Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017-07-12 CPC PacketAGENDA PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Council Chambers, 216 Fourth Street North July 12th, 2017 REGULAR MEETING 7:00 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Possible approval of minutes of June 14th, 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. 1. Case No. 2017-14: Consideration of a Preliminary plat for an 8 single family home subdivision for the property located at 1902 William Street North. Sterling Black, Fairway Development, LLC, property owner. TABLED AT THE DEVELOPER'S REQUEST. NOTICE WILL BE GIVEN IN ADVANCE OF THE NEXT SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING. 2. Case No. 2017-23: Consideration of Variances associated with an addition to and the rehab of the structure located at 419 2nd St. S. Brian Brosdahl, property owner. 3. Case No. 2017-24: Consideration of a Conditional Use Permit to operate a Type C Short Term Home Rental to be located at 322 Broadway St. S. Brian Brosdahl, property owner. 4. Case No. 2017-25: Consideration of a Concept Planned Unit Development for a senior living housing facility to be located at 114 Brick Street South and 1616 Olive Street West. Our Savior's Lutheran Church, property owner. Daniel & Gretchen Smith, property owners. Anne Stanfield representing Ecumen, applicant. 5. Case No. 2017-26: Consideration of an 8' Variance to the rear yard setback for the construction of a 15' x 15' deck. Sithyvon & Jill Chau, property owners. VI. NEW BUSINESS VII. STAFF UPDATES/FOR YOUR INFORMATION 6. 2040 Comprehensive Plan Scoping Document (Available Wednesday) VIII. ADJOURNMENT THE 1I11TNYLACE OF MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 14, 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, Lauer and Siess, Councilmember Menikheim Absent: Commissioner Hade Staff: Community Development Director Turnblad APPROVAL OF MINUTES Possible approval of May 10, 2017 meeting minutes Commissioner Siess requested the following corrections: 1) remove Commissioner Kelly from the roll as he is no longer on the Commission; 2) regarding Case No. 2017-11, Amendment to a Special Use Permit to extend amplified outdoor music time, she would like the record to state that her point was that, of the residents who came to the last hearing, none talked about children and she would like to point out that the Commission was looking for input from all the residents, not just those with children. Motion by Commissioner Collins, seconded by Commissioner Fletcher, to approve the May 10, 2017 meeting minutes as amended. Motion passed 5-0-1 with Chairman Kocon abstaining. ELECTION OF OFFICERS Chairman Kocon nominated Commissioner Collins as Chair. Commissioner Lauer nominated Commissioner Siess as Chair. Community Development Director Turnblad collected paper ballots. He reported there were five votes for Commissioner Collins and one vote for Commissioner Siess. Chairman Kocon vacated the Chair position and Commissioner Collins assumed the role of Chair. Commissioner Hansen nominated Commissioner Siess as Vice Chair. Commissioner Kocon nominated Commissioner Lauer as Vice Chair. Commissioner Siess said she would abstain, which was interpreted as withdrawal from the nomination. A voice vote was taken electing Commissioner Lauer as Vice Chair - all in favor (there was no roll call). OPEN FORUM Commissioner Siess, 170 Interlachen Way Court, addressed the Planning Commission regarding her concerns in the process of election of the chair for the Commission, Open Meeting Law, conflicts of interest and ethics. She indicated that she would be sending a presentation to commission members regarding the Open Meeting Law. Planning Commission June 14, 2017 Commissioner Kocon felt that there has not been a violation of the Open Meeting Law. Chairman Collins requested that the Commission move on to other agenda items. PUBLIC HEARINGS Case No. 2017-14: Preliminary plat for an 8 single family home subdivision for the property located at 1902 William Street North. Sterling Black, Fairway Development, LLC, property owner. Chairman Collins noted that the developer is requesting this item be tabled. New notice will be given. Case No. 2017-17: Conditional Use Permit to operate a Type C Short Term Home Rental to be located at 807 Harriet Street South. Truett and Jill Lawson, property owners. Community Development Director Turnblad explained the application. Truett & Jill Lawson currently operate the property at 807 Harriet Street as a B&B with a Special Use Permit. However, it is a "hybrid" B&B since breakfast is not served on site, nor do the owners live on site to host their guests. The Lawsons have applied for a Conditional Use Permit to convert the property from a "hybrid" B&B to a Type C vacation rental, under the City's recently adopted Short Term Home Rental Ordinance, which fits their business model. He explained the differences between parking requirements for B&Bs versus Type C. A few safety items need to be corrected before the CUP would become effective. Staff has received several phone calls and one letter from neighbors opposing the CUP. Staff finds the application meets the requirements of the ordinance and recommends approval with 13 conditions. Cheryl Larson, realtor, spoke on behalf of the Lawsons who are on vacation. She explained that there is a buyer who has written a purchase agreement with a contingency that the Lawsons obtain the CUP and the buyer then be able to get a license. Once the buyers take over the building and it's used as a Type C, the two garage spaces will be available to guests who will be given an access code to use the garage. There are two parking spaces outside. The purchase agreement states that the Lawsons shall add the third parking space so there will actually be five off-street parking spaces. Chairman Collins opened the public hearing. Sarah Handley, 702 Churchill Street West, expressed concern about safety. With three young children she feels the street is not conducive to this type of a use. Dave Handley, 702 Churchill Street West, remarked that the Lawsons are great people but he is aggressively opposed to the CUP for safety reasons, because commercial and residential traffic has to back into driveways due to the limited space, and because the Lawsons chose not to come advocate on their own behalf but sent their realtor. He questioned why a realtor was allowed to speak on their behalf. He feels the process might not be being followed correctly. He added that he would like the neighbors' exact comments regarding parking, which staff referred to as negative commentary, to be shared with the Commission. Nancy Lambert stated she and her husband have a pending purchase agreement with the Lawsons. Because of the way the carriage house is designed, to convert it to a single family residence would be difficult and prohibitively expensive. They intend to do exactly what was done before. They don't believe the third parking space is necessary, however in response to concerns about parking, they have asked that the Lawsons add that third space. even though the Type C license doesn't require that. They Page 2 of 12 Planning Commission June 14, 2017 feel that having one family rent the house as a VRBO as opposed to renting each individual room will be better for the neighborhood. Chairman Collins closed the public hearing. He noted the Commission received emails from Dr. Gambone and Mr. Peterson, and from Ms. Glennon. Commissioner Siess pointed out that it's very difficult for vehicles to turn around. Mr. Turnblad replied that drivers can do a three point turn without using other driveways. Commissioner Lauer stated that not everybody will be cautious. He asked if using other driveways could be considered a credible strike against the license and a threat to public safety. Chairman Collins said he realizes it is a unique street, not a cul de sac. He understands the Handleys' concerns and agrees with Commissioner Siess that safety is an issue. Commissioner Kocon pointed out if it were a single family home, there would still be the issue of drivers backing out of the driveway. Chairman Collins replied a single family home and a business are two different things. Commissioner Hansen stated the Type C use will generate more traffic than the average family. He recalled the last time the property came before the Commission, the Commission had suggested a one- year extension on the existing use, because the new Short Term Rental Housing ordinance was in process. He supports granting the CUP, acknowledging that the three closest neighbors are strongly opposed to it and emphasizing that the Commission has the ability to revoke the CUP after three violations. Commissioner Fletcher said she is troubled by the fact that there is a real estate deal conditioned upon approval. Community Development Director Turnblad said the ordinance was written for this sort of a situation. It is common to put contingencies into a purchase agreement. A CUP runs with the land. The new owner would apply for the license. Commissioner Kocon stated that the application meets the requirements for the CUP. If guests are not careful then it won't be an air B&B very long. Commissioner Siess voiced concern that if tenants use the two parking spaces and the manager comes, where will they park? She noted that in the past the garage was full and unavailable for parking. Commissioner Lauer pointed out that even if the garage is unavailable, there are still two parking spaces, which is what is required. Motion by Commissioner Lauer, seconded by Commissioner Kocon, to approve Case No. 2017-17, a Conditional Use Permit to operate a Type C Short Term Home Rental to be located at 807 Harriet Street South, with the 13 conditions recommended by staff. Motion passed 4-2, with Commissioners Siess and Fletcher voting nay. Case No. 2017-18: Conditional Use Permit to operate a Type C Short Term Home Rental to be located at 210 Main Street South (a/k/a 209 Union Alley). St. Croix Investors, property owner. Sarah Heitpas, Manager. Community Development Director Turnblad stated that Sarah Hietpas, one of the owners of 210 South Main and its attached apartment at 209 Union Alley, has submitted an application for a Conditional Use Permit to operate the apartment as a Type C vacation rental. The property failed the safety Page 3 of 12 Planning Commission June 14, 2017 inspection on May 24, 2017. Several corrections are required, but work has been scheduled already so staff is comfortable recommending approval with the understanding that the work will be completed and the inspection must be passed before the CUP is effective. Commissioner Lauer asked what proof of insurance means. He added that some carriers dislike the idea of a property owner renting out their home. Mr. Turnblad replied that a certificate of insurance covering guests and property must be submitted and verified by staff. Sarah Hietpas, 3704 Kinder Court, Lake Elmo, stated she, husband and her parents will manage the property. They have commercial insurance. It's a unique space that has a one car garage for off-street parking which is uncommon for downtown. The fire and building inspector indicated two deficiencies and both should be corrected within the next couple of weeks. She is requesting approval of the CUP; the license may be held until the reinspection. Chairman Collins opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. He closed the public hearing. Motion by Commissioner Fletcher, seconded by Commissioner Hansen, to approve Case No. 2017-18, Conditional Use Permit to operate a Type C Short Term Home Rental at 210 Main Street South, with the 14 staff -recommended conditions. Motion passed 5-1 with Siess voting nay, stating she is uncomfortable approving it before the safety inspection is passed. Case No. 2017-19: Conditional Use Permit to operate a Type C Short Term Home Rental to be located at 520 Main Street North. ABS Company, property owner. Monty and Terri Brine, applicants. Community Development Director Turnblad reviewed the request. Monty and Terri Brine, ABS Company, own the duplex at 520 North Main Street. They have recently renovated the property and would like to offer both units to vacation rental guests. The property is zoned properly for both duplexes and vacation rentals. The Brines have submitted applications for both the Conditional Use Permit and the license to operate a Type C Short Term Home Rental (STHR). A letter of support was received from neighbor Linda Amrein, 307 East Laurel Street. Staff finds the regulations in Ordinance 1093 to be satisfied and recommends approval with 12 conditions. Terri and Monty Brine stated they have been working on the property almost two years and feel that using it as a VRBO might be the best way to have it stay nice rather than traditional rental. Chairman Collins opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. He closed the public hearing. Motion by Commissioner Siess, seconded by Commissioner Kocon, to approve Case No. 2017-19, Conditional Use Permit to operate a Type C Short Term Home Rental at 520 Main Street South, with the 12 conditions recommended by staff. Motion passed 6-0, all in favor. Case No. 2017-20: Conditional Use Permit to operate a Type C Short Term Home Rental to be located at 1008 Oak Street West. Joseph Metzger, property owner. Community Development Director Turnblad reviewed the request. Joseph Metzger has submitted applications for both the Conditional Use Permit and the license to operate a Type C Short Term Home Page 4 of 12 Planning Commission June 14, 2017 Rental (STHR) to be operated by his brother, Paul Metzger who lives in Roseville. Staff finds the regulations in Ordinance 1093 to be satisfied and recommends approval with 12 conditions. Joe Metzger, owner, stated he has been a landlord for many years and his brother Paul Metzger will help with management. Chairman Collins opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. He closed the public hearing. Motion by Commissioner Lauer, seconded by Commissioner Fletcher, to approve Case No. 2017-20, Conditional Use Permit to operate a Type C Short Term Home Rental at 1008 Oak Street West, with the 12 conditions recommended by staff. Motion passed, 6-0. Case No. 2017-21: Conditional Use Permit to operate a Type C Short Term Home Rental to be located at 210 Laurel Street East. Daniel Priebe representing Mary E Rice Trust, property owner. Matthew Stepaniak, Manager. Community Development Director Turnblad stated that Daniel Priebe and Molly Rice own the single family house at 210 East Laurel in trust. They have been offering their property as a short term rental, but have taken no new reservations since the City began working on the vacation rental ordinance. They would like to once again accept reservations and have submitted applications for the Conditional Use Permit and license to operate a Type C Short Term Home Rental (STHR). The property will be managed by Matthew Stepaniak who lives in Hudson. Staff finds the regulations in Ordinance 1093 to be satisfied and recommends approval with 12 conditions. Chairman Collins opened the public hearing. Mark Arps, 620 Main Street, Terra Springs Condos, explained he is concerned about the proximity of this property to the condos because the cliff creates an echo chamber. With seven bedrooms, there could be 15 people staying at the VRBO plus three visitors so there could be a lot of people enjoying the property. He thinks three strikes per year for revocation sounds too high. He believes the large VRBOs have a tendency to turn into party houses with no manager on site. He feels it would be a great site for a manager -occupied B&B but not a VRBO. Matthew Stepaniak, the property manager of 210 Laurel, stated that noise is a concern for everyone, and they feel they addressed it in the verbiage of their contract with guests. They do not intend to be a party house. They hold an entrance interview for clientele and are specifically targeting wedding groups coming into town so family can use the home as a base camp. They have written in their contract that there are not to be parties. They believe in sharing the property with the community as well, and host events there as members of the Greater Stillwater Chamber of Commerce. They have reserved the space for The Locals to use during Lumberjack Days. Commissioner Siess asked why they are pursuing short term rental and not B&B. Mr. Stepaniak responded that as a short term rental, they can hand the keys over to the house, walk away and know it will be well cared for. Also, to serve breakfast as a B&B would require upgrades. B&Bs have a well established place in Stillwater. They feel as a VRBO, this property will offer customers a lodging alternative. Page 5 of 12 Planning Commission June 14, 2017 Robyn Anderson, 620 Main Street North, Terra Springs Condominiums, said that when the owners have been home in the past, she could hear almost every word spoken from their patio. As the evening progressed, it got louder and louder. She is relieved to know that at 10:01 the police may be called and that after three strikes, the license can be revoked. Jo Harrison, 620 North Main Street, noted that a couple years ago the owners added a porch or patio on the back that overlooks the cliff, and that she could sit on her deck and hear their entire conversation. At times it would go on until 1 or 2 in the morning. It's a beautiful home but putting 18- 19 people on that back patio will create a lot of noise and sleepless nights for many people. Mr. Stepaniak said he understands the concerns and they will do everything they can to follow the ordinance He noted that the police were not called in the past. He clarified that based on the ordinance, the owners of the home may hold events at the home. Mr. Turnblad said that is correct. Commissioner Siess pointed out that per the ordinance, events are not allowed to be hosted by guests on the premises. Events hosted by the property owner are allowed but must abide by the City ordinances. Community Development Director Turnblad confirmed that guests of the VRBO may not have events. The owner may hold events, but may not rent out the property for events. Chairman Collins closed the public hearing. Commissioner Kocon remarked that noise is an issue in any neighborhood. The key thing is that the licensee must abide by the conditions and there are strikes for violations. Commissioner Hansen asked the primary difference between Type Cs vs. B&Bs. Mr. Turnblad responded that a B&B serves breakfast, usually requiring a commercial kitchen, and that usually a property owner or manager lives on site. Commissioner Hansen asked what constitutes a noise nuisance. Mr. Turnblad replied that even prior to 10 p.m. if the decibel limit is exceeded at the home of the complainant, it is considered a nuisance. Chairman Collins remarked it's clear that noise is an issue, which puts a lot of pressure on the property manager to maintain compliance. He hopes the property manager will share contact information with the neighbors. Commissioner Siess reminded the audience that the short term rental ordinance is new. She encouraged them to call their City Council members if they have concerns with the way it is written. Motion by Commissioner Kocon, seconded by Commissioner Fletcher, to approve Case No. 2017-21, Conditional Use Permit to operate a Type C Short Term Home Rental at 210 Laurel Street East, with the 13 conditions recommended by staff. Motion passed, 6-0. Case No. 2017-22: Comprehensive Plan Amendment to the City's Downtown Framework Plan, Chapter 6, as required by the release of a Metropolitan Council System. Community Development Director Turnblad explained that every ten years, communities in the Metropolitan Area are required by State law to update or re -write their comprehensive plans. The City of Stillwater is writing its 2040 Comprehensive Plan in four phases. He introduced Project Manager Page 6 of 12 Planning Commission June 14, 2017 Joni Giese from SRF for a presentation on the third phase, the draft Downtown Plan. Joni Giese explained the downtown study area boundaries. She stated that the 22-member Downtown Plan Advisory Committee helped provide direction and there were two community workshops and two open houses in addition to MnDOT meetings. She reviewed recent and planned infrastructure modifications including the new St. Croix River Crossing and the St. Croix Loop Trail. She reviewed a downtown market analysis which revealed the downtown's key strengths and weaknesses. There are significant retail gaps in certain service areas. Opportunities include trying to draw back in the local customers, improving the appearance of downtown, and being more selective about what events are held downtown and how the events can be supportive of the businesses downtown. She summarized ten downtown value statements drafted as part of the plan. The plan recommends redevelopment on Second Street for basic goods and services, keeping Main Street more for visitors and tourists, and Water Street as a shared one-way street. The plan also highlights nine parcels as potential redevelopment sites. It recommends enhanced pedestrian circulation, creating a plaza on Chestnut Street from Main to the lift bridge, closing Sam Bloomer Way to vehicular traffic and repurposing it for bicycles, and creating separate bicycle and pedestrian spaces. The plan also looks at vehicle circulation and locations for additional parking structures. It suggests the eventual conversion of the surface lot near the co-op into an activity area rather than parking, and Main Street modifications via curb extensions, parking bays, removing sidewalk signs and merchandise, widened crosswalks, pedestrian -scaled lighting and street trees. Ms. Giese explained phased implementation strategies. She informed the Commission that the draft plan will be presented to the City Council next week. She invited Commissioners to share input. Commissioner Siess asked how sites were identified for potential redevelopment. Ms. Giese replied many are city -owned property; others, like the Armory, are properties already targeted for redevelopment. Any private property would require a willing seller to make any improvements. Commissioner Siess asked Ms. Giese to explain the leakage graph revealing retail gaps. Ms. Giese replied that the graph shows percent of dollars that are spent outside the primary downtown shopping area. It indicates there are a lot of retail sales that Stillwater should be capturing. Commissioner Kocon asked about parking and vehicle circulation, and what is meant by raised crossing. Ms. Giese responded there would be six-inch bumps to slow down traffic. Commissioner Fletcher said she loves the emphasis on bikes and pedestrians. She asked how to ensure the circulation and shopping initiatives are receptive to an aging population. Ms. Giese responded that the committee had that conversation and also talked about making sure that downtown is accessible, for instance with ADA-compliant curb ramps, and things like making sure snow is removed downtown. She explained pedestrian preference at signals, saying the pedestrian light comes up first before the green lights for the vehicles, so pedestrians can enter the crosswalk and start their movement before the vehicles. Chairman Collins thanked Ms. Giese, City staff, business owners, and Commissioners Hade and Hansen who represented the Commission on the committee. Community Development Director Turnblad asked the Commissioners to provide input prior to Tuesday's City Council meeting, but added that even after that they may still submit suggestions. Page 7 of 12 Planning Commission June 14, 2017 Commissioner Siess stated she is very concerned that the last comprehensive plan did not seem to be very well respected; she recalled hearing comments from former staff inferring that it didn't really have to be followed. Mr. Turnblad responded that Stillwater's residents and business community demand that that comprehensive plan is followed. Every discussion with developers or property owners is based on the comprehensive plan. When other agencies undertake projects involving Stillwater, the plan must be followed. Commissioner Hansen agreed the plan is a guideline. Predicting what will happen in the next 20 years is difficult especially with the bridge closing. He is concerned about making the plan too pedestrian - oriented. He doesn't want to make it so impossible for vehicles to get downtown that nobody wants to drive down there anymore. Overall he feels the downtown plan captures the general feeling of the community and committee. Commissioner Fletcher said she really likes the downtown plan. With the closing of the bridge, there may be opportunities for some temporary measures to get everyone used to a more pedestrian focus. Chairman Collins opened the public hearing. Renee Murray, 350 Main Street, Stillwater Mills Condos, asked that the plan address accessibility for people with disabilities, for instance people who are blind and use motorized scooters. Louise Watson, a member of the steering community of sustainable Stillwater, Minnesota, said her group would like to review the final version of the plan from a sustainability point of view, so they can develop suggestions for transportation, recycling, walkability, and other issues. Community Development Director Turnblad responded that many of the issues raised will be addressed when the rest of the comprehensive plan is completed. As the City identifies funds to use toward implementing some of its goals, that is when design work is done. Cameron Murray, 350 Main Street, Stillwater Mills, said he hopes the City will address the problem of motorcycle noise as it transitions to a more bicycle -oriented downtown. Also, the City could make an effort to provide offsite parking especially in the summer. He acknowledged that Stillwater doesn't have the budget of a bigger city, but asked that the City include costs for the highest priority items in its budget plan for next year, and he asked the Commissioners to encourage this. Chairman Collins closed the public hearing. Regarding capital improvement programming, Mr. Turnblad stated the City has a five year capital improvement program. Elements of the comprehensive plan find their way into the CIP via staff recommendations. It's a good idea for the Commission to keep tabs on the CIP is so they can track whether or not the comprehensive plan is being implemented. Motion by Commissioner Hansen, seconded by Commissioner Kocon, to recommend approval of Case No. 2017-22, Comprehensive Plan Amendment to the City's Downtown Framework Plan. Motion passed, 6-0. NEW BUSINESS Page 8 of 12 Planning Commission June 14, 2017 Case No. 2017-15: Food Vendor License for El Coronel to be located at 225 Main Street North. Frank Fabio, property owner. Emilio Candia, applicant. Community Development Director Turnblad summarized the request. With the permission of the property owner, Frank Fabio, Emilio Candia of El Coronel has applied for a seasonal food vending permit to operate a food vending trailer that would be parked in the parking lot at 225 North Main Street (Maple Island Brewery). Staff would prefer the truck move over one space where there is more room. Staff finds that with certain conditions, the application meets all requirements of the Food Vendor licensing provisions. If the Planning Commission finds the proposed truck's location acceptable, staff recommends approval of the license with eight conditions. Emilio Candia, applicant, agreed he could move the food truck over one space. Chairman Collins opened the public hearing. There were no comments. The public hearing was closed. Motion by Commissioner Fletcher, seconded by Commissioner Kocon, to approve Case No. 2017-15, Food Vendor License for El Coronel with the eight conditions recommended by staff and a ninth condition stating that the food truck will be moved over one space. Motion passed, 6-0. STAFF UPDATES Community Development Director Turnblad reported that staff is beginning the fourth phase of the comprehensive plan update and is creating an advisory committee on which they would like at least one Planning Commissioner to serve. OPEN FORUM CONTINUED Chairman Collins offered to continue the discussion that began during the open forum. The Commission continued discussion on the election of chair process, possible future processes and and commissioner concerns. Community Development Director Turnblad reminded the Commission to be careful about ex-parte communications. He emphasized that making decisions by email should not be done and that communications should go through City Planner Wittman. Chairman Collins thanked Commissioners Kocon and Hansen for their leadership and thanked all the Commissioners for service to the community. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Commissioner Siess, seconded by Commissioner Fletcher, to adjourn the meeting at 10:20 p.m. All in favor, 6-0. Respectfully Submitted, Page 9 of 12 Planning Commission June 14, 2017 Julie Kink Recording Secretary Page 10 of 12 fflwater 6' . R T N P 1.. 4 T; E 91 F MINNFSOITA PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE: January 14, 2015 CASE NO.: 2017-23 APPLICANT: Brian Brosdahl, property owner REQUEST: Consideration of variances associated with the proposed reconstruction of a kitchen, as well as the addition of a front porch and attached garage to the structure located at 419 2nd Street South ZONING: Central Business District COMP PLAN DISTRICT: Downtown Mixed Use PREPARED BY: Abbi Jo Wittman, City Planner REQUEST Brian Brosdahl has applied for variances to make certain improvements to the structure located at 419 2nd Street South. Though the property is addressed off of 2nd Street South, approximately half way up Chillkoot Hill, the structure is accessed off of the driveway at the end of Broadway Street South; the residence is situated facing North. The house is minimally visible from 2nd Street South. The improvements include reconstructing a rear yard kitchen addition, adding a north -facing front porch, as well as the construction of a new, two -car attached garage on the East side of the structure. VARIANCES REQUIRED The applicant is requesting the following variances: • A 16.76' variance to the 20' Rear Yard setback for the Northwest corner of an attached garage; and • A 17.74' variance to the20' Rear Yard setback for the Southwest corner of an attached garage; and • A 8.5' variance to the 15' Front Yard setback from South 2nd Street for the addition of an attached porch. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS AND STANDARDS Section 31-208, Variances, indicates the Planning Commission may grant a variance, but only when all of the following conditions are found: 1. The variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of this chapter. The general purpose and intent of the Zoning Code is to regulate and restrict use of land for the protection of public health, safety and welfare. The purpose a front yard setback is to maintain an open, unoccupied space for uniform front yards for aesthetic and environmental benefits. The purpose of rear yards is to help preserve open areas between properties for drainage, fire safety purposes as well as for occupant parking. There is no prevailing Front Yard setback on South 2nd Street in this location. The variance for the construction of a front porch would maintain a front yard in on this property equal to what exists today. The 22' wide by 26' deep garage is proposed to be situated where an existing 1970s era constructed garage is situated today. Expansion would occur in depth to accommodate modern vehicle lengths. The owner has proposed it to be located in this location to help minimize the attached garage to this circa 1860/70 structure. While the garage is proposed on or near the property lines, the property owner is proposing fire -rated construction to help isolate potential fire from spreading to nearby structures. 2. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan. The property is zoned Central Business District and is guided for Downtown Mixed Use, despite being accessed in a residential neighborhood. There are no application elements that are contradictory to the Comprehensive Plan. 3. The applicant for the variance establishes that there are practical difficulties in complying with this chapter. "Practical difficulties," as use in connection with the granting of a variance, means that all of the following must be found to apply: i. The property owner proposes to use the land in a reasonable manner for a use permitted in the zone where the land is located, but the proposal is not permitted by other official controls; Residences of all classes are allowed in the CBD. The construction of a garage in the rear yard is encouraged in the residential district. As the fire -rated constructed garage would be situated in the 20' Rear Yard setback area, designed for parking purposes, the attached garage is reasonable. The City Code encouraged porches on residences. The addition of this porch, extending no closer to 2nd Street South that the existing West wall of the residence, is reasonable. ii. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property and that are not created by the landowner; and The property was developed in the middle of the 19th Century, prior to the adoption of the City's modern Zoning Ordinance. This is why the structure is situated where it is on the property. While demolition of the existing porch and garage are proposed, these existing improvements are modern construction that have failed over time due to a lack of maintenance. The property owner has owned the structure for less than two years. CPC 7/12/2017 (Case No. 2017-23) 419 2nd Street South Page 2 of 4 iii. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. The essential character of the neighborhood will not be affected by this improvement given the decreased visibility of the structure from all road right- of-ways. Section 31-208 further indicates: • Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. • A previous variance must not be considered to have set a precedent for the granting of further variances. Each case must be considered on its merits. ALTERNATIVES AND RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission has the following options: 1. Make the finding that practical difficulties do exist for the property owner and approve a 16.76' variance to the 20' Rear Yard setback for the Northwest corner of an attached garage; a 17.74' variance to the20' Rear Yard setback for the Southwest corner of an attached garage; and a 8.5' variance to the 15' Front Yard setback from South 2nd Street for the addition of an attached porch, with or without conditions. The Planning Commission may impose conditions in the granting of a variance. A condition must be directly related to and must bear a rough proportionality to the impact created by the variance. If the Commission were to find practical difficulties do exist for the property owner, staff would recommend the following conditions: a. Plans shall be substantially similar to those on file with the Community Development Department's Case No. 2017-23. b. The property owner shall obtain a Design Permit from the Heritage Preservation Commission. Conditions of approval shall be incorporated into the variance conditions of approval. c. A building permit shall be reviewed and approved prior to any construction occurring on the property. d. Major exterior modifications to the variance permit request shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission as per Section 31-204, Subd. 7. 2. Make the finding that practical difficulties have not been established and deny the variance, with or without prejudice. 3. Table the application and request additional information from staff or the applicant. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION On the basis that practical difficulty has been established by the applicant, staff recommends conditional approval of the aforementioned variances. CPC 7/12/2017 (Case No. 2017-23) 419 2nd Street South Page 3 of 4 ATTACHMENTS Site Location Map Narrative Request (2 pages) Zoning and Location Map Aerial Imagery Building Plan Certificate of Survey Building Elevations (2 pages) Photographs (3 pages) CPC 7/12/2017 (Case No. 2017-23) 419 2nd Street South Page 4 of 4 1.7,01 OLw �1 �\�w \ pN F°LE� ON ,, S ,, ; C.11- . 114 �, N 4(jH1VV'11iL u'rt •,, --* j ?t - JY q ram. X t A oy. x s ., �,A ,, = -�,, F�� , c.l)lli; . _. C., �, -4* G. - "-5.• S " y e ' A - 0\ N� S �O A) , \ M G Ns , ! �{ �:.. .. The Birthplace of Minnesota 419 2nd Street South Site Location Map GI Subject Property Parcel Boundaries 04.- Municipal Boundary 0 105 210 420 Feet 3�. ^• 0 yy, General Site Location u rF A Ai ='I t, r° "` qrr A. e e,,� 4 ijk'� _ - ;� , III li .73 k cn cp\SI ,l -+-ON ; — K „, w `I ; e o p op °o o ', Q •I i Je I r •Y .'� ` '� 1 � � 0 � � �.. �" � 1 �`> DATE: June 10, 2017 CASE NO.: TBD APPLICANT: Brian Brosdahl, property owner REQUEST: Four Setback Variance Requests LOCATION: 419 2nd Street South, Stillwater, MN 55082 ZONING: CBD — Central Business District PUBLIC HEARING DATE:July 12, 2017 ATTACHMENTS Attachment 1 — Zoning and Location Map Attachment 2 — Aerial Photo Attachment 3 — Building Plan Attachment 4 — Survey Attachment 5 — Building Elevations Attachment 6 — Photos of Existing Home BACKGROUND The subject property at 419 2nd Street South is situated on the bluff overlooking downtown and the Saint Croix River directly above Teddy Bear Park. The property is located within Downtown Mixed Use on the Comprehensive Plan and zoned as CBD — Central Business District. It is a single-family home so could be considered part of Neighborhood Conservation District, when reviewing design and plans. See Attachment 1 for Zoning and Location Map and Attachment 2 for Aerial Photo. The existing single-family home on the property was constructed in 1868. This structure existed before the area was platted resulting in the unusual lot configuration. The property is accessed via a shared private drive accessed from Broadway Street South and the home also has street frontage access via steps from 2nd Street South. The home has a 2nd street address, so the west side of the home is considered the front of the home based on address. However, the home was originally constructed with front of home facing north. So, the home is oriented to the bluff rather than the street. From a setback perspective, the front is the east side and the rear is the west side. The subject property has a detached garage, built around 1970 and an existing porch, estimated to have been built in 1970's. The current home and garage were constructed prior to current setback requirements, so, the current structures do not comply with setback requirements, as outlined by the City of Stillwater Zoning Ordinance, Division 3, Section31-317. The current structures are located within setback limits of property line on the east, west and south sides. The proposed construction plan is to: • replace the existing garage, as it is poorly constructed, but is located within 20 feet of east (rear) and 10 feet of south (side) property lines. So, two setback variances (east and south) are needed to replace current garage with the new garage. • replace the existing porch, as it is poorly constructed and does not adhere to Italianate architecture style. The porch will be replaced with a porch that meets appropriate Italianate design. The west (front) side of current porch is within 15 feet of property line and the new porch will be the same distance. So, a setback variance is needed to proceed. • replace the existing kitchen (south east corner of house), as the foundation needs repair and it is poorly constructed. The new kitchen will include a laundry/mudroom that attaches to the garage. The current kitchen is within 10 feet of south (side) property line. The new kitchen and laundry/mudroom will also be within 10 feet of the property line, so a setback variance is needed to proceed. Please see Attachment 3 (Building Plan), Attachment 4 (Survey with replacements noted), Attachment 5 (Building Elevations) and Attachment 6 (Photos of Existing Home) for further explanation of setbacks, variances, and replacements. As described above, the property has special characteristics and history that do that not adhere to current setback requirements. The plan is to restore the property to Italianate design and replace poor construction without significantly changing current distances to property lines. So, it does appear that that there is existing special or extraordinary circumstances applying this parcel of land and building that prevent the property from retaining current use and from being used to the original intended extent. We believe that the proposed replacement and renovation of existing structures are in harmony with general purposes of Neighborhood Conservation District and consistent the comprehensive plan for this historic area of Stillwater. As described above, there also practical difficulties in complying with the setback requirement, as the current home, garage and porch are already located within the allowed setback distance. So, the property owner; • does propose to use the land in a reasonable manner for a use permitted in the zone where the land is located; • does need variances granted due to circumstances unique to the property that were not created by the current landowner; and • the requested variances will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood, but will improve the character, as home will be restored to Italianate design. SPECIFIC REQUEST The current property owner requests four setback variances to facilitate replacement of current garage, kitchen and porch, and addition of laundry/mudroom. These variance requests include; • One setback variance from the east property line to replace and expand the existing garage. • One setback variance from the south property line to replace and expand the existing garage. • One setback variance from the south property line to replace and expand the current kitchen, including laundry/mudroom connection to garage. • One setback variance to replace the existing porch. Please see Attachment 3 (Building Plan), Attachment 4 (Survey with replacements noted), Attachment 5 (Building Elevations) and Attachment 6 (Photos of Existing Home) for further explanation of setbacks, variances, and replacements. brQsdahl Variance Zoning Location Map Zanlig Marlins AA. kgrcullulalPro.realm-, FIA • .trign rArn,lp krimianlul MI • irci Lam Fr 11R. Ind r4.5 ▪ LR. Mal CFL, Cot] ego Falanturtal C tit Cava trmiluroll PlArOlorm a itit..0;1',4•01.111914 R.PWIP.Ig I CIF Owls ThWedart011 Revile nti ▪ Tairthautt RCM - PAM DiSkfte =KM Pori 151.olv Rowley WI VC. Wags Donirriircial MI - Gams] Crtff 111 III CEO - Ca nval &Alum Dm. el iSikt human. 1km:ft - twarrercol - 19 RV* cfrWS. IBPJ, EINV nit I Ihirlq ▪ le - weiair Industrial ▪ CND - Oimput Flisearo. Ds, el wits, - 1000.014..nslirlkm 1111 K.0115 • oark. relVVIIKM Cr Vain .5 pm EX] Raise *wit a. Favicy *CLAD 'PATER deal uopepoi pue 2u!uo2 IluawLpelle Attachment 2 Aerial Photo Attachment 3 Building Plan kiiive, of Avoid )K7E/I'm A rt t*r fou000L-0 t.• _op 0511* Ate 14e. Attachment 4 Survey tq ,.p' CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY ' ''G` Desrinn syste, in an '"k," indicates- record: Adsuraeed ,datum, ithkR@'I-i .i. STACK value, n Inr'llcates #1i77d ¶run 1:,1tre set. tillLIAATTAK.MINN. Idatid P. Indicmte* Measured value. r Irl.tice9.tes anrvel point ark as noted. LLNNI5Dia NEGIS im,,,, o',raste a P-OW11 to eX1et111! stttrttur-, Underground ar overhead. public or LAMPIIIILEYOR ar4 oposore1 t•P the outside rkuildinrl private Utilities, ors ar adjacent the Tot Nu, 0.9,5Ple well line, unless eihown or 1t{ite4? parcel, were nut tocate3 in cantenction otherwise hereon, Any proieetints frolr with this stitLeys UnLess shown otherwise. safe wall line pooh as naves, aillaa Stops, "S e" lhdirates #11774 iron pipe set In 201J1, etc., will impamt Ind, offsets ncccsr,11ntily. not rccoverscl in current Purvey work, 5UNYL,Y,M,4UkICLLCVALY V11N: "ir. Harold Klumral, 41% Swnith SrAC:one '411.,. Rtillwater, MN 55n 1 ENCRFI'1ION: PtiltVjptinn at Pargaweycli lass supplied end client) All that. l:a:rt of Lots 21, 22, 21 and S4, nr B1ac1R 29, Stillwater, aiar.cribed ea folioed., t • slits emMaenCind at the Southwest corner of ca5r1. Lot Twenty one (21.Fn running thence Northerly on the Rant line oC Second. Street Lo the Northwest corhsr or said Lot Twenty oaa Kilt thence Northerly on the Bait line of said SetonrllStreet fifty 15o) rent. thence Easterly on a Line parai101 with tin North lino al said Lela. TNeoty OThe (711 Seventy five 1751 f-etl thence Lnutherly nn a 'lime parallel with the $set line or amid Second Street to the 'South line orsold Lot Twenty ]ne 1211i thspvw Lfeeterl}' an the South lints nt pm1A foot Twon.Ey one i21) to the place of begs ntylexf u0TF,i, yr da recten, soy tallest. slsirvi,y =."irl '•ae 11-itec, t,:, tits survey of tie 'encrilx:Q 1Sclrin,iarie- ur the tbcre aescri1',nA patrol mn'. I!..rstrnrty rr the►ticha et shown rrlrl n4Eac1 1emrtne, NF d#•-sis:kgr#, nn tether irt.rnve•,:.u1n nr nillities wets to ►,E 10uat•_ed 01- maFp00 a1. this I1rra,. as direct —et the joint ."_; n4-na' sOe ft : pOteeet, oanturly rvf the 'Kimmel parcel, was rnt. surveyed Ur slapped in cn:r,a,anr 1. inn iai rl5 the Ck1rrsetIRn y pro ier"i, N,/ .__/fir _ . --_-,- ,.�.,.. ._ 4; #' .57 y,< - 1 — _ ~}M m,`s' "'r 1 1.,. ,...,. RiAt7 N72"� ?;",e- , -.r.G - - L ? - iy•. _ l ter.:-- 4_a�•.'a4 i . - - } f _ _ _ - •.w:r .7,,r '..,_1,-.a-'..,_1,-.a-."F ee, - 0 , - ... rt I `T r .;."1. r" .fi ,16(?F:i — � I ,P: gr "! d• r A'€ £i "} , tat ,y�� I 4 � �. °,�,�s ,r"6: F. w 4 l,)w 4, 1 1 V 131 .Fm•��s �.:k ,fiP,ftrlerr! dr -44 1 -I .ter.- zr',� c..t r'o..p d...• .r,r -rf J L2ae. ,4*. 27 :72"IS CY.l1'. a r.r f. r .}! -R“.• • - - NYi" a"a `'/- ': .77..7AV l - 'I .' rsrLOW rt? 11serlty eerufy Lhst tine wnrl. pLie, ,tm report ne. rr'epined Iry re or uwdks wry ,6te-i supmrvihah end rhii I ems, s duly Rirgieineil lard Sumx4¢rurldin T!.i Faws DI !lit Sum nt Riinnr,..ai..�y 10--27-2•0111 1377d , - Attachment Building Elevations _ -4 Attachment 6 Photos of Existing Home -- '... . - '''' '..:n; ...4.."- .,..`, -"SWIM ........m'C,^..or.,-- ... rb.t7 , i,..' - j...1....—.m.m.„,..r . . t . ::......,,. __,..mm.:'4„. 1.- -- -4,r,- , .:„..... .,... ,..j. \,1...I.m.... —,......:.%----1.`m6—'...--,-&---- ggmilit--ki mnImm— 4 \\L'""...mm.....m=f-m..--:—.'.—.--_, Am.' ''''.--T-rii,_ 7.71.P7'• ,.. . - . '5— - ..A-- ...„. ..,....._..Arre ' ' fse2EV: . - -7" Agimit .1; ! tlllwaler THE BIRTHPLACE OF MINNESOIA PLANNING REPORT DATE: July 12, 2017 TO: Planning Commission APPLICANT: Brian Brosdahl LAND OWNER: Brian Brosdahl CASE NO.: 2017-24 REQUEST: Conditional Use Permit for a Type 3 Short Term Home Rental (STHR) STHR LOCATION: 322 Broadway Street South ZONING: CBD, Central Business District REPORT BY: Erik Olson -Williams, Zoning Administrator/Assistant Planner BACKGROUND Brian Brosdahl owns the single family house at 322 Broadway Street South. Mr. Brosdahl currently lives at this property, but he owns and plans to move into the adjacent property at 419 2nd St. S. after completing renovations to the property. Therefore, Mr. Brosdahl does not plan to immediately begin to use the property at 322 Broadway Street South as a short-term home rental. Brosdahl has submitted applications for only the necessary Conditional Use Permit to operate a Type 3 Short Term Home Rental (STHR), and will apply for a license at a later date. A Type 3 STHR is a dwelling unit that is offered to transient guests for a period of less than 30 consecutive days, and the property does not serve as the owners' primary residence. These types of vacation rental properties are typically investment properties and could either be operated by the owner or a manager. In this case, Mr. Brosdahl will operate the property himself. EVALUATION OF REQUEST A Type 3 vacation rental license can be issued for a property in Stillwater if: 1) A Conditional Use Permit has been approved by the Planning Commission; 2) The Conditional Use Permit has not lapsed [in those instances where a license renewal is being requested, or a new owner wishes to operate the vacation rental]; and 3) The total number of STHR licenses does not exceed the allowed limit. The Planning Commission's role in the vacation rental licensing process is to review and either approve or deny the property owner's request for a Conditional Use Permit. STHR Use Permit June 5, 2017 Page 2 The applicable review standards for the STHR Conditional Use Permit, per recently adopted Ordinance 1093, include: A. Zoning Type C Short Term Home Rentals are allowed by Conditional Use Permit in all Residential Zoning Districts and in the Downtown CBD Zoning District. The subject property is zoned CBD, which allows vacation rentals by use permit. B. Performance Standards 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. The proposed vacation rental has five bedrooms, which requires four parking spaces. The property has more than four off-street parking spaces available, which satisfies the parking requirement. Number of guests The maximum number of guests allowed is limited to two times the number of bedrooms plus one. So, with five bedrooms, the maximum number of overnight guests will be eleven. Proximity of assistance The vacation rental ordinance states: For Type B and Type C Short Term Home Rentals, the property owner or a manager/representative must be located within 30 minutes travel time of the property. The property owner lives in a property which is adjacent to the subject property. Signage No signage is allowed on the property of a Type A, B or C Short Term Home Rental. None is proposed. Events Events are not allowed to be hosted by guests on the premises. For purposes of the vacation rental ordinance, an event means a gathering of more than three un-registered guests. Events hosted by the property owner are allowed, but must abide by all applicable city ordinances and polices, including the prohibition on renting residential property for events. C. Proof of Insurance STHR Use Permit June 5, 2017 Page 3 Proof of appropriate and sufficient insurance was submitted with the use permit application form. D. Safety Inspection The safety inspection has not been completed yet. It is scheduled for August 2, 2017. If there are items to be corrected after the inspection, approval of the use permit would need to be conditioned upon correction of the items. E. Total Number of STHR Conditional Use Permits Fifteen Type C Conditional Use Permits may be issued at any one time. To date, three Type C permits have been issued and an additional five have been proposed. In summary, all standards are met, except that the safety inspection must be conducted and passed yet. ALTERNATIVES A. Approval. If the Planning Commission finds issuance of the Conditional Use Permit to be acceptable, it could approve the use permit with the following conditions: 1. Parking - All guest parking must occur on the subject property; none on the street. 2. Number of guests - The total occupancy of the property shall be limited to eleven. 3. Proximity of assistance a. The property owner or a manager/representative must be located within 30 minutes travel time of the property. b. The property owner must provide the name, address and phone number for the owner or manager/representative to all property owners within 150 feet of the lot lines of the vacation rental property. This must be completed within 10 days of issuance of the license. The owner must also provide the community development department with the neighborhood notification list within this 10 day time frame. c. The community development department must be notified within 10 days of a change in the contact information of the owner or manager/representative. The property owner must also notify neighboring properties within 10 days of a change in the contact information of the owner or manager/representative. 4. Garbage - As required by City Code, all garbage must be kept in rubbish containers that are stored out of view of a public street. 5. Signage - No signage identifying the Short Term Home Rental is allowed on the property. 6. Events - Events are not allowed to be hosted by guests on the premises. For purposes of Short Term Home Rental, an event means a gathering on the premises of more than three un-registered guests. 7. Length of guest stay - The property is not permitted to be rented for a period of less than one whole day. 8. Guest records - The owner must keep guest records 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. 9. Guest disclosures STHR Use Permit June 5, 2017 Page 4 The owner must disclose in writing to their guests the following rules and regulations prior to arrival. In addition the disclosures must be conspicuously displayed in the home. 1. The name, phone number and address of the owner, operating or managing agent/representative. 2. The maximum number of overnight guests at the property at a time is limited to fifteen. 3. The maximum number of vehicles is limited to seven at the property. These parking spaces must be clearly identified. No on -street parking is allowed for guests. 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. 6. No events with more than three unregistered guests are permitted. 10. License number - The owner must post their city license number on all print, poster or web advertisements, in addition to posting it on the booking agent's website. 11. Lodging tax - The owner, or booking agent on their behalf, is required to pay the city lodging tax quarterly. If no sales are made during a quarter, a report must none -the - less be submitted to the city stating that no sales were made or lodging tax collected during that quarter. 12. Conditional Use Permit Expiration - The Conditional Use Permit will expire if the property is not operated as a Short Term Home Rental for a period of twelve consecutive months. 13. Issuance of Conditional Use Permit - Prior to issuance of the Conditional Use Permit, the safety inspection and any corrections must be approved by City inspectors. B. Table If the Planning Commission finds the request to have incomplete information, the case could be tabled. C. Denial If the Planning Commission finds the request to be inconsistent with Ordinance 1093, it could be denied. With a denial, the basis of the action should be given. RECOMMENDATION Staff finds the regulations in Ordinance 1093 to be satisfied and therefore recommends approval with the conditions listed in Alternative A above. Attachments: Location Map Floor Plans cc: Owner/ applicant Y ST S 1�- p , s ' -- t X $ - t ' The Birthplace of Minnesota 0 r a w < _ {� . �.lk , S� 322 Broadway Street South Site Location Map ST5 C'• 1111:i �C• .. �• �> ` --_ -of- G�SO �` _� y � • Parcel Boundaries Municipal Boundary 0 105 210 420 Feet ✓ �� �Fs General Site Location v' got �� �� t. SCR _ .: � pro; ` 1 ��� as ���t ,1� c p c `"� Q ° ••� �.. s Penfield, Inc. SKETCH ADDENDUM File No. 1111-12MM Case No. 2012-104 Borrower Brian Brosdahl Property Address 322 Broadway Street S City Stillwater County LenderlClient Central Bank Washington State MN Zip Code 55082 Address 2270 Frontage Road W, Stillwater, MN 55082 19.0' 19.0 22.0' 20.0' 22.0' 22.0' Upper 28.0. Level Living Area First Roor Al:22.0x1.0= A2:34.0x19.0= A3:220x8.0= A4:20.0x8.0= Second Floor A5 : 22.0 x 1.0 = A6:34.0x 19.0 = A7 : 22.0 x 8.0 = SKETCH CALCULATIONS Perimeter Area 22.0 646.0 176.0 160.0 1004.0 22.0 646.0 176.0 844.0 Total Living Area 1848.0 UAD Version 9/2011 Produced by ClickFORMS Software 800-622-8727 Page 12 of 20 3-00s1.2(m( afar4i �Te � we, Idaafrit -.2L5- 1 .2b' '-letiALke2 6-ar-a5e, ('(PP6r Let .R.drvialt Sti1IwaL S f MINEEJIA PLANNING REPORT MEETING DATE: July 12, 2017 CASE NO.: 2017-25 APPLICANT: Anne Stanfield representing Ecumen REQUEST: Consideration of a Concept Planned Unit Development for a senior living housing facility to be located at 114 Brick Street South and 1616 Olive Street West ZONING: RA - One Family Res. COMP PLAN DISTRICT: Low Density Res. PREPARED BY: Abbi Jo Wittman, City Planner BACKGROUND Anne Stanfield with Ecumen is planning to develop a Senior Care Living Facility (Facility) behind Our Saviors Lutheran Church (OSLC) located at 1616 Olive Street West. The new Facility would be accessed off of Brick Street, directly across the street from Ramsey Street West. This facility will be developed, owned and operated by Ecumen. The applicant recently gained approval for a City of Stillwater Zoning Text Amendment to allow for these types of facilities to be located by Special Use Permit in the RA - One Family Residential zoning district. SPECIFIC REQUEST The applicant has requested approval of the Concept Planned Unit Development (PUD) for a future campus setting that would include Ecumeri s (approximately) 50,000 square foot facility as well as an addition to the existing OSLC structure. The request requires the Planning Commission to hold a public hearing prior to making a recommendation to the City Council. The applicant is aware that if the Concept PUD is approved, subsequent applications will need to be made for 1) a Special Use Permit for a Senior Care Living Facility to be located in the RA District; 2) Final PUD; and 3) associated preliminary/final plats. EVALUATION OF REQUEST As the property is greater than three acres in size and contains at least two principal buildings, the project is eligible to be considered as a PUD by the City. The purpose of a PUD1 is to provide for a means of: ' City Code Section 31-210(a) (1) Allowing a mixture of uses in an integrated and well planned area to aid in providing a better living environment. (2) Allowing for flexibility in group building development wherein the relationship is between building and building or buildings and site, rather than between building and property lines, as is the case in monostructural development. (3) Preserving natural beauty spots, open space and recreational areas. (4) Ensuring variety, innovation and flexibility in the development of land and its improvements. As indicated in the narrative request, the applicant has applied for the concept PUD to better plan for the unified development of the site as a whole. However, the development would occur in phases. The Facility is anticipating construction in 2018 whereas OSLC would like to reserve the right to construct in approximately ten years or greater. Typically, only six months may pass after a Concept PUD is approved before an application must be submitted for a Final PUD permit. However, there is an exception for "phased development", which allows the Final PUD to be applied for "according to the approved staging plan". Since development methods and materials, as well as Best Management Practices, evolve over time, it would be in the City's best interest to grant approval of the Concept PUD with an identified sunset clause. However, since the owners of the "future phase" properties do not know when they will develop, a sunset clause is not acceptable. However, they are willing to agree to develop according to development standards that will exist at the time they develop, as long as the Concept PUD approval continues to allow them the location and footprint of the Church additionwhen they finally develop. So, this will need to be a condition of approval. In review of the campus development concept PUD, the following development regulations are considered: Zoning Code Site Size A standard PUD has to be on a project of at least 3 acres in size. The subject property has 15.03 gross acres. Density Density is governed by the ability to meet all development controls. A total of 145 units are proposed which equates to (approximately) 9.5 units per acre for the entire development site. The density is approximately 20 units per acre on the developable portion of the Facility's proposed property. The density will not have an impact to the local school district. Setbacks Currently the church structure sits (approximately) 40' from Olive Street and 150' from Brick. OSLC's proposed addition(s) would not extend closer to the Olive Street right-of-way but would be closer Case No. 2017-25 (114 Brick Street/ 1616 Olive Street West) CPC: 7/12/2017 Page 2 of 8 Brick Street by approximately 20'; this is still well within compliance of the 30' Front Yard setback. The proposed Ecumen Facility is proposed to be located approximately 50' off of Brick Street and, at its closest point, 60' from the Myrtle Street/CSAH 12 right-of-way. The setback required is 20'. While the Facility is proposed to be located approximately 100' from the west property line (adjacent to homes located off of Deer Path), OSLC would not be extending further west than the structure already is situated. The Ecumen Facility is proposed to be setback at least equal to twice the proposed building height, as required per the PUD regulations. . While the facility is proposed to be located approximately 25' from the delineated wetland, a non -disturbance buffer is required to be a minimum of 25' in the Middle St. Croix Watershed District. Additionally, there is a 15' structural setback from the non - disturbance buffer. The applicant's revised site plan, dated 6/30/2017 shows the structure achieving compliance on the Northeast side by utilizing buffer averaging in this area. Each structure will achieve the Side Yard setback minimum requirement of 10' to the interior lot line. There is approximately 50' proposed between the two structures. Impervious Surface The property currently contains 35.42% lot coverage; a total of 1.46% of the existing lot coverage is for the public trail across this property. Under the new plan, a total of 36.91% of the development site will be covered by structures or other impervious surfaces. The RA Zoning District allows 30% maximum coverage. However, the PUD approach allows flexibility to this standard. As long as the mass of the structures are not inappropriate for the site, and the stormwater is adequately treated, the 36.91 % coverage would be allowed. Building Height The PUD standards indicate structures must conform to the height limitations imposed by the underlying zoning district. The RA zone allows for a 35' maximum structure. The proposed Ecumen Facility would be 33'4". Parking As the developer addresses in the narrative, parking standards for Senior Care Living Facilities is not specifically noted in the City Code. However, the developer has proposed 364 spaces on the site plan; a total of 350 would be required at the time of final buildout. The applicant has indicated an additional 14 spaces could be Case No. 2017-25 (114 Brick Street/ 1616 Olive Street West) CPC: 7/12/2017 Page 3 of 8 constructed at a later date. The following calculations have been applied to similar uses in Stillwater: Memory Care (36 units) 1 space/5 units 7.2 Assisted Living (36 units) 1 space/5 unit 7.2 Independent (73 units) 1.5 spaces/1 unit 108 Staff (30 @ shift change) 1 space/max no. 30 Church (650 seats) 1 space/3 seats 216 Total 368 -5% (18 spaces) 350 spaces required A parking lot planting plan shall be developed and submitted with the Preliminary Plat. Open Space and Recreation As indicated, 63 % of the property is proposed to remain as open space. This includes the preservation of the wetland areas adjacent to the northern property line, tree coverage to the west of the exiting City trail as well as woodland area to the west of Brick Street South. Selective removal of trees is proposed but, as per the subdivision regulations, no greater than 50%. Open areas between the two buildings and north of the Ecumen Facility will also be preserved. A complete landscaping plan will be required as part of the Special Use Permit and platting review. The PUD standards further indicate land must be dedicated to the city for recreation or other open space purposes consistent with the standards and criteria contained in the park dedication policy. Ordinance 963 establishes minimum public park and trail dedication requirements. In cases such as this one where the Comprehensive Plan and park planning efforts do not identify a need for on -site parkland, a park dedication fee is required in lieu of a land dedication. According to the City's Comprehensive Plan, no public park improvements are envisioned for the project site. There is no established park dedication fee for senior living facilities. The most similar fee may be for multiple -family projects, which requires $1,500.00 for each unit. However, the impact of a senior living project and an apartment building are not similar. Therefore, the Park Commission in similar cases reduced fees. If those reductions were applied to the lots to be final platted at this time, it would result in the following fees: Unit Type Number of Units Park Usage Fee Per Unit Recommended Fee Per Unit Recommended Total Memory care 36 0% $1,500 $0 $0 Assisted living 36 0% $1,500 $0 $0 Independent living 73 50% $1,500 $750 $54,750 Case No. 2017-25 (114 Brick Street/ 1616 Olive Street West) CPC: 7/12/2017 Page 4 of 8 TOTAL $54,750 As with the park dedication fee, it is unlikely that the impact of the project's residents upon the trail system will be in the same order of magnitude as a standard apartment building. Therefore, the Park Board has made the following recommendation for similar projects. Unit type Number of units Trail Usage Fee Per Unit Recommenced Fee Per Unit Recommended Total Memory care 36 0% $500 $0 $0 Assisted living 36 25% $500 $125 $4,500 Independent living 73 100% $500 $500 $36,500 TOTAL $41,000 An existing public trail on the property will remain. However, the applicant has preliminary discussed improvements to this amenity for emergency service access, requiring certain improvements to the trail (discussed below). As a result, the trail will need to be maintained in the wintertime months. Therefore, the Final PUD will need to include an upgrade and maintenance agreement of this public trail. Other Development Controls Streets & Other Public Ways The main entrance into the project would align with Ramsey Street West off of Brick Street. It is proposed to be a private access road. The applicant has provided a traffic study conducted by SRF, and engineering firm pre -approved by the Community Development and Engineering Departments. City Engineer Sanders has determined the traffic study is sufficient. The traffic study determined the existing infrastructure will be able to accommodate the increased demand. The private access will navigate to underground parking as well as a two-way parking lot in the center of the building and situated on the north side of the church. The existing westerly parking lot of the church is proposed to remain as developed; the access point will not be changing. There would be a connection between the two parking lots. A shared access and use agreement would be required to be submitted as part of the Final PUD. No other improvements or access points are proposed. However, the City's Master Trails plan calls for the construction of bicycle/pedestrian facilities in this location. Prior to the submittal of the Final PUD, the applicant will need to have a detailed plan for the potential construction, upgrades, and future maintenance of existing and proposed trails, sidewalks and other pedestrian improvements. Public Safety Stillwater Fire Department has reviewed the plan. Two areas of concern are the parking stall design of the existing westerly parking lot and its connection to the future Ecumen Facility lot Case No. 2017-25 (114 Brick Street/ 1616 Olive Street West) CPC: 7/12/2017 Page 5 of 8 as well as access to the north side of the structure. Prior to the submittal of the Final PUD, the applicant will work with the Fire Department to ensure all necessary life/safety measurements are taken. Utilities No utility plan has been included in the concept PUD. The City Engineering Department has indicated that the existing sanitary sewer lift station in this area may not be sufficient for this development. A study will need to be conducted to determine if upgrades to the lift station will be required. The cost of the study, as well as improvements required, will be the responsibility of the property owner(s). Additionally, the Water Department has indicated the property will be fed off of the middle system, opposed to the high system which has greater capacity. Design of the water infrastructure will need to be coordinated with the Water Department. Drainage The developer is proposing to maintain all drainage onsite by meeting the requirements of the City and Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization. Full drainage plans, including easement areas, will be required to be submitted as part of the platting process. Comprehensive Plan Conformity As the City Code further indicates, the PUD project must be designed and developed to harmonize with both existing and proposed development in the area surrounding the site and with the city's Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan's housing chapter encourages the provision of a range of housing opportunities for aging in the community and for the elderly. This PUD helps fulfill the following policies and program goals while preserving a significant amount of private and public open space areas: Policy 4. Attempt to disburse assisted housing throughout the community. Policy 5. Locate assisted housing near transit lines and public parks. Policy 9. Utilize the Future Land Use map to designate residential sites appropriately located for a range of housing densities. Program 3: Attempt to meet regional lifecycle housing goals for the City of Stillwater. The following implementation items of the Comprehensive Plan's Chapter three, Natural Resources, may be able to be met with this development: • Requiring protection of the natural resource areas. • Ensuring open space resource areas, including sensitive natural resource areas, are identified and incorporated into development design. ALTERNATIVES Case No. 2017-25 (114 Brick Street/ 1616 Olive Street West) CPC: 7/12/2017 Page 6 of 8 A. Approval If the Planning Commission finds the proposal to be consistent with the provisions of the Planned Unit Development, the Commission should forward a favorable recommendation of approval of the Concept Planned Unit Development with the following conditions of approval: 1) A 5% reduction in the total number of parking stalls shall be permitted in the Final PUD. The total number of stalls is contingent on the density maximums and shall be determined utilizing the following ratios. i) Memory Care/Assisted Living =1 space/5 units ii) Independent Living =1 space/1.5 units iii) Church =1 space/ 3 seats iv) Senior Care Living Facility Staff = 30 spaces 2) A complete landscape plan, including the preservation of significant trees and crown cover, will be included at the time of Preliminary Plat and/ or Final PUD. 3) Copies of all covenants and easements relating to the provision, use and maintenance of common open space, parking and drive areas must be filed with the Final Plat. 4) Redesign of the parking lot drive lanes and northerly access for fire safety purposes will need to be submitted as part of the Preliminary Plat and/ or Final PUD. 5) Prior to the submittal of the Preliminary Plat and/or Final PUD, the applicant will determine if pedestrian improvements will be required on the East property boundary, consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 6) Public land dedication may be used to fulfill public park and trail dedication requirements only if it is found acceptable by the Park Commission and the City Council at the time of the Preliminary/Final Plat review. 7) The applicant will work with the City Engineering Department to determine if upgrades to the lift station will be required. The cost of the study, as well as improvements required, will be the responsibility of the property owner. 8) Determination of all conservation, drainage and utility easements shall be determined and found acceptable by the City of Stillwater and the Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization prior to Final PUD submittal. 9) Since there is no Concept PUD sunset clause for the Our Savior's Lutheran Church properties, this property will need to develop according to City standards and Best Management Practices in place at the time of development. However, regardless of the City development standards in place then, the planned church addition can be developed according to the foot print and location included in this Concept PUD. B. Table If the Planning Commission finds that the application is not complete enough to make a decision, it could continue the review for additional information. C. Denial If the Planning Commission finds the proposal is not consistent with the provisions of the Planned Unit Development, the Commission should forward Case No. 2017-25 (114 Brick Street/ 1616 Olive Street West) CPC: 7/12/2017 Page 7 of 8 recommendation of denial to the City Council. The Commission should indicate a reason for such recommendation. RECOMMENDATION Staff finds the Concept Planned Unit Development is in keeping with the purpose and intent of the PUD provisions and is in general conformance with the principles, policies and land use designations set forth in the comprehensive plan. Therefore, staff makes the recommendation the Commission recommend conditional approval of this application. ATTACHMENTS Site Location Map Applicant Narrative (4 pages) Concept PUD Site Plan Concept PUD Submittal (15 pages) Unit Mix Matrix Parking Analysis Impervious Surface Analysis OSLC Preliminary Site Plan OSLC Preliminary Elevations Traffic Study Stiles Letter of Support Case No. 2017-25 (114 Brick Street/ 1616 Olive Street West) CPC: 7/12/2017 Page 8 of 8 x 31,111VnI lCl d y .''gym a rm j2 T ,L i1f A M ; z .r 4, 4 � �..... SUNNYSLOPE L `41 is yyyy y, WEST MY - The Birthplace of Minnesota 114 Brick Street South �► i .L: i ! ` 49,�'°' W W " 11`' CY e _ 113 1401 1 1616 Olive Street West ���Y. a Vx r"�.'� '� �C��� QP-° � ,Tiiit ".. WEST 1 t 1 . •6 . RAMSE Site Location Map GI Subject Properties i Q .— in CI m -� " 0 co Parcel Boundaries 4.- Municipal Boundary WEST OLIVE _ _ _ STREET CSAH 5 0 if € 0 180 360 720 Feet General Site Location -immili sr � 1 � r a jII J.yL1.. 1 1 t + rew. . . R, '.�w..r..w �,� 0 o r `Ni." p, .-L `saes y 7 ECUMEN & OUR SAVIOR'S LUTHERAN CHURCH / CONCEPT PUD APPLICATION INTRODUCTION / REQUEST Ecumen and Our Savior's Lutheran Church (OSLC) are pleased to submit this application for concept Planned Unit Development (PUD) to allow for a new Senior Living Care Facility and Church Expansion on 15.0 acres at 1616 West Olive Street and 114 Brick Street. The request includes: 1) A new Senior Living Care Facility The proposed Senior Living Care Facility would provide 145 housing units including 73 Independent units, 36 Assisted living units and 36 Memory Care units. Ecumen would own and operate the senior living community. Ecumen is under contract to purchase two contiguous properties: 114 Brick Street (current location of the AM radio tower for KLBB radio) and approximately 6.4 acres at 1616 West Olive Street (land which is currently undeveloped and owned by OSLC). OSLC would retain the remainder of their property and continue to operate the Church in an enhanced campus environment adjacent to Ecumen's new senior living community. 2) A future expansion of Our Savior's Lutheran Church at 1616 West Olive Street. OSLC plans to add an approximately 9,600 sf sanctuary. The timing of this project is a minimum of 10 years into the future. PROJECT BACKGROUND Ecumen, a leading national non-profit senior housing provider, was approached by OSLC after the adjacent property owner inquired about OSLC's interest in purchasing their land. The OSLC board considered senior housing to be a good fit as a potential future use of the site as such a community would be an extension of OLSC's commitment to service and would create great synergies. OSLC was aware of Ecumen's 150+ year history of serving those in need and believed Ecumen would be an ideal partner to realize an expansion of the Church campus to include housing for seniors in Stillwater. Based in Shoreview, Ecumen operates in 37 cities and 7 states, with the majority of its communities in Minnesota. Dedicated to empowering individuals to lead richer, fuller lives, Ecumen prides itself on innovation and radically changing the way aging is viewed and understood. As a long-term owner and operator of its communities, including locations in MN which have been under ownership for over 100 years, Ecumen is committed to enhancing the broader communities in which it operates. OSLC also has a 150+ year history, all within the City of Stillwater. The Church was established in Stillwater and has served this community from its inception. OSLC has been at 1616 Olive Street since 1961. The OSLC congregation is currently comprised of approximately 900 members, the majority of which are Stillwater residents. Given this unique opportunity to partner with OSLC, Ecumen has entered into contracts with OSLC and the KLBB property owner to purchase land. The goal of this partnership is to create a project that enhances the community with a building that complements the Church and adjacent homes and by providing a new home for Stillwater's seniors, a segment of the population that is currently underserved with limited housing options. In advance of this application, Ecumen requested a Zoning Text Amendment to allow for Senior Living Care Facilities in the RA district for sites 5 acres or greater by special use permit which was approved by City Council on May 16, 2017 (CASE #2017-07). 1 ECUMEN & OUR SAVIOR'S LUTHERAN CHURCH / CONCEPT PUD APPLICATION PROJECT OVERVIEW Ecumen's new senior living community will provide a range of housing options for individuals and couples 55+ under one roof. While a resident's health needs may change, offering Independent, Assisted and Memory Care housing options in one building allows residents to age in place. In addition to rental housing, the new building will provide common spaces available to residents and Church members including formal and informal dining venues, a wellness center, lounges for social gathering and activity rooms for larger group meetings and programs. There will be direct pedestrian connections to the Church which will facilitate safe passage between the two buildings and encourage intergenerational engagement between the residents of Ecumen's building, the Church's congregation, youth ministry and daycare. A focus on wellness and intergenerational engagement extends to the site design as well. Ecumen will provide walking paths that connect to the city's existing walking trails, an outdoor picnic area, park benches, and an open field for larger group recreation and gatherings. These amenities will serve the residents of Ecumen's building and the 900 members of the Church as well. The proposed campus and building design coupled with the rich programming and quality care that will be offered will facilitate active and healthy lifestyles for seniors in Stillwater, bolster residents' physical and psychological health and enhance their engagement with the community. SITE / BUILDING DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS Site Access Site access will be off of Brick Street and will align with Ramsey Street; this will result in a standard 4-way street intersection. Zoning Requirements All dimensional standards for the new building are in compliance with the requirement in the RA zone. Additionally, all PUD requirements are met for both the new planned Senior Living Care Facility and the future expansion at OSLC. Maximum Lot Coverage Proposed Ecumen Building Existing OSLC Church Building Proposed Ecumen Impervious (Paving) Existing OSLC Impervious (after sale) 55,160 s.f. 31,645 s.f. 68,677 s.f, 76,728 s.f. TOTAL IMPERVIOUS (BUILDINGS/PAVING) 232,210 s.f. Existing PUD Site Size (Ecumen & OSLC) 654,852 s.f. (15.03 acres) MAX IMPERVIOUS (BUILDING + PAVING) ALLOWED = 50% in PUD TOTAL IMPERVIOUS (BUILDING + PAVING) BOTH SITES = 35.4% *If the church were to expand, the total impervious between the both sites considered in this PUD application would increase to 37.0%. (1.6% increase from existing church property after sale + proposed Ecumen property). 2 ECUMEN & OUR SAVIOR'S LUTHERAN CHURCH / CONCEPT PUD APPLICATION Maximum Building Height Ecumen Building Setbacks 35' allowed 33'-4" proposed The proposed building meets all setback requirements for the RA zone and PUD. To the north, the building is beyond the 25' wetland buffer from the wetlands that comprise the northern portion of the site. To the west, the building footprint steps back in response to the angled property line in an effort to maximize the distance between the building and adjacent properties. It is a minimum of 69'-5" from the western property line, which exceeds twice the height of the building. Residential Design This project is appropriate for the site as the building is residential in character and in the way it functions (e.g. it is not an office building, industrial use, etc.). Residential building materials including brick and cement fiber board lap and panel siding will be used to complement OSLC's brick facades and the adjacent, lap sided single family homes. Landscape We will retain all existing healthy trees on site and will plant additional trees and landscaping throughout the site to provide screening and enhance the visual appeal. We will plant a combination of fast growing deciduous and coniferous trees on the west side of the site to maximize screening impact to adjacent homes year round. We will maintain the existing walking path at the west side of the property as this is valuable amenity to the neighborhood, the senior residents, and the Church community. Additionally, we will provide large, green open spaces between the senior living building and the Church as well as on the north side of the senior living building to create outdoor spaces for gathering and recreation to be used by both the Church and residents. Site Lighting The majority of site lighting will be at the driveway and parking lot for safe site circulation. The senior building wraps around the new parking area, which will effectively shield the majority of sightlines to parking lot lighting from neighboring homes. We will complete a photometric study at the time of final PUD approvals to ensure compliance with city ordinances. Parking We will provide a total of 168 parking spaces; 85 in the below grade secure garage, and 83 surface spots. This provides adequate parking for residents, staff and visitors. Also, the surface parking will be connected by a drive aisle to the Church's existing south parking lot and will function as overflow parking for OSLC. Ecumen and OSLC will prepare mutual parking agreements and access easements. Parking stall count meets both the current proposal and the Church's future expansion. Residents in Memory Care and Assisted Living typically do not drive or own cars. Based on previous staff reports it was deemed appropriate to provide 1 per 5 standard, resulting in 14.4 required spaces for these units. For independent units we assume 1 space per unit, resulting in 73 spaces. This is consistent with our other projects in the metro area. There will be a maximum of 30 staff during the day at shift change, and fewer at night. See attached Sheet C2.1 for a detailed parking analysis with total site stall counts including the Church. 3 ECUMEN & OUR SAVIOR'S LUTHERAN CHURCH / CONCEPT PUD APPLICATIOF' Storm water Management Storm water will be handled on site per the requirements of the city and the local watershed district. Engineered drawings and storm water report will be submitted at the final PUD submittal phase. TRAFFIC IMPACT A Traffic Impact Study was completed by SRF for the proposed design and is included in this submission. The study concluded that "no significant approach delays or queuing issues were observed in the traffic simulation" as a result of our project. Additionally, "the proposed site plan including access and circulation is generally well considered." PROJECT BENEFITS Supports the Goals of Stillwater's Comprehensive Plan Within Chapter 4 (Housing) of the Comprehensive Plan, Goals 1 and 2 call for "...planning for a range of new housing opportunities" and "providing a balanced choice of housing types and densities, suitable to a wide range of demographic groups, with a focus on life cycle housing." The objectives of this chapter also support development of higher density infill, encouragement of housing for a range of age levels, and use of the planned unit development process for reviewing innovative development concepts and protecting natural resource areas. Provides Housing Options Seniors to Stay in Stillwater Currently the residents of Stillwater do not have many senior living options in the community in which they live, and often move to adjacent communities for this type of housing opportunity. Market demand for this type of building, regardless of where it is located, often demonstrates that most residents come from a fairly small radius around the building, as residents want to stay close to their friends and family, as well as the city amenities that they enjoy. Based on a 2015 Census Bureau American Community Survey Data, seniors occupy 23% (or 1,275) of the single family homes in Stillwater. As seniors move out of their homes into a senior living building, their former homes are opened up for new families moving to the area. Addresses Market Need / Demand 65+ population in the market area, which includes Stillwater and adjacent communities, is projected to grow over 30% in the next 5 years. By 2021, Stillwater's senior population will increase by approximately 1,500 bringing the total senior population in Stillwater to over 3,700 residents. Currently, there are only 228 nursing home beds in Stillwater to support this population and no options for Active Adult Rentals, Independent Living with some services, Assisted Living or Memory Care in the City of Stillwater. While options are available in Oak Park Heights, Oakdale, Mahtomedi, Woodbury, and White Bear Lake there is a gap within Stillwater of providing a variety of housing options for an aging population. This project address this gap and demand in Stillwater for Independent, Assisted and Memory Care housing. Creates New Jobs in Stillwater Ecumen is recognized as a top employer, having been named "Best Places to Work" nine times by the Minneapolis/St. Paul Business Journal and one of Minnesota's Top Workplaces by the Minneapolis Star Tribune and Minnesota Monthly Magazine. The proposed Senior Living Care Facility will create new jobs in the City of Stillwater for the equivalent of 50 full time employees from nursing staff to housekeeping, culinary to administrative roles. 4 Site Plan 1 " = 50'-0" FOUND 112" IRON PIPE - FOUND RLS# NOT LEGIBLE 1 J X TOTAL CHURCH ADDITIONS +15,000 ft2 BUILDING -5,240 ft2 PAVING (net impervious change during addition = +9,760 SOUTH BRICK STREET 0 00 Site Plan Ecumen Ecumen - Stil wa er Stillwater, MN DEVELOPER / PROPERTY OWNER: ECUMEN 3530 LEXINGTON AVE. N SHOREVIEW MN 55126 651-766-4300 MAIN OFFICE ENGINEER / LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT: CIVIL SITE GROUP 4931 W 35TH STREET SUITE 200 ST LOUIS PARK, MN 55416 612-615-0060 SURVEYOR: ACRE LAND SURVEYING, INC. 9140 BALTIMORE STREET NE, SUITE 100 BLAINE, MN 55449 763-458-2997 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER: INTERTEK PSI, INC. 2915 WATERS ROAD, SUITE 112 EAGAN, MINNESOTA 55121 651-646-8148 STILLWATER SENIOR STILLWATER, MINNESOTA ISSUED FOR: CONCEPT P.U.D. 4 Jackson wrgfife ! 13agerhed'ir Area 0 SITE LOCATION MAP MASTER LEGEND: 1125 - X1137.12 1137 41.26 891.00 G 891.00 TC 891.00 BS/TS EOF=1135.52 O■■I %..I EX. 1' CONTOUR ELEVATION INTERVAL EXISTING SPOT GRADE ELEVATION 1.0' CONTOUR ELEVATION INTERVAL SPOT GRADE ELEVATION (GUTTER/FLOW LINE UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED) SPOT GRADE ELEVATION TOP OF CURB (GUTTER TOP) SPOT GRADE ELEVATION TOP OF WALL SPOT GRADE ELEVATION BOTTOM OF WALL DRAINAGE ARROW EMERGENCY OVERFLOW ■ SILT FENCE / BIOROLL - GRADING LIMIT INLET PROTECTION STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE SOIL BORING LOCATION CURB AND GUTTER (T.0 = TIP OUT) * 0 EXISTING MANHOLE EXISTING CATCH BASIN EXISTING HYDRANT PROPOSED MANHOLE STORM PROPOSED CATCH BASIN OR CATCH BASIN MANHOLE STORM PROPOSED GATE VALVE PROPOSED FIRE HYDRANT PROPOSED MANHOLE SANITARY PROPOSED SIGN PROPOSED LIGHT PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER PROPOSED STORM SEWER PROPOSED WATER MAIN EXISTING SANITARY SEWER EXISTING STORM SEWER EXISTING WATER MAIN EXISTING GAS MAIN EXISTING UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC EXISTING UNDERGROUND CABLE J EXISTING STOPBOX ►t EXISTING GATE VALVE EXISTING ELECTRIC BOX EXISTING LIGHT A EXISTING GAS METER EXISTING GAS VALVE GOPHER STATE ONE CALL WWW.GOPHERSTATEONECALL.ORG (800) 252-1166 TOLL FREE (651) 454-0002 LOCAL SHEET INDEX SHEET NUMBER Co.0 C0.1 C2.0 C2.1 C3.0 SHEET TITLE TITLE SHEET SITE SURVEY SITE PLAN OVERALL SITE PLAN GRADING PLAN 4931 W. 35TH ST. SUITE 200 ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416 CivilSiteGroup.com Matt Pavek Pat Sarver 763-213-3944 952-250-2003 4I aas wilson architects 3530 LEXINGTON AVE. N, SHOREVIEW MN 55126 H 0 w 0 a I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. Ma thew R. Pavek DATE 6/16/17 LICENSE NO. 44263 ISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARY DATE DESCRIPTION 6/16/17 CONCEPT PUD SUBMITTAL REVISION SUMMARY DATE DESCRIPTION PROJECT NO.: 17055 TITLE SHEET co.o ©COPYRIGHT 2017 CIVIL SITE GROUP INC. D# 2 9- 030 - 20 - 42 0001 PROPERTY ADDRESS: # 114 Brick Street So., Sti GRAPHIC SCALE 0 COMMITMENT) Section 29, Township 30 North, Range the Southeast Quarter of 0 L 0 v +_c 41) o U (,) L 0) 0."0 0 U7 _C �-a Q N 0) o N U 0 0) Q) 4- 0 0 (n L 0 0) 0 O 0 0 0 4- O S L 0 Z 0 0 4- 0 C 1 0 z 0 0 Iw 0) 0 0- '' 0 0 z N c 0 0 0 t17 c 0 _tc .c 0 .0 CL w (/) 0 O) 0 O N 0 K) 0) +' +' - LC 0 04- 0 + C to 4) a 07 O W r#. U 4 O GO Z L y m a) +' 0 0 C tO CI M _o w' O • (f) ON >,cV) 0 N 0 0 0 +' L (1) G - C 0I-- •y s O a ¢� U7 ) 0 0 N Y (f) 07 CO 4) L SCHEDULE B-2 SURVEY RELATED EXCEPTIONS: 0 4) v 0 U c +� 0 N 0] 3 c .F' cc O O 0 C.)$ 07 -' V) IT 0) U CO ert 4-7 0) C 0 C m r-' 0 0 0 a.'4- 0 0 1 0 0 N 0 G TITLE COMMITMENT* z d 0) (n W X w Q a z 0 0) W ce ce 0 0 (n z 0 1= a_ IJ U X W 0 J W u7 0 Z (Abstract Property) c 6 / REVISION SUMMARY Document No. 155252. / �.,� ti 1CO DESCRIPTION w 0 ao 0 co / / cot- SITE SURVEY -- DENOTES IRON MONUMENT FOUND WER MANHOLE DENOTES SANITARY S 0 U to 0 tottl STORM SEWER MANHOLE rx V >- 1- J P D. Lu UJ W W LH La n 0 0© 0 0 0 0 Z Z Z Z Z Z w W W W w Li w o a o 0 0 0 0 C FIRE HYDRANT / ` — 1 STORM SEWER A A GAS METER/BOX Z co P 11 11 X ) W Z RETAINING WALL EXISTING FENCE STREET LIGHT EXISTING CONTOUR UNDERGROUND TELEPHONE UNDERGROUND WATERMAIN (n to W w W w(f) (n (n t� w W I- 1-- F © 0 0 0 0 0 ZZZZ Z Z w w w W W w d 0 0 0 0 d r — tin =1: W Z J W W 00 W 0 0 SOIL BORING cL� ............................................... ca P. c.4 4 0 so 00 r a, 1-0 47 O N m 00. —Czt c9 co a `Arm an'. leo z hJ ' (.000M 031/) I 0,-- I I 1 m0 co coo 0x Ian a I I I co a 1�i1S �k1�18 llf"11CSF x r m �a4) • $ r iD • M' r'Y to CO cd cQ J to r.6 `O sr] .L+ )' W * ri coo- m co. 1 r I"1 (1s3M , l9' L2o' °1N1f]d� 3aN'd1S1a i " NOLL33S a3el�los3a aid 31V111 1~aaaNnoe---' bc4.344 a n h0 co cn u) 1 I ¢ e` r. a 0 � T co I,C) rryr 0 ,. 05 Y co.j rm I IX7 co a y�r I a �rtc .R 00 ■.�to • ..--� : -:W--, vas ry, I. r -- w co as co co rr- 0 0'+ • no co 1.0 co tin co to s '....� •. ,,.. W �I' ,9fR�i- '=. h5 '- 4 — — — — 313a3NQ3 .ifl 0 r N >rc-0 co •06 .� r, 0 c0 CO. 0 0 0 0,6 ri t7r 7-0 14 A ct' j If) 3l'Do z m Q co rn P co o z c coo r r t0 0 a' 0 0 co WW 4/) _0co 03 coco CO 00 40 II II II ij s4. n I 0� 1 C/] 0 -0 0 l!) 2(0 _CM C � C 00 0 C O D E Z U 7 = 70 E Ys U7 N 2 O O u 0 0 0 2 o c 0 7 (4 U x m 0 0 0. -0C 0 Duo ou O '0 _0 0 C 7 tm cep7 a 0 E C 0) 0 0 2 0 p 0) N .� 1- O e 0 0 m 0 0> O -O - G o 2 as co. N 6) 0) A o The fieldwork was completed on 03/08/17. Date of Map: March 22nd, 2017 >- Lu ce JOB #17076 1124157 AM CDT Cs\Users\erlc j\©neDrIve\CAD-1D\17076stlUwater-Senior-Kaas\dwg\170761andry-alta.dwg 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I 1 \FOUND 1/2" IRON P PE FQ\J 0 '1 /2' IRON PIPE • EXISTING BIT. WALKING PATH -� RLS# NOT LEGIBLE FOUND }am EXISTING BIT. WALKING PATH 7II INFILTRATION BASIN 1 \� MATCH EXISTING BIT. WALKING PAIN `jIDROP-OFF / VALET PULL IN I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I - INFILTRATION BASIN 2 PROPOSED NEW PROPERTY - 93.184 N82° 10' 28. 74 W MATCH EXISTING CURB AND GUTTER, TYP. J 6g 1 • • MATCH EXIST NG PARKING LOT PVMT, TYP. 24.0' TYP. 25' WETLAND BUFFER WETLAND BOUNDARY 0 0 1 III III II IIIIIIII cti �.`�' ao 9.0' TYP. 1111111111■11101►.11°INEWll ,� ■■r. PARKING ISLAND GREEN SPACE �■■■■w■�- 'ii_iii' i-MEW rammonw �1 m 111■IliL MEMMMMEMML r■■-■n■■ MD MID -LOW- NV =8 37 8. 3 B-75,8 •�� ..-1111M NOUN i II - uu�■� J PROOF OF PARKING 14 SPACES ♦ II II II II II II II IIIIIIIIIIIIIII B6-12 CURB AND GUTTER, TYP. ` N1 / of SE1 //1 =ID MID M --«--E- WALKWAY & LAWN AREA ADJACENT TO EXISTING PLAYGROUND, FOR MULTI -GENERATIONAL MINGLING 498.660 N88° 30' 49.07"W EXISTING BUILDING ♦ Ss WETLAND BOUNDARY TLAND BUFFER DOC. 589804-- o‘. 2 NOTES) ' UNDERGROUND PARKING LOT ENTRACNE / EXIT 600 SF TRUCK LOADING AREA `fiY.k' 14_'t_t PROPOSED NEW PROPERTY EX.BLDG. ST • tip'Q� RLS#10938 p C..) -_ (-o_ <v FLOW=860.75"a INV 8586.85 1 I <v MATCH EXISTING CURB AND GUTTER, TYP. MONUMENT SIGN S.E. CHURCH LOT 58 SPACES II! SMH INV_ 12 4.44 S SITE LAYOUT NOTES: 1. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY LOCATIONS AND LAYOUT OF ALL SITE ELEMENTS PRIOR TO BEGINNING CONSTRUCTION, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, LOCATIONS OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED PROPERTY LINES, EASEMENTS, SETBACKS, UTILITIES, BUILDINGS AND PAVEMENTS. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR FINAL LOCATIONS OF ALL ELEMENTS FOR THE SITE. ANY REVISIONS REQUIRED AFTER COMMENCEMENT OF CONSTRUCTION, DUE TO LOCATIONAL ADJUSTMENTS SHALL BE CORRECTED AT NO ADDITIONAL COST TO OWNER. ADJUSTMENTS TO THE LAYOUT SHALL BE APPROVED BY THE ENGINEER/LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF MATERIALS. STAKE LAYOUT FOR APPROVAL. 2. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN ALL NECESSARY PERMITS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION, INCLUDING A RIGHT-OF-WAY AND STREET OPENING PERMIT. 3. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY RECOMMENDATIONS NOTED IN THE GEO TECHNICAL REPORT PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF SITE IMPROVEMENT MATERIALS. 4. CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY COORDINATES AND LOCATION DIMENSIONS OF THE BUILDING AND STAKE FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE OWNERS REPRESENTATIVE PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF FOOTING MATERIALS. 5. LOCATIONS OF STRUCTURES, ROADWAY PAVEMENTS, CURBS AND GUTTERS, BOLLARDS, AND WALKS ARE APPROXIMATE AND SHALL BE STAKED IN THE FIELD, PRIOR TO INSTALLATION, FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE ENGINEER/LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. 6. CURB DIMENSIONS SHOWN ARE TO FACE OF CURB. BUILDING DIMENSIONS ARE TO FACE OF CONCRETE FOUNDATION. LOCATION OF BUILDING IS TO BUILDING FOUNDATION AND SHALL BE AS SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS. 7. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT SHOP DRAWINGS OR SAMPLES AS SPECIFIED FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE ENGINEER/LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO FABRICATION FOR ALL PREFABRICATED SITE IMPROVEMENT MATERIALS SUCH AS, BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE FOLLOWING, FURNISHINGS, PAVEMENTS, WALLS, RAILINGS, BENCHES, FLAGPOLES, LANDING PADS FOR CURB RAMPS, AND LIGHT AND POLES. THE OWNER RESERVES THE RIGHT TO REJECT INSTALLED MATERIALS NOT PREVIOUSLY APPROVED. 8. PEDESTRIAN CURB RAMPS SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED WITH TRUNCATED DOME LANDING AREAS IN ACCORDANCE WITH A.D.A. REQUIREMENTS -SEE DETAIL. 9. CROSSWALK STRIPING SHALL BE 24" WIDE WHITE PAINTED LINE, SPACED 48" ON CENTER PERPENDICULAR TO THE FLOW OF TRAFFIC. WIDTH OF CROSSWALK SHALL BE 5' WIDE. ALL OTHER PAVEMENT MARKINGS SHALL BE WHITE IN COLOR UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED OR REQUIRED BY ADA OR LOCAL GOVERNING BODIES. 10. CURB AND GUTTER TYPE SHALL BE B612 UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED ON THE DRAWINGS -TAPER BETWEEN CURB TYPES -SEE DETAIL. 11. ALL CURB RADII ARE MINIMUM 3' UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 12. CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO FINAL PLAT FOR LOT BOUNDARIES, NUMBERS, AREAS AND DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO SITE IMPROVEMENTS. 13. FIELD VERIFY ALL EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS, DIMENSIONS. 14. PARKING IS TO BE SET PARALLEL OR PERPENDICULAR TO EXISTING BUILDING UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. 15. ALL PARKING LOT PAINT STRIPPING TO BE WHITE, 4" WIDE TYP. 16. BITUMINOUS PAVING TO BE "LIGHT DUTY" UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. SEE DETAIL SHEETS FOR PAVEMENT SECTIONS. 17. ALL TREES THAT ARE TO REMAIN ARE TO BE PROTECTED FROM DAMAGE WITH A CONSTRUCTION FENCE AT THE DRIP LINE. SEE LANDSCAPE DOCUMENTS. CITY OF STILLWATER SITE SPECIFIC NOTES: 1. RESERVED FOR CITY SPECIFIC NOTES. SITE PLAN LEGEND: • - - - • ti' • LIGHT DUTY BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT HEAVY DUTY BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT CONCRETE PAVEMENT AS SPECIFIED (PAD OR WALK) PROPERTY LINE CONSTRUCTION LIMITS CURB AND GUTTER -SEE NOTES (T.O.) TIP OUT GUTTER WHERE APPLICABLE -SEE PLAN TRAFFIC DIRECTIONAL ARROWS SIGN AND POST ASSEMBLY. SHOP DRAWINGS REQUIRED. HC = ACCESSIBLE SIGN NP = NO PARKING FIRE LANE ST = STOP CP = COMPACT CAR PARKING ONLY GOPHER STATE ONE CALL 7„. WWW.GOPHERSTATEONECALL.ORG (800) 252-1166 TOLL FREE (651) 454-0002 LOCAL 1" = 40'-0" 20'-0" 0 40'-0" a L © 4931 W. 35TH ST. SUITE 200 ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416 CivilSiteGroup.com Matt Pavek Pat Sarver 763-213-3944 952-250-2003 rA aas wilson 0 0 o_ z 0 w L; cn 111 2- > z -I I- :T)3 ce 3530 LEXINGTON AVE. N, SHOREVIEW MN 55126 I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. Ma thew R. Pavek DATE 6/16/17 LICENSE NO 44263 ISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARY DATE DESCRIPTION 6/16/17 CONCEPT PUD SUBMITTAL REVISION SUMMARY DATE DESCRIPTION PROJECT NO.: 17055 SITE PLAN C2.0 ©COPYRIGHT 2017 CIVIL SITE GROUP INC. • 8NN 1 41 FOUND 1/2" IRON P 1 i FOUND 1 /2* IRON PIPE J FOUND 1 i LEGIBLE- 3 S#10938 .46 wet _� LIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII — FO ND /2" IR N PIPE r 1.2 .`193.184 N82° 10�74 N L.J (couldn't find manhole RIM=873.07* INV.-J0G .12* ' n 9.0 r - — —« J L NV RIM=868.00 INV.=862.80 =8 37, 38. 43 3 9.4 vouslommoinmialip :1�1111111! MO =ID _498.660 N88° 30' 49.07"W EXISTING BUILDING • BRIM=868.76 e(� I INV.=861.80* I 0 7 FLOW=868.2 12"(Inv=7') T OLIVE STREET V 86513 IMM * 12"(inv=6.6') —EL __ QW=86715, I FLOW=86 cf% n IM 04 4000 x 873.8 CHK RIM=871.13- INV.=863.83 04 FLOW=869.87 INV.=866.37 861.4 SMH INV2 ■ --- 60- ---- 50.9 - W W cn m 0 -- 50.9 4.4 RIM=861.36 INV.=849.36 v W. RAMSEY ST. INV.= 855.45 871.1 SMH-INV7.3 O RIM=870.77 INV.= 865.42* gv S RI 70.88 FLOW=869.88 G „ INV.=?j69.28 PARKING CALCULATIONS: PARKING ANALYSIS 6.14.2017 OSLC - church site Current sanctuary seats Current parking required Current SE/SW parking stalls 177 Future expansion sanctuary seats 650 Future expansion parking required 217 Future expansion parking available on church site 164 Ecumen - senior living site MC units 36 AL units 36 IL units 72 MC/AL parking required (1:5) 14 IL parking required (1:1) 72 TOTAL RESIDENT PARKING REQUIRED 86 Max. anticipated staff @ shift change 30 Guest parking (estimated) 30 TOTAL ECU MEN PARKING DEMAND 146 Ecumen garage stalls 85 Ecumen site stalls 83 TOTAL ECU MEN PARKING AVAILABLE 168 COMBINED OSLC (w/ expansion) AND ECUMEN PARKING DEMAND 363 REQUIRED PARKING (REDUCED BY 10% FOR SHARED PARKING) 327 TOTAL Ecumen (gar/surf.) stalls + church existing (no exp.) 332 SURFACE PARKING - OSLC w/ expansion + Ecumen 247 * This surface parking exceeds OSLC (w/expansion) parking demand by 31 stalls, which still should accommodate staff parking and 5guest parking if peak demand coincides. An additional 14 proof of parking stalls could be added in the future if needed. 17, GOPHER STATE ONE CALL • WWW.GOPHERSTATEONECALL.ORG (800) 252-1166 TOLL FREE (651) 454-0002 LOCAL 1 " = 60'-0" 30'-0" 0 60'-0" G G�3 © 4931 W. 35TH ST. SUITE 200 ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416 CivilSiteGroup.com Matt Pavek 763-213-3944 Pat Sarver 952-250-2003 Ft aas wilson architects 1— U w O 0 Z w ce E 0 0 O Z w J i; W 2 V / � CeLJJ W Q J a a~ J W W cc Z w 0 W 3530 LEXINGTON AVE. N, SHOREVIEW MN 55126 I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. Ma thew R. Pavek DATE 6/16/17 LICENSE NO. 44263 ISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARY DATE DESCRIPTION 6/16/17 CONCEPT PUD SUBMITTAL REVISION SUMMARY DATE DESCRIPTION PROJECT NO.: 17055 OVERALL SITE PLAN C2.1 ©COPYRIGHT 2017 CIVIL SITE GROUP INC. )5.5 -OUND 875.00 875.00 87� _ .........„."....-_,\ ! \ \ \\ \ \ 5) ' J)) �sal�r r8587 y BCS�D0WN K\�7a�\ `\ 0 \ 851 I 8. r' %; I EXISTING POND% 85 8 \ t84,/963 1 51,4 NWL=856.2 / 1 \85 •`\= 851 4 HWL=860.5 - g5� � I �859,0 9 /• .a\ \ 855,0 1 8 ?�\\ X86 /855,�i ;\ 59�, $ES36RCP DES 18 j7' a.4 i ' �''6 /ik \ \ 859,2 / iL * 62�X�6,8 9514 51,3 858,6,' �7 Z�X c i 55,1 65,0\8 8 85�a /86/ `� / '� / X$\ \\``�, .5 8 �'S �858,6 -- ------ 8 / 8�2 `� 86 / `/854,9 / ` 85k3\ 33�,__ 8-}an,�� __iffi93�7g6�X / / / a ' $58 7 / x 859.5 1 ;3 `./ I- 0 ): 854,8 / g66,� , $ i 65'6 -X 4 ----- - X8638 �� g63 � X 862. 86i3O 860.2 ` 859,8 t 864'�X 86�/6 863 `./ 2,6 862,2 s60,8 860,4 / \�> 1 Z,p ti g860,1 855,1 5, 65___ - 96 '61,0 859,8 / 6�-8 4, /� ^g66,8,,,- _��.' __ -862.8 861,7 /a,4 861,4614 860.2 X86 � / � f `�`��______-----_____\- _86�--86-2'�X 861,6 � M 860,7 854,9 866� 6�i0 ^ - - 4 - \-/6 861,2 6 - \2 g61 859,5 88 / // / ---- __----- ____j_ 86\ / / / \ / / / V r// / \4 854,4 / 8 854.5 X 8642- Xi / 43 / / 915,4 )8y 3.G: X F' 877 877 9641 '9 - / / / / // / /' / ./ / ^��N�,,., INF LTRATION / / 871.00 I BA IN 1 / // / / /(1/ III III /^ / 1 / 9/70 1// / / / / \/ ,', / 871.00 I / 1 / / 1 /2" IR� ' 11 am"- 1' X FOUND 878.1-' X1\ 879 r 7918 _I I I I I � I I IRON PIPE FOUND RLS# NOT LEGIBLE 70 5363.6 • • mft 871 876 877 878_ 0881008.00 880.33- / ,9 B 1 • 881. 881. 990' g90,8 890. ago. Xa 890 0 8g2' \ dI'■■■■■■■■■■■■■■►. IIMMMIMMk \■■■\ MEM IMMUMMws IMMEMMMI / IMMO - s13L �881.00 880.00 • 879 878 877 T7 .00 SB-10 878- 877 878 8n,9 878 3g.95C� 879.90 ) ) 878. vsk 877.99 • • • • )03 878.04 878. \ \ • 577.52 3 59,3 BB NN 11001111111111 ;17:777! IIMMii NMEMMEMMEMMEMMv mEr MIIIIMIIIIMIN MI ME EEL 59.5 859,5 863.5 59,1 41 • 878.70 59.6 878.78 875.73 878.66 ilumsEmmulurfar v LP 8633 860,2 • • • 578.33 87 • -850.53 575.29 • • • • • • 575.43 tir 859.5 855.33 DOOR 873.78 immarnira -..ent • .40 mr • -ut ofpumenniil • • EROSION CONTROL NOTES: SEE SWPPP ON SHEETS SW1.0-SW1.5 GROUNDWATER INFORMATION: PER GEOTECHNICAL REPORT BY INTERTK PSI, INC., DATED 03-03-17 GROUNDWATER WAS NOT OBSERVED IN BORINGS RANGING FROM XX FEET TO XX FEET DEEP. CITY OF STILLWATER GRADING NOTES: 1. RESERVED FOR CITY SPECIFIC GRADING NOTES. 858,8 i 858.9 1859.4 859,4 870.33 DOOR 870.33 1570.95 878.70 34-141444,47 cc CC 15 4311 CONSTRUCTION LIMIT 4/0 860.2 1859.3 8571.4 875.00 do ass 887.82 4. 860.6 2153 z• 1/4S> 963. abc-r f/9) IN \/QE856.85 2530 CB3,9 INV 859.5 9 859.8 858.31 .1 rn cfp 7/ ---;";k1\ BFL IN a, 861,4 50.9 -- SEA LLI (f) 963' CO 0 862,0 861.6 BO- 6 860 GENERAL GRADING NOTES: 1. SEE SITE PLAN FOR HORIZONTAL LAYOUT & GENERAL GRADING NOTES. 2. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL COMPLETE THE SITE GRADING CONSTRUCTION (INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO SITE PREPARATION SOIL CORRECTION EXCAVATION EMBANKMENT, ETC.) IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE OWNER'S SOILS ENGINEER. ALL SOIL TESTING SHALL BE COMPLETED BY THE OWNER'S SOILS ENGINEER. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR COORDINATING ALL REQUIRED SOIL TESTS AND INSPECTIONS WITH THE SOILS ENGINEER. 3. GRADING AND EXCAVATION ACTIVITIES SHALL BE PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE NATIONAL POLLUTION DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM (NPDES) PERMIT REQUIREMENTS & PERMIT REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY. 4. PROPOSED SPOT GRADES ARE FLOW -LINE FINISHED GRADE ELEVATIONS, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 5. GRADES OF WALKS SHALL BE INSTALLED WITH 5% MAX. LONGITUDINAL SLOPE AND 1`)/0 MIN. AND 2% MAX. CROSS SLOPE, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 6. PROPOSED SLOPES SHALL NOT EXCEED 3:1 UNLESS INDICATED OTHERWISE ON THE DRAWINGS. MAXIMUM SLOPES IN MAINTAINED AREAS IS 4:1 7. PROPOSED RETAINING WALLS, FREESTANDING WALLS, OR COMBINATION OF WALL TYPES GREATER THAN 4' IN HEIGHT SHALL BE DESIGNED AND ENGINEERED BY A REGISTERED RETAINING WALL ENGINEER. DESIGN DRAWINGS SHALL BE SUBMITTED FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. 8. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTENANCE OF GRADE STAKES THROUGHOUT THE DURATION OF CONSTRUCTION TO ESTABLISH PROPER GRADES. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ALSO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR A FINAL FIELD CHECK OF FINISHED GRADES ACCEPTABLE TO THE ENGINEER/LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO TOPSOIL AND SODDING ACTIVITIES. 9. IF EXCESS OR SHORTAGE OF SOIL MATERIAL EXISTS, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL TRANSPORT ALL EXCESS SOIL MATERIAL OFF THE SITE TO AN AREA SELECTED BY THE CONTRACTOR, OR IMPORT SUITABLE MATERIAL TO THE SITE. 10. EXCAVATE TOPSOIL FROM AREAS TO BE FURTHER EXCAVATED OR REGRADED AND STOCKPILE IN AREAS DESIGNATED ON THE SITE. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SALVAGE ENOUGH TOPSOIL FOR RESPREADING ON THE SITE AS SPECIFIED. EXCESS TOPSOIL SHALL BE PLACED IN EMBANKMENT AREAS, OUTSIDE OF BUILDING PADS, ROADWAYS AND PARKING AREAS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBCUT CUT AREAS, WHERE TURF IS TO BE ESTABLISHED, TO A DEPTH OF 6 INCHES. RESPREAD TOPSOIL IN AREAS WHERE TURF IS TO BE ESTABLISHED TO A MINIMUM DEPTH OF 6 INCHES. 11. FINISHED GRADING SHALL BE COMPLETED. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL UNIFORMLY GRADE AREAS WITHIN LIMITS OF GRADING, INCLUDING ADJACENT TRANSITION AREAS. PROVIDE A SMOOTH FINISHED SURFACE WITHIN SPECIFIED TOLERANCES, WITH UNIFORM LEVELS OR SLOPES BETWEEN POINTS WHERE ELEVATIONS ARE SHOWN, OR BETWEEN SUCH POINTS AND EXISTING GRADES. AREAS THAT HAVE BEEN FINISH GRADED SHALL BE PROTECTED FROM SUBSEQUENT CONSTRUCTION OPERATIONS, TRAFFIC AND EROSION. REPAIR ALL AREAS THAT HAVE BECOME RUTTED BY TRAFFIC OR ERODED BY WATER OR HAS SETTLED BELOW THE CORRECT GRADE. ALL AREAS DISTURBED BY THE CONTRACTOR'S OPERATIONS SHALL BE RESTORED TO EQUAL OR BETTER THAN ORIGINAL CONDITION OR TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE NEW WORK. 12. PRIOR TO PLACEMENT OF THE AGGREGATE BASE, A TEST ROLL WILL BE REQUIRED ON THE STREET AND/OR PARKING AREA SUBGRADE. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE A LOADED TANDEM AXLE TRUCK WITH A GROSS WEIGHT OF 25 TONS. THE TEST ROLLING SHALL BE AT THE DIRECTION OF THE SOILS ENGINEER AND SHALL BE COMPLETED IN AREAS AS DIRECTED BY THE SOILS ENGINEER. THE SOILS ENGINEER SHALL DETERMINE WHICH SECTIONS OF THE STREET OR PARKING AREA ARE UNSTABLE. CORRECTION OF THE SUBGRADE SOILS SHALL BE COMPLETED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SOILS ENGINEER. 13. TOLERANCES 13.1. THE BUILDING SUBGRADE FINISHED SURFACE ELEVATION SHALL NOT VARY BY MORE THAN 0.30 FOOT ABOVE, OR 0.30 FOOT BELOW, THE PRESCRIBED ELEVATION AT ANY POINT WHERE MEASUREMENT IS MADE. 13.2. THE STREET OR PARKING AREA SUBGRADE FINISHED SURFACE ELEVATION SHALL NOT VARY BY MORE THAN 0.05 FOOT ABOVE, OR 0.10 FOOT BELOW, THE PRESCRIBED ELEVATION OF ANY POINT WHERE MEASUREMENT IS MADE. 13.3. AREAS WHICH ARE TO RECEIVE TOPSOIL SHALL BE GRADED TO WITHIN 0.30 FOOT ABOVE OR BELOW THE REQUIRED ELEVATION, UNLESS DIRECTED OTHERWISE BY THE ENGINEER. 13.4. TOPSOIL SHALL BE GRADED TO PLUS OR MINUS 1/2 INCH OF THE SPECIFIED THICKNESS. 14. MAINTENANCE 14.1. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROTECT NEWLY GRADED AREAS FROM TRAFFIC AND EROSION, AND KEEP AREA FREE OF TRASH AND DEBRIS. 14.2. CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR AND REESTABLISH GRADES IN SETTLED, ERODED AND RUTTED AREAS TO SPECIFIED TOLERANCES. DURING THE CONSTRUCTION, IF REQUIRED, AND DURING THE WARRANTY PERIOD, ERODED AREAS WHERE TURF IS TO BE ESTABLISHED SHALL BE RESEEDED AND MULCHED. 14.3. WHERE COMPLETED COMPACTED AREAS ARE DISTURBED BY SUBSEQUENT CONSTRUCTION OPERATIONS OR ADVERSE WEATHER, CONTRACTOR SHALL SCARIFY, SURFACE, RESHAPE, AND COMPACT TO REQUIRED DENSITY PRIOR TO FURTHER CONSTRUCTION GRADING PLAN LEGEND: 11 25 1137 41.26 891.00 G 891.00 TC 891.00 BS/TS iiifr GOPHER STATE ONE CALL EX. 1' CONTOUR ELEVATION INTERVAL 1.0' CONTOUR ELEVATION INTERVAL SPOT GRADE ELEVATION (GUTTER/FLOW LINE UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED) SPOT GRADE ELEVATION GUTTER SPOT GRADE ELEVATION TOP OF CURB SPOT GRADE ELEVATION BOTTOM OF STAIRS/TOP OF STAIRS CURB AND GUTTER (T.0 - TIP OUT) EMERGENCY OVERFLOW • WWW.GOPHERSTATEONECALL.ORG (800) 252-1166 TOLL FREE (651) 454-0002 LOCAL 4931 W. 35TH ST. SUITE 200 ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416 CivilSiteGroup.com Matt Pavek 763-213-3944 Pat Sarver 952-250-2003 aas wilson architects 0 CL Z 0 w> Ui ce UJ 3530 LEXINGTON AVE. N, SHOREVIEW MN 55126 I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. Ma thew R. Pavek DATE 6/16/17 LICENSE NO 44263 ISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARY DATE DESCRIPTION 6/16/17 CONCEPT PUD SUBMITTAL REVISION SUMMARY DATE DESCRIPTION PROJECT NO.: 17055 GRADING PLAN C3.0 OCOPYRIGHT 2017 CIVIL SITE GROUP INC Site Plan with Dimensions 1/32" = 1'-0" an with Dimensions VA V INFILTRATION BASIN 1 71 1111111111111111 CONSTRUCTION LIMIT PROPOSED BUILDING ill I I I IIII I I I 111111IIII I CONSTRUCTIO LIMIT Ecumen Site Aerial Ecumen - Stil wa er Stillwater, MN OLevel -1 1" = 20'-0" 1 U N EXCAVATED v. 005 Tras 004 Elev. Lobby 002 Staff Breakroom 003 , Stair 091 ti N LX 0 44 45 46 41 47 UNEXCAVATED 40 48 39 49 38 50 37 51 36 52 LI 35 53 34 54 33 55 32 56 31 57 30 58 29 Garage 001 59 28 60 r 27 61 Li LI LEI [. 1 62 'i ev. Equip. 007 1 ras SD 501' Stillwater, MN Unit 0-2 MC Unit 0-3 Unit 0-3 Unit 0-2 MC Level 1 Unit 0-1 Stair 199 Unit 0-1 Unit 0-1 Unit 0-1 146 145 Unit 0-1 Unit 0-6 SD_502 155 156 157 Unit 0-7 Unit 0-7 Unit 0-1 Unit 0-1 SD_503 Unit 0-2 MC Unit 0-3 Unit 0-3 Unit 0-2 MC MC Dining Unit 0-1 MC Dayroom Unit 0-1 138 139 Unit 0-1 Unit 0-1 198 MC Activities MC Activities Unit 0-1 158 Unit 0-5 Unit 0-1 Unit 0-1 Unit 0-1 ani/Pe . i Unit 0-1 Unit 0-1 Unit 0-6 Unit 0-6 ] 130 Unit 0-1 Unit 0-1 Unit 0-4 SD_502 Dining 179 7-itness SD_500 ining Dir. 178-B Kitchen 178 Porch 177 Bistro 176 Lobby 166 PATIO Community Room 175 : • ES I �I cubbies • : • ES FP Mail/Lounge LJ L.!I Wo SD_500 01 121 Unit 2-1 IL 105 Unit 3-2 IL Unit 2-1 IL SD_502 106 Unit 1-1 IL 11 Unit 3-7 IL 107 Unit 3-1 IL IL Lobby Key Common IL MC MC Commons UI Unit 2-6 IL 114 Unit 4-1 SD501 Unit 3-5 IL Unit 4-1 1" = 20'-0" 3�S D501 rl First Floor & Site Plan VA V Ecumen - til wa er Stillwater, MN Level 2 1" = 20'-0" VA V 248 246 236 Unit 2-2 AL 254 244 256 238 Unit 2-4 AL 237 Unit 2-3 AL 235 Unit 2-2 AL Stair 298 234 Unit 1-2 AL /1116311 SD_503 233 Unit 1-2 AL 258 260 Unit 1-2 AL 1L J 226 Unit 1-2 AL 228 230 Unit 1-2 AL 232 Unit 3-4 AL L AL Dining Room AL Living Room L( 201 Unit 1-2 IL 224 Unit 1-1 IL 223 Unit 3-2 IL 222 Unit 3-2 IL 204 Unit 1-2 IL 221 Unit 1-1 IL 205 Unit 3-2 IL SD_502 Key AL Common IL 214 Unit 4-1 213 Unit 4-1 Second Floor Ecumen - Stil wa er Stillwater, MN Level 3 1 " = 20'-0" VA V 350 Unit 2-1 IL 348 Unit 3-1 IL SD_503 2 SD 502 \v4/ 336 Unit 2-2 AL 342 Unit 2-4 AL 338 Unit 2-4 AL 337 Unit 2-3 AL 335 Unit 2-2 AL 1 Stair 398 334 Unit 1-2 AL 333 Unit 1-2 AL 358 Unit 3-6 IL 360 Unit 1-2 AL 300 Unit 3-4 IL 326 Unit 1-2 AL 332 Unit 3-4 AL 301 Unit 1-2 IL 303 Unit 1-2 IL 304 Unit 1-2 IL I 321 Unit 1-1 IL 320 Unit 2-1 IL SD 502 306 Unit 1-1 IL Ecumen Key AL Common IL 315 Unit 2-6 IL Third Floo Stillwater, MN LAP SIDING PANEL SIDING BRICK VENEER LAP SIDING LAP SIDING PANEL SIDING LAP SIDING PANEL SIDING LAP SIDING 9 000000000 1 I i i ' II Ir I I I I f ] I I 111111111 i 11 i i i I 11111111 I' / 1 I 1 ■ 11111111111■1u1■11111111111111111111111111u11111111111 1111111111= 11111111111111 -isms---- 111111111 1111111111 __- il ___ ! ___! ===.1 11111111111111isms��111111111111 isms -- --- F Truss Brq. 131'-5 5/8" PANEL SIDING Level 3 gilk 122'-3 3/4" Level 2 all 111'-1 7/8" Elevation 1 - a 1/8" = 1'-0" BRICK VENEER OElevation 17 - a 1/8" = 1'-0" .IIIIIIII��iIIIIIIIIIIIIIIn�IIIIIIIIIIIII LAP SIDING 11111111111111111111111111111111111r BRICK VENEER PANEL SIDING IIIII ■ 11111111111111111111111111111I =_MIIIII■IIIIIIIIIIIIE_= =.41 �_ __ isms -3! ._= __ -_ mom -•mom isms — isms ---ime •!m• !, mi!! ommum31 ------isms--I- LAP SIDING BRICK VENEER I�I I•II 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 I • ===111111111111111111111_= m.—....... isms --isms 1___ —== — �• isms_-_- 1__- ____ —_a ___ -won- isms--. ----- •isms--- — -isms--' ___- namummi BRICK VENEER Elevation 3 - a 1/8" 1 0 LAP SIDING BRICK VENEER LAP SIDING isms --- ^___ism Emimm isms--• ___ laM __ mo __ 3111 milrim __= isms-- • 1-- �!-r MEM ----- I___ J_I—_--' 111.1.11 -- _=IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII'■_!,I .16 111111111111111111111-1■,_ —. ■isms--.. ----- ._isms .- PIIFhIF:I 111III1119 _isms-isms--- �--- _�---—_- EM �■--� �..�■ ..---��M!!le MMEN �isms -�®� �_�� \ M_�_�—I��.a.i—_—����isms—• '----1■�isms--• -= — - , \ I mI WI. -� �Cl� ���n11t1■1■1■1■1■Y� �1■1■Y:::: BRICK VENEER PANEL SIDING LAP SIDING BRICK VENEER PANEL SIDING 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 BRICK VENEER Level 1 100'-0" c) BUILDING HEIGHT LAP SIDING BRICK VENEER 0 0 119 11119 0 0 9 PANEL SIDING 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 ._==111111111111111111111_==?: _■_ �.-__. .____I_ -__. I ____.- oimom Rini .---. J6!___I.:: mi=a isms-- ----- M!!M =isms= .....1 EIMMIMIElm nemumm .isms --- BRICK VENEER BRICK VENEER ..] IIIII I111111111 11111111...I i �__! -__i .I ._. -_isms •--.1.. ��::I 1l:Ij : LAP SIDING PANEL SIDING III II II II IIIII IIIII IIIII _�IIIII.IIIII.IIIIIE== M=41111111111111 ■ 111111111111111111111 IIIIII1IIIIInIIIII isms isms---. -isms• isms isms--- tE - NM � __ _ — BRICK VENEER _ LII II 11111111r1. LAP SIDING BRICK VENEER PANEL SIDING Truss Brg. 131'-5 5/8" Level 3 122'-3 3/4" Level 2 111'-1 7/8" Level 1 100'-0" LAP SIDING Truss Br 131'-5 5/8" Level 3 122'-3 3/4" Level 2 111'-1 7/8" Level 1 Alui 100'-0" Level -1 Aikk RA'-4" Ecumen Exterior Elevations Ecumen Stillwater, MN LAP SIDING PANEL SIDING BRICK VENEER COLORED ARCHITECTURAL CMU LAP SIDING PANEL SIDING BRICK VENEER LAP SIDING PANEL SIDING LAP SIDING • IL II tlJ 11 II Vu 1 1 COLORED ARCHITECTURAL CMU ®Elevation 7 - a 1/8" = 1'-0" I �11 Elevation 4 - a 1/8" = 1'-0" f _— ___ MIIIMM mwmoi --- __= —__ 1 1 1 1 111I111111I1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1111111111 I1111 1111111 1 1 1 1 II 1111 11111 1111 111 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 1 1 1 1 I I I I I I I 11 1111111 1111111111 Elevation 6 - a 1/8" = 1'-0" III III I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I H IIIII)II �"•••••Il1==l �niW==WEB LAP SIDING PANEL SIDING I Truss Brq. ak 131'-5 5/8" PANEL SIDING Level 3 a:* 122'-3 3/4" Level2 111'-1 7/8" BRICK VENEER Level 1 4 100'-0" COLORED ARCHITECTURAL CMU PANEL SIDING [111111111111111111 II II II 11111 1 MEIMMINI ME ME 1 1111 111111111111111111 I I 1 1 111111 I 111111111111111111111111111 II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 111 111 1 1 I 1 1 III 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I III 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 I 1 I I I I I 1111111 1111111 IIIIIII IIIIIII 111.1 1111111111111 1111 11111 •IIIII IIIIII I IIIIIIIIIII I IIIII IIIIIIII 11111 1111111 11111 1111111 PANEL SIDING BRICK VENEER COLORED ARCHITEC CMU LAP SIDING ---tmi1--------------■■----------■------■---.--- 11III1I 111111 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 111111 1 1 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I 1 1 I LAP SIDING I IIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIII I I 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 IIIII I I I PANEL SIDING IIIIII ■ 1111111111111111111111 ■ IIIIII 11 111111 111111 11 Elevation 5 - a 1/8" = 1-0" — LAP SIDING Truss Br 131'-5 5/8" Level 3 AIL 122'-3 3/4" Level 2 IL 111'-1 7/8" PANEL SIDING BRICK VENEER Level 1 abik 100'-0" Level -1 89'-4" Hv 11111111111111111 ■ 111111111111111111111111 ___= ___ ' ==== NEN M ll •IM == - Emi ;11 II II Nom ii *ENNEZ l■1111111■1111111111111111■111111F __ !EI1'.ui IIIIIII in "- ==• =' I?I ------- --- --IlimETEm ------ i i --- . 11: --' _------ --#. —r psi ■-------------------- •IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII I I I I I •IIIIIIIII I I I I LAP SIDING Mm ME meNN MEN Mern LAP SIDING PriMillIME __- -- ==-111111111_===: PANEL SIDING LAP SIDING 1— li 1 1111 IIIIIIIIIII minim 1 IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII1111. —_= ' I : —_ = __ : _� ___: 1 = __ ___ ---- ---- �__� 't=_=111: -- ____ = ___. II r_■1�1d 1 '===: INIMMIIIIMMINEIMMIIIN MOM 1=1 11.111.111.11111.1 MIME INNI Milmmi IM MIME 11■Ifil■II • : 111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 I I ;111111111111111111111•_= 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 -4411111111111111 PANEL SIDING PANEL SIDING 1111111111■■I■■1■1■1■I■11111111111 ___. ■1■-1■1■1■1■ __ ___ ===-1111111u■■■■■111111�1l 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1111111111 M=====M===================1==============MM============ _____11M______1_________1___________1■=== LAP SIDING Truss Br 131'-5 5/8" PANEL SIDING PANEL SIDING i"d __ _= ill NM MM MINMMI IIIIII■1■1111■1■1■1■■IIIF =_ NMIMOMMIMIMM MMMIM MMNIMMIN �-------__I 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I I I I I 1 1 1 1 1 - 1 - ___■_______________________■___________ I1111111111 IIIIII I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1111111I 111111 II II II II III11111 II11111111 1 1 1 I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I 1 1 I 1111111111 III II II II II I I I I I I I I I IIII I I I I I I I I I I I I II II II111 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I11111 11�111 1 1 1 1 Level2 jik 111'-1 7/8" BRICK VENEER Level 1 oak 100'-0" Level -1 ak 89'-4" LAP SIDING MomM =_ MomM ■;- =_ 1111__11111111111111 111111111 1 1 1 111 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 II I I I I IIIIII 111111 111111 I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 IIIIIIIIIII 1 1 IIIIII I I I I I I BRICK VENEER • M M BUILDING HEIGHT LAP SIDING Truss Br . 131'-5 5/8" PANEL SIDING Level 3 AL 122'-3 3/4" Level 2 Ai 111'-1 7/8" Level 1 AL 100'-0" BRICK VENEER Level -1 89'-4" Exterior Elevations Ecumen Stillwater, MN LAP SIDING PANEL SIDING PANEL SIDING PANEL SIDING PANEL SIDING LAP SIDING PANEL SIDING LAP SIDING LAP SIDING PANEL SIDING LAP SIDING �iiullllllllllllllllllllllliir -� IIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIu1111111111111111111111■IIIII ___— -- -- ___- ___- •M•INEMIM • MEMINIMI --- -_—_—_■ EMME MENEM ---_ EMME 1 • • MMMINEN _MENNE MMENIMI 1__. �= ■ -- _—_— • • r— i1•i ■ 1 111 1 11 11 11 BRICK VENEER Elevation 8 - a 1/8" = 1'-0" Elevation 9 - a 1/8" = 1'-0" LAP SIDING INICEAMMI IMEINWAM MWAM •-- -n- .—- ,MIIM MEM=1 �___ —__= ___■ '_ -11111111111111111111111111111111 BRICK VENEER Elevation 11 - a 1/8" = 1'-0" V V BRICK VENEER BRICK VENEER - __ i MU 111 _= 111111111111111111111111111■I 1 11. _=111III.IIIIIIIIIIIII__ --NIMMI �----ENNI ilwEL.IMMI 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Truss Brg. ALI • 11111111111 ■ 1 1111111111111111 - BRICK VENEER - BRICK VENEER PANEL SIDING ?---- :111111111111111111111r 111111111111111111111:- aas wilson architects :----. 11111111111111 BRICK VENEER Truss Brg. 131'-5 5/8" PANEL SIDING Level 3 122'-3 3/4" Level 1 100'-0" LAP SIDING BRICK VENEER PANEL SIDING MM ----1 ■- =� _MIN inwm --tii■i� I Elevation 10 - a 1/8" = 1'-0" PANEL SIDING Truss Brg. 131'-5 5/8" Level 3 122'-3 3/4" Level 2 Ak 111'-1 7/8" MC FENCE - ---------Level 1 100'-0" i 1 BRICK VENEER LAP SIDING --- --1111, MMM MMIM 1---u117 ��1111 M- M ___:— M- MNIMMIM MM •-- -MM .= ----- •---1- EMMMENI ---IIIII PANEL SIDING BRICK VENEER 1 11111111111111 r 11 11 III r i 11111 i i i n 1111111L__I __1 II IIIII IIII111111111111111111111111111111111111111111IIII - __ __==..111111111111111111111'= _---_.. YI----■ _----i _---_ 1----• -----� II11 .- --1111 ----_ la ----- _---_ 11 uIII II IIII ----■ _---- 1111 �■—_—_—_-1111 ■11.1---_—_ .—_--_—. -- �• 1111 11111 ---� _--i—' -o—e �c-- —cam— - �__= 1- ---------• S—= _= - ���� Y --_- —■----• - Y--1-1-_ IIIII IIIII���IIII --- C ��� C _===n BRICK VENEER PANEL SIDING .... EMIMMINEM —1---- MMMM EMMIMIM —1---- '-1MINIMMUN- . —1---- . LAP SIDING —__- •EN aMM VME i i—_E •1 __= —_• MIIMEMI ■__: 1111111111.M IIIIIIIE_ =•i - IIIII ----•--- .-.- --1 IMMIMIMIMIMMIMIMM.MOM ME -- - --. ----1----=----- = ----------------� 1—diMiMEMOMOMEMOMEEMMOMEMMOMEMIaJ�1 UM MM LAP SIDING ----' I1111I I I1111111111111111111111111111111111I I I I •----• .----• .____. ---a111111111111111111111 ■u- ---------1 -----•_----• •----Y ----1 ---1 --- �•Y IMI MI IMI monimmilm BRICK VENEER PANEL SIDING BRICK VENEER Elevation 14 - a 1/8" 1 0" BRICK VENEER - MC FENCE LAP SIDING II 11111111111111111111111111 BRICK VENEER 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ---1-- mimmimmun ---•••• limum --.1 1 ism --.1 mmo mmimmmon 1 Emimmimmol LAP SIDING BRICK VENEER 1111111111 i i 7T .au u 11 11 �I PANEL SIDING MillEME i i_ • ll �1 1� -_- moo: 1�oumullummumui�i it IIIIII�I�IIII�I�I�I�II.. - __' 1111111111111111111111! PANEL SIDING 11111111 1111111111111 LAP SIDING 11111111111111111111111111111111 111111111111111111111111111111 1111111 =_= _. ■ CUMIN I::• 11011111111111111....1_ 111.1 0 BRICK VENEER BRICK VENEER LAP SIDING ---_—_ M=MMI MMM =IMMIMEM •----• IIIIIIIIEMMONON --- _• ••----• . —___• MM MINIM MM _ M MEM MINIM _— --i 122'-3 3/4" Level 1 Truss Brg. PANEL SIDING Level 3 di" Level 2 MI Truss Brq. AG, PANEL SIDING Level 3 AL Level 2 Level 1 BRICK VENEER Level 1 al' 3u1I LerlArCh Exterior Elevations • Ecumen Stillwater, MN v M M BUILDING HEIGHT LAP SIDING LAP SIDING PANEL SIDING LAP SIDING PANEL SIDING PANEL SIDING 11■ M11111111 --II— i 11111111 • ■ w ii -- -- I1111111111111111111■1111111111111 IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII Ull ■� i III ___�I IIIIIIIIII Ems___= =______iiilIIIIIIlIIIIIIIl'!! 1 u __ 113111111-___• ----- _ _111' _r= ___= �__= 1111111E === ='' MENN EN• �MEM _ _� ___• IWW IIIE � �-- u ii I ■ i fl:1111111111111---- NEM EN ME MEEM ME • IIIIIIIIII� ii NO I lfflhIlIlllUlIllllIll. OElevation 2 - a 1/8" = 1-0" 1I I 711111111111 ---------- Elevation 16 - a El BRICK VENEER 1/8" = 1'-0" VA V 1 BRICK VENEER LAP SIDING 1 1 1e'-i. 111111111.■mi■■■■IIIII 111111111 M kIL5 BRICK VENEER PANEL SIDING A 11111111111111111111111111111 • BRICK VENEER LAP SIDING 11 IIIII■1111111111111111111111■IIIIII BRICK VENEER LAP SIDING BRICK VENEER PANEL SIDING 111111111111= BRICK VENEER Truss Brg. 131'-5 5/8" �F PANEL SIDING Level 3 AL 122'-3 3/4" 1111■1111■ --- ---• • LAP SIDING Level 2 111'-1 7/8" - Level 1 100'-0" BRICK VENEER LAP SIDING LAP SIDING Truss Br 131'-5 5/8" PANEL SIDING mwommoi immumi ----• � =----■— BRICK VENEER Elevation 12 - a 1/8" = 1'-0" Level 3 AL 122'-3 3/4" Level 2 111'-1 7/8" Level 1 100'-0" PANEL SIDING 1 1 IIIII IIIII IIIII 11111111111111 11111111111111111111 • _I___� ____-- __- ___- :--=_f---i_. �.-7: Imo: .___ ��� is _= ■_■MP- - �_. = ��� —�I— ___ __:�I ■ I -I __=_I_IIIIIII 1111111111I11 -----wird�---ina—I---omm. _Thifil ■ __I LAP SIDING BRICK VENEER PANEL SIDING LAP SIDING PANEL SIDING Truss Brg. 131'-5 5/8" Level 3 122'-3 3/4" Level 2 idik 111'-1 7/8" Level 1 100'-0" PANEL SIDING LAP SIDING p BRICK VENEER IV 11111011 11111 111110111111 111111111111q III�11�11�11�111111�1 11101110111 IIIIII IIIIII IIIII - I- 1111111111111 IIIII j 11111 11111 I II II�11 I • 1 I'T MC FENC I' c r f — --- 11111111111r • • . AM liL ®1-a 1/8" = 1'-0" BRICK VENEER BRICK VENEER BRICK VENEER PANEL SIDING Truss Br 131'-5 5/8" Level 3 122'-3 3/4" `-P PANEL SIDING Level 2 111'-1 7/8" Level 1 alk 100'-0" Exterior Elevations Ecumen Stillwater, MN Al Ecumen Stillwater Unit Mix 6.29.2017 Assisted Living 1 BR 12 1 BR + Den 16 2 BR 8 Independent Living 1 BR 17 1 BR + Den 19 2 BR 37 Memory Care Studio 36 TOTAL 145 aas wilson architects r PARKING ANALYSIS 6.29.2017 aas wilson architects OSLC - church site Current sanctuary seats Current parking required Current SE/SW parking stalls 177 Future expansion sanctuary seats 650 Future expansion parking required 217 Future expansion parking available on church site 164 Ecumen - senior living site MC units 36 AL units 36 IL units 73 MC/AL parking required (1:5) 14 IL parking required (1:1) 73 TOTAL RESIDENT PARKING REQUIRED 87 Max. anticipated staff @ shift change 30 Guest parking (estimated) 30 TOTAL ECUMEN PARKING DEMAND 147 Ecumen garage stalls 85 Ecumen site stalls 83 TOTAL ECUMEN PARKING AVAILABLE 168 COMBINED OSLC (w/ expansion) AND ECUMEN PARKING DEMAND 364 REQUIRED PARKING (REDUCED BY 10% FOR SHARED PARKING) 328 TOTAL Ecumen (gar/surf.) stalls + church existing (no exp.) 332 SURFACE PARKING - OSLC w/ expansion + Ecumen 247 *This surface parking exceeds OSLC (w/expansion) parking demand by 30 stalls, which still should accommodate staff parking and 5 guest parking if peak demand coincides. An additional 14 proof of parking stalls could be added in the future if needed. (117/SW lot, 58/SE lot) (short 53 stalls, but shared surface parking w/ Ecumen site) * + 14 proof of parking available * "excess" of 21 stalls, without 14 proof of parking stalls required at time of expansion PROVIDED aas wi lson architects Impervious Analysis 6.30.2017 EXISTING Area (ft2) Existing site - Church & Radio Tower (15.03 acres) 654,815 Existing radio tower property (3.55) 154,652 Existing structure 400 Total Existing impervious / radio tower property 400 0.26% Existing church property (11.48 acres) 500,163 Existing church building 31,514 Existing church paving 106,462 Total Existing Church Property impervious 137,976 27.59% PROPOSED Church property after sale (4.15 acres) 180,688 Existing church building 31,514 Existing church paving 75,809 Ecumen Property after sale (10.88 acres) 474,127 Ecumen Building 55,931 Ecumen Paving 68,680 Combined sites - considered jointly under PUD Total Site 654,815 Total Building 87,445 Total Paving 144,489 Total lmpervious 231,934 35.42% FUTURE Church property (4.15 acres) 180,688 Church w/ addition building 46,565 Church w/ addition paving 70,518 Ecumen Property (10.88 acres) NO CHANGES 474,127 Ecumen Building 55,931 Ecumen Paving 68,680 Combined sites - considered jointly under PUD Total Site 654,815 Total Building 102,496 Total Paving 139,198 Total lmpervious 241,694 36.91% (of currently owned land) PK'ELIMINXKY SITE PLAN v• ©2008 STAT1ONI9 AKCHITECTS, INC. 6231 z O 0 So O 1 I Aimed.. A NW h 89'20'O8" PRELIMINARY Fit SITE MASTERFLAN CONCEPT OUR SAVIOR'S LUTHERAN CHURCH, STILLWATER. MN 02008 STATION NINETEEN ARCHITECTS, INC. 8/24/08 TWP MidEILUEL t-� NE NORTH E 5 PKEL1MIN)\KY BUILDING PLAN • CEILMELL %AEA FM WiaLhL LILECIL2264 ©2008 STAT1ONI9 ARCHITECTS, INC. NM/ADDITION f©+ 2 nn SE 7`° W/ POSSIBLE GROWTH ON I PPFR I FVFI WOLK CLC SHARFT) I KF >taze 1 srrueer. L., i rtLLSE t JW..^�fAi": sv"Ifft6Y�iC lliSiiSR1 I CIMANFAM a11°dBe3. REMODEL SANCTUARY TO CHAPEL/ CLASSROOM/ OFFLE aPAgF ��uec_ ` ueira i FYDQr+'M .T, Duradr I A6r, SW ADDITION + 8,650 SF XCCVE AGE I_NCgE OFF-3 c15.0_SE) POSSBI F NF ADDITION (15TORY m 1680 5F SHOWN) g• rsre W1 qrn[ a i nn r_LuwreY A'RbR YMDlliFCl FUTURE ACC,TION 5TOP.Y 6 2,075 5F 5HOWN) ERELIMINAMMILDING MASTERI'LAN CONCEPT 013R SAVIOR'S LUTHERAN CHURCH, STILLWATER. MN C 2008 STATION NINETEEN ARCHITECTS. INC. 8/24/08 TWP 141E5r OLIVE 5TKEET 0 10' 20' 40' co a PK€L!M1N)KY €L€V)J1ONS ©2008 ST T1ONl9 AKC k 1TE CT5, 1NC. 4 Consulting Group, Inc. E NGINEERS P LANNERS D ESIGNERS To: Anne Stanfield, Director of Business Development ECUMEN From: Jeff Bednar, TOPS, Senior Traffic Engineering Specialist Date: May 26, 2017 Subject: ECUMEN-STILLWAlLR SENIOR HOUSING DEVELOPMENT TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY Introduction Memorandum SRF No. 01710489 As requested, SRF has completed a traffic impact study (TIS) for the proposed Ecumen-Stillwater Senior Housing Development, located west of Brick Street and north of Our Savior's Lutheran Church (with shared access to Olive Street) in Stillwater, Minnesota (see Figure 1: Project Location). The TIS includes development plans for 73 independent senior living units, 36 assisted senior living units and 36 memory care units on approximately 5 acres (see Figure 2: Proposed Site Plan). The primary objectives of the study are to review existing operations within the study area, evaluate future traffic impacts to the adjacent roadway network and recommend any necessary improvements to accommodate the proposed development. The following information providing the assumptions, methodology, analysis and study conclusions and recommendations, is offered for your consideration. Existing Conditions The existing conditions were reviewed to establish a comparative baseline and determine any future impacts associated with the proposed development. The evaluation of existing conditions includes peak hour intersection turning movements, field observations and an intersection capacity analysis. Data Collection Weekday a.m. and p.m. commuter peak period and Sunday a.m. church peak period vehicular turning movement and pedestrian/bicyclist counts were collected at the following study intersections on Sunday, April 30, 2017 through Wednesday May 3, 2017: • Myrtle Street (CSAH 12)/Brick Street • Brick Street/Ramsey Street • Olive Street (CSAH 5)/Brick Street • Olive Street (CSAH 5)/Our Savior's Lutheran Church Site Access Observations were also completed to identify roadway characteristics within the study area (i.e. roadway geometry, posted speed limits, and traffic control). Supporting roadways have posted speed limits that are generally 30 mph throughout the study area. The existing geometrics, traffic control, and traffic volumes are shown in Figure 3: Existing Conditions. ONE CARLSON PARKWAY, SUPLE 150 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55447 763.475.0010 WWW.SRPCONSULTING.COM Mi • -n WWAT . 7 "g .'ect Locatio NMIProject Location Consulting Croup, Inc Ecumen-Stillwater - Traffic Impact Study 10489 Ecumen I City of Stillwater, Minnesota Figure 1 May 2017 )469'Ty1.9pures gure 1 — Prb Gs9L' Site Plan ►'T.Y E, 1 Proposed Site Plan Con Ming Gruuy, In` Ecumen-Stillwater - Traffic Impact Study 10489 May 2017 Ecumen I City of Stillwater, Minnesota Figure 2 \Projects\10489\TS\Figures\Figure 3 — Existing Conditions Consulting Group, Inc 10489 May 2017 Weekday AM Peak Hour Intersection Movement Volu mes Weekday PM Peak Hour Intersection Movement Volu mes Sunday AM Peak Hour I ntersection Movement Volu mes 1 Existing Conditions - Figure 3 Ecumen-Stillwater - Traffic Impact Study Ecumen I City of Stillwater, Minnesota Anne Stanfield, Director of Business Development, ECUMEN ECUMEN - STILLWATER SENIOR HOUSING DEVELOPMENT TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY May 26, 2017 Page 5 The existing roadway characteristics shown in Table 1 identify the functional class, generalized typical cross-section, posted speed limit, roadway right-of-way (ROW) width and Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) volume for the study area roadways. Additional details and discussion will be included in the Site Access and Circulation Review section and the Conclusions and Recommendations Summary of this memorandum. Table 1. Existing Roadway Characteristics Street Name Functional Class Typical Cross -Section (1) Posted Speed Myrtle Street (CSAH 12) Minor Arterial 2-lane Undivided Brick Street Ramsey Street Olive Street (CSAH 5) Local Street Local Street Minor Arterial 2-lane Undivided 2-lane Undivided 2-lane Undivided 30 MPH Right -Of -Way (2) AADT (3) 60' to 160' 6,500 30 MPH 30 MPH 30 MPH 50' to 60' 60' 40' to 60' 2,250 70* 8,600 (1) Typical cross -sections identified are for Urban Streets. (2) Roadway Right -of -Way (ROW) width varies throughout the study area. ROW widths shown indicate the study area range, (3) MDT as reported in MnDOT's 2015 Twin Cities Metro Area MDT Maps or as estimated* from peak hour counts. Intersection Operations Analysis An operations analysis was conducted to determine how traffic is currently operating at the study intersections. All intersections were analyzed using Synchro/SimTraffic and the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM). Intersection capacity analysis results identify a Level of Service (LOS) which indicates how well an intersection is operating. Intersections are ranked from LOS A through LOS F. The intersection LOS results are based on average control delay per vehicle from SimTraffic, which correspond to the delay threshold values shown in Table 2. LOS A indicates the best traffic operation and LOS F indicates an intersection where demand exceeds capacity. "Overall" intersection LOS A through D is generally considered acceptable by drivers in the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area. Table 2. Level of Service Criteria for Signalized and Unsignalized Intersections LOS Designation Signalized Intersection Average Control Delay/Vehicle (seconds) Unsignalized Intersection Average Control Delay/Vehicle (seconds) A <_10 B C D > 10 - 20 > 20 - 35 E >35-55 > 55 - 80 > 80 <_10 > 10 - 15 > 15-25 > 25-35 > 35-50 > 50 Anne Stanfield, Director of Business Development, ECUMEN ECUMEN - STILLWATER SENIOR HOUSING DEVELOPMENT TRAI+FIC IMPACT STUDY May 26, 2017 Page 6 For unsignalized intersections, special emphasis is given to providing an estimate for the level of service of the side -street approach. Traffic operations at an unsignalized intersection with side -street stop control can be described in two ways. First, consideration is given to the "overall" intersection level of service. This takes into account the total number of vehicles entering the intersection and the capability of the intersection to support these volumes. Second, it is important to consider the delay on the minor approach. Since the mainline does not have to stop, the majority of delay is attributed to the side -street approaches. It is typical of intersections with higher mainline traffic volumes to experience high levels of delay (poor levels of service) on the side -street approaches, but an acceptable "overall" intersection level of service during the peak hours. Results of the existing operations analysis shown in Table 3 indicate that all study intersections currently operate at an acceptable "overall" LOS C or better during the weekday commuter peak hours (7:00-8:00 a.m. and 4:45-5:45 p.m.) and the Sunday a.m. church peak hour (10:00-1100 a.m.) with the existing traffic control and geometric layout. No significant existing approach delays or queuing issues were observed in the field or in the traffic simulation at the study intersections. Table 3. Existing Peak Hour Intersection Capacity Analysis Weekday Commuter Peak Study Intersection Myrtle Street (CSAH 12)/Brick Street (1) Brick Street/Ramsey Street (1) Olive Street (CSAH 5)/Brick Street (1) Sunday (Church) A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour A.M. Peak Hour LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay A/B 15 Sec. A/C 21Sec. A/B 13 Sec. A/A 9 Sec. A/B 11 Sec. A/A A/C 20 Sec. A/B 13 Sec. A/B Olive Street (CSAH 5)/Church Site Access (1) A/B 14 Sec. A/C 18 Sec. A/B 9 Sec. 13 Sec. 12 Sec. (1) Indicates an unsignalized intersection with side -street stop control, where the "overall" LOS is shown followed by the worst approach LOS. The delay shown represents the worst side -street approach delay. Future Conditions Proposed Development The Ecumen-Stillwater Senior Housing Development TIS includes development plans for 73 independent senior living units, 36 assisted senior living units and 36 memory care units for a total of 145 units on approximately 5 acres. The proposed development was assumed to be completed and open in year 2019 and fully occupied by year 2021. Therefore, traffic forecasts were developed for both no -build and build conditions, for year 2022, one year after full occupancy. Access to the proposed site is planned to be provided at two locations (see Figure 2: Proposed Site Plan). The primary site access is proposed to connect to Brick Street at Ramsey Street with secondary Anne Stanfield, Director of Business Development, ECUMEN May 26, 2017 ECUMEN - STIL.LWATER SENIOR HOUSING DEVELOPMENT TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY Page 7 access to Olive Street by a connection to the existing church parking lot. Additional discussion of the site access analysis is included in the Site Access and Circulation Review section and the Conclusions and Recommendations Summary of this memorandum. Site -Generated Trips Trip generation estimates for the weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hours and daily trips were calculated for the proposed development based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers (Il E) Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition. Results of the trip generation estimate are shown in Table 4. The proposed Ecumen- Stillwater senior housing development is expected to generate a total of approximately 26 a.m. peak hour, 34 p.m. peak hour, and 440 daily trips on a typical weekday. Table 4: Weekday and Sunday Trip Generation Estimates Land Use (ITE Land Use Code) Size A.M. Peak Hour (1) P.M. Peak Hour Daily Trips In Out In Out Independent Senior Living Units (252) 73 Units 5 9 10 7 251 Assisted Senior Living Units (254) 36 Units 4 2 5 5 99 Memory Care Units (255) 36 Units 4 2 3 4 90 Weekday Totals 145 Units 13 13 18 16 440 Sunday Totals 145 Units 18 9 — _ 460 (1) The Weekday a.m. peak hour is 7:00-8:00 a.m. and the Sunday a.m. peak hour is 10:00-11:00 a.m. Since the proposed site would share access to Olive Street with the church, a Sunday morning church related peak hour (10:00-11:00 a.m.) analysis was included. However, the ITE trip generation data for Sunday was limited. Therefore, traffic counts on Sunday were completed at a nearby comparable (slightly larger with 150 units, but otherwise very similar) Ecumen Seasons at Maplewood senior housing facility in Maplewood Minnesota. From these traffic counts, Sunday trip generation estimates were developed for the proposed Ecumen-Stillwater senior housing facility (also shown in Table 4). As can be seen in Table 4, the proposed Ecumen-Stillwater senior housing facility would generate a very modest level of site -generated traffic. This is due to comparatively less active lifestyles and lower auto ownership of seniors housed in independent living, assisted living and memory care units. While there may be some pedestrian/bicycle trips generated by the proposed Ecumen-Stillwater senior housing facility, they are not anticipated to be significant and in order to provide a more conservative trip generation estimate, pedestrian/bicycle trips were not specifically identified. Anne Stanfield, Director of Business Development, ECUMEN May 26, 2017 ECUMEN - STILLWATER SENIOR HOUSING DEVELOPMENT TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY Page 8 No -Build Traffic Forecasts Based on the Stillwater Downtown Plan Update - Traffic Impacts Analysis, completed by SRF in November 2016, through traffic volumes on many of the Stillwater area roadways are expected to be significantly reduced with the 2017 opening of the New St. Croix River Bridge and the closing of the existing Stillwater Lift Bridge to vehicular traffic later this fall. For example, in the subject traffic study area, through traffic volumes on Olive Street are expected be reduced by 10 percent and on Myrtle Street by five (5) percent, after the new bridge is opened and the existing lift bridge is closed to vehicular (see Appendix A). However, soon after the new bridge is opened and the existing lift bridge is closed to vehicular traffic, it is expected that traffic volume growth will resume on the Stillwater area roadways at recent historical growth rates typical for Washington County. Therefore, in order to develop the year 2022 background future no -build traffic forecasts, the existing study intersection through traffic volumes on Olive Street and Myrtle Street were reduced by 10 percent (projection factor of 0.9) and five (5) percent (projection factor of 0.95) respectively to account for the new bridge opening and the existing lift bridge being closed to vehicular traffic. The study intersection non -through traffic movements were not reduced for these bridge related affects. Then based on the MnDOT 2016 20-year traffic projection factor for Washington County of 1.3, an annual growth rate of 1.32 percent, over five years (projection factor of 1.07), was applied to the study intersection adjusted peak hour volumes to develop year 2022 no -build traffic volumes. The resultant year 2022 no -build condition traffic volumes are shown in Figure 4: 2022 No -Build Conditions. Future Build Traffic Forecasts The total site -generated vehicle trips were assigned to the adjacent supporting roadway network assuming a directional distribution (see Figure 5: Site -Generated Trip Directional Distribution) based on the regional distribution of households, employment and services, a review of existing and future area travel patterns and engineering judgment. The resultant year 2022 build condition traffic volumes are shown in Figure 6: 2022 Build Conditions. Intersection Operations Analysis To determine if the existing roadway network can accommodate the year 2022 no -build and build traffic forecasts, a detailed traffic operations analysis was completed. The study intersections were once again analyzed using Synchro/SimTraffic assuming existing geometric layout and traffic control. Results of the year 2022 no -build conditions traffic operations analysis shown in Table 5 (assumes existing geometrics and traffic control), indicate that all study intersections continue to operate at an acceptable "overall" LOS C or better during the weekday commuter peak hours (7:00-8:00 a.m. and 4:45-5:45 p.m.) and the Sunday a.m. church peak hour (10:00-1100 a.m.). TS\Figures\Figure 4 — Year 2022 No -Build C Weekday AM Peak Hour Intersection Movement Volu mes Weekday PM Peak Hour Intersection Movement Volu mes Sunday AM Peak Hour I ntersection Movement Volu mes 6 8 • Olive St )live SI (CSAH 5) 2i+� Ove SI (CSAH 5) ) Olive St +e91(CSAH5) Olive St 'Ine St (GSAH 5) 12e 725* 15. 243$ B ti 8 Olive R:CSAH 5) OWe St (CSAH 5) Year 2022 No -Build Conditions 3,' 214. 534. 3x • Myna. Myrtle St it to A" Ramsey St to- U ASS l• tit Mytles Myrtle St 1 " Ramsey St Olive' Olive St Consulting Group, lnt Ecumen-Stillwater - Traffic Impact Study 10489 May 2017 Figure 4 Ecumen 1 City of Stillwater, Minnesota 0489 T \Figures\Figure 5 — Site -Generated Tri • Directional Distributio Consulting Group, Inc 10489 May 2017 . , t fi+ 1_tJl-ar wr' it .y ! �qr... 4fr, iii f ,u + 4 M` L. 1tE..* -. e. ;, 1 Site -Generated Trip Directional Distribution Figure 5 Ecumen-Stillwater - Traffic Impact Study Ecumen 1 City of Stillwater, Minnesota H:1Prajeetsk10489\TS\Figures\Figure 6 — Year 2022 Build Conditions Weekday AM Peak Hour I ntersection Movement Volu mes Weekday PM Peak Hour Intersection Movement Volu mes Sunday AM Peak Hour I ntersection Movement Volu mes Olive St Orve St(C8AH5) Olive St eS (CSAH5) Olive St I eSt(CSAH5) Olive St (CSAH 5) 210. 113. 725. 6 +7i Olive St (CSAH 5) 2140• 21. Owe St (CSAH 5) 51. 243. 253 1 3 E R. OI" Olive St Olive St OINt Olive St Year 2022 Build Conditions Figure 6 Consulting Group, Inc Ecumen-Stillwater - Traffic Impact Study 10489 May 2017 Ecumen 1 City of Stillwater, Minnesota Anne Stanfield, Director of Business Development, ECUMEN ECUMEN - STILLWATER SENIOR HOUSING DEVELOPMENT TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY Table 5. 2022 No -Build Condltlons Peak Hour Intersection Capacity Analysis Study Intersection Weekday Commuter Peak May 26, 2017 Page 12 Sunday (Church) A.M. Peak Hour LOS Delay P.M. Peak Hour LOS Delay A.M. Peak Hour LOS Delay Myrtle Street (CSAH 12)/Brick Street (1) A/C 16 Sec. A/ D 26 Sec. A/B Brick Street/Ramsey Street (1) A/A 9 Sec. A/B 11 Sec. Olive Street (CSAH 5)/Brick Street (1) Olive Street (CSAH 5)/Church Site Access (1) A/C 22 Sec. A/C 16 Sec. A/A A/B 14 Sec. 9 Sec. 13 Sec. A/B 14 Sec. A/C 19 Sec. A/B 12 Sec. (2) Indicates an unsignalized intersection with side -street stop control, where the "overall" LOS is shown followed by the worst approach LOS. The delay shown represents the worst side -street approach delay. Again, no significant approach delays or queuing issues were observed in the traffic simulation at the study intersections under the 2022 no -build conditions. Results of the year 2022 build conditions traffic operations analysis, shown in Table 6, (assumes existing geometries and traffic control), indicate that all study intersections continue to operate at an acceptable "overall" LOS C or better during the weekday a.m. (7:00-8:00 a.m.), p.m. (4:45-5:45 p.m.) commuter peak hours and the Sunday a.m. (10:00-1100 a.m.) church peak hour. Once more, no significant approach delays or queuing issues were observed in the traffic simulation at the study intersections under the 2022 build conditions. Table 6. 2022 Build Condltlons Peak Hour Intersection Capacity Analysis Study Intersection Weekday Commuter Peak Sunday (Church) A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour A.M. Peak Hour LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay Myrtle Street (CSAH 12)/Brick Street (1) Brick Street/Ramsey Street (1) A/C A/A 16 Sec. 9 Sec. A/D A/B 28 Sec. 11 Sec. A/B A/A 14 Sec. 9 Sec. Olive Street (CSAH 5)/Brick Street (1) Olive Street (CSAH 5)/Church Site Access (1) A/C A/B 22 Sec. 14 Sec. A/C A/C 19 Sec. 19 Sec. A/B A/B 14 Sec. 12 Sec. (1) Indicates an unsignalized intersection with side -street stop control, where the "overall" LOS is shown followed by the worst approach LOS. The delay shown represents the worst side -street approach delay. Since the study intersections operate at acceptable "overall" LOS C or better during the peak hours under the 2022 build scenario, it is concluded that the proposed Ecumen-Stillwater development would not represent a significant negative traffic impact to the supporting roadway system. Anne Stanfield, Director of Business Development, ECUMEN ECUNIEN - STILLWATER SENIOR HOUSING DEVELOPMENT TRAFFIC IMPACT SrUDY Site Access and Circulation Review Site Access Review May 26, 2017 Page 13 A review of the proposed site plan was completed to identify any issues and recommend potential improvements with regard to access, sight distance, traffic control and circulation. Access to the proposed site is planned to be provided at two locations (see Figure 2: Proposed Site Plan). The primary site access is proposed to connect to Brick Street at Ramsey Street with secondary access to Olive Street by a connection to the existing church parking lot. The proposed site plan, (see Figure 2: Proposed Site Plan) including access and circulation, is generally well configured. Based on field observations there is adequate sight distance at the two proposed site access locations. Conclusions and Recommendations Summary Based on the traffic study analysis, the following summary of conclusions and recommendations is offered for your consideration: 1. All study intersections currently operate at an acceptable "overall" LOS C or better during the weekday commuter peak hours (7:00-8:00 a.m. and 4:45-5:45 p.m.) and the Sunday a.m. church peak hour (10:00-1100 a.m.) with the existing traffic control and geometric layout.. No significant existing approach delays or queuing issues were observed in the field or in the traffic simulation at the study intersections. 2. The Ecumen-Stillwater Senior Housing Development includes plans for 73 independent senior living units, 36 assisted senior living units and 36 memory care units for a total of 145 units on approximately 5 acres. The proposed development was assumed to be completed and open in year 2019 and fully occupied by year 2021. Therefore, traffic forecasts were developed for both no - build and build conditions, for year 2022, one year after full occupancy 3. The proposed Ecumen-Stillwater senior housing development is expected to generate a total of approximately 26 a.m. peak hour, 34 p.m. peak hour, and 440 daily trips on a typical weekday. The proposed Ecumen-Stillwater senior housing facility would generate a very modest level of site - generated traffic. This is due to the comparatively less active lifestyles and lower auto ownership of seniors housed in independent living, assisted living and memory care units. 4. The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) suggests that a detailed traffic operations analysis is required for developments that generate more than 100 peak hour trips. Since the level of site - generated traffic by the proposed Ecumen-Stillwater senior housing development is estimated to be significantly less than 100 peak hour trips, it is concluded that the proposed development would not need a detailed traffic operations analysis and therefore, would not generate a significant negative traffic impact. 5. Through traffic volumes on many of the Stillwater area roadways are expected to be significantly reduced with the 2017 opening of the New St. Croix River Bridge and the closing of the existing Stillwater Lift Bridge to vehicular traffic later this fall. In the subject traffic study area, through Anne Stanfield, Director of Business Development, ECUMEN ECUMEN - STILLWA ITR SENIOR HOUSING DEVELOPMENT TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY May 26, 2017 Page 14 traffic volumes on Olive Street are expected be reduced by 10 percent and on Myrtle Street by five (5) percent, after the new bridge is opened and the existing lift bridge is closed to vehicular. 6. To develop the year 2022 background future no -build traffic forecasts, the existing study intersection through traffic volumes on Olive Street and Myrtle Street were reduced by 10 percent (projection factor of 0.9) and five (5) percent (projection factor of 0.95) respectively to account for the new bridge opening and the existing lift bridge being closed to vehicular traffic. The study intersection non -through traffic movements were not reduced for these bridge related affects. Then based on the MnDOT 2016 20-year traffic projection factor for Washington County of 1.3, an annual growth rate of 1.32 percent, over five years (projection factor of 1.07), was applied to the study intersection adjusted peak hour volumes to develop year 2022 no -build traffic volumes. 7. Results of the year 2022 no -build conditions traffic operations analysis shown in Table 5 (assumes existing geometries and traffic control), indicate that all study intersections continue to operate at an acceptable "overall" LOS C or better during the weekday commuter peak hours (7:00-8:00 a.m. and 4:45-5:45 p.m.) and the Sunday a.m. church peak hour (10:00-1100 a.m.). Again, no significant approach delays or queuing issues were observed in the traffic simulation at the study intersections under the 2022 no -build conditions 8. Results of the year 2022 build conditions traffic operations analysis, shown in Table 6, (assumes existing geometries and traffic control), indicate that all study intersections continue to operate at an acceptable "overall" LOS C or better during the weekday a.m. (7:00-8:00 a.m.), p.m. (4:45-5:45 p.m.) commuter peak hours and the Sunday a.m. (10:00-1100 a.m.) church peak hour. Once more, no significant approach delays or queuing issues were observed in the traffic simulation at the study intersections under the 2022 build conditions. 9. Since the study intersections operate at acceptable "overall" LOS C or better during the peak hours under the 2022 build scenario, it is concluded that the proposed Ecumen-Stillwater development would not represent a significant negative traffic impact to the supporting roadway system. 10. The proposed site plan, (see Figure 2) including access and circulation, is generally well configured. Based on field observations there is adequate sight distance at the two proposed site access locations. II:\Pro ed c\ 10000\ 10489\TS\Memo\ 10489_Eaimen Development TIS_ 170526.doc' Appendix A Bill Turnblad City of Stillwater Figure 3 - Volume Distribution Shift from Bridge Closure Existing Distribution APPlewood Hills Public Golf V Moulton November 9, 2016 Page 5 Year 2017 Volume Shift • -5°/u r' 4 • APWewooa Hills Public Golf -10°/ L7 +10% +20% +35% M°ullon Note: Volume distribution changes of bridge volume outside of downtown are assumed consistent with St. Criox River Crossing Project 2004 Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement directional distributions. Year 2040 Volume Forecasts Year 2040 daily volume forecasts were developed based on previous average annual growth rates (AAGR) identified in the St. Criox River Crossing Project 2004 Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement applied to the year 2017 daily volume forecasts. Using the year 2017 daily volumes, year 2040 daily volumes, and the year 2017 peak hour forecasts, year 2040 peak hour forecasts were developed (see Figure 5). Future Conditions With the decrease in vehicular traffic after the lift bridge closure to vehicular traffic, multimodal improvements are being considered in downtown along Hwy 95, Chestnut Street, and a number of other locations. As previously noted, this analysis considered the potential for a reduction in turn lanes, changes in traffic control, roadway closures, and improvements for pedestrians and bicyclists. The purpose of evaluating these changes is to allow for the repurposing of the downtown transportation network. The analysis also looked at other opportunities including: • Changes to Chestnut Street between Hwy 95 and the lift bridge approach. • Changes to Sam Bloomer Way. • Changes to pedestrian areas and crossings along Hwy 95. • Changes to bicycle connections. OUR. •(SAVIORS 1 LUTHER,AN CHURCH Our Savior's Lutheran Church 11616 W. Olive Street, Stillwater, MN 55082 I (651)439-5704 Email: info@oslcstillwater.org Thursday, July 6, 2017 Stillwater City Planning Commission Stillwater City Council Mayor of Stillwater 216 4th Street North Stillwater, MN 55082 Re: Consideration of a Concept Planned Unit Development for a senior living housing facility (CPC/2017-25) Greetings. Since I will be unable to attend the public hearing on Wednesday, July 12 as you consider the planned unit development between Ecumen and Our Savior's Lutheran Church, I wanted to express my support of the project in writing to you directly. As I have served as Lead Pastor at Our Savior's Lutheran Church on West Olive in Stillwater for nearly three years I have come to know this specific community of faith as one that cares deeply for the care, well-being, and needs of not only its members, but its entire surrounding community. Many of our members have been a part of the Stillwater community and our community of faith for many years and have the best interest of all in mind. That is why when Dan and Gretchen Smith approached members of our Church Board and me in April of 2015 regarding their desire to sell us their radio station property, our continuing conversations centered around a potential senior living partnership. Of the many organizations that offer reputable senior living opportunities throughout the Twin Cities Metro and surrounding suburbs we quickly thought of Ecumen as our potential partner of choice. They have long Lutheran roots, are typically more affordable, and shared common values and mission with us as a community of faith. Our congregation overwhelmingly approved the sale of the church property to Ecumen that would be needed to build their facility. I am supportive of this project. Our Savior's Lutheran Church is supportive of this project. I hope and pray that the surrounding community will also be supportive of this project. To have an Ecumen-run senior living facility in the location of choice (mostly residential and next to a church) can be a wonderful addition to our overall community. It would be unique, which I have come to realize is true of much of the Stillwater community, and is what draws so many people to it. We understand the legitimate and personal concerns of our nearest neighbors on Deerpath and Brick, but we hope too, that they will be able to see and understand the benefits as a whole to our community and the growing needs of seniors within it. Ecumen is committed to listening to their concerns, addressing them, and responding as best they can. In full support and trusting in God's wisdom, Cs Pastor Dale Stiles GROUNDED IN FAITH, GATHERED IN LOVE, SENT WITH A PURPOSE, SO THAT OTHERS MAY GAIN THE KINGDOM liwater THE BIRTH P L A TE OF MINESOJ PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE: July 12, 2017 CASE NO.: 2017-26 APPLICANT: Sithyvon & Jill Chau, property owners REQUEST: Consideration of an 8' Variance to the rear yard setback for the construction of a 15' x 15' deck. Sithyvon & Jill Chau, property owners. ZONING: CCR - Cove Cottage Residential COMP PLAN DISTRICT: LMDR: Low Density Residential PREPARED BY: Erik Olson -Williams, Zoning Administrator/Assistant Planner REQUEST Sithyvon & Jill Chau are requesting an 8' variance to the required 25' Rear Yard Setback for the construction of a deck, to be located 17' from the east property line. The proposed deck is split into two sections, with only the southernmost section requiring the setback variance. The north section of the deck will also include a swim spa. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS AND ANALYSIS The purpose of the variance is to "...allow variation from the strict application of the terms of the zoning code where the literal enforcement...would cause practical difficulties for the landowner." In addition to the requirements, below, Section 31-208 indicates "[n]onconforming uses or neighboring lands, structures or buildings in the same district or other districts may not be considered grounds for issuance of a variance" and "...a previous variance must not be considered to have set a precedent for the granting of further variances. Each case must be considered on its merits." Section 31-208 further indicates: • Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. • A previous variance must not be considered to have set a precedent for the granting of further variances. Each case must be considered on its merits. The applicant must demonstrate that: The variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of this chapter. The general purpose and intent of the Zoning Code is to regulate and restrict use of land for the protection of public health, safety and welfare. The purposes of the Rear Yard Setback are in part to maintain an open, unoccupied and uniform space for aesthetic and environmental benefits; and to provide separation between neighboring homes for light and air circulation, to provide sufficient space to maintain each home, to provide sufficient stormwater drainage. The 17' setback is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the zoning code. The subject property's rear property line functions as the neighboring property's side property line, so the requested variance would have a minimal impact on adjacent property owners, despite being visible from the street. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan. There are no application elements that are in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan. The applicant for the variance establishes that there are practical difficulties in complying with this chapter. "Practical difficulties," as use in connection with the granting of a variance, means that all of the following must be found to apply: The property owner proposes to use the land in a reasonable manner for a use permitted in the zone where the land is located, but the proposal is not permitted by other official controls; The property owner proposes to use the land in a reasonable manner, as it is reasonable to have an attached deck in a residential area. Though, the owner could meet setback requirements and still have a deck with reasonable dimensions. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property and that are not created by the landowner; and The dimensions of this property are unique, as the lot is wedge-shaped and located on a corner. The unique shape of this property does make it difficult to meet some setback requirements. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. The proposed deck would be visible from the street, but there are other decks of similar size in the neighborhood, so the granting of this variance would not alter the essential character of the area. ALTERNATIVES The Planning Commission has the following options: 1. Make the finding that practical difficulties do exist for the property owner and approve an 8'variance to the 25' Rear Yard Setback [City Code Section 31-303(c)(1)] from the South property line for the construction of a two-tier, 15' x 15' and 22' x 16' deck, at the property located at 1429 Macey Way, with or without conditions. The Planning Commission may impose conditions in the granting of a variance. A condition must be Case No. 2017-26 CPC: 0712/2017 Page 2 of 3 directly related to and must bear a rough proportionality to the impact created by the variance. If the Commission were to find practical difficulties do exist for the property owner, staff would recommend the following conditions: a. Plans shall be substantially similar to those on file with the Community Development Department's Case No. 2017-26. b. A building permit shall be reviewed and approved prior to any construction occurring on the property. c. Major exterior modifications to the variance permit request shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission as per Section 31-204, Subd. 7. 2. Make the finding that practical difficulties have not been established and deny the variance, with or without prejudice. 3. Table the application and request additional information from staff or the applicant. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION On the basis that the shape of the property creates unique circumstances and the granting of the proposed variance will not alter the essential character of the locality, staff recommends approval of the variance request. ATTACHMENTS Site Location Map Narrative Request Site Photographs Proposed Site Plan Case No. 2017-26 CPC: 0712/2017 Page 3 of 3 COUNTY ROAD 64 MCKUSICK ROAD NORTH Niiivvatct I is 1F 4 i `I-* -i i"Z I4y '" i 44 COURT'` 1 I— } II 4 j Lo LEs .+ .,ter O st3 w 4 w 2 I_ 12 O I U WRIGHT 1425 ` { MACEY i PLACE v in ; The Birthplace of Minnesota , w E i la r ' • 4 ,, i f Ilit 1 I oltou ,'It 1429 Macey Way Site Location Map 0 Subject Property Parcel Boundaries -,••- Municipal Boundary • r,dl" 7 MA[EY t. r ► x 0 205 410 820 Feet 1400 • MACEY , ., r General Site Location �41465 14c,2_ 1444 } . __ r �� r I�Q. E 141 C I 1a„i. i ���'cy WEBSTER COURT /� 1 ,../ o \ 1 .a /d< 14cc, e le. June 22, 2017 Sithyvon and Jill Chau 1429 Macey Way Stillwater, MN 55082 Planning Commission City of Stillwater 216 4th Street North Stillwater, MN 55082 To the members of the Planning Commission for the City of Stillwater, Thank you for reviewing our application for a permit to build a deck on our home, located in the 9th Addition of Settlers Glen neighborhood. Attached you will find all of the required documents for a deck permit, as well as a request for a variance and those supporting documents. We appreciate your time in considering our request for a variance. We hope to build a modest two tier deck (15x15 upper portion, stepping down to a 22x16 lower deck) that is consistent with the architecture and aesthetics of the neighborhood. While the length of the proposed deck is well within side setback regulations, we respectfully request you grant us a variance for the rear setback for the deck. Unfortunately the shape of our property is a trapezoid, ranging from 26.2 feet to 45.9 feet from our house to the rear property line. Therefore we are unable to observe the 25 foot setback rule required from a deck to our neighbors' property line. Fortunately we feel confident that this proposed deck will not negatively affect our neighbors. Our neighbors' home is at a 90 degree angle to ours, and our rear property line is their side yard. Our neighbors' home only has two small windows facing our rear yard, and therefore would have minimal visual impact to them. Furthermore, we have shown our detailed plans and discussed our proposed deck and project with both of our immediate neighbors, and they are both in full support of our plans. The specifics for the requested variance are as follows: The proposed upper deck will be 15 feet from the house plus stairs running parallel to the deck, for a total of 18 feet from our house. We are requesting a variance to allow us to have parts of the deck less than 25 feet from our rear setback. Please see attached pictures and drawings for clarification. Starting at the southern end of the deck, we propose to have our setback range from 13 feet to 22 feet from the property line. 1 Thank you once again for your time and consideration in this matter. We look forward to hearing from you soon and welcome the opportunity to discuss any questions you may have. Sincere Sithon and Jill C 1429 Macey Way Stillwater, MN 55082 651-283-5235 €L 2 Deck layout with stakes and strings 4 View from the north side of the house ( looking southeast) 5 View from 1429 Macey Way. Looking east from the house 6 50 d n 7yy fi05 4. 4 NHA 0 rn W iP26. PROPOSED WO GF = 907.7 BF = 897.7 OS#I 905.00 904.5 x I t T -f L.vI / 1\180015' 30" E 44.0 SURVEY LEGEND 117.28 Os#2 900.05 05 #j3 003 45 C) CAST IRON MONUMENT N 0' • CATCH BASIN GATE VALVE HYDRANT IRON PIPE SET IRON PIPE FOUND SANITARY MANHOLE •9725 GROUND ELEVATION ® STORM DRAIN ® STORM MANHOLE ID ELECTRIC TRANSFORMER (9725) CD TREE DECIDUOUS m TELEPHONE PEDESTAL 021 UTILITY PEDESTAL �- (000.0) WETLAND BUFFER POST CONCRETE SEWER SERVICE ELEVATION PROPOSED ELEVATION DIRECTION OF SURFACE DRAINAGE CONTOUR EXISTING CONTOUR PROPOSED 599. tom) cn .. 20.00ti S w N 904 2 04.9 PROPOSED SILT FENCE CONCRETE CURB > - SANITARY SEWER >>- STORM SEWER - I -WATERMAIN SANITARY SEWER ELEVATION (9725) PROPOSED ELEVATION 0 0 0 0 0) W O 0 O O 0 O PROPOSED WO GF = 906.6 BF = 896.6 I f •t L,4./ I v BENCHMARK "0" -fNH ELEV. = 901.82.,-\ NOTES: 1.) Existing utilities shown are shown in an approximate way only. The contractor shall determine the exact location of any and all existing utilities before commencing work. He agrees to be fully responsible for any and all damages arising out of his failure to exactly locate and preserve any and all existing utilities. 2.) Must maintain a minimum 2% slope gradient to accommodate positive drainage. 3.) All offset irons are measured to hundredths of a foot and can be used as benchmarks. 4.) The proposed driveway shown is conceptual only and does not purport to show exactly how the driveway shall be built. 5.) A title opinion was not furnished to the surveyor. 6.) Proposed grades shown adjacent to building foundation refers to top of black dirt. 7.) Benchmark: "A" TNH @ Lot 2/3, Block 1, Settlers Glen 9th Addition = 908.64 Feet "B" TNH @ Settlers Glen 6th Addition = 901.82 Feet Development Plan Data - WO/LO Garage Floor Elevation = 907.3 Basement Floor Elevation = 899.3 Lookout Opening Elevation = 902.3 Proposed Elevations Proposed Garage Floor Elevation Proposed Top of Foundation Elevation Proposed Basement Floor Elevation Proposed Lookout Opening Elevation Setbacks Min. Front Yard Setback = 20' Min. Side Yard Setback = 7.5' Min. Rear Yard Setback = 25' Offset Irons (elevations are to the top of pipe) OS #1 = 905.00 OS #3= 903.45 OS #2= 900.05 OS #4= 906.06 = 907.3 = 907.6 = 899.6 = 902.6 NORTH I hereby certify that this is a true and correct representation of a survey of the boundaries of: Lot 8, Block 3, SETTLERS GLEN 9TH ADDITION, according to the recorded plat thereof, Washington County, Minnesota and the location of all buildings, if any, thereon, and all visible encroachments, If any, from or on said land. as surveyed by me this 14th day of February, 2014. David B. Pemberton, PLS Minnesota License No. 40344 pemberton@sathre.com JOB #: 5046-565 REVISIONS FIELD CREW: JV/JD DRAWN BY: EMW/MNK CHECKED BY: DBP DATE: 02/11/14 SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. c 150 SOUTH BROADWAY WAYZATA, MN. 55391 (952) 476-8000 4< jiffi Pot CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY PREPARED FOR LENNAR OF MINNESOTA 1429 MACEY WAY CITY OF STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 20 10 0 10 20 40 SCALE IN FEET