Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-05-24 Joint Board Packet (2)• te, P THE BIRTHPLACE OF MINNESOTA Meeting Notice Stillwater City and Town Joint Board City Council Chambers 216 North Fourth Street Stillwater MN 55082 7 p.m. Wednesday, May 24, 2006 Agenda 1. Case No. PUD/06-10. A concept planned unit development for a 15 lot development on 5+ acres (Brown's Creek Reserve) in the AP, Agricultural Preservation District. Tim Freeman, Folz, Freeman, Erickson, Inc. 2. Case No. PUD/SUB/ZAM/06-16. A planned unit development for a 51 lot development on 25.28 acres located at 12525 75th St N and 12620 and 12550 72"d St N in the AP, Agricultural Preservation District (Legacy on Long Lake), a subdivision of a 51 lot development of residential use and a zoning map amendment to rezone from AP, Agricultural Preservation to RA, Single Family Residential. Elite Development, applicant. Other Items. CITY HALL: 216 NORTH FOURTH STREET • STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 55082 PHONE: 651-430-8800 • WEBSITE: www.ci.stillwater.mn.us d tJ► Stillwater City and Town Joint Board April 26, 2006 Present: David Johnson and Linda Countryman, Stillwater Township David Junker and Jay Kimble, City of Stillwater Others: Community Development Director Bill Turnblad, City of Stillwater Attorney David Magnuson, City of Stillwater Chair Johnson called the meeting to order at 7 p.m. Case No. ANN/06-02 Annexation petition for a 2.3 acre parcel of property at 12764 Boutwell Road in the AP, Agricultural Preservation District, into the City of Stillwater. Scott Junker, applicant. Mr. Turnblad explained the request and noted that city utilities will be available to the parcel by the end of this construction season. He noted that the City Planning Commission had approved the request based on Mr. Scott Junker's statement that he intends to subdivide the property after the extension of utilities. Staff believes it would be appropriate to wait until services are actually available to the parcel, he said; if the Board does decide to take action at this time, he said it is the recommendation of staff that a condition be attached that the annexation does not become effective until the final subdivision plans are approved. Mr. Kimble pointed out that this parcel is contiguous to the City both on the northeast and the south as Boutwell Road also has been annexed to the City. Attorney Magnuson suggested, if approved by the Joint Board, annexation could proceed at this time with the condition that Scott Junker not make application for subdivision until after construction is completed; it also was noted that approval of the subdivision would come back to the Joint Board for comment/approval. Chair Johnson pointed out that typically of concern to the Joint Board in annexation requests is whether the request meets the criteria of contiguousness to the City and the timeline for proper consideration. Beyond that from the Joint Board's standpoint, Chair Johnson said the issues are City issues. Chair Johnson said he thought this request meets the criteria according to the Orderly Annexation Agreement. Ms. Countryman questioned why other annexation requests in the nearby area were denied. Mr. Turnblad explained that other requests involved much larger properties. Mr. David Junker noted that the traffic impact of other requests would be much greater; he also noted the other requests involve property to the south of Boutwell Road and involve a decision on the extension of Neal Avenue. Mr. Kimble moved approval of the annexation request subject to the condition that the subdivision not proceed until the sewer is in place. Ms. Countryman seconded the motion. Chair Johnson questioned the need for any condition, suggesting that any condition should be a decision of the City. Motion passed 3-1, with Ms. Countryman voting no. Case No. ZAM/06-01 Zoning Map amendment changing the zoning designation from Agricultural Preservation, AP, to TH, Townhouse on 25.3 acres of land, Millbrook Development, located south of TH 96, west of Neal Avenue, north of Brown's Creek and east of Manning Avenue. US Homes, Applicant. Case No, ZAM/06-02 Zoning Map amendment changing the zoning designation from Agricultural Preservation AP, to CR, Cottage Residential on 69.9 acres of land, Millbrook Development. US Homes, applicant. Stillwater City and Town Joint Board April 26, 2006 Case No. ZAM/06-03 Zoning Map amendment changing the zoning designation from Agricultural Preservation, AP, to TR, Traditional Residential on 72.7 acres of land, Millbrook Development. US Homes, applicant Case No. PUD/06-07 Planning Unit Development for a 270 lot development on 132+/- acres of land south of TH 96, west of Neal Avenue, north of Brown's Creek and east of Manning Avenue, Millbrook Development, US Homes, applicant. Case No. SUB106-06 Preliminary plat approval for a 270 lot development on 132+/- acres, Millbrook Development. US Homes, applicant. Case No. ANN/06-01 Annexation of 132 +/- acres of land into the City of Stillwater, Millbrook Development, located south of TH 96, west of Neal Avenue, north of Brown's Creek and east of Manning Avenue. US Homes, applicant. Mr. Turnblad noted that for the first three cases related to the rezoning of the Millbrook Development, the Joint Board has the authority to approve or deny the cases. With respect to the Planned Unit Development, preliminary plat approval and annexation, the Joint Board has the authority to review and comment. He noted that the Joint Board authority regarding the annexation request is limited to review and comment because this property is located in Phase III of the Orderly Annexation Agreement, where annexation is allowed after 2003. Mr. Turnblad briefly reviewed the plans for development in three phases, along with parks and trail dedication. He noted that US Homes has asked to be guaranteed the issuance of 90 building permits per year during the course of their project. According to the Orderly Annexation Agreement, 120 permits can be issued annually and there should be no problem in guaranteeing the issuance of 90 permits a year for the Millbrook project, he said. Chair Johnson pointed out the Joint Board has reviewed a number of plans for the project and asked that the changes between the last presentation and the current proposal be identified. Phil Carlson, Jay Liberacki and Dan Schmidt were present representing US Homes. Mr. Carlson reviewed the changes. One of the changes was the location of some of the townhomes, he pointed out. A significant negotiating point with the City he said was the amount of park dedication. The latest proposal represents a 30 percent increase in the amount of parkland, he noted. Another change he spoke to was the design of interior roadways, including a roundabout. He noted there have been numerous minor changes, including the trail connections. The number of units, 270, is about the same, he said. Mr. Johnson asked about the intended uses of the three designated parks. Mr. Carlson said the area by South Twin Lake is intended for more passive use; the one -acre park is intended as a neighborhood play area. Dan Schmidt spoke to the use of the water amenities and the retention/filtration of the water prior to entering Brown's Creek. Mr. Johnson asked about the view from Highway 36, whether there would be berming, etc. Mr. Carlson said the park would be City property and the City could do landscaping if it chooses. Mr. Carlson also noted that the grading plan will result in homes in the development being at about the same height as the ground form that is seen now. Mr. Carlson noted that existing trees along Highway 96 would be retained. Ms. Countryman asked about the use of permeable surfaces for trails, etc. Mr. Carlson said at this point there are no plans for permeable paving for streets or sidewalks; the trails will be asphalt, except for the trail along the south of South Twin Lake, which is still an issue in negotiation. Mr. Carlson noted the developer has pledged to build trails according to the City's specification. Mr. Junker noted there are 17 conditions of approval; he noted that regarding Condition No. 14, the Planning Commission recommended that plans be review and approved by the City engineer. Mr. Junker stated he had been rather vocal regarding Conditions 1 and 2 providing for a bituminous trail around the Stillwater City and Town Joint Board April 26, 2006 entire perimeter of South Twin Lake. Mr. Junker said regarding Condition No. 8, he would like some additional language, although that might be a City issue. Mr. Johnson asked about parking near the major, active park. Mr. Carlson pointed out there are 48 spaces on -street in close proximity to the park; a parking lot would be a City option. Mr. Junker asked if the proposed conditions of approval should be added to all of the cases; Mr. Turnblad said it would be appropriate to add the conditions to the PUD and preliminary plat approval. Mr. Johnson opened the meeting to public comment. Ruth Bruns, 8790 Neal Avenue, expressed a concern about construction traffic on Neal, an unimproved road. She also expressed a concern about trash and maintenance of the trail around South Twin Lake. It was noted that City staff has requested that construction traffic be kept off Neal for as long as possible, certainly during the first phase. David Stone, 12850 McKusick, expressed concern about the trail along Brown's Creek and asked whether the trail could be set back farther from his property. He also questioned the use of blacktop for the trail surface and the possibility of runoff. Ed Otis, 12070 87th Street Circle, expressed a concern about the phasing and the provision for access for emergency vehicles. Mr. Carlson said that issue has been discussed with City staff; in the second phase, the City may require an emergency access to Neal, he noted. Mr. Liberacki said there have been discussions with City, County and State about the possibility of a secondary access off Highway 96 during the construction period. Mr. Otis asked about any future plans for a shelter for those folks living in townhomes. It was noted the townhomes will have basements. Mr. Otis questioned who would be doing the ongoing inspection/maintenance of the water filtration systems. Mr. Kimble explained that the issue of the inspection/maintenance of the water retention/infiltration systems was an issue between the Watershed District and the City. Art Palmer, 12427 Dellwood Road, expressed concern about "people pollution" and the "urbanization" of South Twin Lake by providing for the trail. The public comment period was closed. Mr. Kimble moved approval of the Zoning Map amendments, Case ZAM/06-01, ZAM/06-02 and ZAM/06-03. Ms. Countryman seconded the motion; motion passed unanimously. Mr. Kimble moved approval of the planned unit development, Case No. PUD/06-07, as conditioned, with the language change to Condition No. 14 as suggested by Mr. Junker, and approved by the City engineer. Ms. Countryman seconded the motion. Mr. Junker said for the record he did not feel some of the conditions were cleared up enough. Chair Johnson noted that was an issue for the City. Motion passed 3-1, with Mr. Junker voting no. Mr. Kimble moved approval of the preliminary plat, Case No. SUB/06-06. as conditioned. Ms. Countryman seconded the motion. Motion passed 3-1, with Mr. Junker voting no. Stillwater City and Town Joint Board April 26, 2006 Mr. Kimble moved approval of the annexation, Case No. ANN/06-01, as conditioned. Ms. Countryman offered a reluctant second to the motion. Motion passed 3-1, with Mr. Junker voting no. Case No. ANN/06-03 Annexation into the City of Stillwater of a .36 acre parcel of property on Boutwell Road, 328 feet southeast of the intersection of Neal Avenue, for the purpose of stormwater retention in the Agricultural Preservation District. City of Stillwater, applicant. Mr. Turnblad said the City's Public Works Department is requesting annexation of the parcel to provide stormwater ponding for runoff from the Boutwell Road improvements. The parcel is owned by the Township. The property is very low lying and a parcel that can easily be converted to a stormwater pond, he said. The resident of 7919 Neal Avenue, whose property abuts the parcel in question, said it was his understanding the property was dedicated parkland by the Township. He noted the new trail would go by the parcel and suggested it might be nice to have the ponding area serve as a stopping off point, with a bench perhaps. Richard Schultz, 13055 Boutwell Road, who lives across the street from the parcel, asked if the track culvert would be blocked off to prevent drainage through the culvert into a nearby low spot. Chair Johnson noted the parcel has served as a stormwater detention area for years since it is a depression. He said he welcomed the constructive suggestion that the area be improved to serve as an additional amenity. There was a question as to whether there might be a covenant regarding park use. Chair Johnson noted that the change in ownership from the Town to the City would not change the use — it would remain public space. Ms. Countryman spoke in favor of making the trail friendly and welcoming with the suggested enhancement. Ms. Countryman moved to approve the annexation and encourage the City to consider improvements/enhancements to the parcel so that it is conducive for use as a passive park area as well as a water retention resource. Mr. Kimble seconded the motion; motion passed unanimously. Case No, ANN/06-04 Annexation of all that part of the right of way of Neal Avenue North from the north side of the railroad right of way of the Minnesota Zephyr to the north right of way of Boutwell Road North excluding therefrom any portions already annexed to the City of Stillwater, City of Stillwater, applicant. Mr. Kimble noted this request is being made so that future improvements to Neal Avenue can be made with the benefit of State Aid funding. He said only the roadway is involved, similar to the action taken with Boutwell Road. Ms. Countryman, seconded by Mr. Junker, moved approval of the annexation. There was a question about the location of the future trail on Neal Avenue; it was noted a decision has not been made as to whether the trail will be located on the east or west side of Neal. Motion to approve the annexation passed unanimously. Stillwater City and Town Joint Board April 26, 2006 Other items: Update of McKenzie and Meisterling development: Mr. Turnblad said staff had not yet reviewed the details of the proposal. The main feature, he said, is that 72nd Street would be realigned. Park/open space along Long Lake is an item of discussion, it was noted. Mr. Turnblad said the Carlson PUD would likely be on the Board's next agenda and asked about a preference for scheduling the next meeting. Mr. Johnson noted that generally it is the City's timeline that determines the need for meetings. A preference was expressed for a May meeting, rather than June. Mr. Kimble, seconded by Mr. Junker, moved to adjourn the meeting at 9:10 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Sharon Baker Recording Secretary a ,,.Sillwate THE BIRTHPLACE OF MINNESOTA Meeting Notice Stillwater City and Town Joint Board City Council Chambers 216 North Fourth Street Stillwater MN 55082 7 p.m. Wednesday, April 26, 2006 Agenda 1. Case No. ANN/06-02. Annexation petition for a 2.3 acre parcel of property located at 12764 Boutwell Road in the AP, Agricultural Preservation District, into the City of Stillwater. Scott Junker, applicant. 2. Case No. ZAM/06-01. Zoning Map amendment changing the zoning designation from Agricultural Preservation, AP, to TH, Townhouse on 25.3 acres of land, Millbrook Development (Palmer Property), located south of TH 96, west of Neal Avenue, north Brown's Creek and east of Manning Avenue. US Homes, applicant. 3. Case No. ZAM/06-02. Zoning Map amendment changing the zoning designation from Agricultural Preservation, AP, to CR, Cottage Residential on 69.9 acres of land, Millbrook Development (Palmer Property), located south of TH 96, west of Neal Avenue, north Brown's Creek and east of Manning Avenue. US Homes, applicant. 4. Case No. ZAM/06-03. Zoning Map amendment changing the zoning designation from Agricultural Preservation, AP, to TR, Traditional Residential on 72.7 acres of land ,Millbrook Development (Palmer Property), located south of TH 96, west of Neal Avenue, north Brown's Creek and east of Manning Avenue. US Homes, applicant. 5. Case No. PUD/06-07. Planned Unit Development for a 270 lot development on 132+/- acres of land located south of TH 96, west of Neal Avenue, north Brown's Creek and east of Manning Avenue, Millbrook Development (Palmer Property), in the TH, Townhouse, CR, Cottage Residential and TR, Traditional Residential District. US Homes, applicant. 6. Case No. SUB/06-06. Preliminary plat approval for a 270 lot development on 132+/- acres of land located south of TH 96, west of Neal Avenue, north Brown's Creek and east of Manning Avenue, Millbrook Development (Palmer Property), in the TH, Townhouse, CR, Cottage Residential and TR, Traditional Residential District. US Homes, applicant 7. Case No. ANN/06-01. Annexation of 132+/- acres of land zoned TH, Townhouse, CR, Cottage Residential and TR, Traditional Residential District into the City of Stillwater, Millbrook Development (Palmer Property), located south of TH 96, west of Neal Avenue, north Brown's Creek and east of Manning Avenue. US Homes, applicant. CITY HALL: 216 NORTH FOURTH STREET • STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 55082 PHONE: 651-430-8800 • WEBSITE: www.d.stillwater.mn.us 8. Case No. ANN/06-03. Annexation into the City of Stillwater of a .36 acre parcel of property located on Boutwell Road 328 feet southeast of the intersection of Neal Avenue for the purpose of stormwater retention in the Agricultural Preservation District. City of Stillwater, applicant. 9. Case No. ANN/06-04. Annexation of all that part of the right of way of Neal Avenue North from the north side of the railroad right of way of the Minnesota Zephyr to the north right of way of Boutwell Road North excluding therefrom any portions already annexed to the City of Stillwater. City of Stillwater, applicant. Other Items Update of McKenzie & Meisterling Development. City of Stillwater Stillwater Township Joint Board December 22, 2005 Present: David Junker, City of Stillwater; Linda Countryman, Stillwater Township; David Johnson, Stillwater Township Others: Stillwater Community Development Director Steve Russell Chair David Johnson called the meeting to order at 7 p.m. Mr. Russell explained that three of the five items on the agenda relating to the Liberty West development — Comprehensive Plan amendment, Annexation and PUD -- require a decision and recommendation from the Joint Board. The City Council has final authority over the subdivision and annexation requests, he said. Mr. Russell reviewed the 8 -acre site, noting that the provision for access and services to the area was pre -planned in conjunction with the Liberty on the Lake and Legends projects. He said the proposal is to designate the parcel small -lot, single-family, which is consistent with the surrounding land use. He spoke briefly of the uniqueness of the site, including trees and natural topography, which make the site a difficult one to develop in a manner that accommodates the existing resources. Marc Putnam, landscape architect who also did the master plan for the Liberty on the Lake development, spoke on behalf on developers Chris Aamodt and partner. He reviewed the site plan and tree inventory. He also spoke of planned Manning Avenue improvements and the impact on plans for the Liberty West site development. He also reviewed plans for walks/trail connections; retaining walls for tree protection; and water feature as part of the storm water retention plan. He noted that the development includes 19 homes; one house was eliminated at the recommendation of the City's Planning Commission and Park Board and the lot dedicated to open space. Mr. Johnson asked about the water feature and how often water would be flowing. Mr. Putnam explained the water will be recirculated to provide constant flow, but admitted that in extremely dry conditions that might not be the case. Mr. Russell noted that storm water currently flows to the site from Grant. There was a question about whether this development would be part of the Liberty on the Lake Association. Mr. Putnam explained that the Liberty West Association would be a stand-alone homeowners' association as proposed. The questioner expressed a concern that the Liberty on the Lake Association has spent a lot of money on beautification efforts that will benefit the Liberty West residents. Also expressed was a concern about the alley access at the southern portion of the site and the impact on the existing homes. Kristin Kroll, Harvest Green, said a concern about the alley is the safety of children, as well as the visual impact and privacy issues. Ms. Kroll said if the two homes that would be served by the alley had front garages, that would resolve all the issues. Jeff Doe, 430 Harvest Green, also spoke in favor of redesigning the two homes with front -entry garages. Mr. Putnam spoke of the greater issue of the streetscape for the entire development. Mr. Aamodt said Mr. Putnam, engineers and he should look at the concerns voiced by the neighbors in more detail. There was a question as to when the final layout would be approved. Mr. Johnson noted the Joint Board does not make the final decision on the development layout; the Joint Board is dealing with zoning issues, compatibility with the Comprehensive Plan and subdivision. Mr. Junker noted that there would be a public hearing at City of Stillwater Stillwater Township Joint Board December 22, 2005 the City Council level where specifics will be discussed; the alley issue would be decided at the Council meeting, it was noted. Also expressed was a concern about the current safety of the intersection of Country Road and Heritage, which will be compounded by the addition of the traffic generated by the new Liberty West development. It was requested the City consider making that intersection a controlled one. There was a question about the possible naming of a street that might be changed due to the new development. Later in the meeting, Mr. Russell stated the engineering department will determine the street name. Mr. Johnson encouraged the City to receive input from residents and to make any decision known sooner rather than later so residents can deal with any issues related to a possible address change. There was a question about whether this development would be controlled by the same architectural covenants as Liberty on the Lake and whether there would be an architectural review process. Mr. Putnam said the same approach will be applied to this development. Mr. Junker moved to approve the Comprehensive Plan Amendment to change the land use designation from Rural Residential to small -lot, single-family. Ms. Countryman seconded the motion; motion passed unanimously. Mr. Junker moved to change the zoning from Agricultural Preservation to Cottage Residential. Ms. Countryman seconded the motion; motion passed unanimously. Mr. Junker, seconded by Ms. Countryman, moved to approve the 19 -lot subdivision on 8 -acres in the Cottage Residential District. Mr. Johnson said he would not like action on this to cement any decision related to the alley access discussed earlier in the meeting. He asked about the possibility of reconfiguring three lots. Mr. Junker noted that what the Board is approving is 19 lots, not final approval of the layout. Mr. Russell said he would reflect that in the staff report. Motion passed unanimously. Mr. Junker moved approval of the preliminary plat for 19 lots. Ms. Countryman seconded the motion; motion passed unanimously. Mr. Johnson reiterated his comments regarding encouraging continued discussions of how to reconfigure the lots to address the alleyway concerns. Mr. Johnson noted that the Board does not take action on this matter, but merely comments/makes recommendations to the City Council. A resident requested that consideration be given to moving the curb in the area of one of the historic trees in order to prevent damage to the root system of the tree. Regarding annexation, Mr. Junker said he thought annexation was appropriate. Mr. Johnson agreed that annexation is a logical next step in development of the area. There was a comment regarding the possible impact of this development on sales of properties in the Liberty on the Lake development. Mr. Johnson noted that is a private sector decision, not a public sector decision. Mr. Putnam expressed his appreciation to Mr. Russell for his past work and efforts City of Stillwater Stillwater Township Joint Board December 22, 2005 The meeting was adjourned at 8:45 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Sharon Baker Recording Secretary City of Stillwater Neighborhood Conservation Program Public Meeting December 14, 2005 Community Development Director Steve Russell explained the purpose of the meeting was to discuss infill design guidelines for the downtown, the initial charge given to the Heritage Preservation and Planning Commissions. That charge was expanded to include ways to recognize historic structures and the historic significance of residential areas. The Heritage Preservation Commission, he explained, has developed an Heirloom Housing Program, one part of a Neighborhood Conservation Program. The second part is the infill design guidelines, and the third part modifications to the Zoning Ordinance to help guide development to be more consistent with the character of existing neighborhoods. An infill subcommittee has been meeting since August. Paul Teske, chair of the subcommittee, gave some introductory comments. He noted that every time a proposal comes forth that might alter the face of neighborhoods or the community; people come forward en masse to express concerns. People, he said, come forward because of the fear of the unknown — they want to know how a proposal is going to impact their property or neighborhood. Many concerns can be addressed by referencing the City's Comprehensive Plan or Zoning Ordinance. However, he said, there are some unknowns that those documents fail to address and most of those are related to infill development. Those concerns led Council to direct members of the Planning and Heritage Preservation Commissions to develop guidelines to address some of the concerns. The subcommittee, he said, has strived to ensure that the proposed guidelines serve as a tool and not a hindrance to preserve that which we value in the community. Councilmembers in attendance, Dave Junker, Ken Harycki, Mike Polehna, were introduced. Subcommittee members in attendance were Roger Tomten and Jeff Johnson, of the HPC, and David Peroceschi and Robert Gag, Planning Commission, along with consultants Brian Larson and Don Empson. Other Commission members in attendance were Gregg Carlsen and Suzanne Block, Planning Commission, and Howard Lieberman, Phil Eastwood, and Larry Nelson, Heritage Preservation Commission. Don Empson explained that he served as a consultant to the Heritage Preservation Commission. The HPC's mandate this contract year, he said, was to find some way of identifying historic houses in Stillwater that merit recognition. The purpose of the Heirloom Housing Program is to acknowledge/reward those owners who have preserved or restored the integrity of their old homes; to serve as an educational tool that will inspire and encourage others to preserve/restore the integrity of their old homes; and overall preserve the historic neighborhoods, the defining characteristic of Stillwater. He explained that due to staff time and other considerations, as proposed, he would survey and identify the homes in the older part of the City that still retain the look and the feel of the 191h century. The list of addresses will be submitted to the Heritage Preservation Commission to gain the Commission's input to see if members agree with his judgment. At that point, Mr. Empson will contact owners to obtain permission to use a photograph of their house and address on the Heritage Preservation Commission web page. The web page also could include lists of educational resources on preserving/restoring old homes, he said. He noted that Council approval will be required in order to proceed with contacting property owners for permission to post the photos/addresses on the web page. City of Stillwater Neighborhood Conservation Program Public Meeting December 14, 2005 Mr. Junker asked how the Heirloom Housing Program would relate to the infill design guidelines. Mr. Empson said the Heirloom Housing Program was primarily in response the Heritage Preservations Commission's desire to come up with a way to designate the historic houses in Stillwater. Mr. Russell said the Heirloom Housing Program relates to the infill design guidelines by recognizing the historic resources of a neighborhood and what is special about a neighborhood. There was a question as to whether this would be an ongoing program. Mr. Russell responded in the affirmative and suggested that perhaps, depending on response to the initial contacts, neighborhoods could be resurveyed every five years or so. Jeff Johnson noted the HPC presents awards to recognize restoration efforts in the downtown area on an annual basis and suggested that perhaps that might be expanded to include residential properties. Brian Larson reviewed the infill design guidelines and proposed Conservation District. The guidelines, he said, give some general ideas as to how a building might fit on an infill lot. The guidelines are arranged according to scale and, he noted, that the larger scale guidelines, those related to massing, for example, affect residents the most. The purpose of a Conservation District, he explained, is to preserve the character of a neighborhood, as well as property values. A map of the proposed district was included in the packet and displayed at the meeting; the district boundaries are basically based on homes constructed during the lumbering days of the City's history. The guidelines, he said, provide a common framework to develop plans. The guidelines are just that, he said, rather than hard and fast rules. He explained that, as proposed, infill new construction in the Conservation District will require design review. Key elements of design review include: massing, scale and roof forms; character in relationship to the neighborhood, street and adjacent houses; siting and natural features; details, color, materials and landscaping. Guidelines 1-3 deal with the larger scale of a new building; guidelines 4-5 also deal with larger scale details; guidelines 6-9 deal with preservation of the natural features of a site; guidelines 10-11 are related to garage placement/scale; guideline 12 also deals with size and mass; guidelines 13 and 14 relate to porches/accessory buildings; guideline 15 relates to four-sided architecture, carrying design details around a house on all four sides; guidelines 16-20 all deal with design details and how to use those details authentically; guidelines 21-26 are "good neighbor" considerations such as minimizing run-off, minimizing the impact of exterior lighting and respecting the privacy of neighboring properties. Mr. Larson also briefly addressed the design review application and checklist. Mr. Junker asked how restrictive the design review process would be. Mr. Larson said he didn't think the intent was to be restrictive; he said the guidelines provide enough flexibility to accommodate almost any style of building. Mr. Empson said there are certain areas/neighborhoods in town that are predominately of certain architectural styles. Howard Lieberman, chair of the HPC, said the intent was to provide basic guidelines that look at fundamental issues, using common sense to try and be a good neighbor. The guidelines are not meant to micromanage what style of house can be constructed on an infill property, he said. Mr. Johnson also noted that the guidelines are meant to serve as an educational tool, to bring awareness to people as to the characteristics that make a neighborhood special. A member of the audience suggested that "remodeling" also should be addressed in the guidelines. Mr. Russell said the City of Stillwater Neighborhood Conservation Program Public Meeting December 14, 2005 charge to the subcommittee was to deal with development on vacant lots, and at this point the guidelines do not apply to remodeling. However, he said there are processes in place for any demolition and variance applications. Suzanne Block also questioned why additions/remodeling were not included. Mr. Russell reiterated that was beyond the scope of the charge from the City Council and gets into issues of privacy; he also noted review of such projects would require substantially more staff time. Mr. Lieberman also suggested that when change is made, it is sometimes wiser to proceed in small steps. Mr. Russell and Mr. Lieberman also noted that the City Council may choose to regulate remodeling/rehab in the future should problems become severe. Another member of the audience talked of potential issues related to extensive remodeling in Dutchtown and suggested that the next step needs to be considered. Mr. Johnson pointed out that most of the basic guidelines could apply to remodeling projects. Mr. Johnson said, hopefully, if this new process works well, it can be expanded in the future. Mr. Junker suggested the proposed guidelines would work very well for major remodeling projects; he said the question is where to draw the line — dollar amount, design, square footage. Mr. Empson noted that the majority of Stillwater's "affordable" housing is located in the older portions of the city where the smaller houses are located, and he noted that in the future there likely will be more and more pressure to expand the size of the houses. Mr. Russell addressed the design review process. He said basically the design review is a public hearing process. The applicant would have to fill out the application and checklist, submit plans including building and site plans; staff reviews those plans; and then a public hearing held by the Heritage Preservation Commission. If the plans are denied, the applicant would have the opportunity to appeal the decision to the City Council. Mr. Russell noted the infill design process is not unlike that currently in place for the downtown area, and he noted the Heritage Preservation Commission has a very good track record in working with applicants. Also, he pointed out that every house in the Liberty/'Legends developments went through a design review process, so this is not new to the City. Mr. Russell also reviewed possible changes to the Zoning Ordinance to deal with new development on the small lots in the RB District. The major proposed changes include requiring a minimum lot width of 70' for corner lots; requiring that garages be placed 10' behind the front of the house; and restricting the maximum building coverage to 25 percent of a lot. Another change relates to building height depending on lot size. The proposal would also eliminate multi -family use in the RB District. There was a question about the starting point for determining building height; Mr. Russell said currently that is determined at finished grade, but there is talk of changing that to street - front grade. Mr. Polehna questioned the requirement for a public hearing. Mr. Johnson explained the intent is to accommodate the "good neighbor" part of the process and provide a forum for the community to express concerns. Mr. Polehna suggested the public hearing could become a "not -in -my -backyard" forum and said he would be more comfortable with HPC review, rather than subjecting applicants to such a hearing. Mr. Gag suggested that having plans presented lets neighbors know what to expect. Mr. Lieberman agreed that once people see plans they feel more comfortable. Mr. Harycki said he thought the guidelines were great and the Council should discuss whether to expand the process to include major remodels/tear downs; he spoke in favor of adopting the guidelines now, rather than later. City of Stillwater Neighborhood Conservation Program Public Meeting December 14, 2005 There was a question as to whether there is a follow-up process to determine whether submitted plans are actually implemented. Mr. Russell noted that there is a certificate of completion process but suggested that Commission members are often the best "watchdogs" for that mechanism. Mr. Polehna asked whether any consideration had been given to developing criteria for "major" remodels. Mr. Russell noted that would require a decision of the full City Council but suggested he was certain the subcommittee would be happy to do that if given the charge. Dick Kilty asked about the proposed change related to duplexes and also raised questions about several projects that have been done and whether they would have been allowed under the proposed guidelines. There was a question about the Conservation District boundaries; Mr. Empson responded that the map represents the time of the lumbering period, which ended in 1914, and noted there was very little construction in the City from 1914 until after World War II. There was a suggestion that the checklist be expanded to include attached versus detached garages and consideration of existing easements on adjacent properties. Mr. Teske thanked those in attendance for their participation and comments. It was noted that there will be public hearings at the Planning Commission and City Council levels before final adoption of the guidelines. Respectfully submitted, Sharon Baker Recording Secretary