short Term Home Rentals Study —November 30, 2016 80.00% 70.00% 60.00% 50.00% 40.00% 30.00% 20.00% 10.00% 0.00% Q3: Do you think short term home (house, condominium, or room) rentals where a homeowner is living in the home should be regulated differently than short term ome rentals where a homeowner lives elsewhere during the short term rental? [461 respor1dents] Yes, they should be regulated differently No, they should have the same regulations Q4: In which areas of Stillwater should short term home (house, condominium, or room) rentals be allowed (select all that you find appropriate): [501 respondents] City Wide Downtown Stillwater Multiple -Family Neighborhoods Single -Family Neighborhoods in Western Stillwater Single -Family Neighborhoods in Central Stillwater Historic Single -Family Neighborhoods 91.62% 0.00% 20.00% 40.00% 60.00% 80.00% 100.00% 7 — Short Term Home Rentals Study —November 30, 2016 Q5: Do you think short term home (house, condominium, or room) rentals should be required to pay the 3% City Lodging Tax currently required for bed & breakfasts, hotels, and motels in Stillwater? [498 respondents] 60.00% 50.00% 40.00 % 30.00% 20.00% 10.00% 0.00 Yes 80.00% 70.00% 60.00 % 50.00% 40.00% 30.00% 20.00% 10.00% 0.00% 8 i Yes m No Taxed Differently No Taxed Differently Q8: Please select any responses below that describle you [495 respondents] I live in an I have rented lam Historic out my home interested in Neighborhoodas a STR in the renting out in Stillwater past my home as a STR in the future 70.10% 1.01% TOTIn I own a bed & I have stayed I have stayed I have a I have a breakfast in a bed & in a STR when vacation vacation breakfast travelling in home/cabin home/cabin when another city that I have that I am travelling in rented out as interested in another city a STR in the renting out as past a STR in the future Short Term Home Rentals Study - November 30, 2016 Findings 1) An overwhelming number of survey respondents (87.5%) want to allow STHRs in Stillwater. 2) Sites like AirBnB and VRBO have a very good reputation and people feel very positive about using them; 70.36% of all respondents indicated that they have stayed at an STHR when travelling. 3) Hand -in -hand with the allowance of STHRs, respondents were also in favor of reasonable regulations and also some sort of taxation/fee set by the City of Stillwater. 4) In general, people seem more concerned about owners/hosts being close-by/accessible if problems arise more than the specifics of whether or not the owner is on -premises during the rental, or whether the house is homesteaded vs. a vacation home. Essentially, as long as the owner/host is within a 30-minute drive of the property to address issues while the home is being rented, it didn't really matter to respondents whether the home was owner -occupied or not. 5) Of the respondents who want to allow STHRs in Stillwater, an overwhelming number of them (91.25%) want them to be allowed city-wide. 6) Question #7 allowed people to list concerns if STHRs were allowed in their neighborhood: a) Most of the concerns were over parking (82 respondents) and noise (86 respondents). b) Concern over increased crime/the safety of neighbors was brought up by 40 respondents c) 39 respondents felt that allowing STHRs would be positive for the city, and outweighed any concerns about allowing them d) Other concerns involved property maintenance, safety of guests (via fire codes/inspections), and access/accountability of the owner e) A handful of respondents raised concerns about rental properties in general and a few even said that STHRs would be preferable to traditional long term renters in their neighborhood 7) Under "Additional Thoughts" (Question #8), 122 people responded that allowing STHRs would be a positive thing for the city. a) Many said that the city's tourism cannot be supported solely by traditional lodging: ■ Local lodging is either too expensive, too small for large groups, or too unavailable (booked up) • A number of respondents mentioned they had visitors who stayed in Woodbury because accommodations in Stillwater were so scarce 9 Short Term Home Rentals Study -November 30, 2016 b) Many respondents also said they felt that people should be able to use their property as they please. 8) Fire code/ safety code/ building standards area concern for respondents. 9) Various comments regarding ways that an ordinance or permitting process could further restrict STHRs: a) Limit total number of permits allowed in the city b) Limit the number of guests c) Revoke permits if too many complaints (three strikes policy) d) Regulate length of stays (e.g. minimum of two days?) e) Limit number of stays within a year f) Notification to neighbors about STHRs g) Inspections h) Criminal background checks of guests KEY CONSIDERATIONS FOR THE CITY IN DEVELOPING A POTENTIAL ORDINANCE Should STHRs be considered a principal use, accessory use, or both? • Need to establish definitions in the Zoning Ordinance • In Duluth, if the owner is on -premises during the stay (renting out a room), then it is considered an accessory use, only requiring administrative approval; if the owner is off -premises (renting out their entire home, or entire vacation home), then it is considered a principal use and requires an Interim Use Permit • The City of Stillwater should consider whether they want to distinguish between owner - occupied home rentals vs. non -owner -occupied homes and vacation homes utilized for STHRs How could the STHR use(s) be allowed? • Not allowed — STHRs remain a prohibited use as is the case today o Not recommended based on the number of existing STHRs today and the community support for STHRs in Stillwater expressed in the questionnaire • Conditional Use o Conditional Use Permit (CUP) runs with the property, so would be difficult to keep control it when a property owner moves 10 Short Term Home Rentals Study - November 30, 2016 o Requires submission of an application to the City, a Public Hearing in front of the Planning Commission (with notice to neighbors), and approval by the City Council o Theoretically reviewed annually by the City Council, but difficult to keep tabs on • Interim Use o Interim Use Permit (IUP) runs with the property, so can become complicated if sold o Requires submission of an application to the City, a Public Hearing in front of the Planning Commission (with notice to neighbors), and approval by the City Council o Requires the establishment of a sunset date (cannot run in perpetuity) ■ Permitted Use outright (licensing not required) o Could be processed through a zoning application (similar to a fence permit) o Potentially could become difficult to enforce any additional standards (off-street parking requirements, etc.) • Permitted Use but subject to licensing o Approved administratively through the City (easier, quicker, and less costly for the applicant) o Could establish an STHR licensing program that includes an annual fee and inspection schedule if desired o Could build in a complaint clause (e.g. three strikes policy) Where could the STHR use(s) be allowed? A Within all zoning districts ■ Only within residential zoning districts • Only within specific residential zoning districts, e.g. downtown neighborhoods How could the City address taxation? s Different types of taxation could be considered: o Income tax: if an owner rents out a property for more than 14 cumulative days in the year, the earnings made from that rental must be reported on annual income taxes o Property tax: based on the value of the property and use of the property, determined by the County Assessor. The STHR use will not impact the use or value of the property according to the County Assessor, so no change would be necessary Short Term Home Rentals Study - November 30, 2016 o City lodging tax: a 3% lodging tax could be added to what is charged to the customer/guest of any type of lodging establishment in Stillwater. The funds from the local lodging tax go directly into a fund to promote Stillwater tourism and advertise lodging establishments • Options include: o Charge local lodging tax on STHRs, same as traditional B&Bs (3%) o Charge local lodging tax on STHRs, but different and less than traditional B&Bs (e.g.1.5%) o Remove local lodging tax from B&Bs and do not tax STHRs o Charge STHR permit/licensing fees to cover city administrative costs of processing permits and inspections, but do not charge an additional tax o Do not tax STHR uses What performance standards could be considered as potential requirements for the STHR use(s)? • Off-street parking minimum and location • Maximum number of guests • Maximum number of vacation stays/days per month or year • Types of required inspections • Screening, lighting, garbage ■ Requirement for owners to be on -premises or within a certain distance of STHR • Minimum lot size • Lodging tax applicability Attachments: Appendix A - Table 1: City of St Paul Study Summary Appendix B - Table 2: Peer City Research Table Appendix B - Stakeholder Meeting Comments 12 City of Saint Paul Short Term Rental Study Table 1- Regulation of Short Term Rentals in Minnesota Cities City How Currently Regulated Permit Fire & Safety Length of Stay Number of Guests Allowed Parking Requirements Penalty Bloomington Short term rentals are prohibited Burnsville Short term or vacation rental is prohibited. An amendment to the City Code Business Regulations was adopted February 16, 2016 that specifically restricts short term home rentals within the city as a business regulation. Chanhassen Short term rentals are not regulated Chaska Short term rentals are not regulated Duluth Interim use permit to operate a vacation rental and a home share permit to rent out part of a home. Regulations revised May 2016 Permit and inspections are required. Inspections required 2 to 29 days Depends upon the number of bedrooms Determined by the number of bedrooms Eagan The city prohibits stays of less than 30 days unless guests reside within the owner/tenant occupied unit. STR is allowed for 30 days or more in an accessory dwelling unit that is within or attached to a primary residence and either of the units is owner occupied. The unit must be registered as an accessory dwelling unit and cannot be larger than one third the size of the primary residence. Accessory dwelling units must be registered with the city. Smoke detectors are required in all sleeping rooms and Carbon Monoxide detectors are required within 10 feet of sleeping rooms in accessory dwelling units. Occupancy of the accessory dwelling unit is limited to two people. Two parking spaces for the primary residence and two spaces for the accessory dwelling unit are required. Minneapolis Short term rentals are not regulated Prior Lake http://156.99.83.130/weblink8exter Short term rentals are allowed by an ordinance adopted in 2015 Permit and inspection are required. Ordinance adopted mid-2015. Owners/tenants are not usually present. Hosts are limited to five rentals per month Varies depending upon the size of the lot and the size of the unit (children under three are not included in the total number of guests) Off street parking spaces equal in number to the number of bedrooms in the dwelling unit Revocation of permit; gross misdemeanor nal/0/doc/437387/Pagel.aspx C:\Users\vickis\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\VDBO7TKG\Appendix J- Peer City Review without phone numbers.doc City How Currently Regulated Permit Fire & Safety Length of Stay Number of Guests Allowed Parking Requirements Penalty Rochester City does not regulate short term rentals but has specific regulations to allow for medical stay dwelling units for patients and their families that were enabled by state legislation in 2015 which regulates them as lodging establishments. These units must have a license, pass an inspection, and be properly zoned. Savage Bans rentals of homes in residential zones for any period shorter than 15 days. Ban adopted December 7, 2015. Ban adopted due to residents' complaints, along with the apparent commercial use of properties in residential areas. (Info is from an online article) Stillwater Short term rentals are not permitted in residential neighborhoods. Stays of less than 30 days are permitted in central business district and commercial districts with a CUP. No specific conditions or standards apply, though building and fire inspections are required. St. Louis Park Short term rentals are not regulated C:\Users\vickis\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\VDB07TKG\Appendix J- Peer City Review without phone numbers.doc Table 2 - Regulation of Short Term Rentals Outside of Minnesota City Prohibited License Zoning Taxes Length of stay Fire & Safety Registration Ordinance Owner occupancy Maintenance records Insurance Housing Code compliance Number of occupants allowed Floor Area Requirement Parking Requirements Other San Francisco, CA 2014 Regulations X Renting a portion or your entire unit while you are also present for an unlimited number of nights per year and renting a portion or your entire unit while you are not present for a maximum of 90 nights per year. If you are a tenant, you may not make more than your monthly rent from your short-term rental fees charged to guests. Clearly posted sign at front door with locations of all Fire extinguishers in unit and building, gas shut-off valves, fire exits, pull fire alarms This must be posted on the hosting platform's listing. You may only register one residential unit. Fee of $50, registration is good for 2 years. X Permanent resident (owner or tenant — 275 nights in a calendar year) Records for two years. Residential unit must not have any outstanding Planning, Building, Housing, Fire, Health, Police, or other applicable City code violations. Liability insurance in the amount of no less than $500,000 or provide proof that liability coverage in an equal or higher amount is being provided by any and all hosting platforms through which you will rent your unit. X Residential units that are subject to the Inclusionary Affordable Housing Program and residential units designated as below market rate (BMR) or income - restricted under City, state, or federal law are not eligible to register. Chicago, IL 2011 ordinance Vacation rental license is required. A dwelling unit with up to six sleeping rooms that is available for rent or for hire, for transient occupancy by guests which are not owner - occupied. X 90 days or less per year, otherwise a bed and breakfast license is required An inspection is required, zoning board review and $500 fee every two years Proof of insurance *The City is proposing a $1500- $3000 Fine or 6 months in jail as a penalty for violations Madison, WI X Tourist rooming house X If operator occupies at time of rental there is no limit. If the operator does not occupy at time of rental the limit is 30 days per licensing year. Smoke detectors Carbon monoxide detectors X Owner or renter can operate if explicitly allowed in the lease An on -site registry for inspection identifying all guests, dates of stay, whether operator is present or absent during stay, and length of stay. Registry is for the current year and the year immediately prior. Low density areas allow one family plus one roomer or no more than two unrelated individuals. In higher density area, one family plus four roomers or up to five unrelated individuals. C:\Users\vickis\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlool<\VDBO7TKG\Appendix J- Peer City Review without phone numbers.doc City Prohibited License Zoning Taxes Length of stay Fire & Safety Registration Ordinance Owner occupancy Maintenance records Insurance Housing Code compliance Number of occupants allowed Floor Area Requirement Parking Requirements Other Isle of Palms, SC X 3 months or less 6 nighttime 40 daytime X X Monterey County, CA X Between 7 and 30 days San Bernadino County, CA X Special use permit and signage required Less than 30 days X Determines number of beds allowed X Miami Beach, FL Prohibited in all single family homes and some multi- family buildings C:\Users\vickis\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\VDBO7TKG\Appendix J- Peer City Review without phone numbers.doc 0 tober 10, 2016 — Short Term Va ation Rental: Stakeholder's Input Session Qu stions Comm nts For ommunities who already li ense/regulate, are there differen es between rentals less than two weeks and those that are greater than two weeks (given that federal tax regulations don't apply less than two weeks in a given year)? Paying lodging tax does not seem that ompli ated and (general onsensus) is that the tax should be paid. What about the ounty and how do their inspe tions relate to these types of uses? How does this impa t other City of Stillwater (COS) regulations? VRBO business model is simplified if property rented less than 14 days in a year, sin e federal in ome tax is not required for that limited period of time. Is the use ommer ial or residential? Is the zoning ommer ial or residential? Is the tax rate/status ommer ial or residential? Good to look at from the perspe tive of guest safety (water temperature, fire extinguishers or sprinklering system, two means of egress, home meets all building and fire odes, et .). This has to be a part of any regulations for this type of use. Che klist should be developed and required to be met as part of permit pro ess. How will this refle t upon the ommunity? There is a differen e between B&Bs and other types of short term va ation rentals, but there is ross-over in the ustomers, operations, impa t upon neighborhood, taxes, et . How will the neighborhoods look with hanges of this nature? The thing that is universal is whether or not the lodger has had a bad experien e within the ommunity. Does COS have any idea on the ost of administration of an expanded program? Is there a me hanism for the COS to pay program funds? Would the ost of staff or monitoring programs be paid for? Is there the politi al will to fund a program and to what level? Not every lodger prefers the types of existing lodging establishments within the ommunity. There are those that want to rent an entire house without an owner/manager. There are also those that want to rent a room but not eat breakfast with the other guests. What about zoning/permits for spe ifi areas/neighborhoods and has there been onversation about areas whi h the ommunity would not allow them or that they would not be permitted? Stillwater is an event/wedding destination. How an a 'va ation home' business be a residen e? The County staff is looking at the City of Stillwater's efforts to study and regulate short term va ation rental properties to help inform their de isions on what they would like to do with the industry in the future. What good does a la k of overnight lodging do for the image of the ommunity and the events that the ommunity holds? As a VRBO owner, appre iates all the diversity at the table. As a business owner (other than VRBO), think overnight rentals are a good thing for the ommunity and has been benefi ial to the ommunity and downtown businesses. What will the impa t of another 50-70 unit hotel have on the ommunity? Will hotel investment o ur if there are so many alternative short term lodging options available within the ommunity? Will this affe t ROI on new investment within the ommunity? Is it appropriate to have a zone-spe ifi allowan e? In other words, an the City restri t short term va ation rental properties to a spe ifi zoning distri t? Should a non -a essible utility room be required for monitoring (i.e. water heaters)? As a popular event destination (this is the reason people are oming to the ommunity) there are not that many lodging options for people to stay in downtown. People enjoy walking to downtown. How are the market/ ommunity needs shifting and how is this ordinan e/regulations/et . going to address those hanges? Maybe a different set of rules for ommer ial/downtown areas opposed to residential areas. What are the total number of rooms/units in the other ommunities? Likely need to have these regulations through the zoning ode whi h would allow for limited ommer ial uses in the residentially zoned neighborhoods. Question of what we want the City to look like (opposed to who we are atering to)? Private property owners an be more restri tive than the City's regulations. So, Home Owner's Asso iations an prohibit short term va ation rentals even if the City hooses to allow them. What is the maximum number of rooms in a single VRBO that are allowed in other ommunities? We have one of the largest homes on the VRBO website. Our guests are often families/extended families who want a ommunal va ation experien e. This type of lodging option is not available in the ommunity without the short term va ation rental properties. The VRBO website ompany requires their listed properties to have someone within 25-30 miles of the site at all times there are guests/lodgers onsite. Community is losing wedding events be ause of a la k of lodging within the ommunity. This is a way to maximum ROI on a house. An in ome-generator to allow for new investment into single family residen es. Con erns in lude: size of groups per size of house, parking, hara ter of residential neighborhoods, and age of lodgers. Con erns and omplaints don't appear to hange over time. Intent to give flexibility to rent a home but have a me hanism in pla e in the event things do not go well. Try to find the happy -medium for everybody (but not likely to be perfe t for any one). Limiting to ation (as in a parti ular zoning distri t, or within a ertain distan e of downtown, or along olle tor streets), and distan e (as in no short term va ation rental ould be loser than 300 or 500 or 900 feet of another or of a B&B), and the potential total number of properties permitted in the City would be a reasonable to start. Dis ussion with individual stakeholders after meeting in luded the following notes: 1. The County onsiders short term va ation rentals to be ommer ial for health inspe tion purposes if the property is not the primary residen e of the property owner. The homestead redit would be lost for State in ome tax purposes if the home were not the primary residen e. (The County may also hange the tax status from residential to ommer ial, though we are not sure of this.) In addition, City building ode and fire ode onsider the property to be ommer ial if it is not a primary residen e. This triggers a number of issues in luding: egress, fire suppression, handi apped a essibility, railings, et . 2. In some tourist destination ommunities (Duluth, many in the mountain states, et ) the total number of permitted short term va ation rentals is apped. Duluth allows only 60. The primary reason for this is that without a limit, the affordable housing sto k is onverted to STVRs and servi e industry employees an no longer find suffi lent housing. Stakeholder's in luded: 1. Several HOA presidents 2. B&B owners 3. Hotel owners' representative 4. Residential property owners that put STVR on hold until study on luded 5. CVB President 6. Planning Commission member 7. Two City Coun it Members 8. Others who have expressed an Interest iliwater THE R I R T H PLACE OF M I N N E S 0 1 a Planning Commission DATE: March 8, 2017 CASE NO.: 2017-05 REQUEST: Variances to allow expansion of two-family home APPLICANT: Michael and Charlene Markwardt LAND OWNER: Same as applicant LOCATION: 1333 6th St. S. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: LMDR, Low/Medium Density Residential ZONING: RB, Two -Family Residential HEARING DATE: March 8, 2017 PREPARED BY: Erik Olson -Williams, Zoning Administrator/Assistant Planner BACKGROUND The applicants, Michael and Charlene Markwardt, propose a significant addition to their two- family home at 1333 6th Street South. The proposed addition includes two new attached two -car garages, as well as roughly 1,024 square feet of additional living space. In order to expand the home as proposed, setback, coverage, and height variances would be necessary. SPECIFIC REQUESTS The applicants have requested the following variances: 1. A five foot setback variance from the 6th Street South right-of-way in order to allow the porch of the house to be constructed 15 feet from the right-of-way, whereas a minimum setback distance of 20 feet is required. (See attached site plan.) 2. A 9.47% coverage variance in order to allow for the lot's building coverage to be 34.47%, whereas a maximum of 25% is allowed. 3. An accessory structure coverage variance, in order to allow for the construction of two attached two car garages of 605 square feet and 656 square feet in size. The Markwardt Variances Page 2 maximum accessory structure coverage allowed in this district is 1,000 square feet, but the requested coverage is 1,261 square feet. 4. A height variance for each new garage in order to allow for the construction of a half -story of livable space above each garage, whereas the maximum height for an attached garage is one story, not to exceed 20 feet. RB Two -Family Standards Proposal Lot area 10,000 square feet 10,125 square feet Lot width 75 feet 75 feet Lot depth 100 feet 135 feet Front yard setback Main building 20 feet 15 feet 6 inches Garage Detached or attached: A minimum of 30 feet and set back at least 10 feet from the front set back line of the principal dwelling. 34.86 feet from lot line, 22.67 feet from the front set back line of the principal dwelling Side yard setback Interior Main building The total of both side yards must equal 15 feet with at least five feet on each side. 17.9 feet to north property line, 19.9 feet to south property line Garage Attached: 5 feet Detached in the rear yard: 3 feet 5 feet Rear yard setback Main building 25 feet 50 feet Garage Attached: 5 feet Detached in the rear yard: 3 feet 50 feet Frontage requirement 35 feet on improved public street Maximum lot coverage Buildings 25 percent 34.47% Impervious surfaces 25 percent 13.53% Accessory structures 1,000 square feet or 10 percent 1,261 square feet (12.45%) Height Main building3 35 feet maximum 18.5 feet Accessory building3 1 story, not to exceed 20 feet 1.5 stories, 15.33 feet In the above table, highlighted fields are ones with which the applicants' plan is not in conformance. EVALUATION OF REQUEST Markwardt Variances Page 3 The proposed addition would result in a very significant expansion in the size of the home. The existing home has 2,028 square feet of total living area, meaning that the proposed addition would create an approximately 50% increase in the size of the home's living area. If the two proposed garages (605 and 656 square feet in size) are included in this calculation, the footprint of the building would more than double in size. Expanding the house to the proposed size would make it uniquely large in comparison to other homes in the area. This home is one of six very similar twin homes located on the same block. While some of the other twin homes in this block have been expanded and added to over the years, none have increased in size as dramatically as proposed by the applicants. As such, the proposed expansion would cause the applicants' home to stand out significantly when viewed in the context of their block. Found below is a staff evaluation of each requested variance. Variance 1: Five foot front yard setback variance. — Per City Code Section 31-308(b)(1), two family homes in the RB Zoning District are required to be setback a minimum of 20 feet from the front lot line. The applicants' existing home meets this requirement, but their proposal includes a covered porch which would extend eight feet from the front of the existing home. Section 31-514 Subd. 3(a) allows for awnings or steps to project into a yard area three feet from the front of the principal building. As such, the proposed porch only extends five feet beyond what is permitted by the City Code. In their application narrative, the applicants state that the porch is intended to add to the home's curb appeal. Variance 2: 9.47% lot coverage variance. — Per City Code Section 31-308(b)(1), two family homes in the RB Zoning District are permitted no more than 25% lot coverage for buildings. The applicants' proposal would result in 34.87% lot coverage, much of which would come from the two new garages. In their narrative, the applicants state that the garages, which are intended to store two cars each, are necessary to protect their cars from the elements and to provide easier access to their vehicles during the winter months. In addition to the garages, there is 1,014 square feet of proposed living space which would also contribute to the need for this variance. Variance 3: 261 square foot accessory structure coverage variance. — The need for this variance arises from the same issue as variance 2. City Code Section 31-308 (a)(3)i. states that accessory structures are only permitted to be 1,000 square feet in size or 10% of the total lot area, whichever is smaller. Since the applicants' lot is more than 10,000 square feet in area, any accessory structures on the property must be less than 1,000 square feet in size, combined. The proposed garages are 605 and 656 in size, respectively, resulting in a total size of 1,261 square feet. Variance 4: Accessory structure height variance. — Per City Code Section 31-308(b)(1) two family lots in the RB Zoning District are permitted to have accessory structures which are a maximum of one story in height, not to exceed 20 feet. Each of the proposed garages includes a half -story walk-in closet above. These closets are not part of the accessory use, as they are only accessible from the living space of the principal structure, but they would cause the garages to Markwardt Variances Page 4 be more than one story in height, nonetheless. The applicants did not explain the need for the walk-in closets in their application narrative. The State of Minnesota enables a City to grant variances when they meet the review criteria below. 1. A variance may be granted when the applicant establishes that there are "practical difficulties" in complying with the Zoning Code. A practical difficulty means that the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the Zoning Code; the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; and the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Economic considerations alone do not constitute a "practical difficulty". a. Is the property proposed to be used in a reasonable manner? The house and attached garages are much larger than any neighboring properties. The two-family residential use is reasonable in this area, but an expansion of this degree is not. Therefore, staff does not find the requested variances to be reasonable. b. Is the plight of the landowner due to circumstances unique to the property? The property is one of six very similar properties located within the same block. The size and shape of these lots is regular and standard for two- family lots in the City. None of the neighboring properties have undergone expansions of this manner, nor have they demonstrated a unique need for this kind of expansion. Therefore, staff does not find the circumstances to be unique. c. Are the circumstances created by the landowner? The plight of the landowner relates to their desired use of the property. The land owner's desire for additional living and storage space are the only circumstances which would necessitate the proposed addition. Therefore, staff finds that the landowner did create the set of circumstances associated with the property. d. If granted, would the variance alter the essential character of the locality? The variance would alter the essential character of the immediate neighborhood. The proposed addition would make the property unique among other properties in the neighborhood. No other residential properties in the neighborhood contain structures of this size or that are in non-conformance with City Code to this degree. e. Is the lone consideration an economic one? The major consideration is about allowing the property to better meet the needs of the property owner. The property owner and the property owner's immediate family are the only individuals living on the property, so the lone consideration is not an economic one. 2. The variance must be in harmony with the Zoning Code and the Comprehensive Plan. Markwardt Variances Page 5 a. What is the purpose of the regulation for which the variance is being requested? The purpose of the regulations in question is to preserve the early character of the neighborhood and to effectively manage runoff from residential properties. Since no other house in the immediate neighborhood is in nonconformance with these regulations, it does not make sense to allow this property to deviate from them to this degree. b. If granted, would the proposed variance be out of harmony with the Zoning Code? Yes, it would be out of harmony with the Zoning Code. The existing home is in harmony with the Zoning Code, but granting the proposed variances would change its relationship to the neighboring properties and the Zoning Code. c. If granted, would the proposed variance be out of harmony with the Comprehensive Plan? No, it would not be out of harmony with the Comprehensive Plan. The lot size and use is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan's land use plan for the neighborhood. 3. No variance may be granted that would allow any use that is prohibited in the zoning district in which the subject property is located. The property is zoned RB, Two -Family Residential. There is an existing two family home on the property, and the proposed addition to the home would not change its use. Both single family and two-family houses are permitted in the RB Zoning District. Therefore, the use is not prohibited in the zoning district in which the subject property is located. ALTERNATIVES The Planning Commission has the following options: 1. Approve all or part of the requested variances. 2. Deny all of the requested variances. 3. Table the variance requests for additional information. RECOMMENDATION City staff finds that the variance review criteria have not been satisfied and therefore recommends denial of all requested variances. attachments: Location Map Aerial View of Subject Property & Surrounding Area Application materials II I -.--d 4,/ I - -, (1) 1 tY Z 11 • ' 0 H -,* r 4r ii 1 I (water •,1 . 1"..t-. -) t., _f..r H .r' . ie .... - 4,„, •,--tref, i_ w A 4 *. : . .1 N. _ . : . 0 . . -... • , . . 1,... - • . IV s07 iWE 0) STREET The Birthplace of Minnesota Site Location Map Li H I , • _ , -, _ ,.. BURLINGTON H • Lu Lu rx H ..L. i i I- H X u_ (7) LT_ LL. WEST MARSH —61 • , w D 0 STREET q giiit yr - T 12 9 it.-6 H EAST 4itt MARSH i t 40....! Wr5111 cL 0)E. 0 190 380 760 Feet (.) Tt LIJ 1,* _ w „At ok General Site Location 40001 0Platit (j:1 -likiglki i H H 1 D H ._„.„.. —....... . 1 -40. 0 0 < D u) u) (/) 0) 0 0 WEST ORLEANS STREET ill'ILLrial : ''''--\'111•111n-11311111:/ .._, a ire .i1.* = Fre..,:. - ,-•:, D l-T : - , al If I : I- -G.S.A.kl. -24 - - - .. -6k .5.1g -T R E ET 11.,11DR.T.17-..--,E,ket1 1 1 * i . .4-i i z e , 0 < /70-, i , z ...,/- ,fr 3 er. 4c 6+REE-ettT1-1'89-'it'''4 i.....-..-......---.._......._,J ,.., :1=4: ii r-arj Nil& : I f , . • i _ \ rW, ww i. r / 0 Dear Board Members: We are requesting a variance for the proposed addition to our home as follow: 1) Applying for a setback variance for the front porch. We would like to put an 8-ft. architectural porch to the front of the house to enhance the look. We are allowed a 3-ft. porch so the variance we are asking for is a 5-ft. variance which still leaves us 20'6 inches from the curb and 15'6 inches from the lot line. 2) The overall variance we are asking for is 9.47%. This will allow us to add additional living space and attached garages to each side. Although this addition puts us over by 9.47% for building we would still fall below the allowed 50% for green space. The addition and current structure would only come in at 48% of building and non -permeable area, leaving 52% green space. We would like you to consider these variances for our home which has a very small kitchen and living area. By increasing the size of our living space, it will make our home more functional and family friendly. The need for the garages is due to the climate we live in, in Minnesota. With more months of cold weather, it will keep our cars out of the winter elements. It will also provide a way for our daughter to get her three small children to the car without having to take them out when the weather is bad. As much as it would be easier for them to stay home when the weather is bad, two of them are in school and they have frequent doctor appointments. It will also benefit my wife who has had knee surgery last year and has a hard time walking on unstable ground, especially the snow and ice. It will also provide a better storage for outdoor things (shovels/snow blower/lawn mower). This storage place will allow us to not have a shed in the backyard which in turn will allow us to make better use of the backyard during the warmer months, These variances will not only increase the functionality for our family, but will increase curb appeal to match the charm of the surrounding Stillwater neighborhoods. Thank you for your time and consideration, Michael & Charlene Markwardt of GENERAL NOTES - SCOPE OF WORK, ALL CONSTRUCTION 511AI1 COMPS Y WITH 2015 I.12.0 4 ALL OTHER, LOCAL CODES 7 ALl EXTERIOR OPENINGS SHALL BE FLASHED TO MAKE THEM WEATHERPROOF 3 VERIFY ALL DOOR 4 WINDOW ROUGH OPENINGS 4 LOCATIONS. 4 ALL STRUCTURAL MEMBERS 4 LOADS SHALL DE VERIFIED BY PROVIDER 5 DIMENSIONS ARE TYPICALLY TO THE FACE OF SHEATHING AND/OR CONCRETE 1. PROVIDE SYSTEM FOR PASSIVE RADON MI ICAI ION A5 PER 1303 2400. 7 CONTRACTOR 10 VERIFY ALL EXISTING (:ONUS I IONS AND DIMENSIONS B RE FRAM`_ UAMAGPUN/FAI. 1VAI15 TO REMAIN. THROUGHOUT THE BUILDING 9 INSUI ATE. PROVIDE VAPOR BARRIER, AND SHEET ROCK EXTERIOR, WALLS I 0 REPAIR OR REPLACE WINDOWS AND DOORS, AND ADD CLOSETS A5 SHOWN I I REFINISH HARDWOOD FLOORS, ADD CARPET AS PER OWNER AND CERAMIC I IIE IN WET AREAS (SEE PIANS) 12 REPLACE SIDING. ADD NEW ROOF, FASCIA, AND GUTTERS NOTES FRAM NG: All INTERIORS PERIMETER DIMENSION STINGS INCLUDE 1I2' 331EATHIUG SHEATHING 15 FLUSH TO THE OUTSIDE !ALE OE FOUNDATION WALL OR 5D BAC/. A' FOR 510.NE OR ENTRY PORCH JOIST LEDGE (OPTION FOR 51WATLI NG 10 OVERHANG FOUNDATION FOR 51D4NG OVER 1YP05ED FOUNDATION I FLITMB NG 4 MECHANICAL CONTRACTORS: CONFINE ALI ROO( VENTS 1 ROOF PENETRATIONS TO EAST SIDE OF R031 R1DCE ROOF TRUSS SUPPLIER: STRUCTURAL GABLE END TRUSS CAN ACT AS HEADER 4 MA.51 ER BEDROOM l SITTING ROOM WINDOWS IF FINAL ROD` TRUSS PLAN CHANGES WI NEW TRUSS DIREC1ION5 OR G RDER LOCATIONS PROM T1115 RAN. 13011FY THE GFNFRAI CON! RACEOR 10 VERIFY ADEQUATE BEARING CONDITIONS 43 AFFECTED FRAMNG 4 FOJNUAIIOEl I ()CATIONS S1KUCI URAL MI SONG OE BEAMS POSTS. FOOTING 512E5 4 YOUNDATION REINFORCING :5 TO BE PROVIDED BY CORI RA310K 013 THEIR EAATERIAI 54PPL ER5 ANY STRUCTURALLY RELATED INFORMATION NOTED ON 10115E PLANS MUSE BE CONFIRMED 4 FINADZED BY THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR 1 INCLUDING 45111.1Ai111 LOADS ) A11 HEADER OPENINGS TO BE 2-2V 12, UNLESS NOTED OTB1RW.SY (1YY ) WIND()` S: All WINDOW DESIGNATIONS ARE G4N1RLC AGTIIAI W1NUOA' S1A5 MAY VARY. DEPENDING ON WINDOW MANUFACTURER CONTRACTOR 10 V1R1)Y WMNTENT .51/T5 AND (()CATIONS UNEXCAVATED I v..111 ,74.n cualaY BASEMENT b`Cr FIA1 CLG CPT l EXISTING BASEMENT UNEXC. rr n IC 10 BASEMENT B' O' r1A1 QG CPI EXISTING BASEMENT C cN,sll-�.�1.4.88471 RTI UNEXCAVATED UNEXC r•n. m.m0, wI n. t. 175/8 a 12� ./0.SP,I,T., 40 snzuwl R LIT 2 CAR GARAGE Chr • 1 RAISED PATIO LIVING ROOM 87,7.3 MING Ai e0. ELM CLG Y0 L5 Cr PORCH RE:NE CANE SLAB I j[J1 ; • it SITE PLAN RAISED PATIO Iv*Au 431 •• nco-45x5e 10 ,rn) L VFICAT nROOM YDWD NORTH • Non TO c Ecoa.s • 2CAR GARAGE BASEMENT PLAN FIRST FLOOR PLAN SOU ao = 'a ADDICN=G545f CAI! v1G• - I cr Arn ITCP,1 4A 51 25TH AVENUE SOUTH ti MARKWARDT RESIDENCE ADDITFON - II 4,1 V a ;7 t:--1 ,-..ft.,14.01f4F1‘.1 a. • /r11,L7 5131,11,1,1 .1_,•1111.154.GLLS 1,111,r:/11,C, ou_rw.,cm. 1.11111.1 1,1741 ,11,14101111/1 SOUTH ELEVATION 5,,,/;\p"j" ELEVATION 1! NORTH ELEVATION 1 1111-.0.1011 :C7C011o.. rLooF -- CAOTIG 11A5fAILLif - ,01 LICCORAM2 CL•AFOSITE !CI 11, 111. FIR9f FLOOR AIL DASELALLIT ‘11.. I • Tf -f-T 1 .1, 1. 1_ 1 1, 1 L • 1 • I WEST ELEVATION SCALE: N I G" = I '-‘7' ACCtILLT ,tovats • 1 1 1 I 11 1 1 — - 1 1 -1 • 1 CR C I s c , 1,111Prel N.111C1, •TrtcC: IF 1--- PEW BEDROOIA 45.01 FIAT C16 crt MC MITT IMISC.S6 EYEING BEDROOM EXISTING BEDROOIA S5CA1 ECOND FLOOR,TfL,3,t1 5.1 4cf4 rIH flu 2 A5PHALT SHINGLES ON ROOFING PAPER ON 1/2' SHEATHING ON ENG ROOF TRUSSES Q 24' O C R 49 BAIT II1.5UL W/ CONI POLY VAPOR BARRIER L 5/6' GYP BD CLG --- pry IttCL ♦ 15T FLR CLG 3/8' PLYA'D SOFFIT WI CONT VENI STRIP (M I 2ND FIR• SI IIR CLG. Ali IST FL Y F. 23 PROVIDE P I FPI L YLAIF WILHA B. T(P. 4 P. T. PJM JOIST ♦ LATERAL 121)55 BRACING TrE W 0 CLG. SLOPE GRADE 5% TYP AWAY FROM FOUNDATION AT PERIMETER It) 3' MIN AWAY FROM' I1MI^e'- 2' RIGID IIISUTATION AT ENT FACE: DAMP PROOFING L R-:0 RIGID INSUL TO 6' ABV GRADE MIN W! CONE CAP FLASHING.PROVIDE. 3/4' DRAINAGE MAT OR GRAVEL, TYP. Ley FOUND 'HAIL PERIMETER W O TOP OF SLAB CONT DRAIN n1E IN PEA RDCR IYD Af 1(C'(t2wr DRAIN /365/11 -- 44Nl' I.;)NL. F1D MIN 24. N ON 25 TA PAR ADEUA1E BEARIN G 50,1 -- C11 — - --- TA'HAL WAI1 CO1.5TRUCTION VINYL 51DING L111 HUH DING PAPF.K ON I/2' CD% PLYWD APPLIED VERT L NAILED W/ 6D COMMON NAZIS 6' 0 C g ?tKIM r' 2' 0 C a-1 INTERNED. SUPPORTS ON 2%6 '/iD. 5/005 A4 16' 0 C W/ R-21 HAT! IN5111 r CON1 4 MII rot,' VAPOR BARRIER 1 S/B' GYP BD L 3/4'IN. PIWN UN 1 2' E11G FLOOR TRU55E5 LEY 1G.0 C TFP W/ 5/8'GYP DD CLG 314' T.G rlYWD ON 12' EI1G FLOOR TRI/55E5 @ 1G'OC 11/P W/ • GYP BD CLG, {1 F 5/8. ANCHOR BOLTS TYP L.1`414. T MIN, ENTBEi. -- 8' POURED CONCRETE WAIL (3500 P51 MIN ) VERI ICAL REINFO CPMFNI: Y5REBAR936'OC MAY HORII REINFORCEMENT: I4 REOARQ 24' O C (PR ) VERT , )IORZ 4 HEADER TIES SHAH HAVE A MIN OF 2' CONC COVER FROM OUTSIDE EDGE OF CONCRETE WALL VERI REINE 10 BE LOCAI0U 15' MAY PROM 114510E FACE OF WAI I A5 PER 1309 R404 1 2 3 7 2 VERi1CAL WALL REINFORCEMENT INTERRUPTED BY OPENINGS SHALL HAVE ADDITIONAL VEKIICAL REINFORCEMENT OF THE SAME 511E PLACID WITHIN 12' OF EACH SIDE OF TI IE OPENING (M' ) WATERPROOFING ON OFT FACE 4 3/4' DRAINAGE MAT r MORI CANT DP AT FOUND FERN PROVIDE 2Y4 P T WD. 5TU0 FURRING AT F%T WAIL L2 1 G.0C (TYP) 4' CONC. 51AB W/ ICY I O WW MESH REIN/ ON G MIL VAPOR BARPJER ON ?' 1.250 If.4/IU L1I•IUTANLI!/ ON SAND OR GRAVEL L'UKE — WALL SECTION SCA: 3/4` CON! DRAIN 111 F IN PEA ROCK BEV (DRAIN 10 SI/MP BUCKET) FOOTINGS TO BE 5000 P51 OR EQUIVALENT A5 PER 1309 R402 2 RIDGE VENT DETAIL 2 r_J 2 0' 3 BEDROOM LAUNDRY BASEMENT P.R. BATH LMNG ROOM VAPOR BARRIER r 5/5' GYP BD CLG BATH 3M'TeG PDWDON 12'FLR 1RU'SES 1 @ IG'OG WISO'GYP BD _LO fTP BASEMENT bl WATERPROOF FOUNDATION 1/ INSULATION / SEALER B'-4' H. KEINE POURED CONC, FOND WAU (VER 12' , r11CK1.1r'[11 4' RHINFCONC. 51A8 W/ I0 10 VIIr1.1 ON 6 MIL VAPOR BARRIER ON 2' EIS INSUL ON 2500 P5F MIN SOIL (IYP ) BUILDING SECTION A SCALE 1/4' RIDGE VENT BATH BASEMENT BUILDING SECTION B SCALE: I H' - 1'.0' MEP '01C-, F1P1 /141425 AN1 GrAeolx 9G.,•H HIGG 1'2:i l Il l4"41,41'LVA4 1 H RTM1 4 Nri51 MY' CO4O PARCH N+A, 1247) rtcf0 r 01. 2412,4 EP 'A4\Y1'-S I401/tiff.242,4 4'4 4 /) q 1wil ' j'NJL 6F1D r MR: 171,1 V4NYve. B P!7C.1 ees s.n HI I A511IALT SHINGLE-5 ON ROOFING PAPER ON 1/2' COX 511EATIIING ON ENG RODE TR1/55E5 ® 24' 0 C R-49 BATT 1115111 W/ (.ONT POLY VAPOR BARRIER 4 5;8. GYP BD CLG VENTED `#TI-S T'MI TRUSS BEARING + 17'0' 1CCL-FH E116.7IR :' cr VINYL LAP SIDING (1YPI FIRST FLOOR + /- CY-Cr BASEMENT 9' 0' TRUSS BEARING , + 17'0' ,! VW% 51U15 ON BLDG F.AISR ON 12' GDR LYXV PAPPUEU VERT 1 WAILED WI GO COWRON !AIL56'OG @PERM r 11 OC gNREILLCU SUPPORTS DY ?YR WV 5.1/ C/5 @ a 0 C Wi R 21 INSM a GONT a MI POLY VAPOR WW2. 1 5/5. GYE BD Tw SECOND FLOOR 111. FIRST FLOOR +/-0'O' BASEMENT - y.�. sV RESIDENCE CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY -for- Michael and Charlene Markwardt -of- 1333 6th St. South Stillwater, MN �''^� 36.8 v, W (1.) CO CO 36.8 Step — 20 2 krs 8.4 Wood retaining wall , 17.3 Wall 0.5 S. of lot line EXISTING HOUSE #1333 I 1 L 00 N SET MAG NAIL A /• 1.A I .I N89°08'51 "W 134.86 (Mess) 135.00 (Plat) ram - Wall 0.3 N. of lot line / 12.3:' EXISTINGN GARAGE FFr ' Door/ 00 Concre oop r . L ` I II\II I. L Door/ Concrete stoop r S. line of the N1/2 of Lot 17 x X 18 85.3 17 x S89°1235"j » 134.81 (Hens) 135.00 (Plat) EXISTING HOUSE A r7 1 I I , /^Y r ' r, I if L i L Fence on lot fine' Fence corner 0.3' N. of lot line Bushes -- EXISTING BUILDING 1 I I I \ I In -• \ - FND 1/2" IP NE CORNER OF S1/2 OF LOT 20 = FND IP - 2.5 r7 d(1) g0 O O Lri� N r FND IP �( LS# 25715 SURVEY NOTES Field survey was completed by E.G. Rud and Sons, Inc. on April 25, 2016. - Bearings shown are on an assumed datum. - Curb shots are taken at the top and back of curb. - This survey was prepared without the benefit of title work. Additional easements, restrictions and/or encumbrances may exist other than those shown hereon. Survey subject to revision upon receipt of a current titlecommitment or an attorney's title opinion. LEGAL DESORIPTION Lot 18 and the North 1/2 of Lot 17, Block 2, CHURCHILL'S SECOND ADDITION TO STILLWATER, Washington County, Minnesota OHW • 0 LEGEND DENOTES IRON MONUMENT FOUND AS LABELED DENOTES IRON MONUMENT SET, MARKED RLS# 41578 (UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED) DENOTES BOLLARD DENOTES GAS METER DENOTES POWER POLE DENOTES RETAINING WALL DENOTES TREE LINE DENOTES OVERHEAD WIRE DENOTES BITUMINOUS SURFACE DENOTES CONCRETE SURFACE DENOTES GRAVEL SURFACE DENOTES PAVER SURFACE DENOTES WOVEN WIRE FENCE NORTH o Denotes Iron Set • Denotes Iron Found Bearings shown are on an assumed datum. Scale 1"= 20' Job No.: 16292LS Drawn By: SNN Project Manager: JER I hereby certify that this plan, survey or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Registered Land Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Dated this 6th day of June , 2016. License No. 41578 www.egrud.com LB. RUG a SONS, INC. Professional Land Surveyors 6776 Lake Drive NE Suite 110 Lino Lakes, MN 55014 Tel. (651) 361-8200 Fax (651) 361-8701