HomeMy WebLinkAbout1994-10-10 CPC Packetwater
7TTHEBIRTHPLACE OF MINNESOTA
H E B I R T H P L A
PLANNING COMMISSION
CITY OF STILLWATER
216 NORTH FOURTH STREET
NOTICE OF MEETING
The Stillwater Planning Commission will meet on Monday, October 10, 1994, at 7 p.m. in the
Council Chambers of City Hall, 216 North Fourth Street.
Approval of Minutes of September 12, 1994.
AGENDA
1. Case No. SUP/94-48. Continuation of a special use permit to grade and fill an existing ravine
with approximately 745.98 cubic yards of fill and topsoil material. The property is located at
r 726 West Linden Street in the RB, Two -Family Residential District. Michael S. Raleigh,
applicant.
2. Case No. SUB/94-53. Preliminary plat approval for a major subdivision of a 5.98 acre parcel
into 12 lots ranging in size from 11, 250 sq. ft. to 32,500 sq. ft. The property is located on the
east side of Boutwell Road north of County Rd 12 in the RA, Single Family Residential District.
Bill Lecuyer, applicant.
3. Case No. V/94-54. A variance to the front yard setback requirement for the placement of a 30
sq. ft. freestanding sign. The property is located at 232 North Main Street in the CBD, Central
Business District. Greg Skoog, applicant.
4. Case No. V/94-55. A variance to the front yard setback requirement, 20 feet requested, 30 feet
required for the construction of a home on the northwest corner of Deerpath and Olive Street.
The property is located in the RA, Single Family Residential District. Marcia Kilbourne,
applicant.
5. Case No. SUP/94-56. A special use permit for expansion of an existing restaurant use to include
meeting rooms and an outdoor eating area. The property is located at 423 South Main Street in
the CBD, Central Business District. Bob Tanner, applicant.
6. Comp Plan Update.
CITY HALL: 216 NORTH FOURTH STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 55082 PHONE: 612-439-6121
STILLWATER PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING MINUTES
The Stillwater Planning Commission met Monday, September 12, 1994 at 7:00 p.m. in the
Stillwater City Council Chambers, 216 North Fourth Street.
Present: Jerry Fontaine, Chairperson
Dorothy Foster, Duane Elliott, Rob Hamlin, Glenna Bealka, Jay Kimble
Not Present: Darwin Wald, Kirk Roetman, Don Valsvik
Others: Steve Russell, Community Development Director
Ann Terwedo, City Planner
.Approval -of Minutes
Motion by Glenna Bealka, seconded by Dorothy Foster to approve the minutes of August 8,
1994. All in favor.
Public Heajiigs
1. Case No. SUB/94-52. A minor subdivision of a three foot portion of lot 5, block 1, to lot
4, block 1, Green Twig Way in the RA, Single Family Residential District. Tim Nolde,
Applicant.
Mr. Nolde was present representing the proposal.
Motion by Rob Hamlin, seconded by Glenna Bealka to approve the minor subdivision as
presented. All in favor.
2. Case No. SUP/94-48. A Special Use Permit to grade and fill an existing ravine with
approximately 745.98 cubic yards of fill and topsoil material. The property is located at 726 W.
Linden Street in the RB, Two Family Residential District. Michael S. Raleigh, Applicant.
Mr. Raleigh presented the proposal. He stated that the fill will create a 3 to 1 slope in this area.
The bank is eroding away toward his home.
Dave Purcell, West Linden Street, is concerned about ravines.
Carol Peterson, 704 W. Linden, asked about how much fill will be put into the ravines. Mr.
Raleigh stated about 70-80 truck loads.
Jerry Fontaine asked about trees in the ravine. Mr. Raleigh stated that no trees would need to
be removed. He will only be impacting areas where no trees are presently located.
Richard Orthmeir, present owner of the home, stated that the bank is eroding away. Neighbors
throw leaves and garbage into the ravine.
STILLWATER PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES SEPTEMBER 12, 1994
Chairman Fontaine closed the public hearing.
Mrs. Raleigh added that the ravine is very dangerous. She is concerned about her children.
Duane Elliott stated that ravines are where the water drains. If the ravines are to become safe,
improvements need to be made. In this case, erosion control measures need to be made at the
end of the pipe. City staff should look at the whole picture of ravines.
Rob Hamlin stated that the City has an obligation to control run-off and to preserve natural, open
space areas. The ravines are wildlife habitat. He questioned why the neighbors had not given
written approval.
Motion by Rob Hamlin to continue the hearing to October 10, 1994 in order for the neighbors
to approve (in writing) grading and filling of their portion of the property and for City staff to
review this matter further and possibly seek some alternatives. All in favor.
3. Case No. SUB/9449. Final plat approval for the Forest Ridge Second Addition and variance
to the existing front, side, and rear yard setback requirements for the construction of 24 single
family homes with zero -lot line setbacks. The property is located at West Ridge Circle and East
Ridge Circle in the RB, Two -Family Residential District. Mark Kemper, Applicant.
Mark Kemper and Mr. Blichfeldt, developer, presented the proposal. They gave background to
the project. Mr. Kemper outlined the style of the duplexes in relationship to the land and present
subdivision along with reasons for the variances.
Jerry Fontaine questioned lots 1, 17, 18 and 14. Mr. Blichfeldt stated that three -season porches
would be added.
Duane Elliott asked if the size of the structures have increased since the original plat was
approved. Mr. Blichfeldt stated that they were originally a split-level design and now a one -level.
Motion by Rob Hamlin to approve the subdivision and variance requests with an additional
condition of approval: "Lots 1, 2, 15, 16, 17 and 18 shall be in alignment with lots 19, 14 and
3". Seconded by Jerry Fontaine. All in favor.
4. Case No. SUB/94-50. A minor resubdivision of four city lots into two lots of 12,610 sq. ft.
and 21,024 sq. ft. with an existing home. The properties are located on the southwest corner of
West Anderson Street and South Harriet Street in the RB, Two Family Residential District.
David B. Harvieux, applicant.
Dave Harvieux presented the proposal. He gave background on the development of the property.
2
STILLWATER PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES SEPTEMBER 12, 1994
Motion by Rob Hamlin to approve the minor resubdivision. Seconded by Dorothy Foster. All
in favor.
5. Case No. SUPN/94-51. A Special Use Permit and Variance to the rearyard setback
requirement (25 feet required, 11 feet proposed) for the expansion of an existing church, a two-
story addition, and a new gymnasium. The property is located at 14940 - 62nd Street North in
the RB, Two -Family residential District. Pope Associates, Applicant.
Dick Harjininsky, representing Pope Associates, was in attendance. He mentioned access off
Panama Avenue. Mr. Russell stated that there should be no access off Panama.
The principal of the school stated that the neighbors did not have a problem with the project.
He questioned the need for additional parking lot improvements. Steve Russell indicated that
according to the parking regulations, additional parking is needed. However, less parking is now
being provided. If needed in the future, this parking will have to be incorporated.
Motion by Duane Elliott to approve the school addition with the rearyard variance with an
addition to condition of approval No. 3: "Parking for an additional 57 cars shall be provided
including handicapped parking requirements as required by the Planning Commission based on
need after a public hearing to review the parking demand." Seconded by Dorothy Foster. All
in favor.
6. Case No. SUB/94-46. A minor subdivision of a 72,781 sq. ft. lot (1.67 acres) into two lots
of 37,288 sq. ft. (.81 acres). The property is located at 2289 Croixwood Blvd. in the CA,
General Commercial District. Investors Savings Bank, F.S.B., John H. Berman, representative
and applicant.
Mr. Berman gave background on the existing ownership of the property. Restrictions were placed
on this property in 1982.
Duane Elliott questioned the curb cuts on to Highway 5.
Steve DeMars, 2307 Hidden Valley Lane asked about what type of business will go on the lot.
They are opposed to any type of construction.
Monti Moreno, potential owner of the property, stated that the type of business which would be
put on the lot (hair salon) would be compatible with the area.
Peggy Leutele, 2317 Hidden Valley Lane, stated that this proposal is intended to override the
existing restrictions.
Leslie DeMars, 2307 Hidden Valley Lane, stated that the City has made promises in regard to
3
STILLWATER PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES SEPTEMBER 12, 1994
this land and the neighboring property owners thought it would never be developed.
Mr. Russell stated that the lot can be built on according to the covenants but the use is restricted.
A hair salon can be considered a professional office.
Mr. Berman stated that the lot will sell no matter what.
Motion by Rob Hamlin to approve the minor subdivision with three (3) conditions plus one
addition: "4. A utility easement subject to approval of the public works director and water
department director shall be recorded over Lot 1 to provide utility service to Lot 2." Seconded
by Glenna Bealka. All in favor.
7. Case No. 94-47. A variance to the sideyard setback requirement on a corner lot (10 ft.
requested, 30 ft. required) for the construction of a 20 ft. x 28 ft. garage. The property is located
at 1203 W. Olive Street in the RB, Two -Family Residential District. Roger Knapp, applicant.
Mr. Knapp was present. Jerry Fontaine asked about the garage location. Duane Elliott asked
how far the garage is away from the roadway.
Motion by Rob Hamlin to approve the garage variance with condition of approval. Seconded by
Dorothy Foster. All in favor.
8. Case No. PUD/94-4. Modification to the design of a previously approved planned unit
development for the construction of a retail center, office use and gas station at 2500 West
Orleans Street in the CA Commercial District. Dick Zimmerman, Applicant.
Peter Hilger, architect, presented the proposal and changes that have been made since the original
proposal. He feels that the essential elements of the original project are the same.
Duane Elliott questioned the drainage plan along with the building material treatment of the
structures.
Jay Kimble questioned the elevation of the strip mall in relation to the Ann Bodlovick
Apartments.
The signage will be in a 2 ft. letter band. Steve Russell stated that more specific information
needs to be submitted on signage.
Motion by Duane Elliott to approve the project with all conditions of approval, including those
added by the design review committee. Seconded by Glenna Bealka.
Rob Hamlin commented that this project is downgraded from the original project. Approved 5-1.
4
STILLWATER PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES SEPTEMBER 12, 1994
9. Annexation Policy, City Attorney Dave Magnuson presented information on the Minnesota
state statutes regarding orderly annexation. Presently, nine property owners have petitioned for
annexation.
10. Washington County Con prehensive Plan. Bob Lockyear updated the Planning Commission
on the Washington County Comprehensive Plan.
OTHER BUSINESS
Jerry Fontaine mentioned that the public is not being informed of decisions of the Planning
Commission which no longer go to the City Council. He wondered if something could be done.
Motion by Rob Hamlin to adjourn. Seconded by Glenna Bealka. All in favor. Meeting
adjourned at 10:00 p.m.
Respectfully submitted:
Ann Pung-Terwedo
5
MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Steve Russell, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Additional Consideration of Request for Special Use Permit for Grading of Lot at
726 Linden Street
DATE: October 4, 1994
Since the Planning Commission review of the grading permit request September 12, Planning staff
has contacted Mr. Raleigh regarding other methods to protect the ravine slopes from erosion and
minimize the effort of the fill on the ravine.
Mr. Raleigh indicated he is not interested in modifying the proposal. The City Engineer has reviewed
the site and indicated that the erosion caused by the storm sewer outlet does not appear to be a
hazard to the adjacent properties.
If it becomes a problem, the pipe could be extended and pipe covered to better protect the sloped
areas.
There are other ravines in Stillwater used for storm water drainage that need to be reviewed and
improvements planned. This will be done as Public Works has time or the problem needs attention
according to the City Engineer.
Rl�COMML��'TION
Deival
Attachment: Staff report for CDC 9-12-94
PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW
Case No. SUP/94-48
Planning Commission Date: September 12, 1994
Project Location: 726 West Linden Street
Zoning District: Two Family, RB
Applicant's Name: Mike Raleigh
Type of Application: Special Use Permit
Project Description
A special use permit to fill a ravine area which will require a grading permit.
Discussion
The request is to fill a ravine (about 1/4 acre) with approximately 745.98 cubic yards of fill. The
area as described is a tributary ravine which connects to the McKusick ravine directly to the
north.
Mr. Raleigh owns lot 8,9 and 10 as shown on the site plan. A portion of the ravine is also owned
by the neighbor. They have not given approval to fill the ravine. In review of the site, the sloped
area (as shown on picture 13) may be eroding down the hill due to the plastic material which was
placed beneath the landscaping and steep slopes. Erosion control measures could be considered
on this slope which would alleviate this problem in the future without impacting the area in such
a manner as the proposed fill project. The city engineer has outlined some other methods to
stabilize the slope as indicated in the attached memo.
Endings
The existing proposal does not preserve the ravine and the natural ravine areas. Other methods
could be employed to preserve the slope. The preservation of ravines and open space has been
an ongoing issue for the city, especially during the process of update the comprehensive plan.
The project as proposed would impact the character of the neighborhood and natural ravine areas.
Recommendation
Continuation to the planning commission meeting of October 10, 1994, to develop alternative
methods of addressing erosion problems and natural resource protection.
Attachments
Project outline
Application form
MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning Department
FROM Klayton Eckles, City Engineer
RE: GRADING PLAN SUBMITTED BY MIKE RALEIGH, DATED 8-12-94
DATES September 8, 1994
DISCUSSION
Mr. Raleigh has submitted a proposal to fill a portion of a ravine in and along his property. The plan
shows areas of up to ten foot of fill and also includes an extension of a culvert. Mr. Raleigh has also
submitted photos showing the erosion and exposed soils in the area. It appears that at the bottom of
the ravine the slopes are very steep, approximately 1:1. Higher up the ravine the slopes are
approximately 1.5:1 (horizontal to vertical). A metal culvert empties into the bottom of the ravine and
erosion is occurring at the outlet of this pipe. It appears that erosion could continue at this pipe
indefinitely, which would increase the depth of the ravine and, therefore, the severeness of the slopes
would increase and erosion would continue.
Mr. Raleigh's plan would involve extending the culvert down the ravine and then filling over the culvert.
From an engineering standpoint, this is a very sound method of addressing the erosion issue. Mr.
Raleigh's plan could be improved by extending the culvert pipe further down the ravine. This would
eliminate the chance of erosion for a longer stretch in the ravine.
The plan submitted does involve complete filling of the upper 20 feet of this ravine, which creates a flat
space at the top of the ravine and a greater area of gentler 3:1 slopes. The down side of this is that
it creates a larger area to be filled. Alternatives of this plan would be to fill only to a maximum depth
of 5 to 7 feet, which would reduce the area disturbed. Instead of using fill to stabilize the creek bed,
Mr. Raleigh could explore other options such as using erosion mats and seeding along the exposed
side slopes. In order to be effective, much of the tree cover in the area would have to be removed to
allow sunlight into the area. Also, some method of stabilizing the bottom of the ravine would have to
used. A drop structure and retaining wall system could be used, but this would be very expensive and
probably not as effective as filling. Alternatively, the bottom of the ravine could be lined with riprap and
filter material. This option would also be expensive and would not be as effective as a pipe.
The urbanization of Stillwater has created a number of potential erosion problems in the City. The
ravine along Mr. Raleigh"s property shows signs of slow progressive erosion. The plan Mr. Raleigh has
submitted, with modifications, would address much of the erosion problem on this stretch of ravine.
The extent of the filling of the ravine could be reduced to involve filling only the lowest section of the
ravine. This would preserve more of the existing slope in the area, however, it would make it more
difficult to re-establish ground cover and vegetation in the area.
PLANNING ADMINISTRATIVE FORM
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
CITY OF STILLWATER
216 NORTH FOURTH STREET
STILLWATER, MN 55082
ACTION REQUESTED
Appeal
Certificate of Compliance
_ Conditional or
Special Use Permit
Design Review Permit
Planned Unit Development
Variance
Comprehensive Plan
Amendment
Zoning Amendment
Other
Engineering Review Fee
Total Fee
Case No. .pop t" y
Dater
Fee Paid: `4� 7r�
ADDITIONAL ENGINEERING COSTS MAY BE INCLUDED AS PART OF THIS APPLICATION
Environmental Review
EAW
EIS
No Special Environmental Assessment Required
FEE
The applicant shall be responsible for the completeness and accuracy of all forms and supporting material submitted in connection
with any application.
Address of Project - 7?6 yq_ I TNDEN-ST, Assessor's Parcel No. PARCEL # 11080-6480
Zoning District Description of Project ,,n�-ynn fpxi GI-_i nrs c:t-r,rm sewer _-C1 Par and _ __-
- - a= axJ m-4--1 y__4�miarp fPP-f-_ _ Fill to est-ahl i-sly gentler- sl =es to
o
"I hereby state the foregoing statements and all data, information and evidence submitted herewith in all respects, to the best of my
knowledge and belief, true and correct. I further certify I will comply with the permit if it is granted and used."
Property Owner Michael S . Raleicth_
Mailing Address __726 W. Linden St,
Representative -SAME S-hFEET _
Mailing Address
-5ti 1 1 wa t r�r5�`- OR7 _
Telephone No. R�,7� Telephone No.
r
Signature -! - '� : s 5ignatur y�
Any decision made on this proposal can be appealed within ten calendar days of the date of the action.
Lot Size (dimensions) 41 5 x 129 sq. ft.
"Total Land Area 11 A 45--square
Hight of Buildings: t e Feet�
Principal A_
Accessory __N/A-
Date of Public Hearing is
X 2 lots Total Floor Area N_ sq. ft.
feet Proposed floor areaN/A __ _ sq. ft.
Building Coverage NIA sq. ft.
Paved Impervious Area _W/A _ _ sq. ft.
Number of off street parking spaces NIA
M.J. RALEIGH TRUCKING INC.
P-0. BOX 261
STILLWATER, MN 55082
Date:8/25/94
TO: CITY of STILLWATER PLANNING DEPARTMENT
CITY of STILLWATER PLANNING COMMISION MEMBERS
ANY and ALL OTHER CONCERNED and INTERESTED PARTIES
RE: APPLICATION FOR GRADING PERMIT.
726 W. LINDEN ST. PARCEL 111080-5480
Dear Members,
710000 Vind ALtWPUd AEW "IS MMU 0 PLUTning WMIn.3tVitIV�J
101M a chuwK to; $700C. � size mop �O pactcres
PastuTos of th.s arnposes vroject,
Answers to a checx.Lst pvosanted by Mi. Steva Rus5aiwith
vianning GeparLment in nopas t4v! iL w.l. nMiqhLPA ateryan.,-
-
involved an to the natdra and scope of this Propused proje&-
40ua men prepared as �0110ww-
Answers to a CHECK�197 FOR PLAN NARRATIVE
1. PROjECT DESCRIPTION. 7he Piaject hii question lies on vacart,
lond iocated between 726 and 71C W. Linden St. There lies a QTg'',!
depression into which the city aincharoos soury Aatvy OF al Anden
5t. and parts of William and Mulnurry SLs. Orimnai !pig ts date baLr,
to before the LuTn of the century. [he actual development a�
s0eets. lots and housen Gre andartermined at this time. As stated,
with the Presence ot sLorm waaar runotf combined
with very steep slopes this has created an erosion problem as
nature slowly but sur2ly eats away at the boLtom of this swail
and conoinues M path up the ever increasino bankB to the house,..--;
iocated at 726 and 710 W Linden st Nhich in now Located 32 ma as
VS ft away from the top ot this steep and dangerous slope. This v--
�ot a watostiophic erosion prohism such as a one time downpour or
runoff but a gvadual process taking sometimes years to promote.
_his and a grading plan Aas developed Ln which the storm seWar
' ischarge pipe is extended out farther and beyond this critical,
area and 411 brought in to restore zhese memp slopps _o vrhance
this area and to establish a balance betwepm nature and the for
that act apon them. The amount of grading inouived is approximately
745.98 cubiL Yards of fill and topsoil metcriins l,
2. PHASING of CCNSTRUC TION. Construct.Lon consist of six phases.
L Clearing of live brnsh, deaa brush and dead and decaying
Glees,
TN2tawLntion 0� arawlan contruAnilt Vence) Aitk tempurar
40'wns nn an option in o nn�"n, P'a; with th; n! 1' Fenc(
TN-enn�nn nK �3 nyhot.y" wtu� a �"Wz - jisZA07 ap oiw,
7t has been sugges,nd by city stAth thOk PXteQLH9
nlyn Deyopd! �he WrLgln6l qy-�w Al"n AGW�! 5e oeniviciaL Zo
Pdevelopmant ot this mian. it won also suggesLed that
Vn� disGhaTqe and Du'r.p rappod' tc prevent wy�2Lon in
arna. These are acceptable and a viabie alternatives.
4. Fill to proposed grade. Save and preserve all trees alon.g-
the upper ridge oF this project.
5. Topsoil and establish vegetation that is accepable to the
City and which is consistent with the surrounding area.
0. Maintenance and remoual at tempoyary evosion control
cavices alter s�ivablp vegeta�LwA ws davelcped.
3. =S7AG W77 CONDITION9. The existing Luonoraphis and dyalnaq�
11 J 's �Qjoypap L, g gy San a ah. Wesel a! on on 0 1J
cood nn" oecayn nq zq"
so'! b"n�a� �q Yon� gvnna orowtn 07:
4. ADNACTNT AREAS, 7ne nii, pion shows Lw ralationship aetnvo-
�P" tw- annn7-. Poisps an" the exisi;nq shrent 7n�:
YrK"�Ick lako 7nyi-- lies NoYoK u? !�.4 pYQpeT> noxwva�
this site pian taNus tk,s nu cu�vndv, atin. os
proposed nadi= is cftsaL �iwm ind sehird U.There are io
other known areas attectod by this and cisturbance-
5. SCILS. No determination as to so.: 7ames,mappine unit,
erodibility, peimeabillzy, daptn, Lexture and soil strucLwri-.-_:
noTe addveysat at 0�is time becaisp 7L was felt �V was nn't
neccesaYy in nhi2 basic fill in 31hus io'.
A CRITICAL AREAS This uraa,as is, has __hit potential for serious
arosiam pyoKens This gradw was jPvalopew with the molr;
purpose of eliminaLing this siVaLmo.
7 EROSION and SEDIMENT COWROL WASURES. Heavy duty silt rence-
will De insLailed in the location _qd2wated on the grade
plan. A temporary berm in this area nouio aiso be r&ke� int,.
--
consideration as an ng= weasoin ?or arosLon orevention.
S. PERMANENT STABILIZATION. it is proposeu that uoun completdon of
the fill arocess that disturbed areas will be topsoiie&
seeded, mulched and anchoreK. A natl= grass seed is Pi oPosec:
om Al slopes however a wild grasn, "ild !ijwey or pianting
mixture Qat would satisfy any reqw0umanin could be
implimented,
9. STORMWATER MANAGEMENT C3NSICERATIONS. The development 3f thk-:;
site will result in decreasing oeak rates of runoft due to
LKS gentler slopes sou the WP15g onn n" wator instead OF
concentrating and channeling U. Exts"ding the discharge
wipa will give storm Aater Va2v of a chance LO Mode out thA
critical area.
q
:1 "P:NTENAN7E A c4edul� notior 17speations and lops! ,
elovior and setimuht CUPHU! wk""%Uzen wo.lc be 0� ulau. w:
uiice PermanenveqakaLin', is nakahlished-
-77NP. sc v ln�lnt nors AR) n 061;0 !0! design ot sudivak:-
13
basins, diversions, waterway2, runofl or stormwalar detuMon
basins as this grad" PAP wAl reduce maximum and peak runoff
ratas and the shannelizing of water.
7hin cover5 this sectlion,
A wheckiLnt Mr site plap p!nqsv;nLoE .3 aiso included
with this application. The highlights of thig secticn are a-s-
VoLlows:
M77=57 FOR SITE PLAN PR4-PARAT10,",!
�: . *14"7041 YAP �oa c7ad? -!an,
2 MIZATE MR74 5ea qVain PM
A. �-� ury�w 01an
4. 7ENCHMARK. Elevations wars taken �rdm inewn ieVerance narker�3
A wuikinq benchmark can be establish before constructiou-
T PLAN DRAWING, See grade pla�.
a. EXISTING CONTOURS. Ewe yrada plan-
b. FIMAL CONTOURS, Sea orade plan.
c. EXISTING VEGETATION. Trees along 45a uppur :loon am -
marked on oracle plan. Trees at lower elevation are smaller
scrub type treeA planned for removal or replacement.
d. 507LS. Nc soils types classiFications were done for this
plan.
a.PROPEPTV SOUNDARY am LOT LMES. See grade plan.
f.ELEVATION and GRADE Although elevationo For construction,
are the only oNes sKown, other Wevations, SUM as Oil
corners, street grades,storm sewer inlets and outlet
elevations couid be established as conditions for approva-
of this application.
g.DRAINAGE. Water runs From the streeL to a catch 5asin
slocated in tho yare whore any additional watoipikd
up. From there it imply runs down and discharges at
lowei oi north end of the storm sewer pipe.
777773M FROSTON AREAS. An 5td;nj saiLy, Min prnZect j--
designed to alleviatp Potential erosion problems.
-1:M77 2F RLEARIM a,! FRADING 7hena AoAs are vstaMlvhw�:
IJ:)". i; Li".Ie Iill ILS U, Cons& UcLia" U. empnan,n
any and all iivi.g croon nussible ainly t
1 pool ridge limits ot constlaction-
UT717THS, Khl:!are Located within the streat righi-
Sam= - -,
13
'e pro ec
v�l I
A T.1 0 N f E R C) ST 0 N E. D T M E N T F,R (-i CT' C S 9
j\1 0 4- r k C 1-. U I- ��j C Ni
7. 7__; R AL 71 P A CT 1 C E S
') Z, �7.1 I( �,_ T , - L W71 t L C,
y e x p ec ted t D
la �l
3. e
Q3 a
P T C T o, lgi� h I .i gv z i e
1:. ,:r
j1: c c ri l "7- -I
CJ t - e, nd i b
"D S
S C
c a
P
- - - D'.
t
rr U' �l 1 �"v'
c_) 0 K. D i3 scD u C
d i c h a, i e t Is t C) u t 0 1 D
L' 0)_ I- C2 T_
ex'-, -fnely s t p.
- ' .1 j' I d Y- e vi t I - 0 a ss J'. T I g
s' a f f o a ny () TI e (_"S P y s [I) i
a c
v a e r n C)
H7 ini_CJp OF
r c� 0 e Ci U P_ tO Ili .L:__iq8l-i(:)n
(D 1 L f-;! I
uw 11
X) T'
-n o 'L h, i� 1-1 t1h, i:-) �Z-; t p a' T �-.: iP,E "I'l, 8 4� )r andsca'p-a i,.I.uflb��,�T L 1 i L
N c" wei'e- staked j-nplace and not
On P(:') liflr L, e I
T U F` n c) t 1 -1 e ia n d s c a p .-:� t T,, i,n -i gra tin 9 d o wn t
I f_ 1-1 i xi.J o, a (; I o S, ( J. ":31 10 o e. 's
t
s
01
1-1 Ol m
k e
I- i I . S
-U SOU
A r) Ci 0 Oef
rl 10 V C? -S .51 Th,
A ..'-.S a 9 C', 1 T!
L
W :� ' ',-) A Lill; h sp
i p P j- "I 'r h, t s d-s t 0 -L
g r Q U 1
(_ 'd i)i, ot t.,
c000e-ration ar;c! artles I nvo'L u
d t h a I fri p t s w Lie m
T
L V '-i,wyIy ond success'lul
t
M ichet'l-fl
'-,,o,ze - -,
LINDEN
V
7—
I—�
I m
STEEL PD!
AT 8' O.C.
a
z
0
f11
❑PTI❑N I
N
>5 D 30 eo
—I�J�I�I
SCALE 1'- XY
WIRE MESH REINF.
GEOTEXTILE FABRIC
FABRIC ANCHORAGE THE
BACKFILL V/TAMPED
NATURAL SOIL.
6' MIN.
OPTION 2
SILT PENCE —HEAVY DUT
1TURAL
I hereby Certify that lhle plan w prepared by me or
under my direct Professional
don and that I he o duly MIKE RALEIGH 9401 , — Registered %ofeaelCn al Engineer under the laws of the
—.._ __ state Cf Mhneeata. GRADING PLAN
STILLWATER, MINNES❑TA 0
MNIBYDATE REVISIONS ITEM DESIGN CHECKED Dntei Re'S7- No. 8/12/94
PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW
Case No. SUB/94-53
Planning Connlnission Date: October 10, 1994
Project Location: NE Side of Boutwell Road
Zoning District: Single Family R-A
Applicant's Name: Bill Lecuyer
Type of Application: Subdivision Plan/Plat
't Description
Subdivision of 5.98 acre lot into 12 single family lots ranging in size from 11,250 sq. ft. to 32,500 sq.
ft.
Dis!iu-,,5ion
The site is located on the east side of Boutwell as you proceed from Myrtle Street (County Road 12}.
(See location map enclosed) The site is next to the Oak Glen development located west of Eagle
Ridge Trail. The site slopes down from Boutwell Road to the east with a range in elevation of 928
near the end of the cul de sac to 882 near the drainage pond to the rear of lot 7. An existing residences
uses a driveway located approximately where the cut de sac is proposed to get access to the
residences. If this project is approved, access to the residence would be off of the end of the cul de
sac.
Tlie approximate location of a wetland is shown on the map. "Ihe specific location (delineation) of
the wetland will have to be made to determine its extent and to locate the road with the required
setback (50 feet).
Currently, a storm sewer outlet is located in the ponding area/wetland at an elevation of 914. The
storm sewer pipe outlets into a second poind located partially on lot 7_ A drainage plan will need to
be prepared that examines the amount of run-off that'Mill be generated by the development and to hold
run-off to pre -development rates.
Access to the subdivision is proposed directly off Boutwell for lots 1-5, and via a new cul de sac, for
lots 6-11. Boutwell is a two lane County Road that serves as a collector for the area between County
I:oad 12 and 15. Driveway access to the road should be minimized to limit road access points and
potential disruptions to through traffic. It is recommended that shared driveway access be provided
(o lots I and 2 and lots 3 and 4, so there are 3 driveway access to Boutwell rather than 5. Also, it is
recommended that a driveway turn around be provided on the individual lot site design so that head
out access from the lots to Boutwell can easily be provided.
The proposed lots range in size from 11,250 sq. fl. to 21,560 sq. ft. It is recommended that a 50 foot
front yard setback be required on lots 1-5, because of the lots location on Boutvvell and the need to
provide adequate on -site parking and turn around.
The subdivision design meets zoning requirements regarding lot size and dimensions and the street
design meets subdivision street right-of-way requirements. The proposed subdivision shows the lot
configuration and the existing topography. No grading/draunage plan/erosion control plan has been
submitted with the preliminary plat. A storm water arrangement plan and soils analysis will be
necessary before final plat approval (see Engineer comments).
'Il,e Paiks and Recreation Commission has reviewed the subdivision and recommends a 7% in lieu
park fee be required to meet the park dedication requirement.
Tlie flans have been submitted to the City Engineer; SEH, the Water Board and Washington County
for comment. Comments from the City Engineer, SEH and the Water Board have been received and
incorporated into the conditions of approval. City water and sewer services are available in the area
for the site.
Ft indin s
The proposed subdivision as conditioned is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and zoning
regulations.
Rec m mendation
Condi ti s of Approval
i . A detailed grading, and drainage plan showing site grading including erosion control and
wetlands protection measures shall be prepared by a qualified professional and approved by
the City Engineer before final plat approval.
2. Soil boring and survey shall be prepared by a qualified professional and reviewed by the City
Engineer and Building Official before final plat approval.
3. A storni water management plan shall be prepared showing how 2, 10 and 100 year storm
peak discharge rates before development shall not be exceeded after construction and down
stream storm peak impact will result.
4. An iii lieu park fee of 7% of the land value shall be paid to the City before final plat approval.
Iriiveway access to Iots 1 and 2 and 3 and 4 shall be combined with reciprocal driveway
access easement recorded at final plat.
6. Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 shall be setback 50 feet from the wetland.
wA5HR1G70M liA1n� N5R7.K.Y•. . 1 7 � i __ —•
,OCKTTXX
uu)nER1• . - pp��JJ 6 5 ! r I:
�''
1
] W�
R{„ .^'N
• ��* tip- : • `� _,��'` � f
xw i ti
' ' R4 -- ,
' 6
it
It v ]Or STI�LWM-
WASK RRO'EP'Y ` ►YME ��- Lte PUBLIC
T• _ CO_ �.� .T — • • _ __ _�r _ ] WORKS
' •T, PARK r P / I 4REAA`
_ !3 Ay — 1
CS,
j • s a
II '6f • _
WILD D YNlES7)A n `.
' WILDI FE YAf.AfiME S • •'
AREA a -'.f" i �Q• -
_ `: � , �,' , FOR �• '.�� ■:.-
Po L
., •+ , " ;
-- -- -- --_ - - -�. r< <
ff—
lam-
Ij r _ _RRI j.
26
Cl
ri 4 . I-S- - • . 1
i �P� SCF16
.j A
r 7 a CA
�_ R .IIt
r j 4 V 2
4 1
9.
' 1 PARR
71
` - COArE 1 rs I s ? a
PLANNING ADMINISTRATIVE FORM
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
CITY OF STILLWATER
216 NORTH FOURTH STREET
STILLWATER, MN 55082
Case No.
Date:
Fee Paid:
ACTION REQUESTED FEE
Appeal
Certificate of Compliance
Conditional or
Special Use Permit
Design Review Permit
Planned Unit Development
Variance
Comprehensive Plan
Amendment
Zoning Amendment
Ocher �' t
Engineering Review Fee
Total Fee
ADDITIONAL ENGINEERING COSTS MAY BE INCLUDED AS PART OF THIS APPLICATION
Environmental Review
EA W
EIS
No Special Environmental Assessment Required
The applicant shall be responsible for the completeness and accuracy of all forms and supporting material submitted in connection
vith any application.
Address of Project .1017.0 i/ 6A INI AA Assessor's Parcel No. t✓9(]: �% 3 $�S
Zoning District - / Description o Projects _ L�yr �r f3] t U 1 �5 ra td
"I hereby state the foregoing statements and all data, information and evidence submitted herewith in all respects/,,to the best of my
knowledge and belief, true and correct. I further certify I will comply with the permit if it is granted and used."
Property Owner _To zit; Uy/? Representative_ 9"//�.4i
Mailing Address 23Z6amrcAU
Mailing Address L-AM
_67244 tJ hl .sip . 2- w /N -L—
Telephone No. yc3 -i zL Telephone No, 44,3 / -/z z 7
Signature Signature2
Any decision made on this proposal can be appealed within ten calendar days of the date of the action.
Srf AT/AGNi:.O
Lot Size (dimensions) x sq. ft. Total Floor Area so. ft.
Total Land Area S y Ac:f?J,5
Hight of Buildings: SticsFeet
Principal
Accessory
Date of Public Hearing is
Proposed floor area sq. ft.
Building Coverage sq. ft.
Paved Impervious Area sq. ft.
Number of off street parking spaces
APPEALS
BUILDING MOVING PERMITS
I
CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE
CONDITIONAL OR SPECIAL USE PERMIT
i
I
j GENERAL BLUFFLAND/SHORELAND/FLOOPLAIN
I
DESIGN PERMIT
GRADING PERMIT
{�
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
F-1
ON -SITE SEWER PERMIT
F-1 SITE ALTERATION PERMIT
VARIANCE
II VEGETATIVE CUTTING PERMIT
❑ ZONING AMENDMENT
AMENDMENT
C
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMEND._
OTHER
Record of Action on Application
Decision Authority
Date of Action
Decision by Authority
Appeals Period
Appeal Filed
Appeal Scheduled
Appeal Decision Authority
Apeal Decision
Decision Complete
(date)
(date)
(date)
Approved Denied Date.
(date)
N'? pre-larad by ma or undor MY 01rum
_up_rv'ylUrl L4,1 Ulat 14m s ti,i[Y Re_3`1SMrcd
udder the laws Of Ch �'••'iA [�
Iv!Ifi'�5Gt2.
BRUCE A. FOLZ & ASSOCIATES
LAND SURVEYING • LAND PLANNING
9-/ - 9v
BZU C_' FOLZ jZLS gz3-L-
1815 NORTHWESTERN AVE. ■ STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 55082 • (612) 439-8833
September 1, 1994
LAND DESCRIPTION FOR BILL LECUYER
PROPOSED WILDWOOD PINES 5TH ADDITION
That part of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 19, Township 30 North,
Range 20 West, Washington County, Minnesota described as follows:
Beginning at the most westerly comer of WILDWOOD PINES 2ND ADDITION,
according to the plat on file in the office of the County Recorder, Washington
County, Minnesota, also being a pciint of the center lint of Boutwell Road as
presently traveled; thence North 71 degrees 09 minutes 19 seconds East, bearing
oriented to said plat, along the north line of said plat .a distance of 164.54 feet to the
most southerly corner of WILDWOOD PINES 3RD ADDITION, according to the
plat on file in said office of the County Recorder, thence North 22 degrees 00
minutes 00 seconds West along the westerly line of said plat 371.98 feet; thence
North 5S degrees 28 minutes 15 seconds East along said westerly lute 45.75 feet;
thence North 59 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds West along said westerly line 28.47
feet; thence North 21 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds East along said westerly line
136.30 feet to the most southerly corner of WILDWOOD PINES 4TH ADDITION,
according to the plat on file in said office of the County Recorder; thence North 40
degrees 30 minutes 00 seconds West along the westerly line of said plat 207.00 feet;
thence North 13 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds West along said westerly line 190.00
feet; thence North 45 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds West along said westerly line
197.00 feet to the most easterly confer of Lot 18, Block 1 of said WILDWOOD
PINES 4TI-I ADDITION; thence South 41 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds West along
the southeasterly line of said Lot 1S a distance of 95.00 feet; thence South 11 degrees
27 minutes 45 seconds West along said southeasterly line 109.89 feet; thence westerly,
southwesterly and southerly along said southeasterly line and it curve, concave to the
southeast, having a radius of 60.00 feet and a central angle of 102 degrees 19 'Minutes
53 seconds a distance of 107.16 feet to the most southerly comer of said Lot 18 and
a point on the east line of the tract described in Document No. 316549, recorded and
on file in said office of the County Recorder, the chord of said curve bears South 50
degrees 17 minutes 48 seconds West; thence South 00 degrees 52 minutes 08 seconds
East along said east line 205.67 feet to said center line of Boutwell Road as presently
traveled; thence southeasterly along said center line and a curve, concave to the
southwest, having a radius of 1501.20 feet and a central angle of 23 degrees 12
minutes 29 seconds a distance of 608.07 feet, the chord of said curve bears South 34
degrees 47 minutes 45 seconds East; thence South 23 degrees 11 minutes 30 seconds
East. along said center line and along tangent 114.24 feet to the point of beginning.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Subdivision Plat Review Agencies:
Dick Moore - SEH
G.orge Noss - Fire Chief
-+- layton Eckles - Engineer
Dennis McKean - Water Board
Jim Hanson - Washington County Public Works
FR: Steve Russell, Community Development Director
DA: September 15, 1994
RE: SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLAT REVIEW
Please submit any comments you may have on the above application within 15 days of receipt to
the Stillwater Planning Department. For additional information, please contact me. (This item is
scheduled for Planning Commission review October 4, 1994.)
Attachment: Subdivision: Wildwood Pines 5th Addition
Comments:
! �
11N ~JFN
DdAil,,va .A-�u
+:•
T..1(-1 rJ
�L+_L
L-12r�1�i�.�6-
1" I..il�Al��fc!
}�Lf�l-J
L�)�'v%1 L"l�1i �
�j
�'�"Z , � RR �iL 5 �1uL—Dr <�U •:
.:.r. � � 1' �}.5 i
\ � 1
�� �;'� ✓h �_ 71�0 .�- �.,w1-r = /L V�I.1�7/r l,- 5 LT I�Iw'i�- 13c� .�v�(�-� ..
NOTE: PLEASE RETURN COPIES OF PLANS WHEN FINISHED WITH
REVIEW. THANK YOU
MEMORANDUM
TO: Subdivision Plat Review Agencies:
Dick Moore - SEH
George Ness - Fire Chief
\ayton Eckles - Engineer
ennis McKean - Water Board
Jim Hanson - Washington County Public Works
FR: Steve Russell, Community Development Director
DA: September 15, 1994
RE: SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLAT REVIEW
Please submit any comments you may have on the above application within 15 days of receipt to
the Stillwater Planning Department. For additional information, please contact me. (This item is
scheduled for Planning Commission review October 4, 1994.)
Attachment: Subdivision: Wildwood Pines 5th Addition
Comments:
�_ %% � r Via. _ „ / •ye ,rya
NOTE: PLEASE RETURN COPIES OF PLANS WHEN FINISHED WITH
REVIEW. THANK YOU
I
MEMORANDUM
TO: Subdivision Plat Review Agencies:
\�ick Moore - SEH
George Ness - Fire Chief
Klayton Eckles - Engineer
Dennis McKean - Water Board
Jim Hanson - Washington County Public Works
FR: Steve Russell, Community Development Director CL—�
DA: September 15, 1994
RE: SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLAT REVIEW
Please submit any comments you may have on the above application within 15 days of receipt to
the Stillwater Planning Department. For additional information, please contact me. (This item is
scheduled for Planning Commission review October 4, 1994.)
Attachment: Subdivision: Wildwood Pines 5th Addition
Comments:
CL��� I L •4 14>� r �I �z/� ' �T?t�; U/lf SG�Dv� L7
C-C1 �� vli fi G c rl� * - L,O Zper f
NOTE: PLEASE RETURN COPIES OF PLANS WHEN FINISHED WITH
REVIEW. THANK YOU
PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW
CASE NO. V/94-54
Project Location: 232 N. Main
Comp. Plan District: Central Business District
Zoning District: CBD
Flood Plain: No
Shoreland/Bluffland: No
Environmental Review: Exempt
Applicant's Name: Greg Skoog/Associated Eye Physicians
Type of Application: Variance
Project Description
A variance to the front setback requirement for the placement of a 20 sq. ft. free-standing sign
approximately 8 ft. from the property line.
Discussion
The request is to place a 20 sq. ft. free-standing sign approximately 8 ft. from the property line
or 15 ft. from the street. This parcel of property is unique in the downtown because it has a front
yard. The present sign is old and in need of repair.
The new sign will be a two-faced sign so it has visibility from the North and South. The location
will not impair traffic visibility on North Main Street.
The H.P.C./Design Review Committee reviewed and approved the sign at their regular meeting
on October 3, 1993. The staff report and conditions of approval are included.
Conditions of Approval
1. The Design Review Committee conditions of approval shall apply.
Recommendation
Approval as conditioned.
Findings
The proposal meets the intent of the Zoning Ordinance, Sign Ordinance, and Downtown Design
Guidelines.
A itnAmante
-H.P.C. review
-Elevation Plan, Site Plan
-Letter
PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW
CASE NO. DR/94-11
Project Location: 232 N. Main
Comp. Plan District: Central Business District
Zoning District: CBD
Flood Plain: No
Shoreland/Bluffland: No
Environmental Review: Exempt
Applicant's Name: Greg Skoog
Type of Application: Variance
Design Review
Prof cct Description
Design Review/Variance for a sign permit for the placement of a 30 sq. ft. freestanding sign.
Discussion
The request is to place a 30 sq. ft. sign approximately seven feet in height for the Associated Eye
Physicians. The sign height, as proposed, is seven feet. This should be reduced to six feet as
regulated in the sign ordinance.
The applicant has stated that lettering will be vinyl clad but has not indicated the color. Lighting
for the sign will be from another source.
Conditions of App oval
1. The sign height shall be reduced to six feet (as per sign ordinance).
2. The area around the sign shall be landscaped.
3. The size of the sign shall be limited to 3' x 6' 6"
4. The sign shall be of a dark earthtone color with a lighter lettering.
5. The posts on the edge of the sign shall be a simple rectangle shape.
Recommendati
Approval.
Findin s
The proposal meets the intent of the Downtown design guidelines and zoning ordinance.
222 Commercial St., Stillwater, MN 55082
Stillwater Planning Commission / City Council
City Hall
216 North Fourth Street
Stillwater, Minnesota 55082
SEP+ z 3
Jam, 1994
This letter is a request for a variance to allow a double face sign at The
Associated Eye Physicians at 232 No. Main Street. The sign will be made of cedar
wood and -a 1/2 inch metal clad plywood face with vinyl lettering. The sign will be
inderectly lit by floodlights shinning up at it. The lighting will be installed by
others..
Res ectfu"Y'
Gre o koa
g g
�r
Sign Consultant
r
"Quality Signage Using Innovative Technologies.
222 Commercial St., Stillwater, MN 55082 (612) 439-6743
N
CON C2�TE
gR-SE
w
h
M A l N ST f.�''
PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW
Case No. V/94-55
Planning Commission Date. October 10, 1994
Project Location: 290 Deerpath
Zoning District: Single Family RA
Applicant's Name: Marcia Kilbourne
Type of Application: Variance
Project Description
Request for front yard setback for garage (30 feet required, 20 feet requested).
Dismsicn
The request is to construct a single family residence with a garage setback 20 feet from Deerpath
right-of-way. The garage would be located 32 feet from the edge of Deerpath (20 feet is required to
park a car in front of the garage). The site is a marginally developable lot because of its slope.
To control impact on the area, a grading plan inlcuding erosion control measures is required. The site
plan provides a ponding area on the northwest comer of the lot with drainage to the rear.
1tir;commenda-60L!
Approval
C') c itions o Ai?nrc�vaI
1. A silt fence shall be installed and maintained on the north side of the site.
2. Drain spouts on the house and garage shall direct stormwater to Deerpath.
Attachmei t:5
PLANNING ADMINISTRATIVE FORM
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
CITY OF STILLWATER
216 NORTH FOURTH STREET
STILLWATER, MN 55082
ACTION REQUESTED
Appeal ,?
Certificate of Compliance
Conditional or
Special Use Permit
Design Review Permit
Planned Unit Development
Variance
Comprehensive Plan
Amendment
Zoning Amendment
Other
Engineering Review Fee
Total Fee
Case No. v �v
Date:
TT —
Fee Paid:
ADDITIONAL ENGINEERING COSTS MAY BE INCLUDED AS PART OF THIS APPLICATION
Environmental Review
EAW
EIS
No Special Environmental Assessment Required
FEE
The applicant shall be responsible for the completeness and accuracy of all forms and supporting material submitted in connection
`with any application.
Address of Project L-v i t , E� t—c'(-K .i D Lp— P k I-4 Assessor's Parcel No.
Zoning District ADescription of Project D E E e �? R I I\-t- 2 F
l` i'r OPF-R f y : U �i_�.� �a ;�� rt-foJt✓. l=iJ.�[.r'I
P.0
eft S e JD - AsI4 T-1
to'
"I hereby state the foregoing statements and all data, information and evidence submitted herewith in all respects, to the best of my
knowledge and belief, true and correct. I further certify I will comply with the permit if it is granted and used."
Property Owner f;•�Z�C(�: "1 f
Mailing Address r t � '
Telephone No.
Sianature v
Representative _
Mailing Address
Telephone No.
Signature
Any decision made on this proposal can be appealed within ten calendar days of the date of the action.
Lot Size (dimensions) x sq. ft.
Total Land Area
Hight of Buildings: Stories Feet
Principal / 8
�,�e ��f�✓�Aceessory / � " C�,������ s ,•r�k•v" �,�- �
Date of Public Hearing is
Total Floor Areal sq. ft.
Proposed floor area 1,: q5l sq. ft.
Building Coverage sq. ft.
Paved Impervious Area sq. ft�
Number of off street parking spaces �` f
APPEALS
V.
BUILDING MOVING PERMITS
l CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE
�- CONDITIONAL OR SPECIAL USE PERMIT
j GENERAL BLUFFLAND/SHORELAND/FLOOPLAIN
I
DESIGN PERMIT
I I
IF ' l GRADING PERMIT
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
L
E
ON-SITE SEWER PERMIT
17 SITE ALTERATION PERMIT
r
VARIANCE
CVEGETATIVE CUTTING PERMIT
E1 ZONING AMENDMENT
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT
F-11
L) OTHER
Record of Action on Application
Decision Authority
Date of Action
Decision by Authority
Appeals Period
Appeal Filed
Appeal Scheduled
Appeal Decision Authority
Apeal Decision
Decision Complete
Approved
(date)
(date)
(date)
Denied Date
(date)
7
($ 2.. )
EL-,
, s
N.Y\I;•iTA kj Slzl �ETJL� ALoUIr Pf�ot�rLT`i L1N1✓
cu
to
f ..,sio�r `_ir-!d[.. � � .I���.,; •Go -.hV 1 -- - � � 1 r a
OSMT Fi.R,r£L. •�7fn.$ {_,. ' �i -ti•." ;,y, • �'' 91i
5 L� 4 } .� � sT' • �.
�• 1 � G rLA4 E � -, • �' D
f i `v r,, ¢. El .$BSrgQ x
- ' ' , 1 •.. i f !1 $ 01
pgisd� �—�_ �. _ _/JFricrEs: PRoPosEA
a— F i. EL,88• * ffZE51DEtA:.G
•NSTI LL\VAT S; MItJt 1 E. 0-rA
M O' 1 •.' • I I .� SCALE'
AI �� �' APPROVED BY On— R.5AMR
I• N 1'1 -:r'�.�� t � •. 94
—
CrJK+'
{ S IT E PL & 1,l
n c C r� t7 n ter• i1 h .-r-. iTr .+ - . I-rr..•� r, r, i i. �_ _ n+awurn H„uera
PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW
Case No. SUP/94-56
Project Location: 423 S. Main
Comp. Plan District: Central Business District
Zoning District: CBD
Flood Plain: No
Shoreland/Bluffland: No
Applicant's Name: Bob Tanner
Type of Application: Special Use Permit
Project Description
A Special Use Permit for expansion of a restaurant use to include an outdoor dining area and
expansion of the existing restaurant.
Discussion
The request is to expand an existing restaurant and construct an outdoor dining area on the east
side of the Brick Alley Building. The total restaurant use will be expanded by 1860 sq. ft. The
total square footage of the restaurant will be 5,756 sq. ft.
Presently, the parking demand for the restaurant use and existing retail spaces is 42 parking
spaces. With the restaurant expansion and new deck, the parking demand will be 50 parking
spaces. This is an increase of 8 parking spaces. This area of Downtown cannot accommodate
additional parking demand. The site plan shows a modified parking area to increase the number
of parking spaces by 14. A new access is shown directly west of the railroad tracks. The
parking spaces as shown do not meet City standards and access to the site goes over the railroad
property since they own approximately 9 feet off the tracks.
It is not recommended that the parking lot be modified or improved based on the site plan
included. There is an access problem which will become apparent when the deck is constructed.
The south drive as shown on the site plan does not provide room for vehicles to turn and proceed
out if the parking spaces are full. A plan for access needs to be submitted which will allow for
this movement.
Conditions of Approval
1) The Design Review conditions of approval shall apply.
2) A parking lot modification shall be submitted and approved by City staff showing how the last
(south) parking isle can accommodate a turn movement.
Recommendation
Approval as conditioned.
Flndzn 5
The proposal meets the intent of the zoning ordinance, Design Review committee and sign
ordinance.
Attachments
-Site plan
-Interior plan
PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW
Case No. DR/94-10
Project Location: 423 South Main
Comp. Plan District: Central Business District
Zoning District: CBD
Flood Plain: No
ShorelandBluffland: No
Environmental Review: Exempt
Applicant's Name: Greg Skoog/Bob Tanner
Type of Application: Design Review
Project Description
Design review for a sign permit for the placement of signage on three faces of a multiple use
building and construction of an exterior deck.
Discussion
The requests include: the placement of (3) three signs on three building faces of the Brick Alley
Building. The Main Street face includes a projecting sign which presently is located on the
Grand Garage facade. The sign will be placed where the Canelakes sign had been located. The
South facade will consist of metal lettering to be placed below the Brick Alley signage with an
additional light to face down on the sign.
The East face will consist of lettering on a burgundy awning. The sign ordinance allows lettering
on the face of the awning.
An exterior deck will also be constructed on the East face of the building. This deck will be
consistent with the architectural detailing in the Commander Elevator and the Dock Cafe. The
materials will e a concrete/stucco finish with a brick base. Landscaping will be incorporated
around the deck. The only lighting proposed at this time is the utility lighting (appropriate to the
building) as shown on the elevation plan.
The Design Review Committee/Heritage Preservation Commission reviewed the design of the
exterior of the deck along with signage at their regular meeting on October 3, 1994. The report
and conditions of approval are attached. These conditions are included as part of the Special Use
Permit proceeding.
Conditions of Approval
1. One additional utility light is allowed over the metal sign on the south face.
2. The color of the cement block face on the east side of the structure shall blend with the
existing brick and the burgundy awnings. The colors shall be reviewed and approved by City
staff.
Recommendation
Approval as conditioned.
Findi_ ny-s
The sign proposal and exterior deck is consistent with the Downtown Design Guidelines.
Attachments
-Elevation
-Pictures
PLANNING ADMINISTRATIVE FORM
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
CITY OF STILLWATER
216 NORTH FOURTH STREET
STILLWATER, MN 55082
ACTION REQUESTED
Appeal
Certificate of Compliance
Conditional or
Special Use Permit
Design Review Permit
Planned Unit Development
Variance
Comprehensive Plan
Amendment
Zoning Amendment
__......_.._ Other
Engineering Review Fee
Total Fee
Case No.
Date: /
Fee Paid: / Zd - 0 d
ADDITIONAL ENGINEERING COSTS MAY BE INCLUDED AS PART OF THIS APPLICATION
Environmental Review
EAW
EIS
No Special Environmental Assessment Required
FEE
too, d0
The applicant shall be responsible for the completeness and accuracy of all forms and supporting material submitted in connection
,,vith any application.
Address of Project 4�� 3 ��•. ]] _ yr Assessor's Parcel No.
Zoning District Description of Project Th 5 1^ e,
G( V S l)&7, 1 U -r
`e A 5 -f- S :. f _ -:P-) a" 51^ 1c I�I/� 1� /Z, ?I n'7li : s9 .St .
"I hereby state the foregoing statements and all data, information and evidence submitted herewith in all respects, to the best of my
knowledge and belief, true and correct. I further certify I will comply with the permit if it is granted and used."
Property Owner �?'c LC¢ L4 Representative,'ir�� r
Mailing Address Mailing Address..S wr• G',� 1^
Telephone No. 41 Z— 37/ (� _ Telephone No. _ L 6I4f 4/y Lj cf-5- C�y_
Signature _.. Signature
Any decision made on this proposal can be appealed within ten calendar days of the date of the action.
Lot Size (dimensions)
Total Land Area
Hight of Buildings: Stories
Principal
Accessory
Date of Public Hearing is
x sq. ft.
Feet
Total Floor Area —_ sq. ft.
Proposed floor area sq. ft.
Building Coverage sq. ft.
Paved Impervious Area sq. ft.
Number of off street parking spaces
y�
�j
tryww
y !till ll�
• $ '. �• -R6 Pr.� •I• .rl' .r. ri4c; •L�.;S`r;�y. t ��• T'
� _�^� f 1fw ..� _ �. 1• ryi^.• _ •,� - :-w...,.r,ti.: _��•r'7'.n«:-� �-_r'" .�+.,w-^'.-`�'.i
-Y �� �~ w �:�' r.,. `.."\,r �''��.i?�1.�74''_'• t ,+.-r- v..—w .u.-'-H"""•i:yhr�+"� .. ....• �•'L�_ •",..�...w.:+: ....«..---""--. `..w. -
i,wr. 6t -_-_ .:r•.. ,.- �.I.i]. �"R-�-,n Yi^"�+Y•f�.[+•rL'. _'' ""•r""�'�.•...�a .........-.S�w�-
. �.....'.....-.«++... �� � • � .�. .. ry � y+�'.^� v:eK1j"'r":�r"�"�.�rr.`'""..'':.��"" �"�, a..�•. ,..c.-.rt'•..•...^.w✓...�,,, ..�.•1
•w.�
• .. � - `..^�....«...�.� � awn,-`• ,.t"Y'". , K x. , f _:
- �{ C
:t.\` ;:hl; ...
t',ri• •i •.11 f t;i. [:'' S:t[-'ir c..S/?:;+ i re+" - 1 t'
F• .rr, ,: r,r•%y. •�."r7• Y i•lr J' 'Yi` .sti �•s.. `:Y .i^': t
41.
kp
II
kk
: sa, :-r, 1i..,t..t. (,+ :r •zn r r. t:..-- 1..•r y-;,. : :"a''-.'- :t' .j -' qq.
•t ."
'`7' �Y� 9 ti
. i;
rr-- ; 1
r i::r r :` > .
.E �.. .
i-x / ,,
yr.+ , t.., . �� t
1 r. r• • �� ••rt,.. r
-'1 i. 1
ry :r:.. -,a .
`� 'I�
i. t, '.1
.s`r � •t .�
rl t ��" e �{
�r ��ri• JJ-'. •'r.
I' 4
y.:r' ..t. 4 W,
�} b,5 ,:.
::
r'T 3 k i //f,�.
i ' 1 c:
r
'�ti ' S d ` .�.. t . I si., - -,.,....-.! .!1I I -...1I '. I, ., , .. . ". . :�,, ,,. !,, ,-".,,. ,,:. ' ., . .I �,% , .. j ..' I 1- ._-. ,I.* .. ...., . .. .. ... -, ...,..,. ,, '. - .�.-'-.I�,.'.e- II L-�- -.LL .;..L,. ..-. '-*; �.% L1--L, - ,, :... . - -I'. I -.'. I.I..r- -. L ;� . -i . . .,., -, , ..-I�!;I-. -pI.:..,� ..- .., , L,.. .�.L � ,.L.1 - -.I . I .-,- �-j. ,, �: I. ,-.1, ..,,-,. .. . ". .; - . !. LL,,.tII. ,%- . 7 ,1. .. .._, I.: I . 1_L....A -.-..�.�,-- :_.-..,. ,, - ",:V.I, . .,,:.., ,. I --� .; .+ .m �, � . ,.k I-�, , . ,.I -I.- _,�. -m.'�, ..-.. r .,-.,, �. - I.�'�.LI. , . "-: .. ; .��.., .I -. -,.t.- . I, I:. -. ''� ; ,; i.. LL.- . . ..'I - -� . I: . .'". I,. .1q... L..-., . . .. , ' ,7I..-. . ...-:�,..k.�, - -. , I �. - I,_I+,;L ... I , . '-..�,- +. -, , ..,. L..1. -.. 5,,', L- 1�p .,,.I, -I .. .�,�-i- . .'...'.1-..,, ,L. --- L., .p -.--: I +1iI' . .,-L.., : , .P:.-. j,L. --Z,-, " �. L,. ..-. ,I m'�. . : ,-,'.d-".- .. ,.-, L .%. . ._, ...I-IL1- � . .:L L, .-:"-. L!,.,. , . -- -." ,...IL'..' . ,. - ,,, -:.- ..a�I. . .�L... -, .- ,-. �- .�-r..,-"'.. ',- . I .x ..'. - ..`� . .". ..-.- - .,..� , -�, . ,L, :;.4;...'. ,L.-_, .4"'I . -� k -- -,.t'�%.\. - I-. ,.-�L,. :.:-,a- - _, ,,, .� " , .�,' . -'_.,.!�.-,. ."I.P". ". I..I I..�-, . -V..,- t %� � ..,, .+ p.f.- - .,.:'p ,-,- -LI I.' �;, `- ,I -�P- �I - .,..I.-, ..;�.� .-..'-,,�1 -. . . "... k ",," - ,��' -'.�,I",` ; ..,.�-."I,.�,. -L;.I 4 ".-- , )- .:.-: .,1'.-� ,. -,.�L, !.L.k- + .-- .L..
it ? {' , i ;>u;..
r ,'r' r'. i. •..r •It r. h :.i;;, J r, .�
i+ a ;N
r' 1 h l
rr{1.a: .Y..
[ .rY •4•..•r' 1. Y S F�
r n• ti ��.. r .., �_ ram,
1''S r�'!- it Jt �L' ..I�• Fr•5 5.,� :I ''Y •�- .}
-fr : rt+S- --J.. A".- T•r� y`H. _ -I,.L• fr
,r.,
, .r �. 1
t 7 „yy
.er, •r•'• • r' '1 r � . r.
_ ]
`o- F,.
:i;.. '.,SSA �'
7 :1 r 7: s. �..
s r Z r
SY •.L
ti' S }.
=�`.. - ►
+r" ..
I tit .7.� 1 .L.. f•i.
J,
I f J �� i�'S . r. : � � �'Y Yr•, .Ir� , '•Sr'
":r• ]:'
1, Y 15't .lY. .L. 1 -
f S i ar :i', A t' n' r
'u r �• 7•
•'r`•ti.
- ��:cii' �,r 1. . i :s r
:t r, iE r'J ,7
_ ii ` „":: it >u':• Y e. -' '{ 5 e
.�i { `,� ll k-.
i+f S '
',:: �' y t .rFr.a 1 .'.>
^a' .ti r f .j.` N.
�. '� T ,I •
S .a �r tit +�' i.. ",••. L. i- .7: i. t':. . 1 �7i] ..'F
t. : _ i i
t4 . .1 :';rtr :': is :: - ]y: • �' •{, r I.:r, r,
j'. 1! , { r 'li slr•..� .. .' .
r �. r; 'rk.• �..
'I { :l. .iti� 1' .'7'
'ti• "r•r .a Ix �iL
. :�; f,t,
!: r i �r t s.. r •I• S' F
1. r. T:i S }.
i` .•Ys�� �'i�•
S
i ' ' ,''' s'p -ti ' �. i'r o
:.�. i'�:; �.
:ii l' J ,
S' �,. •t "
- rf •i� n 'r
.r� f,.
:�
f
•5 • • Y' 1
Y 't
r .• ,. r .
�l • Si
.. ' C. , i
.Lr' '1�• �5.� AP .0 .ei' i'`.
!!.. i
h1„ t'
", ti'
•'•J r' •I ' '.t Y -t• r Ii' r•. .I.
..11' ���iri ''r. i.` .
.r . Lr'• ', r., .r•'- �;'• .,[ '•i+. � . ,• • �1. S^'.. �; ,r. Sri= •.!•
.. i !'. , `J . r'i'
l: :•1'. wr '•F S•. l r' �•r��' .1 N,
, . 1. r
r n' r , , ` i
'' 1r' 15-.'. } !� �- :a �.„ -.r .r� r,d ..r�:;. "�1 it-; •,a..
:� .
' J ' 4� ' i4 •.'1 .7
.. , .r%r 1 •�y .fir.. •'{.
y p •r,• Syr' 'S ,•7'
}
i.' r `l
.7• 'Y.. ,�• ,,,
h •J., ;r,
r + } i }
•J• 4 I' •J"7" �s' 4l
••ii r•' r'- • r •':'
,1 •. �,i �+:' ., r s ;1. •tip `i^ ,
5•. , '. k. •. '. r5• 'r yf }
,; > . -}i' ;,r .
„? !
r',
y rr • a
J,
- C ••kti
=i'�' -r _ :ix- -� ram''
•,F
;ic t
iw� r
i , ;. .
t' � •'-i
'si '•i • I',yfi.
rti•. �� ' 7lµ Ji
1Z• - �: •ti •.1 . . L .
,• :�fr -t ir•• ,,: !. '7
as 4, f
s" i. �+: ; `I
Ly R ,•�• •r,. }.
i - k •f• ,
.� a i'..•y, i ^r •. i, s t'
Y{ . t •r':
r 7 g li r• rr
_ Id' Y ¢ '•i• r_'
t+rd+ s •,'. 1 .r L - ::i :l:' 1: :f •.rs 1, il:•. �p :.t•: nt. 'I
•,•: � r� •1 r: .I
■ i'f:
... '{ i'!''' fir. 1;, `'7•� i'i•
,: r
,'
��11 tr :.i'-
. e I r'•
I'
r !'' 'r , 4
r.1t• . J Hry .
u. .1 •�l :I • }.
k >z• :.,� • fr 'tom
V �1i "t{':;1�
. '
n is _ rr",.• rl: -::
F,'. r
{ 'r. . [.
r i .r ' 1 •'ic "':,i�
s l •1 L - Yf5 pp
S �' •4':' !• li i•i�
i Sa .I.'•' • • r• . 1.,. Y
... 'Ir • C ••r'1" '•i..
I ,, . • .5 i , [,�. ,'fir. . r. .! '�'; '. i.. ]t., ,.� ,.�. ,.'. .ris
•,: - ''l- • ',;:-.. f. . r.•. a•7r I. ;:. •.d I.Y. rr -l. i ....t%t,. r.'S `1 c. . r,. ]:''
•1 '' q. rr.+. `� ,fit• ? 4 :,,- 1M1• •.t+ x I
r r.: r L`. t. i'
7 r'
y 1
r! �.•=.t
ir='.11 t : ' i R
r
ri•� r'•y� •�r'L'� -L t- -r.'
J •-r t• .� 1f' J •\ :•0. -.: is ,.', n•k-1.; ;i:
,,. �•, r. t:'s
•T. •>`: , '.r 1, ' r
1 P: •.j. .i- r.
t. r.
U, r -sir• 5.ti.-„ k •
) V. i
•I•�. T i •'3.• . ,. � ..r 1• X., �,I., ;f is ; �'t: ' � T::• ..jf' J.� .1t' •i ;_�
n .�F ;'r• 'r2' ,e'' -'r. Ira :.� .�• r• e.' '.7.h' riti �r a' ..
J�.. i irr L ;,, r
:i t i`!•
+ ?' ;• ?
r s^•
5 'i' {' :S-, . rr: h:. ..1w `::..,. .},. r,.' f r t:Y.'.,, S' i1. r
'^7 {.;..'. , t'.r.'r rsi` 4 t, .r'' • „t,'� •ri -rt: t :ry •}'. r`' Y:-, . wC:, •!. .r:
3i , r. .,rv: r r �+ st. t.f- i-• .r s Itl r rl t Y. }:' :x ,: :>' :.1T,, 1.
4- r
1. 'r ^• .ice '.a i
r• i.,. • f a
>v ,t . .rr..:�r=•'st ..J.'C. ± '�••'i� . {,.... 1 :j :•{ ri •,1.. '1,
S K r P' •S'
{ r.»
.F �1 e,• [• .v {. y Z ;.
1'`, ., lr� i'
r �,1 . I -, ,. o
s y . 1' ..
S' +?: i L y�
'•'.' .,'Y!' }: '' II .i,: it .1' ' i ,i 1• • 1''' •:i. , [r :} •� •t ,1: r •'6 •3. Y
i ~, Ji.� :.,.•' •'} •'}r1r` .r .lf•• .! �':• i11`i'l.4y L,�tr,- 1' �.
• i r rv'• ''. }fir ,r,•� .. .1: L'
r''-i` : f; 3'' ' ,.i i, , r•: •:,•' r': •'o �•� '.. ''t'� `rii°i; I ' 1'' :,
T: f 1: s .l t f,.." .%. r
i • :+irrk�- • T' ''i:` I -
11 ,.t� s d�rr•,:: t=sl �I..ri �s F [ '.4":IIr�. •.
t 1. .r,' i :.I t, > ll r '
1•t iJ• y ! .;M1 W. r9 .'- !fir C
J' , i
r ' ` J-
r ' �-r
1'!, . 1
h• 4
r<::. . r 1'i.[. C
r•. J' l,' 't'
h'•� .! t•
Y is
. yy. kr ( .'''
r • i i'.l . i
's L' .n.• •I • i ..5�. :1 r•.
`c 1" f .• i r f
1,, � K [
r •ri.' '1 5
r 7' a i
I ,r;.. k�'•''��' 'r'� 'ice t:
y° :r L Y r--'
!. .
•r !fie., • ";
3
F IT' • ` t c ti , }
u±r' "t d :• it r''
r $'`%:.
> �.
�[ 1 :L. 1 [•'
1. '. t .: ;.r::
•'1' f' is F� , r. . •'�.1. I ar r , �7 - :fr -!
. 14
oo
Ai 4
OUo oL
;ILI
t : lell -i L-L
y�W \ a (�� Ip L°�' � I f ': f + � , 1, ~ 1 _-�_ i'y r G6 s4
ij
)107
igl—p
f3a t
El
6,c; 0
w; aov zv q--? .6150
MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning Commission
FR: Steve Russell, Community Development Director
DA: October 5, 1994
RE: COMP PLAN INFORMATION
Attached to this memo are several items that relate to the comprehensive plan update. The
information includes:
- Selected section of the newly adopted Metropolitan Blueprint.
- Alternative "F" which represents the major vacant property developers ideas on the
density of development that could occur on the Palmer, Abramowicz, Newman, Staloch
and Anderson properties.
- A revised comp plan update schedule.
- Staged growth projections for the 1995 - 2020 planning period (based on Met Council
projections).
- Table 8 showing historic City of Stillwater and Stillwater Township residential building
permit growth from 1970 to 1993.
- Map showing city growth areas from 1970 - 1990.
The City of Stillwater - Stillwater Township task force continues to meet. For the next month,
the task force will develop aXnew Alternative "X" that represents a new development alternative
for the township/city expansion growth area.
On the ward meeting front, a city-wide ward meeting will be held Saturday, October 29, 1994, at
the Stillwater Senior High, 8:30 a.m. to noon to help develop ward impact to the comp plan
update process. The results of the meeting will be presented to the planning commission next
month.
Washington County held a meeting to present two scenarios to guide future development in the
county. The tabloid that describes the scenarios is attached. Comments from the city on the two
scenarios can be presented to the county by October 15. At meeting time, the commission can
discuss the county report and possible city comments on the county's effort. Areas of discussion
could include compact development, county development and impact on city roads, the linear
park system and particularly the County Road 15 greenbelt concept.
Commission discussion can be incorporated into a city response to the county regrading
development of a county comprehensive plan that can be provided to the council for review and
approval at their meeting October 11, 1994.
Attachments.
1
Metropolitan Council
FINAL DRAFT, SEPT. 16, 1994
Regional blueprint
Twin Cities Metropolitan Area
September 1994
Publication no. 78-94-057
Mears Park Centre 230 E. Fifth St. St Paul MN 55101 291-6359voice 291-0904TDD
Working for the region Planning for the future
�1
it
crea
emands
Urban s ravel into rural areas. When urban devei' that attracted many people to the ment encroaches into r-ural �area n the tfist place,
for costly services, jeopardize the rural life style that
and consume prime agricultural land.
have an
t on
5 ecial. one -of -a -kind facilities. The Metrodo�inenand� Spl of ecial al facilities such as thesecthat are regional
proposedsystems
for
such as highways, transit or wastewater trey p
the region should be evaluated to determine whether they
� re built
ull ain
al e mostnds approuldopriate
reviewed.
locations and
at the right scale for the region. Also, programs that draw 5
der consideration for
The debt burden far re Tonal facilities. Passible new
cmajor
e: such ltrojectos e usualjects are ly financ d by regional
wastewater treatment, highways, transit and airports. 5 p
bonds, it is important that debt levels be managed within reasonable bounds.
Setting the Direction for Guided Growth
The Council is in a unique position to oversee major regional
i eotionfacilities
the timin at e lucation and art of the underpinnings
of
of economic and development activity. It sets the
refo
gional systems, and issues bonds to finance capital improvements under the r several Metxopolitan Land
Council also sets the direction for land use planning y governments
Planning Act.
into
ewly deve
The Council coordinates the delivery of regional services andfore
re making new onessis annimportant fiscal
areas. Making maximum use of existing investments
principle. Good fiscal management of regionalfacilities assures far Titles at -the debt for the the urban parted facilities t re -ion oared
burden to the region. Maintaining and upgrading reserve the region's large financial investment.
effectively managing these facilities is necessary to p
to two
As one means to ensure orderly development, in early
betwe�n thtwo--the s the divided
metaopolitan urbannservire
areas for planning purposes and established a bound e y o,� and provided regional
area boundary. In one, the urban service area, the Council supported urban
services. In the rural- service area, urban development w discouraged.
courage ayregional urban services ovements and more closely
central sewer and large -volume sewage treatment, higher -capacity gh
spaced highway interchanges, mass transit, and high levels P too
services in general. The Council will
continue to use the urban service area boundary as a planning o
With local communities, the Council works through local comprehensive plans to ace in the futuxre examine
important
factors and forces affecting their communities today but those they will f c'
issues regarding natural resource protection, economic development, redevelopment, shared services and r.
fiscal impacts are not addressed or adequatelydealt
y j
he regrading of lcomprehensive
h ghway or library sere ce—need
issues that directly affect a community —like t, P
to be planned with adjacent communities and other g o area�1� �d, �n5teadTencourages communitiese Council tg
incremental changes to a local community's urban
to stage their development through comprehensive, long. -term planning.
ll
elop will
ze
The Council's processes for decision -malting erv�ut how the nfor12005vand 2010 working in
ea boundaries in
cooperation. The Council will establish urban sCe ar
partnership with local communities. This extension of the planning horizon will allow local communities
v' 1 ; to stage development beyond the current year-2000 urban service area boundary with confidence about
the timing of regional services expansion. The Council, in turn, will use local comprehensive plans to
assist with its plans to stage the provision of regional services cost-effectively.
M
The Council's role is to:
• Guide development into areas that have regional and local services available and promote new
development to occur adjacent to existing development.
• Establish comprehensive land use guidelines that address:
- Sharing and restructuring of government services.
Coordinating development with infrastructure investments.
- Diversity of housing prices, types and locations.
Incorporating planning for environmental preservation into the development process.
Job creation End economic development.
- Impacts of development on services
(Police, fire, local
- The interrelationship of jobs, housing and transportationoads, schools).
Agricultural land preservation and rural area density standards.
Make more efficient use of local and regional infrastructure by working with local governments
and the private sector to
t selectively increase the density of developrnent--for example, intensifyin
development along certain transportation corridors or filling in vacant land parcels. g
Policy 5. The Council will ensure that regional services and facilities under its
jurisdiction are provided cost-effectively to support development and revitaliz at1 ion
in the region. The Council will work with the providers of other important
g
infrastructure to make sure the region has the facilities it needs to grow and
develop.
The Urban Service Area
REGIONAL SERVICES WITjnN TIIE 1JRBAN SERVICE AREA
Action Step 5A. The Council will provide regional services for urban -scale development only within
the urban service area, including the freestanding growth centers, consistent with local
comprehensive plans and metropolitan system Plans. The Council will work with local units al
government to establish the location and staging of the metropolitan urban service area.Of
Council actions:
1. Ensure there is sufficient developable land in all sectors of the urban service area to:
Meet regional demand for economic development.
Establish land for life -cycle and affordable housing opportunities.
Reserve reasonable amounts of land for comm
Prevent an artificialercial-industrial development.
• increase of land prices.
Discourage leapfrog urban development into the rural service area or adjacent counties.
i+ 2. Develop models indicating how local governments can meet the staging requirements in the
Land Planning Act in ways that are consistent with regional goals and plans.
3. Seek changes to the Metropolitan Land Planning Act to ensure that local governments
periodically update their comprehensive plans to reflect changes to metropolitan system plans that
A affect their community, changes in demographics and socioeconomic changes (see Appendix B
` 40
riate
2. Establish comprehensive plan amendments orther rblagreements ri rea boundary,pncluding
needed with local jurisdictions for changes to
freestanding growth centers, to:
t
�.� arks schools, local sewers and other
Integrate regional and local plans for highways, p
investments.
�.L'� Ensure housing is available in a variety of types and prices for current and future residents
PL of the community.
S preserve environmental resources.
• Maintain agricultural land and support the Council's rural area policy.
d consistent
th
3. Use local gevgx-aghic information system (t;l:S db�vahrsed available
��� b d anhan service area
regional guidelines in reviewing local comprehensiveplans
s process
changes. The Council will improve its own G1S communities apability to uusing itser current process butwith
the Council will continue to verify land use with
updated data.
nt
provide
Each time the Council expands the metropolitan urban service re2, It �ornmitment toes a epravoide local
regional services to that area. In addition, the local government akes a
services to that area. To minimize public expenditures f�� Ds�� rbansservdiceoarea should be timed
economic development of the ure orderly and
region, the addition of new 1
r. The criteria the Council wills e consider requested changes to a local
and staged in an orderly xriaiuie
urban service area boundary are contained in Appendix C, page
72
When a local government requests a change in staging in its comprehensive plan, by either adding more
g the urban service re
land to its urban service went occursthe Council will use the
area or changin
following guidelines to ensure that orderlyS
and contiguous p
a. The Council will support local comprehensive planning that carefully stages development.
When a local government submits a request for a change to its urban service area it must
,,znalyce how that change will affect regional forecasts, system planarandooperations
i .
13ecauso this analysis is most effectively accomplished when changes
aggregate, the Council prefers that a local government limit its requests for such changes
to one per year rather than seeking piecemeal amendments.
b. Based on the currently established year 2000 urban service area boundary, the extension of
wastewater treatment service will be limited to those communities alreadyhe receiving
g some
service. The Council will reevaluate the need to add a new community of the
area as it works with local coo unities2005 t 2e Oblish the location and staging
metropolitan urban service areas f
c. Expansions of a local urban service area will be allowed only wh where
asps �rops ate eed
sufficient regional wastewater treatment and transportation capacity
to coincide with the requested expansion. Redevelopment potential within each sector will
also be considered when reviewing expansion requests.
ll be
d Amendments to a local gpVernment's comprehensiveanlocallan governrnent forusual
tlie provision on of
od of
reflecting agreements between the Council However, in some cases,
regional urban services or urban service area boundary changes.
because of unusual circumstances or issues, it may be more appropriate for the Council
43
The Rural Service Area
Action Step 5D:The Council will support three land use types outside the metropolitan ur
service area: commercial agriculture, rural centers and general rural use.
SIDE BAR: The rural service area includes the:
-commercial agricultural area
-rural centers
-general rural use area
The rural service area includes the commercial agricultural area, rural centers and the general rural use
area. The commercial agricultural area includes "agricultural preserve" land under the Metropolitan
Agricultural Preserves Act that is certified by the local government as eligible for the a'cultural
preserves program_ It also includes the tom, term agricultural land that is categorized as Class I, E, III or
irrigated Class 1V land according to the Capability Classification Systems of the Soil Conservation Service
and the county soil survey. In a prime farmland area, the Council will support a density of one housing
unit per 40 acres.
The rural centers are 34 small cities that used to serve primarily as retail and transportation centers for
surrounding agricultural areas, but are now home to many residents who work in the urban area and many
industries with few ties to agriculture. Examples include Young America, New Market and St. Francis.
These cities should pace development with their ability to provide their own urban services, but without
regional facilities.
The general rural use area is land outside the urban service area that has a wide variety of land uses,
including farms, provide for low -density residential development and facilities that mainly serve urban
' residents, such as regional parks, "Low -density residential development" is defined as a maximum density
of one unit per 10 acres computed on the basis of 640 acre parcels (one square mile). Regional facilities -
and services should not be extended into this area to serve high -density development like that found in j
the urban service area.
Council actions:
1. The Council will support agriculture as the primary long-term land use in the rural service
area. The Council will use the priorities below in protecting those prime agriculture lands most
capable of supporting long-term agriculture production. The Council will not support extensive
development in the rural service area. However, the Council will support low -density residential
development at densities of no more than one unit per 10 acres, with a maximum of 64 units per
640 acre parcel (one square mile). Appropriate rural land uses must meet all environmental quality
standards, not require urban -level support services, and be of a scale to .serve local market
demands.
The Council will use the following ranking in decisions affecting prime agricultural land:
1. Land covenanted in agriculture preserves will receive primary protection. Urban facilities
should be prohibited in this area unless there is strong documentation that no other locations
in the Metropolitan Area can adequately meet the siting and selection criteria.
2. Land certified but not presently in agricultural preserves will receive a level of protection
secondary to agricultural preserves. Urban facilities should not be located in this area unless
M.
• The second way cluster planning will work allows for issues to be identified and addressed in a
manner appropriate to the particular issue. Working with local government and other governmental
units, the Council will identify cluster planning areas considering various factors including:
regional highway and transit corridors
regional sewer system treatment plants/interceptors and service areas
regional housing submarkets
regional transit service areas
employment concentrations and commuting patterns
environmental resources (major rivers, lakes, regional parks designated protection areas,
watersheds)
- shared service agreements
- jurisdictional boundaries
Regional investments will be guided by the objectives of the cluster planning areas as established in each
metropolitan system and policy plan. In an effort to achieve consistency and compatibility across the
various levels of government in the metropolitan area, the Council will compare local comprehensive plans
(including any intergovernmental coordination element) with other comprehensive plans and with regional
policies and plans.
The Council may establish formal agreements or compacts with local jurisdictions to coordinate regional
and local planning, so that highways, parks, schools, local sewers and other investments are made in a
coordinated way. The region's role in providing urban services within a local community will be based
on an evaluation of how well that community meets or is willing to help meet regional goals and policies.
56
a
n - o _r=
� cam
� A
m
m 7 m N. M ^ �> Aenrn y ��"77+� m m C h 4 b O
H O O I"` D r
i h x G �" n- ... ,V
n—
c O
~ y k m m ry
7 N y p~ O~
tu y b
y r
r0
m
co
IVLn
x
a
2
N m N O N y
V (� W W
CDLnr
N p O`'
VI U b pW, m V b V VI m : N kn A
r.W
C
T r V 0 VI N w N
O r
J
N O �V O O V Q ,•, N r
b H N W
O O ON. Q` .� A A W L7 0 W N V VW7 O u N O. b
b
m
N 000 00 OtANbO� O
O Ll
a
cm
O Ln
N O O O O U O O
y
W N Q O Q 10 b N N V W N
O
O O N V W O O O O N b lr� • h'
O O
b
O O O O O C CD
N O 0 0 p• M O W t� r 0 W w W O O
0 CD
VW/
O
Cb
0 O O O O O
O
-Ai
O O O 0 Q O O g O O p o m N w
Ly W P
V W W
OAj CDO O
O O O O
O
ON D CD
CD p OW' C q r W O W W 0 O
O 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 O O O CD CDr Q
LA O O 00
O O O cn, NJ
CD
O 0 0 0 O O
i r '� :` O
N _. O p O
O. NN O. of
v W _. a
V m
't7 N O.NN�O
,VO rNN
CDW O�
P O� _r U
VQNN VNN
U ON A _ Via r O i b ,Q
O O
O O C A i 1 N ry r N
O O
CD
O O O O O O O O V r ' N N
V
1O O O m V1 N A b
r. �_ O O Q
O O 0
00 C 0 0 0 0 ON pQ 00 O O
O r ti r r W OO T
O
CD
0 0 0 0 0 0
P O O b O �^ O
r 'a N
N O O D O m ry
O O O
O CDO CD O CDO O
- O 06 O O y' O Q N u V O O O O O CD
-+�•• W O
O
ol
O O O O O O O O O
OCZ) O O N r `'� •,
N
O O
W w O O O O O
O O O
00
N O o
N O m
cm�. _
W O
W a
r. O a V 0O W W 0, O. _
r
r
•p to O N V s� �` P `O U -O
W O
H •p `O O O V V N O `^ G' �+ m N �` `tn n
O r N •vim O v W N 4 CD N W
CD CZ)
CD
O p 0 CDO O O N
ol Of, 0 W
0 0
U. 0 0
0 0 0
Mi 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O
O p W m C
N
O� P �, W v O pW O O u Y
0 0 O N O O O O O
0 Oq
O V W Q` `O s� O
O OOCD L
p,
O O 0 0 0 0000 rn
•p W Cop N O �„� P to 2
O O
CD
O CDO O 0 O^ O O O a N a
O CD
O O N � W O N
•�
V O
O O00 V WN
OV
O a
O O O OO O O O
O
82
11�
C. Criteria for Changing the Urban A -ran
Increasing the Size of a Local Urban Service Area
The Council will consider requests from local units for expansion to their urban service area. These requests will
be considered together for their impact on the region as a whole, metropolitan systems, regional policy
objectives and other units of government. Each request, submitted in the form of a comprehensive plan
amendment, will be evaluated at both the local level and at a subregional level, as appropriate, and must satisfy
the following criteria:
1. Forecasts and Urban Land Demand. Is there demonstrated urban land need? The Council first reassesses
land supply and demand based on current Council forecasts and a comparison of figures provided by the
local governmental unit. The Council analyzes the local community's request in terms of the urban land
supply/demand in the pertinent regional data sector(s), cluster planning area Cd applicable), the wastewater
interceptor and treatment plant service area, and transportation corridor area to ensure a five-year overage,
serviced land unless there is a shortage of land suitable for development in the urban
Land in a rural service area community will not be added to the urban service area for a net increase of communities within the pertinent data sector(s). service area
2. Tmnsportation Facilities. Metropolitan transportation facilities and the local transportation sysfem must be in
place or planned for implementation to maintain an appropriate level of service concurrent with the
development proposed in the request. Analysis of transportation system impacts will include those
communities or areas that are within the same regional transportation (highway or transit) corridor(s) or
service area(s). Adequate capacity in the regional highway system, as defined in the Council's
transportation system plan, must be available to serve any new development. The focal government must
have an up -to --date local transportation plan.
3. Wastewater Service. Metropolitan wastewater service must be in place or planned for implementation
concurrent with the development proposed in the request. Adequate capacity in the metropolitan wastewater
system (treatment plant and interceptors), as defined in the Council's wastewater system plan, must be
available to serve any new development. Analysis of wastewater service rapacity will include those
communities that are within the same service area of the wastewater interceptor or treatment plant. The
local government must have an up-to-date local comprehensive sewer plan, including on -site wastewater
management requirements.
4. Staging. As communities seek to provide urban services to areas which are not currently urbanized, the
communities must specify in five year urbanization areas, the timing and sequence of major local public
facilities in the capital improvement program and also the official controls which wifl ensure that urbanization
occurs only in designated urbanization areas and in accordance with the plan.
5. Rural Area Policy. Areas of the community not receiving urban services must be consistent with the
Council's rural area policy for land uses and protection of prime agricultural land.
vested development rights, to avoid premature requirements for the provision of urba6. Local Assessment Practices. The local government must have assessment practices that limit creation of
n services
In addition, the request must also explain how the community has addressed and intends to address the
following regional issues:
1. Housing. Local implementation of strategies and actions that:
• indicate that the community is providing its share of the region's low- and moderate -income and life -
cycle housing which includes a variety of housing types and prices for current and future residents; and
allow for building mixed -use or infill development and increasing the density of residential development
(including along selected transportation corridors and at major transit transfer points).
2. Environmental Resources. Use of environmental factors to guide urban development.
3. Shared Services. Local plans for service cooperation or consolidation and cost savings as well as the
governmental unit's place in the broader cluster planning context, including relationship to school districts.
a —
72
t.
Criteria for Changing the Urban Service Area Boundary (continued)
F�otherwise
Trades That Change a Local Urban Service Area Boundary
ity cannot justify increasing the size of its urban service area and/or if the community seeks to
ange the configuration of its urban service area, the Council will consider land -trade proposals
involving vacant, developable land adjacent to the urban service area provided metropolitan systems and other
governmental jurisdictions are not adversely affected. The Council will use two options to evaluate land trade
proposals.
a. The proposals must involve equal amounts of vacant, developable land with similar land use types
and intensities as well as similar urban service (transportation and sewers) characteristics; or
b. If the scale of land use and the intensity of potential development differ between the parcels, then
proposed land trades must have similar urban service characteristics, Proposals will also be
evaluated to determine their impact on the affected sectors five-year overage of land.
Under either option, the Council will use the above criteria to evaluate the proposal, with the exception that the
local community need not demonstrate regional urban land need.
73
D. Examples of Rural Area Land Uses
Land Uses in the Rural Service Area -
Rural Service Area
Commercial Agricultural Area
includes "agricultural preserve"
land under the Metropolitan
Agricultural Preserves Act that is
certified by the local government
as eligible for the agricultural
preserves program. It also
includes the long term
agricultural land that is
categorized as Class I, II, III or
irrigated Class IV land according
to the Capability Classification
System of the Soil Conservation
Service and the county soil
survey.
General Rural Use Area is land
outside the urban service area
that has a wide variety of land
uses, including farms, low -
density residential development
and facilities that mainly serve
urban residents, such as regional
parks. Regional facilities and
services should not be extended
into this area to serve high -
density development like that
found in the urban service area.
Rural Centers are 34 small
cities that used to serve primarily
as retail and transportation
centers for surrounding
agricultural areas, but are now
home to many residents who
work in the urban area and many
industries with few ties to
agriculture. Examples include
Young America, New Market and
St. Francis. These cities should
pace development according to
their ability to provide their own
services, without regional
support
Examples of Consistent Land Uses
Agricultural: broad range of agricultural land uses, including horse boarding and
training, kennels, sod farms, tree farms, fish production and processing, storage areas
or buildings
Residential: single family residences, maximum density of 1140 acres, accessory
apartments
CommerciaUndustrial: small on -farm operations normally associated with farming
Institutional: urban generated facilities, such as waste disposal facilities: prohibited
from primary protection areas unless no other location available; prohibited from
secondary protection area unless no site in general rural use area available
Agricultural: all uses fisted for commercial agricultural policy area
Residential: Low -density residential development is defined as single family residences
at a maximum density of 1/10 acres computed on the basis of 640 acre parcels (one
square mile), twin homes/duplexes (meeting density standard), accessory apartments,
group -Irving homes with shared cooking facilities
Commercial/Recreational and Urban -Generated Uses: urban -generated uses,
including recreational vehicle parks, racetracks, festival sites, campgrounds, gun clubs,
private airports, solid waste facilities, auto salvage/recycling, other similar facilities,
neighborhoods convenience/service/retail uses, such as financial offices, video stores,
gasoline, groceries, daycare centers, comme rcia Ilse rvice/reta il uses adjacent to or
served by existing metro highways, agricultural products processing, home occupations,
bed and breakfast lodging facilities, dentist and doctor offices, landing areas for
ultralight and model airplanes, retreat facilities, golf courses
Industrial: sand and gravel mining, urban -generated uses that require a spacious,
isolated location, small manufacturing firms originating from home occupations, oil or
gasoline storage tank farms, refineries, solid waste transferlprocessing facilities
Institutional: urban -generated uses, such as waste -disposal installations, jails, prisons,
public airports, human service agency satellite offices, parks trails, open space, other
similar facilities, unique natural or conservation areas, schools, churches, cemeteries
Residential: urban density housing development consistent with local plan and ability to
provide and finance services including sewer, roads, water and stormwater drainage;
new residential development in staged contiguous manner and larger amounts within
local central sanitary sewer service area meeting state and federal water quality
standards; on -site systems to meet installation and inspection standards
Commercial/industrial: commerciallretaillservices meeting the needs of the center and
adjacent rural area; manufacturing and agricultural related service operations including
grain elevators, creameries; urban scale development consistent with local plan and
ability to provide and finance services including sewer, roads, water and stormwater
drainage
Institutional: urban uses such as schools, churches, human service agency offices,
community/public buildings
-cven tnougn a panpC.pJ3ar wria use may ae aco:eptaope N ine rums area prom a regionai perspectrve, the t,ouncu wii nos reccrrrrpenu Mat every carrnrwnny provpue
for every possible land use in its rural area it it would not be consistentwith local plans. All uses would also be subject to local, regional or state permits or licenses.
74
11 jilliAm 2,OC
4r,' 1-W 2 7
look
CL
5
29 x
u��v
Yy%An�
0
? ............. ..
Z.
Z,01
2850
211 0
04 2p2
2 .E
2150 2112
STATE
1 '2;
l v
24 ".
L
3065
J 2-00
2 5C a
1 �
205C J
�F - FI _ _ N^r
.,�';v'
r.
1•� Z
c
LIC)29 l 4
IV I �•,_
l _ � � � �,��� � I =� •• _ ��= � o a o by �
• �. P �Rm �L �` 1 � l .
J t 1� � ��j•LLtiM1-��tV . olur
N E J rw
C)VVGoc
5)
F _ Vrh.
95
`9" oj6 V V
Moo
`.. roc' 2]s. B[f77 3 � ` f �L��, •1 �•
OL?LOT //R'I / !a•�p •177OG1�.•
- f� J ' •yp I � � fr. '� 11 r..
'A61 7 r
(�Vt S.0vi
Schedule for Comp Plan Update
August - November Ward and joint task force input.
November Planning Commission receives report from joint task force
and ward network.
November - December Planning Commission recommend Comp Plan alternative
to city council.
January City Council review planning commission recommendation
and direct preparation of draft comprehensive plan.
February - March City Planning Commission and city council hold hearings
on and adopt comprehensive plan.
CITY OF STILLWATER
STAGGERED GROWTH FOR PLANNING PERIOD 1995 - 2020
Population
Household
Increase
Increase
Land
1995 - 2000
1,000
500
240
2000-2005
900
400
192
2005-2010
900
400
192
2010-2015
900
400
192
2015 - 2020
900
400
192
Total increase 1995 - 2020
4,600
2,100
1,008
Vacant land 1994
1994 250 AC (150 Acres Residential, 100 acres commercial)
Density: 1 Dwelling Per 40 Acres
Environmental Conditions
-Farmland
• Woodlands
• Lakes and Streams
• Wetlands
• Soils and Groundwater
40 Acres
160 Acres
Figure 1: Scenario 1 Long-term Agricultural Development Pattern
Density: 1 Dwelling Per 40 Acres
Up to 16 Per 640 Acres
Environmental Conditions
• Farmland
• Woodlands
• Lakes and Streams
• Wetlands
• Soils and Groundwater
40 Acres
160 Acres
Figure 2: Scenario 2 Long-term Agricultural Development Pattern
Partners in Planning • Washington County • BRW INC. July 1994
i
TABLE 8
f
BUILDING
PERMITS - STILLWATER
CITY AND TOWNSHIP
1970-1993
RATIO
YEAR
CITY TOWNSHIP
CITYfivP
1970
100
7
14.29 ?
1971
61
21
2.90 t
1972
216
17
12.71 '
1973
179
15
11.93
1974
130
22
5.91
1975
134
17
7.88
1976
150
22
6.82
1977
)6
46
0.78
1978
148
24
6.17
1979
11
25
0.44
1980
80
11
7.27
1981
9
20
0.45
1982
16
16
1.00
198)
90
14
6.43
1984
48
37
1.30
1985
38
33
1.15
1986
119
40
2.98
1987
119
32
3.72
1988
83
35
2.37
1989
78
31
2.52
1990
45
29
1.55
1991
259
27
9.59
1992
196
33
5.94
1993
153
28
5.46
Averaae
104
25
5.06
Sources; Metropolitan Council (City 1970-1993, Twp 1970-1984)
Washington County Government Records (Twp 1985-1993)