HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001-07-09 CPC PacketI
iwater
THE BIRTHPLACE OF MINNESOTA
PLANNING COMMISSION
CITY OF STILLWATER
NOTICE OF MEETING
The Stillwater Planning Commission will meet on Monday, July 9, 2001 at 7 p m in the Council
Chambers of Stillwater City Hall, 216 North Fourth Street
Approval of Minutes of June 11, 2001
AGENDA
Public Hearings - 7 p m
1 Case No SUP/DR/01-26 A special use permit for the construction of a building housing 29
to 32 condominiums at 501 North Main Street (Domino's Pizza site) in the CBD, Central
Business District and the FP, Flood Plain Jeff Wallis, applicant (Continued from the June
11, 2001 Meeting)
2 Case No ZAM/01-03 Zoning Map Amendment rezomng 5 3 acres of land from Townhouse
Residential, TH and Agncultural Preservation, AP, to Single Family Residential, RA, located
on the southwest corner of CR 5 and Wildpines Lane City of Stillwater, applicant
3 Case No V/01-28 A vanance to the front yard setback (30 feet required, 26 feet requested)
for the construction of an entry way at 2369 Croixwood Blvd in the RA, Single Family
Residential Distnct Michael Bolduc, applicant
4 Case No SUP/01-29 A special use permit for the construction of an accessory dwelling unit
at 711 South ls` Street in the RB, Two Family Residential Distnct Jeff and Rita Ross,
applicants
5 Case No V/01-30 A vanance to the side yard setback (10 feet required, 7 feet requested)
for the construction of an attached garage at 726 South 7th Street in the RB, Two Family
Residential Distnct Darnel and Maria Pohszuk, applicants
6 Case No V/01-31 A vanance to the side yard setback (25 feet required, 2 feet requested)
for the construction of a four -season porch at 2893 Brewers Lane in the TH, Townhouse
Distnct Tim Nolde and John Wooley, applicants
7 Case No SUP/01-33 A special use permit for Tom Thumb Food Market to add on to the
existing gas pumpcanopy and add another pump island at 2601 West Orleans Street in the
BP-C, Business Park Commercial Distract Mike Eichel, Tom Thumb representative,
applicant
CITY HALL 216 NORTH FOURTH STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 55082 PHONE 651-430-8800
8 Case No V/01-34 A vanance to the Blufland/Shoreland front yard setback (30 feet
required, 24 feet requested) for the construction of a 20' x 24' deck and stairs on slopes of
over 12 percent at 2310 Boom Road in the RA, Single Family Residential District and the
Bluffland Shoreland District Suzanne Dressler, applicant
9 Case No SUP/01-35 A special use permit for a parking lot sign at the Linden health care
center location between 303 and 321 North Fourth Street in the RB, Two Family Residential
District Dana Johnson and Bill Seiberlich, representing Linden Health Care Center,
applicants
Other Items
-Consideration of TH 36 Interregional Management Plan (resolution)
-Comprehensive Plan Review
-Discussion of possible amendment to the Fence Ordinance
•
•
•
•
•
City of Stillwater
Plannmg Commission
June 11, 2001
Present Russ Hultman, chairperson, Glenna Bealka, Robert Gag, Dave Middleton, Paul
Teske, Darwin Wald and Terry Zoller
Others Community Development Director Steve Russell
Absent Karl Ranum
Mr Hultman called the meeting to order at 7 p m
Approval of minutes Mr Wald, seconded by Mrs Bealka, moved approval of the minutes of
May14, 2001, as presented, motion passed 6-0, with Mr Middleton abstaining
Case No V/DR/01-21 This case was withdrawn
Case No V/DR/01-22 A vanance to the sign ordinance for the number of signs permitted and a
vanance to the front yard setback (15 feet required, 0 requested) at 220 E Mulberry in the CBD,
Central Business Distnct Tony Lodge and Emmett Carolan, St Croix Lighting, applicants
Mr Lodge was present for the discussion He explained his request for two signs, noting that the
HPC had no problem with the requested free-standing sign, if the building signage did not
include the business name He noted there are two tenants in the building, only one of whom use
signage
Mr Russell noted that the applicants have two street frontages which allows two signs, however,
it is not practical to put the second sign on the Second Street frontage He asked Mr Lodge
whether a sign centered on the front of the building would work for both tenants Mr Lodge said
he would like St Croix Lighting on both the free-standing sign and the building sign
Mr Zoller, seconded by Mr Wald, moved to approve the requested free-standing sign and one
sign on the front of the building, motion passed unanimously
Case No SUP/DR/01-23 A special use for the addition of six rental units in the Joseph Wolff
complex at 402 S Main St in the CBD, Central Business Distnct Steve Bremer, applicant
Mr Bremer was present and briefly reviewed his plans for the complex The main floor will
include a restaurant and three retail spaces Parking for the proposed six new apartment units will
be provided in the back of the complex, all apartments will be accessible from the parking
lot/deck area
Mr Zoller asked if there would be any HVAC units on the roof Mr Bremer said there might be
some, noting there are already some existmg units However, he stated he prefers to have the
•
•
•
City of Stillwater
Planning Commission
June 11, 2001
equipment inside of the apartment units and if there are any roof umts, they won't be very large
and won't be visible
Mr Wald asked if there was sufficient parking for the new living spaces Mr Russell noted that
while city ordinance requires two parkmg spaces per condominium unit, only one space is
required for one bedroom rental units
Mr Gag, seconded by Mr Wald, moved approval as conditioned, motion passed unanimously
Case No V/01-24 A vanance to the side yard setback (10 feet required, 9 feet requested) for
construction of a second story to an existing residence at 113 Bnck St S in the RA, Single
Family Residential Distnct John and Jessica Pack, applicants
Mr Pack was present He explained the request is to expand the existing one and one-half story
house to two full floors Mr Zoller asked is the garage would remain at its existing location, Mr
Pack responded in the affirmative The applicant also stated he would like to use lap siding and
shakes rather than stucco, which is on the existing structure
Mr Zoller moved approval as conditioned, eliminating the condition regarding color and
matenals matching the existing residence to allow for the use of lap siding and shakes Mrs
Bealka seconded the motion, motion passed unanimously
Case No V/01-25 A vanance to the front yard setback (30 feet required, 13 feet requested) for
construction of a deck at 424 S Seeley St in the RA, Single Family Residential Distnct Justin
and Traci O'Bnen, applicants
Traci O'Bnen was present She explained the requested deck would be located at the southwest
corner of the house and would be no closer to the property line than the existing structure
Mr Zoller, seconded by Mr Teske, moved approval as conditioned Motion passed 6-0, with Mr
Middleton abstaining
Case No SUP/DR/01-26 A special use permit for construction of a building housing 29-32
condominiums at 501 N Main St in the CBD, Central Business Distnct and the Flood Plain Jeff
Wallis, applicant
Mr Wallis was present, along with a representative of the applicant's engineenng firm who
explained plans for meeting the Flood Plain requirements The intent is to make the back wall of
the structure thicker and essentially use that wall as part of the levy, Mr Zoller noted the Dock
Cafe does that A survey is being completed, and there may be a need for stairs/patio for access
to the commercial spaces on the Main Street elevation The applicant has agreed to provide
native plant matenal in the open space at the rear of the building and accommodate a trail
•
•
•
City of Stillwater
Planning Commission
June 11, 2001
concept There also has been discussion of roof -top storage to control runoff rates The hope is to
have more definitive specs and plans by July
Mr Wallis stated plans have been presented to the Heritage Preservation Commission, and he
has no problems with the 21 conditions of approval Mr Hultman asked about the proposed
shoebox style lighting and asked if the applicant might consider some more histoncally
appropriate style, Mr Wallis noted they will be returning to the HPC regarding light fixture
styles, and he stated they are trying to use a lot of histoncally appropnate materials
Mr Wallis briefly reviewed the retail space use, and noted that the HPC has recommended that
the Main Street elevation be made more pedestnan friendly, the applicant will be working with
the HPC on that concept
Mr Middleton asked how the proposal fits into the Riverway regulations Mr Russell noted
Riverway regulations do not apply to the plan, only the Flood Plain and Central Business District
regulations are applicable
Ron Anderson, 216 W Orleans St , commented on the proposed underground parking and
suggested that the applicant might need some infrastructure to keep hydrostatic pressure at a
minimum
Bobbi Brohard, 919 S Fourth St , asked about the length of the building The building will be
240' across the front elevation
Linda Amrein, 307 E Laurel, asked about the cost of the units and spoke about affordable
housing needs Mr Wallis noted that is an issue and the applicant is looking at granting sources
Ms Amrein also asked about the height, Mr Wallis explained the building needs to be at the
maximum allowable height, 50', to make the project work
Mr Wald moved to give concept approval as conditioned, with the applicant to work with staff
in refining design plans Mrs Bealka seconded the motion, motion passed unanimously
Case No CPA/01-01 A Comprehensive Plan amendment changing land use designation of 15
acres of land south of Boutwell Road and west of Boutwell Cemetery from Single Family to
Public Facility City of Stillwater, applicant
Mr Russell stated the site has been purchased for a public works facility The zoning distract sets
the performance standards, such as noise levels, landscaping and other requirements Ron
Anderson, 216 W Orleans St , asked who would pay for the road improvements Mr Russell
noted the street has been annexed to the city and is a potential State Aid Street, also he said
improvements are slated in conjunction with the Settler's Glen development Mr Russell said he
was not sure of the exact formula regardmg the cost shanng of the street improvements, noting
•
•
City of Stillwater
Planning Commission
June 11, 2001
that a public works facility would generate less traffic than a 75-unit townhouse development
that could be located at the site if not rezoned
Mr Zoller, seconded by Mrs Bealka, moved approval by resolution Roll call vote was taken,
motion passed unammously
Case ZAT/01-01 Zomng Test Amendment establishing a new Public Facility Zomng Distnct
City of Stillwater, applicant
Case ZAM/01-02 A Zomng Map Amendment designating 15 acres of land south of Boutwell
Road and west of Boutwell Cemetery Public Facility City of Stillwater, applicant
Mr Zoller, seconded by Mrs Bealka, moved to recommend City Council approval of ZAT/01-
01 and ZAM/01-02 Motion passed unammously
Case PUD/01-22 A Planned Unit Development approval for development of portions of a 15-
acre site into a 40,000 square foot public works facility with outdoor storage City of Stillwater,
applicant
City Engineer Klayton Eckles introduced the presentation by noting that the City has been
looking for a site for a public works facility since 1994 The architectural firm working on the
plans and specifications for the facility has received input from neighbors The site will also
include some park space, and the building design includes space for neighborhood meetings
Wayne Branum of SALA Architects reviewed the site/building plans which reflect the rural
character of the neighborhood
Mr Gag, seconded by Mr Wald, moved approval as conditioned, motion passed unanimously
Public Heanng on Minnesota Department of Transportation TH 36 Comdor Management Plan
Present for the discussion were Doug Fisher, deputy director of the Washington County
Transportation Department, Scott McBnde, consultant with SEH, and Linda Heath of MnDOT
Mr McBnde reviewed the plan vision and implementation process The vision includes a goal of
an average speed of 55 mph through the comdor He stated there are two preliminary plans for
the Stillwater area Plan A, eliminating the Oakgreen/Greeley access, Plan B, leaving the 3
existing traffic signals should a new bndge not be constructed
Ms Heath reviewed the shared strategies, asking Stillwater to participate in the comdor
management team, asking that the management plan be incorporated into the City's
Comprehensive Plan and asking that the City adopt a resolution recognizing the significance of
the interregional highway comdor
•
•
City of Stillwater
Planning Commission
June 11, 2001
Mr Zoller noted the biggest concern of the residents in the audience was eliminating the Greeley
Street access Mr Fisher noted the plan is not cast m stone, additional studies will help determine
the best alignment
Richard Kitty, 311 S Fourth St , askedwhy the City was being asked to approve such a nebulous
plan Mr Fisher responded that when the plan gets down to individual projects, that will open up
a whole new approval process
Bill Bengsten, 719 S Fourth St , provided a petition of some 76 signatures opposed to closing of
the Greeley Street access and supporting the original MnDOT plan of closing the Osgood access,
leaving Greeley open
Jeanne Anderson, 1104 S Fourth Street, raised concerns, as she did in the letter that was part of
the record, regarding safety issues, the histonc character of the Third/Fourth streets
neighborhood, the fact the MnDOT plan isn't in compliance with the transportation goals of the
City's Comprehensive Plan
Ron Anderson, 216 W Orleans St , said Greeley Street should never be closed because it
provides needed access to Lakeview Hospital
Mike Anderson, 1312 S Fourth St , said he was a member of the committee that worked on the
City's Comprehensive Plan He said it would not be appropnate to endorse the comdor
management plan until it addresses the key issue of what streets will get more traffic as a result
of implementation
Jim Hamlen, 1206 S Third St , suggested that perhaps the vision of the plan, the 55 mph goal, is
flawed And he said the City should not approve the management plan Concept until solutions are
more visible
David Reimer, 1202 S Third St , suggested it would still be important for the City to be part of
the management team
Also speaking against approval of the plan were Don Nolde, Third Street, and Dawn Rogness
Commission members were in consensus that more details need to be available, and that the City
ought to be in the ongoing planning process Members were in consensus that the Greeley Street
access should not be closed Mr Zoller suggested that another issue for the City is that of plans
for Manning Avenue
Mr Russell suggested that there are some points the City could address in a resolution requested
by MnDOT, points such as that a comdor management plan is needed and that the City needs to
be part of the plan study It was agreed that Mr Russell should bnng a draft resolution back to
s
•
City of Stillwater
Planning Commission
June 11, 2001
the Commission at the July meeting Mr Middleton, seconded by Mr Teske, moved to table the
issue until a draft resolution is available, motion passed unammously
Other business
Church use of 1151 Parkwood Lane — Mr Russell said Young Life is proposing purchase of a
single-family residence at 1151 Parkwood Lane for use as meeting and office space, a use that is
similar to the residence's current use by Bethany Covenant Church Vern Hill, Young Life
director, was present
Mr Russell noted the church property and the 1151 Parkwood Lane residence currently are
zoned Town House Residential where church use is not a permitted use Mr Russell
recommended that the two parcels be rezoned to Single Family, where such use is permitted
Mr Middleton, seconded by Mr Gag, moved to recommend that the property be rezoned RA,
motion passed unanimously
Mr Wald, seconded by Mr Teske, moved to adjourn at 10 20 p m All in favor
Respectfully submitted,
Sharon Baker
Recording Secretary
• Memo
To Planning Commission
From Steve Russell, Community Development Director
Date July 5, 2001
Subject Continuance of Case SUP/DR/01-26
The applicant called and indicated they do not have the necessary engineering data available for
final review but that it should be available for the August Planning Commission meeting
Recommendation Continue Case SUP/DR/01-26 to the regular Planning Commission meeting
of August 6, 2001
•
•
. Memo
•
•
To Planning Commission
From Steve Russell, Community Development Director
Date July 3, 2001
Subject Zoning Map Amendment Rezoning 5 3 acres of land from Agricultural
Preservation, AP,and Townhouse Residential, TH, to Single Family
Residential RA Case No ZAM/01-03
This item was reviewed by the Planning Commission at your June 11, 2001 meetmg and
rezoning intiated The 5 3 two -parcel site is located at the southwest corner of CR 5 and
Wildpines Lane The site was annexed in 1996 as a part of Phase I City expansion A church
and single family residence used as a church classroom and office is located on the two lots
A potential purchaser of the residence, Young Life, is interested in using the structure for a
similar office, meetmg rooms church related use The Townhouse Residential District, TH, does
not allow churches or church related uses The Single Family Residential District, RA, does
allow churches with a special use permit
The Joint Board reviewed the request at their June 21, 2001 meeting and approved the rezoning
No change of use would occur with the rezoning, but the existing use would be allowed with a
special use permit Any expansion of use (addition), would required a public heanng and special
use permit
Recommendation Approval
Attachment ZAM/01-03 map, City Planning Commission Staff Report of June 11, 2001
•
•
•
Memorandum
To Planning Commission
From Steve Russell, Community Development Director
Date 6-7-01
Subject Review of Existing and New Use of Residence at 1151 Parkwood Lane
Discussion
The City has received a request for use determination of an existing building located at 1151
Parkwood Lane Currently the structure is owned and used by Bethany Evangelical Covenant
Church Youth and administration activities take place m this converted residence according to the
attached letter
The request is made by Young Life, a Chnstian Youth Association, to make sure their proposed use
of the building is consistent with the current use and zoning regulations before purchase From the
description contained in the letter, the existing church use and proposed Young Life use are similar
In addition to use of the existing residence, Young Life's plans show a 15' x 15' addition to the
existing building Some parking is shown on site although Youth events use of the Church parking
lot is indicated for Youth events
Planning Status — This site was annexed by the City from the township in 1996 The site is currently
zoned townhome residential The auxiliary church use is not a permanent use into TH District It's
status is "legal non -conforming "
Planning Commission could consider rezoning the property and church from Townhouse and to
Single Family Residential, RA In that district churches are allowed with a use permit This would
allow review and possibly require connection to City services with the expansion of use
Recommendation
Determination or proposal future use as descnbed in Young Life letter of 5-25-01 and decision on
rezoning to Single Family Residential
Attachments
Young Life Letter and Master Plan 5-25-01
WILDPINES LANE
Location Map
0" Inw Pmeall3 PER ooe Iwm.
DRAINAGE
AND UTILITY
EASORENT
OUTLOT F
4x/in/a r 03
Vicinity Map
Scale in Feet
Theery.rg nryu. ew,m.>on
1... wro ,ra.aa a land ..era as Tq
x,m avow MI. wal1 Ca..r lle
n. &.r9 mask, es u.d trWorn.
p.n.s wry w.a.M.aCrM
lamsa-b waY�a.a..
A.... 1. a m3uri�Oma
Poets et.a renDro . Mg31 3001
•
•
•
Case No
Date Filed
Fee Paid
Receipt No
PLANNING ADMINISTRATION FORM
ACTION REQUESTED Fees
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
CITY OF STILLWATER
216 NORTH FOURTH STREET
STILLWATER, MN 55082
Special/Conditional Use Permit
Variance
Resubdivision
Subdivision*
$50/20C
$70/20C
$100
$100+50/Io
Comprehensive Plan Amendment* $500
Zoning Amendment* $300
Planning Unit Development * $500
Certificate of Compliance $70
Design Review $25
*An escrow fee is also required to the costs of attorney and engineering fees (see attached)
The applicant is responsible for the completeness and accuracy of all forms and supporting
material submitted in connection with any application All supporting material (0 e , photos,
sketches, etc) submitted with application becomes the property of the City of Stillwater
A site plan is required with applications
PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION
Address of Project 11 5 I PA V-1. t cr o LA/
Assessor's Parcel No
Zoning District -I++ Description of Project Yo �T�i�-E Bu i L j,) I G ode)
"I hereby state the foregoing statements and all data, information and evidence submiffed
herewith in all respects, to file best of my knowledge and bel,ef, true and correct 1 further
certify 1 will comply with file permit if it is granted and used "
M9osect \' n
Property Owner /0 3 Ll r'— Representative
OS �0 0 p
Mailing Address b3 s I-�U E_ fu Mailing Address
City - State - Zip 5! l LL fA e -i we ru City - State - Zip
Telephone No CQSI (k30 —1 S 13 Telephone No
Signature M--,
Signature
SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Lot Size (dimensions) 173 x Z J D
Land Area ,8 Acv`e-
Height of Buildings Stories Feet
Principal I
Accessory
Total Building floor area
Existing 3 t aoo
Proposed 3, 't
i i-Fics&rt- — i, S73o-
gyrwr — 1 go• e
3 square feet
square feet
square feet
Paved Impervious Area
No of off-street parking
square feet
spaces 5
— . f '''''' C.
STIL.WATER MARAETPIAC
LONO IAU ESTATES
If SECONDADDMON
Location Map
STILLWATE,
RISW R2IW R2oW
•
May 25, 2001
\tungUfe
Steve Russell and Planning Commission
City of Stillwater
Stillwater, Minnesota 55082
Steve,
//r/ /24-724,,,,,(
Vern Hill
Area Director
Adam Timberlake
Realife/WyldLife Ministry
Tera Ross
Student Staff
Darla Goble
Administrative Assistant
This letter is to request a usage determination and is possibly an application for
special/conditional use permit Please address these items at the June 111 meeting
Young Life, a not for profit youth -serving religious organization which has been serving
youth in Stillwater for more than 35 years, is considenng the purchase of a building at
1151 Parkwood Lane The purchase would be contingent on approval of usage by the
planning and zomng commission This request is to determine, should Young Life
purchase the building, that the building would 1) fall under the same conditions of its
current use 2) Please determine also if Young Life could make renovations and an
addition to the building to better serve youth in our community A simple master plan
and elevations of improvements are attached
Currently the building is used for youth activities by the owner, Bethany Evangelical
Covenant Church, and by Teens For Christ, a not for profit youth group The building is
used for youth meetings on Sunday, Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, and occasional week
ends Also the building is used for limited administrative purposes Often youth park on
Parkwood Lane
Should Young Life purchase the property, the building would be used for the same
purposes, administration and program The building would house the administrative
offices of Young Life and would be used for youth programs Monday — Thursday
evenings Under a purchase agreement with the current owner, Bethany Evangelical
Covalent Church, students attending the Young Life programs would be directed to park
in the adjacent church parkmg lot Usage would change only in the amount of
administrative office space that would be developed within the building Numbers of
youth served by the building would be increased
Impact on the neighborhood would be minimized The agreement with the church for use
of their parking lot would reduce the amount of traffic on Parkwood Lane As indicated
by the attached elevations, the building would maintain a residential character if
projected improvements are made
This plan has been shared with four of the adjacent neighbors on Parkwood Lane All
have expressed support of Young Life's programs and mtention to purchase the property
Young Life St Croix Valley
6381 Osgood Avenue North
Stillwater MN 55082
Phone/Fax (651) 430 1873
E mail ylscvmn@aol coin
•
•
•
All would welcome students using the church parking lot instead of Parkwood Lane for
parking during youth events
Please contact me if you need any further information before the June 11th meeting I
will attend the meeting to answer any questions concerning this request
Thank you for your attention to this matter
Sincerely,
Vern Hill
Area Director
Attached
Site / Master plan and projected evelvations
•
• •
?,eo P i: /M4-5`fEg— PLy4``1 6e- I(S( 1)141-2KtvovD L.lJ
1
MU 4 LUn
IL 4, .Bait is
1M4w
Iitalutladar
NEW
itdfv r
-(' IC-�It't.D
Taxzo , ( "..*----`,
1; ; • WELL
1
c.4wec 4
'mac-'
// /
1,
•
•
•
PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW FORM
CASE NO V/01-28
Planning Commission Date July 9, 2001
Project Location 2369 Croixwood Blvd
Comprehensive Plan Distnct Single Family Residential
Zoning Distnct RA
Applicants Name Glona and Michael Bolduc
Type of Application Vanance
Project Description A variance to the front yard setback (30 feet required, 26 feet
requested) for the construction of an entryway
Discussion
The applicants are requesting a vanance to construct an 8'6" x 8'entryway on the front of
their house The attached letter states that the preliminary drawing they are using is
borrowed from a similar modification made at 2314 Edgewood Court There house
would be a mirror image design attached, except they would not have a window in front
and they would use bnck facing to match the existing decor of the main structure There
is a prevailing setback with the houses to the east and west, constructing an addition
make the house non conforming to the immediate neighborhood
Conditions of Approval
1 The addition shall be similar in style, color and matenals as the main structure
2 Drainage from the roof shall remain on site
Recommendation
Denial
Findings
1 That a hardship peculiar to the property, not created by any act of the owner,
exists In this context, personnel financial difficulties, Toss of prospective profits
and neighboring violations are not hardships justifying a vanance
2 That a variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of
substantial property rights possessed by other properties in the same district and
in the same vicinity, and that a variance, if granted, would not constitute a special
privilege of the recipient not enjoyed by his neighbors
I • l 1.-••••GY
4;;
r
et WV.)
UJ Age,
LOT
S-T�U I x zo
NEW PsDDrn
Hoorn-
o WELL
6ris RAN in_-_-sof
la)
WIAJ /gymoNsgtirli
IFio 9c e--"1 SITE/ MIASMA__
A__
PZ- N y4 Npi-
115I p44142-1C JC h LA)
_I
•
•
•
3 That the authonzing of the variance will not be of substantial detriment to
adjacent property and not materially impair the purpose and intent of this title or
the public interest nor adversely affect the Comprehensive Plan
Attachments
Application Form/Letter/Site Plan/Elevation Drawing/Petition
•
•
•
Case No
Date Filed
Fee Paid
Receipt No
PLANNING ADMINISTRATION FORM
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
CITY OF STILLWATER
216 NORTH FOURTH STREET
STILLWATER, MN 55082
ACTION REQUESTED
Vhi-ezy
Fees
Special/Conditional Use Permit $50/20
X Variance $70/20
Resubd'vision $100
_Subdivision* $100+50/Ic
_Comprehensive Plan Amendment* $500
_Zoning Amendment* $300
_Planning Unit Development * $500
Certificate of Compliance $70
_Design Review $25
*An escrow fee is also required to the costs of attorney and eng►neenng fees (see attached)
The applicant is responsible for the completeness and accuracy of all forms and supporting
material submitted in connection with any application All supporting material (i e, photos,
sketches, etc) submitted with application becomes the property of the City of Stillwater
A site plan is required with applications
PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION
Address of Project 230 CAV „,Ah, Assessor's Parcel No
(GEO Code)
Zoning District 'R f\ Description of Project and
"I hereby state the foregoing statements and all data, information and evidence submiffed
herewith in all respects, to file best of my knowledge and belief, true and correct I further
certify 1 will comply with file permit if it is granted and used "
Property Owner ! V l (eilla, 1Ai
Mailing Address 2.3 G 9 C (M443nc.a I&
City - State - Zip 5 1(A/01-c,,. ( 'WV 6S''0'i
Telephone No 6 5-(-- S)_ 4,7 0
Signature }/14 41
Lot Size (dimensions)
Land Area
Height of Buildings Stories Feet
Principal
Accessory
Representative
Mailing Address
City - State - Zip
Telephone No
Signature
SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION
x
Total Building floor area square feE
Existing square feet
Proposed square feet
Paved Impervious Area square feet
No of off-street parking spaces
0 168
Scale in Feet
•
•
Stillwater Planning Commission
216 N 4t St
Stillwater, MN 55082
Attention, please,
June 13, 2001
This is to apply for a variance on an entryway modification to our residence at 2369
Croixwood Blvd m Stillwater, Minnesota We are asking to extend the entryway 8 feet
closer to the street side of the house to allow for a more practical entry and a more
aesthetically pleasmg adjustment to our home
We have met with Sue at the Stillwater Planning Department to explain the project and
follow the proper protocol We would hke to have this processed at the July 9, 2001
meeting of the Planning Commission m order to proceed with the modification this
August before school starts We have an agreement with a licensed local contractor who
will handle the permits and the modification We have also met with the adjacent
neighbors and described the project to them. They have signed the attached sheet that
they are m full agreement with the modification
The modification is shown m the attached prehnunary drawing We have a split entry
home that has a very small entry foyer (4' x 6') with two doors opening into the foyer
We want to expand the entryway with the attractive addition of an 8'-6" wide by 8' deep
foyer that would greatly improve the entry logistics and nicely enhance the appearance of
our home The preliminary drawmg we are using is borrowed from a similar modification
made at 2314 Edgewood Court in our neighborhood Our house is the mirror image
design of the house shown, and our modification would be similar except we will not
have a bay window in front and we will use a brick facmg to match the decor of our
extenor The 8 foot extension towards Croixwood Blvd would change the distance to the
property lme from 34' presently to 26', and the distance to the curb from 51' to 43'
In addition to the precedent set for this modification at 2614 Edgewood Court, there are
other similar modifications to entryways on this style of home at 2324 Oakndge Rd and
100 Northland Ave which are also in our neighborhood
We would smcerely appreciate your consideration and approval of this modification
Please contact us if there are any questions Thank you in advance for your assistance
CyclAA.
Michael and Glo'i'a Bolduc
2369 Croixwood Blvd
Stillwater, MN 55082 (651-351-1670)
1_
•
Ti
f f i
14 4 1
1 1, 1 _ .,
a
I '
A 4
•
4
, ~ .a
ti
{
4
19 1 1," 'r l
11i''Ii�il'11 Y]iI I tI
rj5 r11� 1I t1 JibI11 1
mI11 l,'w11 1111
LL
11 `I'41;a1j-`,;,k11f,1,
f E ' ,I
,r i1,v el ri
rI `t, , p t4'°,111
K !(, :hi
Ll'jJ7�`j 'A f
F 1 47 1' a1P
let1 Frl lii$�'' (r t 1
311'I4i'T' ' .,
If jg'F (li 1 L
xt "1:i ` 4A IGI , 1''
}T 1'=111'a f
I I;411 ri, � 1 I
I t'4Ej�r+!i,
II' 1, , 111 f
54,311 1f
IR r1 i, 1 , ,
1111tiflr 1!I.
' iilI''/J
I' C�, � t t tl
II, Jl1i , 1 Ti.
rii�S�331,lI,I�! r I
In 1st)
1
ill
1
�'
1i
M
1
J
4.
L
ti
•
•
1
• i Y
} t 1
X -T,
1 -4--�_
FXtr.Y! rJLn /OVFctZer� Gu+\JC-
A/f ° EtJU.yC* .D Tv f'UAKC�
tArZ&t e->`•ti1Zi
35'
S71
/a
J
1- -
E h H ,fy tf l
1 po`00- I
r f�
��. 4 :) 4 jL ., h a
ca 1 .. y 7-kr ti ,t1 t 3� v
rf yr .t �
d i-r r a } y' r "r y0,1 E" i F N
f
r �
d
t•
r31.
J
;,
'Ca
T
5S
J 3 .'
{
7:ornte way
i
/lowe (zcaix42')
(ll007' OYerhatt3 Plot 5hoW j
si !�
stoop L _ J ......fit
ropoecitil
entry it)
Property
J1,e
4111111
Croix cicj all cs, 61-1 w Ide)
,P•0..,.R2
Mrcnaif J Folciue,
2 3 9 C �
r'OtXW
Pro posed Entry 1 o
h, hnoaI'tr.ai�w
+ •dune?, Z,6 t tool
•
•
•
•
Regarding the proposed entryway addition to 2369 Croixwood Blvd
To whom it may concern
We, the undersigned neighbors to the house at 2369 Croixwood Blvd , have
seen the prelimmary drawing and discussed the concept with Mike Bolduc,
the owner of the residence The drawing is attached as item A
We understand that it will be an attractive addition of the entryway that will
fit m with the color and style of the house and will be about 8 feet, 6 mches
wide and about 8 feet deep It will extend the house 8 feet closer to
Croixwood Blvd than the present structure
We have no problem with this entryway addition and agree with the size and
design that has been shown and discussed
Signed,
Name, address and date,
to /()' /617
&W3 OnOly/4/th7-6 /6ACCP
966"t- CA-e-A/M-r- cabala/
a, ss Gct;,6touvr-d- 08.-A)d,
d
•
•
•
PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW FORM
CASE NO SUP/01-29
Planning Commission Date July 9, 2001
Project Location 711 South 1st Street
Comprehensive Plan District Two Family Residential
Zoning District RB
Applicants Name Jeff and Rita Ross
Type of Application Special Use Permit
Project Description Special Use Permit for the construction of and accessory
dwelling unit
Discussion
Background
According to the zoning ordinance, the approval process for an accessory
dwelling requires a Special Use Permit from the Planning and Design Review for
consistency with the primary unit in design, detailing and materials
The proposed 676 square foot building will be located in the general area where
the onginal one car garage is located now, but will be demolished before
construction begins on the new garage In the attached letter from the applicants
they are asking the Planning Commission for a Variance to the side yard
setback This will not be necessary since they are in the RB or Two -Family
Residential zoning distnct In this distnct the side yard setback is 10 feet or 10 %
of the lot width They can apply the latter of the two setback requirements and
will not need a Variance
Architecturally, the proposed garage will be compatible with the existing house
And, all the finishes such as the siding, roofing, tnm and colors will match the
existing house
Conditions of Approval
1 All exterior changes to the approved plan be review and approved by the
Heritage Preservation Commission
Recommendation
Approval as conditioned
Findings
J
The proposed use will not be injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise
detnmental to the public welfare and will be in harmony with the general purpose
of the zoning ordinance
Attachments
Application Form/Letter/Site Plan/Elevation Drawing/
HPC Action 9/6/00 Design approval with condition of approval that color of
siding be reviewed and approved by staff +5-0
•
•
6 0
10
9
7
50
43 4
50
11
8
\8
6
50
8
S
2
16 ,12 STIL WATER,
,6
✓� 1
15
13
j1 m S SS
O�S9
55
sz V� °g•G43
oA. / .-1BK ° 6.
eft a 1 ,1;cP Sj s-c f .410W
rt
.iPC
• d s' l o0i yR
to. I c. N
20 f T2 f 16
.P.,m6) P f
O mAe) 71.
15
3
>S 2 0 � �
f liy f A✓'f,4�,I Pl
�1 INS?'J
,
9 1 135
9 29
1N
,
35r
2 J 9
135
28
9 sh
3 R
33 R
to
f
R 27
cab 8
u
35
r 1u
26
9 m6)
5 g
103
135
9 25
e,
6
ON
35
I
35
9
7 g
124
� 35
35
23
1
135
I , 4
22
35
9 9
_ 1354i,)\fr
9
61
ofh f 435 ,35
15 ` 9
135
S t9
eb
t
asIr
12 J 9
32
g 18
73 V
135
_ 35
s
s'
135
16
135
14
1e6)
35
15
135
/9
CHURCHILL STREET
6 0 28
I —I g tote)
LLJ to
w� 1 27
$ m
1 135
Leal me,
J 135
Iq 25
35
IgP
I.J
24
135
23
tub)
Location Map
m0 )
135
2
135
3
135 91
u
4 I el
35
10;1 4
35
6 4
60
7 t
30
loft)
3s
1
foal
135
2
35
$
4
c r
4
135
2gg
mft,
3s
oil:,
35
4
153s
1 4
9
1\\ \
m61
toe
o
25
fz
g r
mft135
9
35
8 V
24
7
8
135
135
23
8
g
tulle)
135
1
35 _ 1o6i
9
1
9
REFERENCE
LINE
23
91a61
22
135
4e
21
3s 10
4
331131
114,11
4
t
135
135
11
s
20
.4.
9
135
35
g
19
teal )
12
R
35
R
,35
18
13
9
tuft,
135
Man
g
10
3s
9
17
_ 133
16
-
15
9
toll)
(oft)
g
110
25
135
6 0 g malo 128 f
1- I
W $ V 27 cob)
a f 26 11
t •
(0145)
25
I8 mal1,
135 _
I 24
35
23
9 10,
1 35
5 13 22
m 9 S m2.
- -- 35 a 35
1
130 15
roll l I$ x
u � __AI")
2 4 D
135 0 2 gib)
3 co
m35 / 4 i
3s
4 g
30
30
33
2
e
204
8
VAC 140 DS PG 2 33
�55
E HUDSON STRE
VAC 148 DEEDS PG 61
A 32 18 f
m6 //
1 n 77 Y
IKali
s
133
635
7
g
3430, r g w
3s
14
13
10
R_IW R32W RI9W
R_W R_IW 820W
Vicinity Map
0
f
Scale in Feet
159
th mewing nsks1 can*
ae M eft▪ s, oroawear...
mg.. so for en nersurays
5r..b 01..
P re. Id! 0101
• 4a.mud e..0..
eurnnt Ore.. . 10 2e0
Case No
Date Filed
Fee Paid
Receipt No
PLANNING ADMINISTRATION FORM
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
CITY OF STILLWATER
216 NORTH FOURTH STREET
STILLWATER, MN 55082
SuP oi
ACTION REQUESTED Fee;
Special/Conditional Use Permit $50/2[
Variance $70/2(
_Resubdivision $100
_Subdivision* $100+50/1
_Comprehensive Plan Amendment* $500
_Zoning Amendment* $300
_Planning Unit Development * $500
`Certificate of Compliance $70
`Design Review $25
*An escrow fee is also required to the costs of attorney and engineering fees (see attached)
The applicant is responsible for the completeness and accuracy of all forms and supporting
material submitted in connection with any application All supporting matena! (i e, photos,
sketches, etc) submitted with appl►cation becomes the property of the City of Stillwater
A site plan is required with applications
PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION
Address of Project 7/1�"-
Zoning District Aee
AVI
Assessor's Parcel No 3, 4030;s0 /I 001 S
(GEO Code)
Description of Project % //L q�6 ,d e
"1 hereby state the foregoing statements and all data, information and evidence subtn►ffed
herewith in all respects, to file best of my knowledge and belief, true and correct 1 further
certify I will comply with file permit if it is granted and used "
Property Owner JeFF0L %'J fo„ ✓ \ o Ss
Mailing Address 7// S I f St
City - State - Zip -<-7`,;//J✓',ut �.�-/ /774,. SSo 8'Z
Telephone No _657 -- 9.' %
Signature
Representative
Mailing Address
City - State - Zip
Telephone No
Signature
SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Lot Size (dimensions) g° x /35'
Land Area vv
Height of Buildings Stories
Principal Z
Accessory /
Feet
z e'
Total Building floor area square fe
Existing / I/D U square feet
Proposed 7G square feet
Paved Impervious Area ! vu square feet
No of off-street parking spaces 5�
1
•
•
•
August 19, 2000
City of Stillwater;
We, (Jeff and Rita Ross) are applymg for a vanance to the side yard set back for the
intention of building a new garage to replace our existing garage We understand that the
side yard set back is 10 feet from the property line We are asking for a variation to reduce
this to 8 feet. The reason we are asking for this is the topography of our yard, the position
of our current driveway, and existing mature trees The yard has a significant slope to the
south and to the east, if we keep to the 10 foot spacing we would need more fill, a larger
driveway and we would be forced to remove a mature oak tree We are planning to replace
our old garage with a one and one half story garage The upper floor will be used as a
home office/ family room and storage, it may be used as rental space some time in the
future (our lot size is 10,800 square feet) In asking for this vanance, we will maintain
15 5' distance between the new garage and the neighbor's house, an increase of 5' from
the existing garage We do not believe that the vanance will impact the neighborhood
Enclosed is a site plan showing the position of the existing garage, position of the proposed
garage, and the existing mature trees along with the position of our neighbor's and our
house If you have any questions, please feel free to phone us at 439-4252 (home) or 612-
623j7235 (Jef at work)
Yo
and Rita
711 South First Street
Stillwater, MN 55082
651-439-4252
•
•
ANCY SHINGLES
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
agfOlitamMiliiMIIZIMWIP
/
1
it FRONT ELEVATION
scALE0/21 an 1 9."4?
�4`
/
7/
/
/
/
/
7
•
•
•
GRAPHIC SCALE
20 ro m 40
IN PEW )
1 lash .c 20 ft
ti
64
SO —1
a/ojIrlLo a/i u/ FIFO w1W ineeuY Yaug vcama ns OWL L.0+61+00 £Iuuww 7Lfd, ecR. uuamo uutca MVP 111.1141.1.
CERTIFICATION
I hereby certify that this survey was prepared by me or der my direct supervision and that I am a Professional
Engineer and a Proveyor under the Laws of the State of Minnesota,
.E. & P S No 9235, President
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
Lots 26 and 27 Churchill Nelson and Slaughters Addition to Stillwater Washington County
Mmnnesota.
SET NAIL AND DISC N
rGSTONE RETAINING WALL
S8940'15"E
--135.25--
Tie water drainage
FOUND`+
5/6' IRON
r 30--
nev driveway
r i- ty
new garage 26 z26
Pc /!
FOUND 1/2' SOLID IRON
0.07 Fr SOUTH OF
-Nc 1PUtED POINT
13
I•
FOUND♦O $
—, IRON�D 18
i •, a.
717 s 1at st
39 $
N 89iO15 W
7 5
V1
FOUND 1/2" IRON
0 5 FT NORM AND
1 0 FT NEST OF
COMPUTED POINT
JOB NO 000527
•
•
•
PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW FORM
CASE NO V/01-30
Planning Commission Date July 9, 2001
Project Location 726 South 7th Street
Comprehensive Plan Distnct Two Family Residential
Zoning District RB
Applicants Name Danial and Maria Poliszuk
Type of Application Variance
Project Description A Variance to the side yard setback for the construction of
an attached garage
Discussion
The applicant is requesting a variance to the zoning requirement of setback
distance to another structure The proposed attached garage would replace an
existing detached single car garage that is scheduled to be demolished The
zoning ordinance states that for an attached garage on one side of a dwelling,
the garage setback from the side property line is five feet, provided that no
habitable floor area is closer than ten feet from the property line and provided
that the garage is a minimum of 15 feet from the nearest structure on the
adjacent lot The nearest structure on the property adjacent to the applicant
would be 9 feet away The lot has a number of mature trees and a 5 foot sharp
slope going through it These two circumstances make it difficult to build a two
car garage anywhere else A two car garage could be sited where the existing
garage is now The applicants state in their letter that constructing a garage
where the existing is now would result in to much concrete for a driveway
Installing a driveway would not exceed the maximum lot coverage by ordinance
which in this zoning distnct is 30 %
Conditions of Approval
Should the Commission approve the request, staff proposes the following
conditions of approval
1 The addition shall be similar in architecture, color and matenals as the
main structure
2 Drainage from the roof shall remain on site
Recommendation
Denial
Findings
•
•
•
1 That a hardship peculiar to the property, not created by any act of the owner,
exists In this context, personnel financial difficulties, Toss of prospective profits
and neighbonng violations are not hardships justifying a variance
2 That a variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of
substantial property rights possessed by other properties in the same district and
in the same vicinity, and that a vanance, if granted, would not constitute a special
privilege of the recipient not enjoyed by his neighbors
3 That the authorizing of the variance will not be of substantial detriment to
adjacent property and not materially impair the purpose and intent of this title or
the public interest nor adversely affect the Comprehensive Plan
Attachments
Application Form/Letter/Site Plan/Elevation Drawing
•
Case No
Date Filed
Fee Paid
Receipt No
PLANNING ADMINISTRATION FORM
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
CITY OF STILLWATER
216 NORTH FOURTH STREET
STILLWATER, MN 55082
ACTION REQUESTED
.Special/Conditional Use Permit
Variance
Resubdivision
.__Subdivision*
Fees
$50/20
$70/20
$100
$100+50/Ic
._Comprehensive Plan Amendment* $500
_Zoning Amendment*
Planning Unit Development *
_Certificate of Compliance
Design Review
$300
$500
$70
$25
*An escrow fee is also required to the costs of attorney and engineering fees (see attached)
The applicant is responsible for the completeness and accuracy of all forms and supporting
material submitted in connection with any application All supporting material (i e, photos,
sketches, etc) submitted with application becomes the property of the City of Stillwater
A site plan is required with appl,cations
PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION
6
�� .�� 0AP7, 023
Address of Project 72� Sf S, STD �c.w,4—, �2 Assessor's Parcel No
Zoning District g6 Description of Project A 4 c D U4 i2AG E (GEO Code
"I hereby state the foregoing statements and all data, information and evidence submitfed
herewith in all respects, to file best of my knowledge and belief, true and correct 1 further
certify 1 will comply with file permit if it is granted and used "
Property Owner DaN+ t 12 O'lane PD Lis 2 ox
Mailing Address 724, 7/4Cf S
City - Stated Zip 5t• 1-147(4, m' SsceL
Telephone o` 65f 5 - O',e
Signature
Representative
Mailing Address
City - State - Zip
Telephone No
Signature
SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Lot Size (dfmensions) I x /i13'
Land Area
Height of Buildings Stories
Principal
Accessory
Feet
Total Building floor area square fee
square feet
square feet
square feet
Existing / 6 5
Proposed / -7/('
Paved Impervious Area
No of off-street parking spaces.
Stillwater 20 June, 2001
City of Stillwater
Planning Commission Review Members
We hereby apply for a variance to build an attached garage on the north side of our
property located at 726 7th Street South m Stillwater
We need a variance because by building this garage we would be m violation of
Stillwater Ordinance 5b3 — Development regulations / Exceptions / Side yard Once our
proposed attached garage is built we will be at least 5 feet from the property line, but only
9 feet from the nearest structure on the adjacent lot
We feel that this is the most appropnate place on our property for this garage to be built
for the following reasons
(1) The house was designed and built with its entrances on the east side (the street side)
and on the north side
(2) Placing the garage on the north side of the property and in back, would take the only
sunny area of the yard, which is wanted for vegetable gardening and simple enjoyment of
the sun
(3) Placing the garage on the north side of the property and in back, would also cause a
good portion of the back yard to be paved for driveway
Sincerely
Daniel & Mana ' ohszuk
726 7th Street South
Stillwater, MN 550820-5719
(651)351-0318
•
if4//
6
5
40 5)
N
4
do )
3
100
2
do 3)
1
50
150
r
1
5
5
0
to
0
30 30
)
,) n
sow 50
2 1
imindso
50)
elot
50 50
603-R
aft
H
w
w
HOLCOMBE
FEE*t
4
20
LO
20
LO
LC)
40
76
f 6,1
31
8 ,438
714
f §091,5
143 5
143 7
72010
143 9
1D5
144
24
144 1
,loon) 11
tb.
Sid
81)2 -
10070)
60
23
2
1442
21
842
» fR
8018
1441
50
19
277)
144 2
f
0
0)
w
m
0
0
J
0
Location Map
WEST
CO
151
4p03)
f 24 -- 91
445
r
•1
•)
1443
IP
)
.o3051)
a13 91 q44
144
f 21 8
91 )
e
1446
1 122.7 10
f
144 7 ,
22., - - 92�004
60
w
w
7-
-
421
5 A 4A
415
3
091
f fl 5
140
719
140
5
71 t)
4)
72g0,w
241
11
72
80
814-f
9 >��
00 80 _' 150oat
140
&I:v.4)&1010
le
244,16f
rucn
140
w
w
r
4
140
CHUR 'I
L�1lLEST:
2,2
2
140
011
25
40 5)
9f 913
-23234, 91 Q° f--$
140
4,
�f91' 140140 0 7� �)
29?2 r
o �23 ��1 q
,.�
140
1.0 00) f
902
3140
-i9081-;
140
5 .0 07)
60
1_6 0
w
w
1-
W
En-
R_'OW RI9W
R_2W R_)W R_'OW
Vicinity Map
0
143
Scale in Feet
.20 no.
000
00026.01w�, .woo,
02000 Tr Ow, reaki 5
00000
0 - 09.
4�0001mA.009. .0
>olap nuct Jkon• 21 0
T
I I I
—r-- I —
_ 4_
7
a
-/4716JS�,
a-'
r— —
T
J
1
T
i
L
r--
•
!
I '
I
7
w
•
♦
♦
♦
♦
\
♦
♦
♦
/
♦
♦
♦
/
♦
•
--b
♦
♦
♦
\
/
♦
♦
♦
\
/
♦
•
♦
/
1
•
! —
— —I -I I— -'-- - I— ( f
1
i I _ I -- - ---I -�
-
1-1-
I__1
--!- -I--1--
I ► - i _ I - I -_ - _I 1 - , -- I_� -
--1 _-I - - i --_I-_I--II I !
► I 1 I
--- — —t — 1 -- — — — 1
__1_ _' i _ I- _!_ 1 I _I
I I --1_ I I_ t
--- -- — — _ — I — -- — --- ---
IIIIII 11 I
t
I I I - i 1 I ! I i I
1 ( �- I =--�_--- - -- -- - -- -I
Ir (
I- - -- '-- - - - '
I I -�
! _1_ ' I 1 I
� 1 —— 1 -- I , ^- I -- —
1 I Lr
t I I I 1 I 1
1
,- L
I I I I'_ lI`- i I I I_ 1__I__i 1 I I
__I- - -— - —1-�! i- -( t_ 1 ! I -I I II _'-
—
-
I —
L_
1
I
1 I I
7
-- I{ I i I I I
I— ( I I I,I
�— CI !— ! I I I I 1 t
► i ( _ !- } -i 1 1 ' I _
!----1--- I I I I
1
- -
—I1
!
-- I
I
-1--
1I_ _I
I I I
t
—,
1
I - 1
! 1 I
I _ _ _
I I ,
I
1 1 I
---{ -- 1 -
I
-- -, -- - I - - - I - - - - - - --- -
I ! I I I I 1 I ,__ , I
I i I -� I r I , 1
i I I , 1 I I 1 1 I ! ! 1 I I I
I
t I ! I I
I I I I , 1 1 I I ' 1
1
I
I
t
_ F
,
—
_r
I I
I
--
i
•
•
•
•
PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW FORM
CASE NO V/01-31
Planning Commission Date July 9, 2001
Project Location 2893 Brewers Lane
Comprehensive Plan District Attached Single Family
Zoning District TH
Applicants Name Tim Nolde and John Wooley
Type of Application Variance
Project Description A variance to fence setback for construction of a four -season
porch
Discussion The request is for a 2 32' variance to the side yard setback for
construction of a 12 x 14 foot four -season porch The structure is a new construction
structure in Long Lake Villas
The required setback is 25 feet in the Townhouse Residential District, TH The
proposed porch is to be setback 22 68'
A development landscape plan shows some screening from the single family residences
to the west Additional landscaping could be added to mitigate the variance request
The site is located in a PUD that allows modifications to standard setbacks
Recommendation Approval as conditioned
Conditions of Approval
1 Four additional 8 foot conifer trees shall be planted in the remaining setback to
buffer the structure from the single family Tots
Findings
1 That a hardship peculiar to the property, not created by any act of the owner, exists
In this context, personnel financial difficulties, loss of prospective profits and
neighboring violations are not hardships justifying a variance
2 That a variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial
property rights possessed by other properties in the same district and in the same
vicinity, and that a variance, if granted, would not constitute a special privilege of the
recipient not enjoyed by his neighbors
3 That the authorizing of the variance will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent
property and not materially impair the purpose and intent of this title or the public
interest nor adversely affect the Comprehensive Plan
Case No
Date Filed
Fee Paid
Receipt No
PLANNING ADMINISTRATION FORM
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
CITY OF STILLWATER
216 NORTH FOURTH STREET
STILLWATER, MN 55082
ACTION REQUESTED
Fees
Special/Conditional Use Permit $50/20
Variance $70/20
Resubdivision $100
._Subdivision* $700+50/Ic
_Comprehensive Plan Amendment* $500
`Zoning Amendment*
Planning Unit Development *
Certificate of Compliance
._Design Review
$300
$500
$70
$25
*An escrow fee is also required to the costs of attorney and eng►neerng fees (see attached)
The applicant is responsible for the completeness and accuracy of all forms and supporting
material submitted in connection with any appl►cat►on All supporting material (0 e , photos,
sketches, etc) submitted with appl►cat►on becomes the property of the City of Stillwater
A site plan is required with apphcat►ons
Address of Project 01 v f..3
Zoning District
PROPERTY IDEb , IFICATION
Description of Project
t 7>ia
-
dieell
or's Parcel No
de, 1 j , Gits, 51t.
"I hereby state the foregoing statements and all data, information and evidence subm►ffed
herewith in all respects, to file best of my knowledge and belief, true and correct I further
certify 1 will comply with file permit if it is, • _ anted and used "
Property Owner
Mailing Address
City - State - Zip
Telephone
Signature
SI
a
Mailing Address
City - State - Zip
Telephone No
Signature
E AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Lot Size (dimensions) x
Land Area
Height of Buildings Stories Feet
Principal
Accessory
Total Building floor area square feE
Existing square feet
Proposed square feet
Paved Impervious Area square feet
No of off-street parking spaces
01/02/1991 15 21 7153865879
s
STEVENS ENGINEERS
PAGE 02
SF
I/
//
4
SEED ALL DISTURBED AREAS NOT
SHOWN SOD WITH MNDOT 5!, IX
SEED AREAS BELO
ON 900
WITH PRAIRIE PESTORATION WETLAND
7
DASHED LINE INDICATES L MITSI
OF 1RRIOPTION AND SOD
(---.1Ir27 yam.
•
i"c,, l �� 92oo/
SC,sa► \ / 712_,e7a/v(
C (SIr 1°4'1)1-e-7-
0-ear Su sa, ;
m7Li m b 0 oc„.lc.-e
40 1.- Alin! ns
/► L
eu ✓' log'oir'S a-/
-e�74'is /CV) /9 z so £ - 0161X
i taa lin 0 r -r__
S)40-‘,1-5 )
fir,, -%u/oJ f1a7/leis 2;76-
GUs af�
��/— yro S/ov
e,
T
•
PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW FORM
CASE NO SUP/01-33
Planning Commission Date July 9, 2001
Project Location 2601 West Orleans Street
Comprehensive Plan District Business Park Commercial
Zoning District BP-C
Applicants Name Pump & Meter Service
Type of Application Special Use Permit
Project Description A Special Use Permit for Tom Thumb Food Market t add on to the
existing gas pump canopy and add another pump island
Discussion
The request is increase the use of a previously issued special use permit The proposal is
to add 25 feet to the existing canopy, and add another gas pump On the attached site
plan, the dashed line shows the proposed area east of the existing pump and canopy If
the pump and canopy were constructed as proposed, the existing eastern dnveway would
have to be redesigned to accommodate the design The attached site plan shows a dashed
line where the existing driveway is located, and a solid line where they are proposing to
relocate the southern curb cut This would increase the dnveway from about 30 feet wide
to approximately 60 feet wide The City Engineer said this would lead to a number of
safety issues One being too wide of a dnveway can lead to ingress and egress confusion
Another issue is cars backing out of the parking stalls in front of the Tom Thumb store,
especially the stalls on the east side, are backing into the area that other cars could be
entering the station It is the City Engineer that the developers find a safer solution by
constructing the pump/canopy elsewhere on the site
Recommendation
Denial
Conditions of Approval
Should the Commission approve the request, staff recommends the following conditions
of approval
1 No additional pumps or canopy shall be permitted
2 All changes to the approved plan be reviewed and approved by the Community
Development Director
Findings
•
i
•
•
•
The proposed use will not be injunous to the neighborhood or otherwise detnmental to
the public welfare and will be in harmony with the general purpose of the zoning
ordinance
Attachments
Application Form/Site Plan
•
•
•
06/20/07 10 15 PUM° AND METER + 6514308310
t_, C1II
R
1 i t 1 .3 Ala l CI r Lir 31 11 L.1J1..I r'
NO 862 902
r -
Case No
Date Filed
Fbe Paid
Receipt No _
PLANNING ADMINISTRATION FORM
ACTION REQUESTED Fees
CI)iV1MUNI1Y DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Y OF Si IL LWATER
2 II NORTH FOURTH STREET
b i It LWATER, MN 55082
_Zoning Amendment'
__Zoning
Unit Development
_Cer011cate of Compliance
.Design Review
j Special/COndltionel Use Parma
Vanance
__„ Resubdivrslon
_Subdivision
$5012'
$70i2'.
$100
ilrlt 501:
Comprehensive Pien end riw it' $500
$500
$70
$25
*An escrow fee Is also required to the costs of attorney and engineering fees (see attached)
7 he applicant is (e4 onslble for the completeness and accuracy of all forms find suphot,
s(
r r �terl�ili submitted In connection with any application All supporting material
'(l e, F
s ketches, etc) submitted with application becomes the property of the City o Si�JJ. ater
1t site plan Is regulrcd with applications
PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION
Addres.. of Pro)ecl a (, O t 14.)7 v R. Leh) 6 Assessor's Parcel No 3a o3Q. o o_ 000a.
(GEO Cods'
,'cming Di stric� Q[__v __ Description of ProJeck AGO eN 'To , i~Tr'� �...-!✓'p-�°-�'''
/4'nv0 A -DO __oftP CSL 0
1 hereby state the foregoing statements and all data, Information and evidence submitted
,herewith in ail respects, to file best of my knowledge and belief, true end correct 1 further
citify l will comply with file permit if It Is granted and used,"
Representative!"KE Er =_ -----
Mailing Address I t 3e 3_ t ia"• 8`''ta
City . State - Zip Ile f K, #r51 rx#
Telephone CNo 32) ) f3 3 ^/ ',- - --
slgnature+�+ - - -
'ropelty Owner2Zt7711"44 FP ea » .tcri"5
i ieliing Address (ID E 7t. S,-
c',tty 51at$-Zip ixsTip)6.4 mq SSa 33
relevhane No (Gs1) '(3 7 ' co .2_
'Signature .• , +"/ '
6"s 'rR
SITE AND PROJECT OESCR1P1 ION
Lot 317e (dimensions) _._ _ x
Land Are')
Height of Buildings Stones Feet
Principal _
,4ccessory
Total Building floor area_ square ft
Existing square feet
Proposed square test
Paved Impervious Area T -.�- soup. s 'cat
No of oft -street parking space 3__..- _ _
06/20/07 10 15
PUMP AND METER 4 6514308810
N0 862 P03
•
•
i
Tom Thumb #219 Pump& Meter Service Inc
260I West. Orleans Sb111wM er MN 55082 1303 Excelsior Blvd Ho k ns MN 55343
Phone (62} 933-4800
Pepe 1 of 1 TT2I R7i 8 4
•
•
•
•
PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW FORM
CASE NO V/O1-34
Planning Commission Date July 9, 2001
Project Location 2310 Boom Road
Comprehensive Plan District Attached Single Family
Zoning District RA, BS
Applicants Name Suzanne Dressler
Type of Application Variance
Project Description A request to construct a front deck off a residence with a 24 foot setback,
30 feet required
Discussion The vanance request is located in the single family/bluffland shoreland district
The front yard setback requirement is 30 feet The proposal is to construct a 24' x 20', 420
square foot deck in front of the existing structure
As proposed, the deck would provide a shelter for a parking space and enclosed storage A stairs
off the front of the deck provides ground access to the front of the house
The front yard setback requirement is 30 feet and the side yard setback is 10 feet The plans do
not show the south side setback but it appears to be less than the required 10 feet
As proposed, the deck and stairs extend 9 feet into the required front yard setback The stairs
can extend 3 feet into the setback as an exception The deck can meet the setback requirement
and be very useable
As shown in Exhibit I and II, the neighbor to the north has a deck 12 feet out from the residence
that appears to meet the 30 foot setback requirement
The letter of application indicates reasons for the vanance request The ramp leading from the
rear of the house provides handicapped access to the front deck
A useable deck can be constructed meeting the setback requirement
Recommendation Denial
Because the site is located in the Bluffland/Shoreland Distract, the Planning Commission's action
is recommendation to the City Council The Council will consider this item at their meeting of
August 7, 2001
Findings
1 That a hardship peculiar to the property, not created by any act of the owner, exists In this
context, personnel financial difficulties, loss of prospective profits and neighbonng
violations are not hardships justifying a variance
2 That a variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property nghts
possessed by other properties in the same district and in the same vicinity, and that a
vanance, if granted, would not constitute a special pnvilege of the recipient not enjoyed by
his neighbors
3 That the authorizing of the variance will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property
and not matenally impair the purpose and intent of this title or the public interest nor
adversely affect the Comprehensive Plan
Attachments Application and plans
•
•
Case No
Date Filed
Fee Paid
Receipt No
PLANNING ADMINISTRATION FORM
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
CITY OF STILLWATER
216 NORTH FOURTH STREET
STILLWATER, MN 55082
ACTION REQUESTED
Fee:
�pecial/Conditional Use Permit a.50/2C
riance $7i 2(
Resubdivision .100
Subdivision* $100+50/1
_Comprehensive Plan Amendment* $500
Zoning Amendment* $300
Planning Unit Development * $500
Certificate of Compliance $70
._Design Review $25
*An escrow fee is also required to the costs of attorney and engineering fees (see attached)
The apphcant is responsible for the completeness and accuracy of all forms and supporting
material submitted in connection with any application All supporting material (► e, photos,
sketches, etc) submitted with application becomes the property of the City of Stillwater
A site plan is required with appljcations
PROPERTY ID NTIFICATION
Address of Project 0 '-:.(41/) /Yt
Zoning District Description of Project
Assessor's Parcel No02/ 036OZ /1 0003
(GEO Code)
"I hereby state the foregoing statements and all data, information and evidence submiffed
herewith in all respects, to file best of my knowledge and belief, true and c rrect 1 further
certify 1 will comply with file permit if it is granted and used "
Property Owner — �2wr - , � �`� r �e �
Represent e
Mailing Address Sa. `iT Mailing Address
City - State - Zip 3 City - State - Zip
Telephone No _ Via--�-� u Telephone No
Signature Signature
SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Total Building floor area square fee
Existing square feet
Proposed square feet
Paved Impervious Area square feet
No of off-street parking spaces
Lot Size (dimensions) x
Land Area
Height of Buildings Stories Feet
Principal
Accessory
R_IW R_'0W RI9W
n2,1
nIN
n0N
T'9N
T'_8N
r1N
R_W R_IW R_'UW
Vicinity Map
0 153
I 1
Scale in Feet
,..tea 49400 ...a
Ywnc Dan �
•
•
6/0-a/a001
11) 'ZM
or '
v LAIA "V T-u
•35-•
Acp
p,„,„..A.,,,,-v,,
y,(\,,,_-E -,Q._-1-60: ce t ?\6._,e) 6, yi,,,,--),,_ INA ct \\„,,,,„ .„)...,._---k--b
k .r-. See‘4-
6 .. N\AJ /k) \i-c). cylos"--' \X.0 MA
U 10.E ,
2 Cis o` '- sb&
ci\ `(' *0 6_
r\--)L_ \\otkz,, A3
hD-",1< ► LAN
gu,-‘.0 4,-.2z_k k Aro,
,_c2-ifv2utr\A
(.c -\TCPJC• LAr.cko_ea_. (‘,0,‘Lo
0-A§D3c1\ 1(
f\o-"vv\ flLe -ea r
c 6a ' d
rove 1�. `o� � �- oil � �
s-+
'`F`TA1 ,k)s
Q/7/
2
•
•
J\J
i
•
•
4t
` 4
`4 r�
1,14'
-r
9
t
i%_.4-c4, 4444
The Home Depot #2806 5800 CEDAR LAKE RD, . LOUIS PARK, Mt 554
'Fri Jun 22 12 59 32 2001
The materials in this deck will cost $3313 75
saved as f \dn\decks\6200B555 DER
Ij View
Fx\, } TIT
•
•
•
•
•
1
l,
-,-' I
t.;.
...4 0 '4 rjill /
L
�t:
1/117
tr
•
•
PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW FORM
CASE NO SUP/01-35
Planning Commission Date July 9, 2001
Project Location 303 & 321 North Street
Comprehensive Plan District Two Family Residential
Zoning District RB
Applicants Name Dana Johnson and Bill Seiberlich, representing Linden Health Care
Type of Application Special Use Permit
Project Description Special Use Permit for a parking lot sign at the Linden Health Care
Discussion
The request is for a Special Use Permit to install a parking lot sign five feet from the
sidewalk at the Health Care center parking lot on 4th Street The sign will be 24 inches by
36 inches on two 4 foot high wooden poles It will have gold lettenng and tnm on a
black background The poles will be black with gold round caps It will not be lit
Conditions of Approval
1 No additional signs
2 All revisions to approved plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of
Community Development
3 Landscape around the base of the sign with flowers or shrubs
Recommendation
Approval as conditioned
Findings
The proposed use will not be injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detnmental to
the public welfare and will be in harmony with the general purpose of the zoning
ordinance
Attachments
Application Form/Sign Elevation/2 Site Plans
Ir
05/22/2001 12 27 4308810
CITY OF STILLWATER
PAGE 02
7
•
•
Case No
Date Flied
Fee Peid
Receipt No
PLANNING ADMINISTRATION FORM
ACTION REQUESTED
.r pecfal/Condltlonal Use Permit
.Variance
.,Resubdivlslon $100
-.,Subdivision* $100+50/10
Comprehensive Plan Amendment* $500
Zoning Amendment; $300
Planning Unit Development* $500
Certificate of Compliance $70
Design Review $ys
''An escrow fee Is also required to the costs of attorney and engineering fees (see attached)
The applicant Is responsible for the completeness and accuracy of all forms and supporting
material submitted in connection with any application All supporting material (1 e , photos,
sketches, etc) submitted with application becomes the property of the Wry of Stillwater
A site plan Is required with applications
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
CITY OF STILLWATER
210 NORTH FOURTH STREET
STILLWATER, MN 55082
Fees
PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION 0403e076/3e/??
Address of Project, IDS
s 4 ).1 ncli S\r 5�%\It4)d-cr Assessor's Parcel No/al' 6i101
Zoning District /C 6 Descnption of Pro a foso code)
P � of �ar�r�,�n c� �e� _ -� ►c �n
"1 hereby state the foregoing statements and all data, information and evidence submitted
herewith In ail respects, to file best of my knowledge and belief, true and correct 1 further
certify l will comply with file permit lflt Is granted and used."
`c1c,1 c0\nhsq r1
Property Owner — i ,r d CH, Representative,
Mailing Address N c.Z_ pn S - Mailing Address
City - State - Zip Sd''/Jwc,
SiTE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Lot Size (dimensions) x
Land Area,
Height of Buildings Stones Feet
Principal
Accessory
Total Building floor roe square fee
Existing square feet
Proposed square feet
Paved Impervious Area1dN seduare feet
No of off-street parking spaces, / 7
r- (✓ <5 d a City - State k\\
wU\fr
Telephone No (vs'�- �3` Soo Telephone No, (s S I -� `i- SOOLI
S18nafura(# / ��
Signature,/,�.. ,�,�
i
• • •
•
Violators will be. lined at ()WII(r 5 expense
1").'taG11 ��� S`CYI
L\Q Nea4\ ea�
IDS w 1,\\06er
\11t,,,rA\e r srYliv sso8 �
ANo 5L-1 �Wy
c,1/4)( Llal an
Co Seoer\,c-�
r
— C c1\\C (9C ass - 3 i J2
LIB
,o
slvisubs
y-,h
ScNros-2
•
•
•
'1"
i
I
yn
t
6,
a
i
N
!t
• Memo
To Planning Commission l----
From Steve Russell, Community Development Director
Date July 5, 2001
Subject Trunk Highway 36 Comdor Management Plan Resolution
Attached is a draft resolution supporting the comdor planning process indicating the importance
of balancing vanous regional and local concerns and a pledge of full participation in the comdor
and IRC partnership study
At meeting time, the Commission can discuss the resolution, make changes as appropriate and
recommend it to the City Council to forward to MnDOT
Attachment Resolution
•
•
Trunk Highway 36 Corridor Management Resolution
Whereas, Trunk Highway 36 provides the major roadway access for Stillwater residents
traveling to and from the Twin Cities and for region visitors traveling to the Stillwater area, and
Whereas, the continued growth areas along the TH 36 comdor if unmanaged can
adversely effect the performances, safety and congestion expenenced by highway users, and
Whereas, the City of Stillwater is located directly north of the comdor and is effected by
traffic using the highway, and
Whereas, it is cntical that a long term vision for the futre of TH 365 be developed that
balances regional and local access needs and maintains the quality of neighborhood in existing
areas adjacent the comdor
Whereas, it is cntical for the City of Stillwater to actively participate in the planmng for
the vision of the comdor and particularly its impact on the City of Stillwater
Whereas, many questions have been raised regarding the specific effects of the TH 36
comdor plan on local residents that have not been adequately studied and addressed, and
Whereas, a IRC partnership planning study is currently being developed and will provide
additional design detail and impact analysis for the TH 36 comdor from Country Road 5 to
Trunk Highway 95
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Stillwater supports sound,
long range transportation planning that balances regional needs with local needs and impacts and
provides a basis for plan implementation at the state, county and local levels
FURTHER, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Stillwater pledges its full support and
participation in a planning process that provides the needed facts to fully evaluate plan
alternatives in developing a consensus vision for the TH 36 comdor
Dated this 9th day of July, 2001
•
CITY OF STILLWATER
PLANNING COMMISSION
Chairperson
ATTEST
Steve Russell, Community Development Director
•
•
Memo
To Planning Commission
From Steve Russell, Community Development Director
Date July 6, 2001
Subject Comprehensive Plan Update
After meeting with Met Council staff regarding the need to update the Stillwater Comprehensive
Plan, the enclosed letter was received listing areas needing study and possible amendment
Most of the items are not substantial policy issues but more "housekeeping" or sanitary sewer
related
The Engineenng Department will address sanitary sewer issues and planning staff will address
land use plan and projection issues
We intend to bnng back a brief amendment to the Comp Plan for Planning Commission review
at your August meeting
If Commissioners have other areas of the Comp Plan that may need attention, this is an
opportune time to discuss them
Recommendation Review report
Attachment Met Council letter dated June 28, 2001
7,
tMetropolitan Council
Improve regional competitiveness in a global economy
•
•
•
June 28, 2001
Steve Russell, Community Development Director
City of Stillwater
City Hall
216 N 4th Street
Stillwater, MN 55082
Dear Mr Russell
This letter follows up on your meeting with Michael King, and Ton Dupre on June 15th to
discuss the Stillwater Comprehensive Plan Metropolitan Council staff and city staff has
been discussing how to update the city's 1996 plan so as to meet the Metropolitan Land
Planning Act requirements for 1998 comprehensive plan updates
The 1996 plan is thorough and well done It was agreed that the plan could be updated to
meet the new requirements through a short addendum to the plan and the submittal of
certain sewer and water quality information It was agreed that the items listed below
would be provided by September 1, 2001
1 Updated forecasts through 2020, including population, households and
employment
2 An updated land use plan map
3 A copy of the city's most recent Capital Improvement Program
4 A descnption of the city's individual sewage treatment system (ISTS)
management program, including inspections every three years Alternatively,
a copy of an executed memorandum of agreement with Washington County to
provide that service in the city of Stillwater could be provided (see attached)
5 Update Table 3, page 5 of the Sanitary Sewer Comprehensive Plan to mclude
any anticipated increase in sewer flows in 2015 and 2020 or mclude a
statement that 2015 and 2020 flows are not expected to increase over the 2010
flows (524,700 gallons a day)
6 Descnbe the city's current and planned activities to reduce inflow and
infiltration into the sewer system
At the meeting, the city's North Hill sewer project was discussed Staff reviewed the
Council's Apnl 27, 1996 comprehensive plan review comments dealing with the
environmental concerns about this area The Council report read m part as follows
"A 1974 report prepared for the city identified problems with on -site systems in
the (north hill) area, and that the level of need for extension of sanitary sewers
into the area was immediate Sanitary sewer service has not been provided to date
due to the high cost of construction in the area The city's plan update proposes
to fully serve the area by 2010 Council staff expressed concern to the city that
www metrocouncll org Metro Info Line 602 1888
230 East Fifth Street St Paul Minnesota 55101 1626 (651) 602 1000 Fax 602 1550 TTY 291 0904
An Equal Opportunity Employer
r
•
•
Steve Russell
June 28, 2001
Page 2
the current questionable operational integrity of the on -site systems should not be
assumed to be acceptable through 2010 "
Through the comprehensive plan process, the Council plays a review and advisory role m
water resources planmng and we work to promote compliance with state standards for
septic systems The Council shares the city's concerns on the broad issues of protecting
public health and preserving the environment Ultimately cities decide the timing, scope
and method of paying for public improvements
Michael King, Sector Representative, will be available to work with you to as you
prepare the plan matenals and to respond to any other questions
Sincerely,
J�
L_hyllis Hanson, Supervisor
Planning and Technical Assistance
Attachment
CC Nile L Knesel, City Coordinator
Klayton Eckles, City Engineer
Marc Hugumn, Metropolitan Council Distract 12
Eli Cooper, Director of Planning and Growth Management
Helen A Boyer, Director, Environmental Services
Michael King, Sector Representative
Ton Dupre, Senior Planner
•
•
MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT
FOR PROVISION OF AN
INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE TREATMENT SYSTEM MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
The Parties to this Agreement are Washington County and the City of which are both
political subdivisions of the State of Minnesota By and through their appropriate officials, the
parties agree as follows
1 Washington County has an Individual Sewage Treatment System Ordinance which meets all
of the rules and regulations of the State of Minnesota
2 State Rules Chapter 7080 require all local government regulations to include performance
standards for the maintenance of individual sewage treatment systems
3 The City of and Washington County have cooperatively developed an
ISTS Management Program for individual sewage treatment systems
4 Washington County has assumed responsibility to administer and enforce the County ISTS
regulations within the County, including momtormg and requiring ISTS maintenance for
those communities that do not have their own maintenance management system
5 The ISTS Management Program has been developed by the County to assist all local umts
of government within the County respond to the policy requirements set forth in the review
of Comprehensive Plans by the Metropolitan Council
6 The City of will assist and support Washington County in efforts to
educate citizens regarding the need for regular maintenance of ISTS, and to obtain
compliance with mamtenance regulations through vanous means, up to and including formal
enforcement methods
7 The City of supports the County in its efforts to financially sustain the
ISTS Management Program through the establishment of fees assessed to septic system
owners and/or pnvate ISTS maintenance contractors
8 Washington County will provide annual reports of ISTS mamtenance records to the City of
9 This agreement may be modified by mutual agreement of the parties It shall remain m effect
until such time that either party shall choose to terminate this agreement by providing one
year's (12 months) notice to the other party
Washington County Date
City of Date
MEMORANDUM
To Planning Commission
From Sue Fitzgerald, Planner
Date July 9, 2001
Subject Fence Ordinance Revisions
Staff is requesting the Commission to consider the following issues, and direct staff to
proceed revising the fence ordinance Attached is the ordinance for your review
Background
Over the last couple years staff has noticed some issues with the wording of the
ordinance in a few areas
Issues
1 Number (m - 4e)
"In residential districts, fences located in the front yard beyond the building line
shall not exceed 42 inches in height " The way this is worded it also includes all houses
located on corners because they legally have two front yards, the sides that abut the
streets This means that the fence cannot exceed 42 inches in the front and 42 inches in
what we would normally consider the side yard Staff would like to research a different
way to approach wording for corner lots
2 Number (m - 5a)
"Fences that require continuing maintenance such as wooden pnvacy fences shall
not be erected within one foot of a property line " In terms of maintenance, it is harder to
maintain two feet of space in between two fences, a lawn mower will not fit The other
problem we are seeing is a neighbor hooks up to an existing neighbors fence, one who
has installed his fence one foot within his property line The neighbor now claims a foot
of his neighbors land
Action Public heanng to revise fence ordinance
•
•
k E\ceotions to Heteht Regulations
1 Roof Structures The maximum height specified in Paragraph One may be
exceeded by church spires, belfnes, cupolas, chimneys, ventilators,
skylights, water tanks, bulkheads and similar features and by necessary
mechanical appurtenances usually carnes above the roof level, provided
such structure is an integral part of a building
1
2 Maximum Height of Accessory Buildings in Residential Distncts In
residential districts an accessory building shall not exceed 20 feet in height
or the distance from the accessory building to a main building or potential
location of a main building on adjoining premises in a residential district
whichever is less
Land Reclamation Regulations
a "Land Reclamation" is the reclaiming of land by depositing or moving
matenal to elevate the grade The term "Land Reclamation" shall not
include landscaping done by or under the direction of a property owner
that does not affect the drainage pattern or alter or intensify the floe into
or upon public or private property When applicable land reclamation
shall be done in accordance with the Flood Plain Ordinance, Grading
Ordinance and City Code Section 31 04 regarding wetlands
b Land reclamation shall be permitted only by special use permit The
permit shall include as a condition thereof, a finished grade plan which
will not adversely affect the adjacent land and as a condition thereof shall
regulate the type of matenal permitted, program for rodent control, plan
for fire control and general maintenance of the site, controls of vehicular
ingress and egress and for control of matenal dispersed from runoff, wind
or hauling of material to or from the site
m Fence Regulations
1 Purpose The purpose of this section is to provide for the regulation of
fences m the City, to prevent fences being erected that would be a hazard
to the public, or an unreasonable interference with the uses and enjoyment
of neighboring property and are compatible with existing uses and other
zoning restrictions
2 Definitions For the purpose of this ordinance, the following definitions
shall apply
Chapter 31- 74
i
a Fences shall be any lineal structure used to prevent access by
persons or animals or prevent visual or sound transference
3 Permit required No fence shall be erected without first obtaining. a fence
permit Application shall be made to the Community Development
Director along with a fence permit fee m the amount of $25 The
Community Development Director is authorized to issue a fence permit if
the application indicates that the fence will be in compliance with this
chapter The council shall hear and decide appeals when it is alleged that
the Community Development Director was in error The appeals shall be
taken as prescribed in Chapter 31, Administration
4 Fences may be permitted in all yards, subject to the following
a Fences in excess of six (6) feet above the ground grade shall be
prohibited unless the abutting neighbor consents to a higher fence
and permission is granted by the Council
b The side of the fence considered to be the face (finished side as
opposed to structural supports) shall face abutting property
c No fence shall be permitted on public right of ways
d No fence shall be erected on corner lot that will obstruct or impede
the clear view of an inter -section by approaching traffic
,/ e In residential districts, fences located in the front yard beyond the
building line shall not exceed 42 inches in height
5 Fences may be permitted along property lines subject to the following
a Fences that require continuing maintenance such as wooden
pnvacy fences shall not be erected within one foot of a property
line
b Fences in commercial or industrial districts may be erected on the
lot line to the height of six feet, to a height of eight feet with a
security arm for barbed wire
6 No existing fence in violation of this section will be allowed to be replaced
or rebuilt Should an existing fence be replaced or rebuilt, it must come
under the regulations of this section
Chapter 31- 75
7 No fence shall be erected where it will impede a drainage way or drainage
easement
8 Violations of this ordinance may be enforced by injunction and the cit\
shall be entitled to the remedy of abatement in order that a fence erected in
violation of this section may be removed
n Swimmin Pool Locations All swimming pools or appurtenances thereto shall
be located in the rear yard at a distance of at least ten (10) feet from any property
line (see City Code, Construction of Swimming Pools, 33 02 for additional
requirements) `� —
o Purpose To ensure that any grading conducted for the purposes of building
construction is done according to the grading plan for a subditi ision as appro.% ec
by the Stillwater City Council To avoid drainage problems which may occur as a
result of building development
Every proposed new building requires a grading plan to be submitted with the
building permit plans The following items are required to be shown on the
grading plan
1 The location of the building, driveway, tree cover, wetlands, drainage
ways or ditches, city streets, neighbonng structures, and other significar,
features
2 The emsting elegy ation of the building pad, neighbonng structures, top of
curb at the driveway, wetlands elevation, all lot corners and any drainage
structures
3 The proposed elevation of the first floor, lowest floor, garage floor, walk-
out (if any), high or low points (breaks in grade)
4 Drainage arrows showing the route of run off across the lot with proposed
elevations of drainage swales
5 If the lot is adjoining a wetlands, the plan should show how erosion will
be controlled Normally a silt fence or other erosion control method will
be required along the flow path to the wetland
6 Any retaining walls, steep slopes, or other special grading features should
be denoted
A cash escrow in an amount established by resolution shall be paid before
Chapter 31 - 76