Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-11-13 CPC Packet1 a ter THE BIRTHPLACE OF MINNESOTA CITY OF STILLWATER PLANNING COMMISSION NOTICE OF MEETING The City of Stillwater Planning Commission will meet on Monday, November 13, 2006, at 7 p m in the Council Chambers of Stillwater City Hall, 216 North Fourth Street AGENDA 1 CALL TO ORDER 2 APPROVAL OF OCTOBER 9, 2006 MINUTES 3 PUBLIC HEARINGS 301 Case No SUP/06-56 An amendment to a special use permit for the transfer of ownership of a bed and breakfast (James Mulvey Inn) located at 622 West Churchill Street in the RB, Two Family Residential District Cynthia Hannig, applicant 302 Case No SUP/06-58 A special use permit for Crabtree Lawyers and Clinic Doctor Inc located at 610 North Main Street, #300, in the CBD, Central Business District Larry D Grell, applicant 303 Case No CPA/ZAM/ZAT/06-53 A Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Zoning Map Amendment and a Zoning Text Amendment to create a new zoning district for lots 1,3,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13 and 14 Block 10, Greeley and Slaughters Addition to Stillwater (110 South Greeley Street) in the RB, Two Family Residential District Timothy Freeman, representing Heidi Rosebud, applicant Continued from the October 9, 2006 Planning Commission Meeting 4 OTHER BUSINESS - 401 Concept discussion for the Hazel Street Golf Course Neighborhood Putman Planning and Design 402 Case No ZAT/06-05 Further consideration of a zoning ordinance text amendment revising the building height limits for downtown City of Stillwater, applicant 403 Annual bed and breakfast review 5 ADJOURNMENT CITY HALL 216 NORTH FOURTH STREET • STILLWATER MINNESOTA 55082 PHONE 651 430 8800 WEBSITE www cI stlllwater mn us 1 City of Stillwater Planning Commission October 9, 2006 Present Dave Middleton, Vice Chairman, Suzanne Block, Gregg Carlsen, Mike Dahlquist, David Junker, Dan Kalmon, Brad Meinke, and David Peroceschi Staff present Planner Mike Pogge Absent Robert Gag Vice Chairman Middleton called the meeting to order at 7 p m Approval of minutes Mr Junker, seconded by Mr Dahlquist, moved approval of the minutes of September 11, 2006 Motion passed unanimously PUBLIC HEARINGS Case No V/06-52 A variance to the street side (front yard) setback (30 feet required, 9 feet requested) for construction of a two -car garage at 521 S Fifth St in the RB, Two Family Residential District Barbara Greeder, applicant Present representing the applicant were Ms Greeder and Brad Swager Mr Pogge reviewed the case, noting that the Heritage Preservation Commission has granted a demolition permit to remove the existing structure The applicant requested in their application that the garage be constructed an additional 2' farther north from Walnut Street Mr Pogge said it is staff's recommendation that the new garage be setback a minimum of 20 feet from the back of the curb, a recommendation that Ms Greeder said she was comfortable with Mr Pogge stated staff's opinion is that the three criteria for granting a variance have been met and staff recommends approval as conditioned Mr Carlsen asked if the existing sewer easement would be a problem Mr Pogge noted the -easement is a -private easement between -Ms Greeder and a neighbor -and -it would be up to the owner to exercise due diligence so as not to create a problem Ms Greeder stated with the 20' setback, there should be no problem with the sewer easement Mr Middleton opened the public hearing No comments were received, and the hearing was closed Ms Block, seconded by Mr Dahlquist, moved approval as conditioned Motion passed unanimously Case No V/06-54 A variance to the side yard setback (10 feet required, 5 feet requested) for construction of a garage at 609 S Broadway in the RB, Two Family Residential District Myron Reubendale, applicant r) City of Stillwater Planning Commission October 9, 2006 The applicant was present Mr Pogge reviewed the staff findings and recommendation for approval as conditioned Mr Pogge noted that the Heritage Preservation Commission had reviewed and approved the proposed design of the structure Mr Reubendale noted they felt a two-story structure, as proposed, is more in keeping with the Victorian architecture of their primary structure Vice Chair Middleton opened the public hearing Terry Zoller, 615 S Broadway, said they have no objections to the proposal and said he thought a two-story structure would look better than a one-story structure No other comments were received, and the hearing was closed Mr Junker, seconded by Mr Dahlquist, moved approval as conditioned Motion passed unanimously Case No V/06-55 A variance to the front yard setback (30 feet required, 14 feet requested) for construction of a porch at 209 N Third St in the PA, Public Administration District Tom Huninghake, applicant Mr Huninghake was present He noted there are no other houses on the block that meet the required 30' setback He stated the request is to enable them to add 2' more to the original structure, and possibly add a garage in the future Mr Pogge reviewed the staff findings and recommendation for approval Mr Pogge noted that the variance would allow for future expansion that would meet all other setbacks/requirements Mr Middleton opened the public hearing No comments were received, and the hearing was closed Mr Carlsen moved approval of the requested variance Mr Junker seconded the motion, noting the applicant had done a great job of rehabilitating the structure and saving the house from demolition Motion to approve passed unanimously Case No CPA/ZAM/ZAT/06-53 A Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Zoning Map Amendment and _Zoning Text -Amendment -to- create a new zoning district for _Lots_ 1,3 and 5-14 Block 10, Greeley and -Slaughters Addition-(110-S—Greeley St ) in the RB,-Two- Family Residential District Timothy Freeman, representing Heidi Rosebud, applicant Present were applicant Heidi Rosebud, Tim Freeman of Folz, Freeman, Erickson and Baiers Heeren, attorney for Ms Rosebud Mr Pogge reviewed the request and staff findings He spoke to a 2002 change in the City's zoning code that eliminated the issuance of special use permits in the Two -Family Residential District for limited commercial uses Mr Pogge said staff had suggested that Ms Rosebud make application to create a new zoning district that recognizes existing businesses in residential districts, included in the packet was a proposed Existing Business District zoning change drafted by the Planning Commission in 1980 to address issues such as this Mr Pogge noted that staff recommends the proposed Zoning Text Amendment (Neighborhood Business District) and the Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Zoning I City of Stillwater Planning Commission October 9, 2006 Map Amendment, but excluding the properties at 109 and 121 S Owens St Mr Pogge noted that, as proposed, not all historic commercial properties would be rezoned at this time --individual property owners could choose to make application for rezoning Mr Pogge also spoke to the controls afford the City in the requirement that property owners requesting a rezoning must submit a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) addressing issues such as parking, lighting, landscaping and signage Mr Middleton questioned whether this proposal would amount to "spot zoning " Ms Block and Mr Junker both questioned the definition of Neighborhood Commercial as "uses that are convenient to the adjacent areas and not for community -wide uses," noting that Len's Family Foods and Nelson's Ice Cream store users are not just from the immediate area but come from throughout the community Mr Kalmon noted that the City would be updating its Comprehensive Plan in the near future and suggested perhaps this request should be looked at in that process Mr Middleton asked if it would be a benefit to create the new zoning district Mr Pogge responded that the new district would legitimize property owners' rights and specify conditions and parameters of business operations Mr Carlsen asked why the City changed the ordinance in 2002, Mr Pogge said he was unsure of the reason Mr Freeman noted that due to the change in the ordinance, Ms Rosebud is hampered from doing anything to her business that is not specifically listed in the original SUP He noted the property currently is mis-zoned He said this is a citywide issue However, he said the applicant was told that City staff was too busy to address the issue and nothing would be done unless Ms Rosebud moved forward with the proposal for a new zoning district He said their intent was not to get the cart in front of the horse — move forward with the zoning issue and then come back with specific plans for the properties In fact, he said Ms Rosebud was told to stop moving forward with plans until the zoning issue is addressed Mr Heeren added that the proposal provides the City with significant oversight through the CUP requirement Mr Middleton opened the public hearing --- Dick Reed, 118 S Owens St , spoke in favor of the proposal, including all of the requested properties He spoke of Ms Rosebud's contributions to the neighborhood and the quality of her business and improvements Ted Gillen, 1011 W Myrtle St , objected to including any of the residential properties in any rezoning, citing traffic issues and loss of property values He also questioned the language of the proposed ordinance, whether the district is "Neighborhood Commercial" or "Business " Susanna Patterson, 1018 W Olive St , spoke of preserving the character of the neighborhood She referred to a letter from Ms Rosebud regarding plans to move the 3 City of Stillwater Planning Commission October 9, 2006 house at 125 S Owens St and use the property for a parking lot, something she said would diminish the value of her property both monetarily and intrinsically Kurt Weidler, 206 S Greeley St , said he could appreciate the fact that Ms Rosebud may want to expand her business, but said any expansion would change the character of the neighborhood and asked what would stop others from expanding their businesses He recommended that the City not approve the request Al Roettger, 919 W Myrtle, spoke against including any properties on Owens Street in any rezoning Dennis Hoffbeck, 206 S Owens, said he could understand the need for a zoning change for the properties on Greeley Street but not Owens Street He suggested that those properties be considered separately, saying he preferred that the Owens properties say residential and not too commercialized Letters from Mr Reed, Ms Patterson and Mr Weidler stating their positions were included in the agenda packet No other comments were received, and the hearing was closed Mr Middleton suggested the Commission should start with the proposed Zoning Text Amendment Mr Dahlquist suggested the language should include a definition of "historic commercial " Mr Pogge suggested that definition is in Item 2b of the draft — "a legal non -conforming use " There also was discussion of language defining "neighborhood service " Mr Pogge pointed out the language was purposefully left vague in order to give more power to the Planning Commission and Council to decide requests for rezoning on a case by case basis Mr Carlsen and Mr Kalmon spoke of looking at the matter in context of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Mr Meinke suggested that would be unfair to Ms Rosebud, —noting —she was not responsible for the change in the City's zoning ordinance There was discussion as to how to address expansion of existing neighborhood businesses and how restrictive the Commission wants to be regarding expansion to adjacent properties Mr Dahlquist said he would be in favor of limiting expansion, but suggested that needs to be defined Mr Carlsen suggested mapping existing properties that would be affected by the creation of the new zoning district It was consensus to table this request and direct staff to more clearly define "neighborhood business district," identify current businesses that would be affected, and provide recommendations on how to address growth issues " Mr Pogge spoke briefly of the 60-day review rule involved in tabling Mr Dunker, seconded by Mr Dahlquist, moved to table this case until the next meeting, motion passed unanimously 4 City of Stillwater Planning Commission October 9, 2006 OTHER BUSINESS City of Stillwater — Determination of TIF District amendment consistency with the Comprehensive Plan Mr Pogge showed a map of the new properties proposed to be added to TIF District 10 in the Downtown District Mr Pogge pointed out TIF is a funding mechanism for possible improvements, such as a parking structure, which is a priority in the Downtown Plan He noted that finding the amendment consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and Downtown Plan is a requirement of state law Mr Dahlquist and Ms Block both stated they wished they had the information earlier Mr Meinke, seconded by Mr Junker, moved approval of the resolution finding the TIF District amendment to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Motion passed 7-0, with Mr Dahlquist abstaining Ms Block, seconded by Mr Junker, moved to adjourn at 9 25 p m Respectfully submitted, Sharon Baker Recording Secretary E ter T f L 0 1 R T H V A L 0 f M I N N F 4 0 1 A Planning Commission DATE November 6, 2006 CASE NO SUP\06-56 APPLICANT Cynthia Hannig REQUEST Transfer of a Bed and Breakfast Special Use Permit from Jill and Truett Lawson to Cynthia Hannig for the James Mulvey Inn LOCATION 622 Churchill St W COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DISTRICT ZONING RB - Two Family CPC DATE November 13, 2006 REVIEWERS Community Dev Director SFSL - Single Family Small Lot PREPARED BY Michel Pogge, City Planner Afp DISCUSSION The applicant is requesting that the special use permit for the James Mulvey Inn be transferred from the current owners Jill and Truett Lawson to Cynthia Hannig Ms Hannig is proposing to purchase the property pending approval of the special use permit The James Mulvey Inn currently has 7 units with 4 units in the main home and 3 units is the carriage house The Lawson s will be retaining ownerslup of the carriage house The applicant is also requesting that one of the existing family bedrooms be converted to a guest room increasing the total number of guest rooms to 5 units in the main home If one of the family bedrooms is converted to a guest room the main home will have one remaining family bedroom and a living room that is used exclusively by the live-in family In Ms Hannig's letter she requested the opportunity to partner with the Lawson s to rent out the carriage house for special occasions if there is a returning guest that feels strongly about a particular room that may hold special meaning to them Stillwater code requires bed and breakfasts to be located at least 900 feet from the nearest bed and breakfast Since the two properties will be under separate ownership and are closer 622 Churchill St W Page 2 than 900 feet from each other only one can continue to be used as a bed and breakfast Staff has discussed this issue with the Lawson's and with Ms Hannig's Each has indicated to staff that they are willing to accept as a condition of approval that the carriage home at 807 Harriet St S would no longer be uses as a bed and breakfast EVALUATION OF REQUEST All bed and breakfasts require a special use permit A special use permit may only be granted after the applicant has demonstrated that they have met the 12 conditions for a bed and breakfast This site meets all of the conditions including the required number of off-street parking spaces, the site is located at least 900 feet from the nearest bed and breakfast, and the home was built over 100 years ago The exterior facade of the building and the name of the Inn are proposed to remain the same RECOMMENDATION Approval as conditioned CONDITIONS FOR APPROVAL 1 This Special Use Permit is issued to Cyntlua Hannig, and shall not be transferred, assigned or conveyed to any other firm or successive owner 2 The manager of the residence shall live on -site 3 The owner shall comply with all Health, Fire, Building, and Safety Rules and Regulations of the State of Minnesota and the City of Stillwater 4 That a maxunum of five bedrooms and ten guests per day shall be accommodated at the 622 Churchill St West property at any one tune 5 The property at 807 Harriet St S shall no longer be used as a bed and breakfast since it will be under separate ownership and fails to meet the City's 900 feet separation requirement for bed and breakfasts 6 No pets of guests shall be allowed at the facility 7 Meals may be served only to guests of the facility without a separate Special Event Permit 8 The premises shall not be used as a rooming house, boarding house, hotel or motel 9 The Bed and Breakfast is allowed one identification sign not exceeding four (4) square feet and shall be located on site The sign plan shall be reviewed by the Community Development Director before installation 10 The applicant shall submit the type of lighting and intensity level for the walkway lighting for review and approval by the Community Development Director 11 There shall be no additional external lighting of the site or residence 12 One off-street parking space for each guestroom shall be set aside and marked "FOR GUEST ONLY" Two off-street parking spaces shall be available for the on -site manager 13 Visitor parking shall all remain on the applicant's property, not on Harriet Street or Churchill Street 14 The property owner of 622 Churchill shall help keep the portion of the ravine on their property clean 622 Churchill St W Page 3 15 All previous planning cases related to this property, including but not limited to, 1991-62 and 1997-26 shall expire and be null and void upon approval of this Special Use Permit 16 The Bed and Breakfast Use Permit shall be reviewed before the Planning Commission and City Council for revocation if complaints regarding the bed and breakfast are received by the Community Development Director FINDINGS The proposal, as conditioned, meets the intent of the City's zoning ordinance for Bed and Breakfasts Attachments Applicant's Form and Letter PLANNING ADMINISTRATION APPLICATION FORM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY OF STILLWATER 216 NORTH FOURTH STREET STILLWATER MN 55082 Case No W!' Q Date Filed Fee Paid AW Receipt No ACTION REQUESTED _A Special/Conditional Use Permit Variance Ame'r0me4 Resubdivision Subdivision* Comprehensive Plan Amendment* Zoning Amendment* Planning Unit Development Certificate of Compliance *An escrow fee is also required to oftet the costs of attorney and engineering fees The fees for requested action are attached to this application The applicant is responsible for the completeness and accuracy of all fors and supporting material submitted in connection with anyappl►cation All support►ngmatenal (i e , photos, sketches, etc) submitted with application becomes the propertyof the C►tyof Stillwater Sixteen (16) copies of supporting matenal ►s required /f application is submitted to the City Council, twelve (12) copies of supporting matenal is required A site plan showing drainage andsetbacks►srequ►red with applications Any incomplete application or supporting material will delay the application process After Planning Commission approvals, there is a 10-day appeal period Once the 10-day appeal period has ended, the applicant will receive a zoning use permit which must be signed and submitted to the City to obtain the required building permits PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION Address of Project (9 Z 2- W L Pt LLC'rj' 1 I I � Assessor's Parcel No 380&),?L0 - 00 'I hereby state the foregoing statements and all data, information and evidence submitted herewith in all respects, to the best of my knowledge and belief, to be true and correct I further certify I will comply with the permit if it is granted and used " Property Ownerc� (1 GO t. A-n L!qq Representative 5 Mailing Address l 01 D �S I [0� C(�t Ci Mailing Address City - State - Zip S _'J I I Ill) ft4-t'f 1y ` I� S S70 .?City - State - Zip OCT 18 �6 Telephone No 5-1- 3 ,5- 1 — q O 8 1 Telephone No *,ITV DEVE Signature Signature DEPARTMENT (Signature is required) (Signature is required) SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION Lot Size (dimensions) x Land Area Height of Buildings Stories Feet Principal Accessory Total Building floor area square feet Existing square feet Proposed square feet Paved Impervious Area square feet No of off-street parking spaces H \mrnamara\chaila\PI ANAPP FRM June 9 2006 Cynthia Hannig 1010 South Sixth Street Stillwater, MN 55082 October 18, 2006 City of Stillwater Community Development Department 216 North Fourth Street Stillwater, MN 55082 Dear Sir or Madam I am purchasing the James Mulvey Inn bed & breakfast located at 622 West Churchill in Stillwater Our closing date is scheduled for December 7, 2006 My business partner, Lee Sather, and I are purchasing the real estate as equal partners I will be sole owner of the bed & breakfast business and rimming that myself My daughter and I will of course be living on site at the inn, and intend to use the five rooms in the main house for bed & breakfast guests I intend to continue running the inn with the integrity and dedication to Stillwater's heritage that the Lawsons have exhibited during their tenure at the Mulvey Prior to this, I co -owned the Lady Goodwood Bed & Breakfast with my now ex-husband, so I have two years of experience in the industry This inn is a beautiful property and I look forward to continuing to provide excellent accommodations and service to our guests, and promote Stillwater as a Minnesota jewel Jill and Truett Lawson will maintain ownership of the carnage house, and they will not do any bed & breakfast business Having said that, we have discussed the possibility and would like to ask permission to occasionally partner up and rent out carnage house rooms if there is a returning guest who feels very strongly that they would like to stay in a room they've had in the past (perhaps on their wedding right or an important anniversary, for example) I have attached my application to amend the Special Use Permit now in effect for the James Mulvey Inn The only change will be that I will not be renting out the carnage house rooms, and will instead be renting out five rooms in the main house Thank you for your consideration Sincerely, Cynthia Hanmg Attachment cc Lee Sather Jill and Truett Lawson 0 t IV Iwater 1 14 E 9 1 H T H P l A F O F M I N N F S O f A DATE APPLICANT REQUESTS LOCATION Planning Commission November 7, 2006 CASE NO SUP\06-58 Larry Grell, Frauenshuh/Sweeney A special use permit for a commercial space in Building 1 of Terra Springs 610 Main St N, #300 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DISTRICT CC - Community Commercial ZONING CBD - Central Business District CPC DATE November 13, 2006 REVIEWERS Community Development Director PREPARED BY Michel Pogge, City Planner Ao7 DISCUSSION Larry Grell of Frauenshuh/Sweeney is seeking approval of a special use permit for Crabtree Law Firm and Clinic Doctor, Inc to be located on the third floor in building one of Terra Springs The Final PUD approval for Terra Springs required a special use permit for any commercial uses in building one in order to review its impact on parking Crabtree Law Firm and Clinic Doctor, Inc will occupy approximately 3700 square feet of space The space is being designed for a total of 17 full time employees with occasional client visits The hours of operation generally will be Monday through Friday from 8 A M to 5 P M The office would have 3 enclosed parking spots for their exclusive use in addition to the 90 plus off-street parking spaces available in the development �610 Main St N, #300 Page 2 EVALUATION OF REQUEST A special use permit may be granted only when all of the following conditions are found 1 The proposed structure or use conforms to the requirements and the intent of this chapter, and of the comprehensive plan, relevant area plans and other lawful regulations Office uses are permitted uses within the Central Business District A special use perrrut is required for commercial uses in the Terra Springs development in order to review impacts on parking 2 Any additional conditions necessary for the public interest have been imposed Staff recommends that the Commission approve the conditions for approval listed below in order to protect the public interest 3 The use or structure will not constitute a nuisance or be detrimental to the public welfare of the community Currently there are over 90 off-street parking spaces available in the Terra Springs development During several visits to the site by staff ample parking has been available during normal business hours Additionally, since this office use will operate during normal business hours between Monday and Friday from 8 A M to 5 P M parking impacts on residents in the development will be minimal FINDINGS The proposed office use will not be injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare and will be in harmony with the general purpose of the zoning ordinance RECOMMENDATION Approve the Special Use Permit as conditioned CONDITIONS FOR APPROVAL 1 The project construction shall be in compliance with the plan set dated October 23, 2006, which is on file in the Community Development Department 2 A change in use shall require a new Special Use Permit 3 This Special Use Permit shall be reviewed before the Planning Commission and City Council for revocation if complaints regarding parking are received by the Community Development Director related to this suite and use Attachments Applicant's Form, Applicant's Letter, and Floor Plan J,7Od (I // 00y� PLANNING ADMINISTRATION APPLICATION FORM case No 5oPIA&.� Date Filed d 3 Fee Paid Receipt No COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT ACTION REQUESTED CITY OF STILLWATER 216 NORTH FOURTH S STILLWATER MN 5508: OCT 23 2006 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT XSpecial/Conditional Use Permit Variance Resubdivision Subdivision* Comprehensive Plan Amendment* Zoning Amendment* Planning Unit Development Certificate of Compliance *An escrow fee is also required to offset the costs of attorney and engineering fees The fees for requested action are attached to this application The applicant is responsible for the completeness and accuracy of all forms and supporting material submitted in connection with anyappl►cat►on All supporting material (► e , photos, sketches, etc ) submitted with application becomes the propertyof the C►tyof Stillwater Sixteen (16) copies of supporting material is required If application is submitted to the City Council, twelve (12) copies of supporting material is required A site plan showing drainage and setbacks is required with applications Any incomplete application or supporting material will delay the application process After Planning Commission approvals, there is a 10 day appeal period Once the 10-day appeal period has ended, the applicant will receive a zoning use permit which must be signed and submitted to the City to obtain the required building permits PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION Address of Protect FaJ Q MA1ti`_;T. k )10 fT ` C� Assessors Parcel No g?grMP&I0 (GEO Code) Zoning Distnct<En Description of Protect_ MUL71-TEIyAtJ'T � m UL'TI VS "I hereby state the foregoing statements and all data, information and evidence submitted herewith in all respects, to the best of my knowledge and belief, to be true and correct I further certify I will comply with the permit if it is granted and used " --Property Owner }'2Ru��5E-EUt=I i esentative Mailing Address % (DI L�1=ST %�? Sr 100C�NtT Mailing Address s City - State Zip ( y) P I_,) ( Y lr 55Li ED City - State Zip Telephone No 5a - lsa9 - 3qW4 Telephone No S M Sign ture Si ature ( i�ature �isreq�uired��� Sig ature is require ) SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION Lot Size (dimensions) x Land Area Height of Buildings Stories Feet Principal 3 Accessory Total Building floor area square feet Existing square feet Proposed square feet Paved Impervious Area square feet No of off street parking spaces H \mrnamara\chPlla\PI ANAPP FIRM June 9 2006 October 20, 2006 City of Stillwater 216 North Fourth Street Stillwater, MN 55082 Ann Planning Commission Re Special Use Permit — Terra Springs Dear Members of the Planning Commission, The occupants of suite 300 at 610 Main will be the Crabtree Law Firm P A & Clinic Doctor, Inc Crabtree Law Firm www CrabtreeLawyers com has provided personal injury, business, family, real estate and estate planning legal services to clients in 28 different States since 1988 The law firm has remote offices in seven statewide locations Its main office has been in Stillwater since 1997 80% of its clients never visit the main Stillwater office The law firm currently consists of 6 full time staff and 4 part time staff Staffing is stable and not expected to change All the full time staff regularly work from their home offices The main offices hours of operation are 8 am to 5 p in Monday through Friday Guests that would visit consist of clients and other attorneys during business hours (approximately 3 a business day for an hour) Clinic Doctor Inc www ClinicDr com is a national online chiropractic business service provider to chiropractic clinics in 17 States Clinic Doctor has provided online billing and consulting services for 2 years at its main location in Stillwater Services are delivered through its hosted (St Cloud) website, email, web cam appointments or phone All of its software programmers work in its Romania office Clinic Doctor currently has onsite 2 full time and 3 part time employees Staffing is growing, but is designed primarily for telecommuting The main offices hours of operation are 8 a in to 5 p m Monday through Friday Guests that visit would consist of clients or business partners during business hours (approximately 1 a week for an hour) The owner of both businesses, Todd Crabtree DC JD MBA, periodically conducts seminars for both businesses but those seminars would occur at Cesares or other suitable Stillwater locations The suite's architectural plans are designed for a maximum of 17 full time employees The suite includes 3 enclosed parking spots Ample parking consisting of more than 90 public surface parking spots is available in the development There is additional parking on the street and in the city lot across the street If you have any questions please feel free to contact me at 952-829-3484 Sincerely, Fra ensa cil huh Sw ey Grell Senior Vice President t-41 ].YNf tsls�lbl FL1rJ4 -rlod v1+3 e4L= -Qt--fir Ti---= Yal,)Nn Ni T40ilvlt hlYtejlWi90 '473dVia BUlnO7ld_�,C 1 I-saanlx� n�a as_oaea¢� da�n�on3u ar -—es`311L7ID� -_ _2-nRN67ofM— �(oV�lcr�irrvarna �_r�=o1va�it— � - r.�vr-z;3 aal�rivL�St — aay awmaa�r �¢ _ azd zav+�o-Ja_a�lQ (P $ -- �rolvn3'u�ivl�rnm�oH awe i'�Nrcti-o vaooa— N � Z �Q7r o 3 11 � �l-�� "000 'JPd alow, e'"011'0h3'Y }]G hM1r.�✓7— u ri1�1Q)`1 -III df srewvrrollr9lxa_aaan 4MOUNIM_ 4NllNrA:Lira_zl %JN1dV1_1ov e, bt 7)@L'7Y711N7o >r017T33: ' c�dri3a � wza�laot,c gxv srr.-�aa vl*to viNtuaJx3- u i ItAaiCA/ tl _ - -L� 7rrn —r� r -1 Z s 9i= — _ —4 Wn?7J H137l-CyS3�9y0d�I"IC '�L "7-I'dVti`liWl �IzD�3c 1a;mP�f712�2 sSLL"1116- YN-I T Ol NOIloyia ao do LWNMV aRLm �1rs'. -aa of 41 zav 1�r�+gv� 1Z_— �NvmYNI ao noad --- - ----- - - _ -- -- - �(J I y./t >t� ��t.71L.1 G31`/�NLL7i7_ NL.yaNMO '3at/�Jd QJ. 3Zd_4710.k7'+�fLNO_7_T1Y ='(---_�3`01�0-��4 -471YM pan 37N933i1.1'YJ -- — O31-fi 7H7r T,v oZagar 'T 07JdQl_'T -ODD-15117� /� 4tal' M 9H1 �094`Aid'Z9H1 �U3 NOI]fJ'f2]SN01 —7nVti OI-9dN 5.371dd0-N3jML9� 4NpWl�tld _ - 7aR7=U07m i7 MOn=� V00aOtn"Ol =J1M YJ1s21N0? 'TTd UOOMdb ` ^L_ - _ _ _ / _ 1y0O.'7»�S41vDsDi70� 99r7n id937SIG �27Hxy19"id__ WnLd�,O II7�nca nl 4r7da wvrjrd 471oo-Id 5Sro7h — i __ '�t� ..\ I -� Q � � I _ J.d71oN �rs1N3lNYYJ0�95.3MS �O'HN0711ONOS= _ OOaMh"sd dimd (i3iYi �r+521GY��Givld — \ / QcYI='�Tf7Cl�6S. s�Ji�571027db1N07 7!O } �l�i]tnrr- t' '-' niHl_0g2orul. saj]d_oSNlydwnitd 41 Do — = b 1L. — - - - .. - - LP - i v -132 i 1cm S / � oQ�� / yti - / �� IA �1.i1 an n f I \ 7tQ1V/fd13 >��' NIl4 � - z \ �l T p, ^ y r In Jill , 5 *dzb DATE APPLICANT LANDOWNER 1wa der ( I- i I liza�� H t B i H I H P a f 0 1 Nil N H f 1 0 1 A Planning Commission November 8, 2006 CASE NO 06-53 Timothy Freeman of Folz, Freeman, Erickson, Inc Heidi Rosebud REQUESTS 1) Zoning Text Amendment 2) Comprehensive Plan Amendment 3) Zoning Map Amendment LOCATION South of Myrtle St W, West of Greeley St S, East of Owens St S, and North of Ramsey St W except the two properties in the Northwest corner of the block (917 and 919 Myrtle St W) CURRENT ZONING RB PROPOSED ZONING NB CURRENT LUP SFSL PROPOSED LUP NC PC DATE November 13, 2006 REVIEWERS Community Dev Director, City Attorney PREPARED BY Michel Pogge, City Planner N4 BACKGROUND Timothy Freeman, representing Heidi Rosebud owner of Just For Me Spa and Stillwater Fitness, has requested a Zoning Text Amendment, Comprehensive Plan Amendment, and Zoning Map Amendment for Lots 1, 3, and 5-14 in Block 10 of Greeley's and Slaughter's Addition These lots represent the existing Just For Me Spa and Stillwater Fitness property (Lots 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, East 90 feet of Lots 11 and 13, the east 1 foot of Lot 8, and the east 1 foot of the south 19 feet of Lot 6), the bed and breakfast approved in July 2005 at 125 Owens St S (Lot 14 and the West 36 feet of Lots 11 and 13), and the existing residential homes owned by Ms Rosebud at 109 and 121 Owens St S(Lots 6, 8,10, and 12 excluding the east 1 foot of Lot 8 and excluding the east 1 foot of the south 19 feet of Lot 6) ` PCP Case 06-53 Rosebud - ZAT, CPA, and ZAM Page 2 DISCUSSION OF TOPICS The Commission opened the public hearing at their October 91h City Council meeting At that meeting the Commission requested that staff address several items related to the request including Defmmg neighborhood business uses Identify commercial uses that are zoned residentially Address the issues and options related to the growth of a commercial use that is surrounded by residential properties Neighborhood Business Uses The Commission requested staff to define "Neighborhood Business Use" The City's comprehensive plan defines Neighborhood Commercial as "Commercial uses that cater to the immediate residential area surrounding the activity The are usually located at intersections of collector or arterial streets The uses are convenient to the adjacent areas and not for community - wide uses The areas are small 5 acres or less with wide setback buffer area in developing areas to screen the use and minimize the impact on adjacent residential areas " This definition is a very broad definition, as all def nations in comprehensive plans generally are The difficulty in establishing a definition or providing a list of business is delineating when a business caters solely to the immediate neighborhood or when it caters to the greater community For example a health club in itself is an appropriate use in a neighborhood setting, however, once it reaches a certain size or market area it begins to serve the community at large It is difficult if not impossible to regulate market area of a business through zoning In order to provide maximum flexibility to the Commission and Council m defining the uses compatible with adjacent properties on a case by case basis the ordinance purposefully avoids an exacting definition Uses can then be judged on case by case bases through the conditional use pernut process In Stillwater's case, it may be most effective to sumply list eligible property rather than define "neighborhood uses " Existing Commercial Uses in Residential Areas As requested by the Commission, staff has compiled a list of all of the commercial uses in the community that are surrounded primarily by residential properties As an exhibit to this report is a list of these sites that also describes the current and known historic uses of each site Issues related to growth of a business in the Neighborhood Business District The proposed NB District requires an amendment to the conditioned use permit for all additions or changes to a property that are not specifically listed in the approved conditional use permit When reviewing a conditional use permit, either a new or an amended CUP, the code requires the impacts of the proposed use(s) to be reviewed to insure they will not constitute a nuisance or detriment to the neighborhood and community ' PCP Case 06-53 Rosebud - ZAT, CPA, and ZAM Page 3 In addition to the conditional use permit staff has included language in this current draft that requires all exterior remodeling and site alteration to undergo design review by the HPC The design review process reviews issues ranging from parking circulation, location and style of buildings, open space, landscaping, pedestrian circulations, effects on adjacent buildings, lighting, landscaping, signage, drainage, and other items By having exterior remodeling and site alterations undergo design review issues related to aesthetic and environmental impacts can be reviewed through the current process that is in place Both the conditional use permit and the design review processes are tools that are currently in place as a part of the zoning code and are available to be used without the need for modification Options related to growth of a business in the Neighborhood Business District Related to growth there are three possible options that could be considered, no growth, limited building expansion within the confines of the existing property, and expansion of a use both physical building and geographic area Currently the city code provides that no nonconforming use shall be extended to displace a conforming use 1 By code, this policy disallows a geographic expansion of any nonconforming uses In the case of properties rezoned to the NB District they will be then classified as conforming uses It is a policy decision for the Commission and Council to decide on what level of growth/expansion, if any, they want to allow properties in the NB District to undertake The options that the Commission could consider include No growth - Allows existing structures to continue to be used in there existing manner preserving the property owners rights Over time when a business leaves a site, either through relocation or cessation of operations, it can be difficult to reuse an existing structure to its full and best use without the allowance for additions or modifications Some commercial structures have over time converted to residential uses, however, some structures like the old daisy building are difficult if not impossible to convert to residential uses Structures that are difficult to reuse/convert can become eyesores in the community Adjoining property owners have assurance that properties adjoining theirs will remain substantially the same Limited building expansion within the confines of the existing property - This allows a property owner to expand and/or make changes to their existing building within the confines of the property it currently occupies While a structure may expand within the limits of their property, adjoining property owners can have a reasonable expectation that wholesale changes will not occur within their neighborhood Expansion of a use in both physical building and geographic area - Tlus allows a property owner to expand an existing building and use on the current site and adjacent sites This option gives the maximum flexibility and growth potential of existing buildings to the property owner This has the greatest impact to the adjoining property owners and the neighborhood they are part of Stillwater City Code § 31 1 Subd 9 (4) 'PCP Case 06-53 Rosebud - ZAT CPA, and ZAM Page 4 In the sprit of the current policy, the draft ordinance has been drafted to allow building expansions within the confines of the existing property Related to the rezoning and comprehensive plan amendment requests, staff acknowledges bed and breakfasts are not purely commercial uses and rather quasi residential/commercial uses 2 It is a policy decision for the Commission and Council to allow the home at 125 Owens St to be relocated and incorporated into the Just For Me Spa and Stillwater Fitness site The existing homes at 121 and 109 Owens St as single-family homes are conforming uses Additionally, three conforming properties can be developed if the home at 125 Owens St is moved between the existing homes at 121 and 109 Owens St Staff would suggest that simply rezoning these properties to NB district in order to allow the applicant to use them for short term rental may not be appropriate If the Commission and Council feel it is appropriate to allow this type of use, it may be more appropriate to change the current zoning ordinance regarding bed and breakfasts to allow homes to be used for lodging throughout the community without an owner occupied/inn keeper residency requirement and without a distance separation requirement PROPERTY BACKGROUND 110 Greeley St South The site at 110 Greeley St South was originally built as a daisy After the dairy closed the property was first converted to a warehouse and then in 1978 a SUPS was granted allowing the building to be converted to an office building In 1992 the applicant was granted a variance and SUP4 to allow an expansion of the fitness club 122 Greeley St South This property was originally a single-family home In 1980 the City issued a SUPS to allow an automotive repair shop to be operated out of the garage of the home The property was purchased by applicant in May of 1996 In 1996 the planning commission granted approval for the demolition of the existing home to make way for the expansion of the 110 Greeley St South building onto the site The building was never demolished In 1998 the applicant made application for a revised SUP and vanance6 in order to renovate the house and move all of the spa activities into the home that also allows the fitness center to expand into the space previously occupied by the spa 2 Stillwater City Code § 31 1 Subd 4 definition for bed and breakfast 3 CPC Case #314 4 CPC Case #92 34 5 CPC Case #387 6 CPC Case #98 74 PCP Case 06-53 Rosebud - ZAT, CPA, and ZAM Page 5 125 Owens St South The property was originally a single-family home The applicant purchased the property in May of 2005 At that time the applicant applied for and received a SUP and design review7 for a bed and breakfast at the site As of the date of this report according to the applicant, the house is not being used as a bed and breakfast and is simply being used as a rental property, including short term rentals 8 121 Owens St South The applicant purchased the property in 2005 The property is currently being used as rental property, including short term rentals 109 Owens St South The applicant purchased the property in October of 2005 The property is currently being used as rental property, including short term rentals APPLICANT'S REQUESTS Until May of 2002 the City's zoning code allowed the City to issue special use permits in the Two -Family Residential District for limited commercial uses that supported the surrounding neighborhood In May of 2002, the RB Zoning District regulations were changed removing this language Additionally, Minnesota statutes prolubit approval of variances that allow uses that are otherwise would not be allowed in a zoning district9 Due to these changes coupled with the requirements of state law related to uses, staff suggested to the applicant that an amendment to the zoning code would be required before the applicant could expand the commercial business To accomplish this, the applicant would need to make application for a zoning text amendment to either 1) provide an opportunity for the City to issue a special or conditional use permit for commercial uses in the RB District, similar to the process that was eliminated with the zoning amendment in 2002, or 2) create a new Neighborhood Business District Staff suggested that the creation of a Neighborhood Business District may be more appropriate in this case Staff did not suggest that the entire property owned by the applicant, specifically the property at 109 and 121 Owens St S, should be included in a rezoning request Zoning Text Amendment - At the request of the applicant, staff has created language for a new zoning district called Neighborhood Business District (NB) This language is modeled in part on an ordinance the City considered in 1980 When this language was first proposed all of the dozen or so historical commercial properties in the City were being considered for rezoning and a number of residential property owners objected to the 'CPC Case #05 38 and HPC Case #05 33 B Minn Stat §327 70 Subd 5 Transient occupancy Transient occupancy means occupancy when it is the intention of the parties that the occupancy will be temporary There is a rebuttable presumption that, if the unit occupied is the sole residence of the guest the occupancy is not transient There is a rebuttable presumption that, if the unit occupied is not the sole residence of the guest the occupancy is transient The use of the properties at 109 and 121 Owens St S as short term rentals appears to be a violation of the City Code 9 Minn Stat §394 27 Subd 7 No variance may be granted that would allow any use that is prohibited in the zoning district in which the subject property is located PCP Case 06-53 Rosebud - ZAT, CPA, and ZAM Page 6 proposed district, especially as it would affect the business property in their neighborhood Consequently, the proposal was dropped by the Council The proposed ordinance, and the previous ordinance from 1980, seeks to recognize the lustorical commercial properties that are not in conformity with the regulations of the residential zoning districts they are located in today The new district makes the existing uses legal and conforming, but only the existing uses This is to say that the lists of permitted uses normally found in a zoning district would not be included in this NB district This requires that each use be reviewed on a case by case nature and helps eliminate the worry of surrounding residential properties that other uses could simply occur one day and upset the status quo None the less, since many of these non-residential uses provide substantial economic investments and due to the good condition many of the structures are in it is not sound public policy to require the removal of these uses from the neighborhoods they are part of This proposed zoning district, with a Condition Use Permit (CUP) and design review, would allow a property owner to put an addition onto their building Also, with neighborhood discussion at a public hearing, the property owner could request a change in use to some other use that may be considered by all participants to be compatible with the neighborhood The ordinance as drafted allows the Commission and Council to determine which uses are compatible on a case by case basis If this district is created, then individual property owners could make application to have their properties rezoned to the NB District This approach distinguishes itself from the last attempt to create a NB District in that all the historic commercial properties would not be rezoned at this time Currently, the City would only be considering a rezoning of the Rosebud property Generally individual property owners would rezone their properties when there is a change in use proposed or when they desire a building expansion Concurrently with a rezoning the draft ordinance requires a property owner to submit an application for a CUP Items such as off-street parking, exterior lights, landscaping, and other exterior elements can be setout in the CUP Additionally, through the design review process issues ranging from parking circulation, location and style of buildings, open space, landscaping, pedestrian circulations, effects on adjacent buildings, lighting, landscaping, signage, drainage, and other items would be reviewed when changes to a site or structure is proposed This gives the Commission (both Planning and Heritage Preservation) and Council greater control and flexibility to address items on a site by site basis Comprehensive Plan Amendment - In order to zone a property to the new Neighborhood Business District the land use map needs to first be changed to the Neighborhood Commercial classification10 The Stillwater Comprehensive Plan describes Neighborhood Commercial as "Commercial uses that cater to the immediate residential area surrounding the activity The uses are convenient to the adjacent areas and not for community -wide uses ' If the Commission and Council find the NB zoning consistent with the Comprehensive Plari s "neighborhood commercial" classification, then this neighborhood 10 Minn Stat §473 865 Subd 2 A local governmental unit shall not adopt any official control or fiscal device which Is in conflict with its comprehensive plan or which permits activity in conflict with metropolitan system plans PCP Case 06-53 Rosebud - ZAT, CPA, and ZAM Page 7 commercial land use classification would be appropriate for the property As with all comprehensive plan amendment a four -fifths (4/5) vote of the council is required Zonmg Map Amendment - The final request is the rezoning of the property to Neighborhood Business District (NB) The NB language, as currently drafted, is geared to legalizing existing historical commercial properties in residential neighborhoods The former daisy building and the later remodel, conversion/ expansion of the home at 122 Greeley Street S for Just for Me Spa are commercial buildings in good condition Existing businesses like these are examples of businesses that could be rezoned to the NB District The applicant has shared with staff that eventually she would like to relocate the house on 125 Owens Street (the location of the approved Bed and breakfast) to an open area between 121 and 109 Owens Street This would make room on 125 Owens Street for an addition to Just for Me Spa and for a new parking area along Ramsey Street W The relocated home and the two other existing homes would each be on lots that conformed to the RB zonmg regulations Before she could undertake these changes the applicant would need to apply for and receive approval of a Conditional Use Permit, a house moving permit, and likely a lot subdivision request in addition to approval of part of the requested rezoning and comprehensive plan amendment The property at 109 and 121 Owens St South are conforming single-family homes in the RB Zoning District and the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District The applicant has developed a plan that even with moving the home at 125 Owens between the two homes at 109 and 121 Owens three conforming lots could be platted Since the proposed intent of the NB district to apply to existing commercial properties in a residential district and the current policy that provides no nonconforming use shall be extended to displace a conforming use, staff suggests that these properties should not be rezoned and should retain their RB zoning classification and single family use Ultimately this is a policy issue for the Commission and Council to decide By allowmg the applicant to move the home at 125 Owens to between 109 and 121 Owens St South and to expand into this area the Commission would allow the applicant to expand while at the same time protecting three homes that could exist on conforming lots in the neighborhood they currently exist in PCP Case 06-53 Rosebud - ZAT, CPA, and ZAM Page 8 ALTERNATIVES The Planning Commission has the following options Zoning Text Amendment A Approve If the Commission finds the proposed ordinance acceptable it should recommend approval B Approve in part or with amendments C Deny If the Commission funds that the proposed ordinance unacceptable it could recommend denial of the requested amendment With a denial, the basis of the action should be given 2 Comprehensive Plan Amendment A Approve If the Commission finds the applicant's request for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment for the entire property acceptable it should be approved This alternative allows full geographical expansion on to 109, 121 and 125 Owens Street If the commission chooses this alternative the conditions included in staff s recommendation should be included B Approve in part Follow staff's recommendation listed below, as conditioned, by approving the Comprehensive Plan Amendment for Lots 1, 3, 5, 7, 9,11, 13,14, the east 1 foot of Lot 8, and the east 1 foot of the south 19 feet of Lot 6, but denying the Comprehensive Plan Amendment for Lots 6, 8,10, and 12 excluding the east 1 foot of Lot 8 and excluding the east 1 foot of the south 19 feet of Lot 6 This alternative allows limited geographical expansion on to 125 Owens St but not on to 121 or 109 Owens St C Approve in part Approve the Comprehensive Plan Amendment for Lots 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, East 90 feet of Lots 11 and 13, the east 1 foot of Lot 8, and the east 1 foot of the south 19 feet of Lot 6, but denying the Comprehensive Plan Amendment for Lots 6, 8,10,12,14 and the West 36 feet of Lots 11 and 13, excluding the east 1 foot of Lot 8 and excluding the east 1 foot of the south 19 feet of Lot 6 This alternative allows no geographical expansion onto 109,121 and 125 Owens Street If the commission chooses this alternative the conditions included in staff s recommendation should be included D Deny If the Commission finds that the proposed request unacceptable it should recommend denial of the requested amendment With a denial, the basis of the action should be given PCP Case 06-53 Rosebud - ZAT CPA and ZAM Page 9 3 Zorunv- Man Amendment A Approve If the Commission finds the applicant's request for a Zoning Map Amendment for the entire property acceptable it should be approved This alternative allows full geographical expansion on to 109,121 and 125 Owens Street If the commission chooses this alternative the conditions included in staff's recommendation should be included B Approve in part Follow staff's recommendation listed below, as conditioned, by approving the Zoning Map Amendment for Lots 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11,13,14, the east 1 foot of Lot 8, and the east 1 foot of the south 19 feet of Lot 6, but deny the Zoning Map Amendment for Lots 6, 8,10, and 12 excluding the east 1 foot of Lot 8 and excluding the east 1 foot of the south 19 feet of Lot 6 This alternative allows limited geographical expansion on to 125 Owens St but not on to 121 or 109 Owens St C Approve in part Approve the Zoning Map Amendment for Lots 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, East 90 feet of Lots 11 and 13, the east 1 foot of Lot 8, and the east 1 foot of the south 19 feet of Lot 6, but deny the Zoning Map Amendment for Lots 6, 8,10, 12,14 and the West 36 feet of Lots 11 and 13, excluding the east 1 foot of Lot 8 and excluding the east 1 foot of the south 19 feet of Lot 6 This alternative allows no geographical expansion on to 109,121 and 125 Owens Street If the commission chooses this alternative the conditions included in staff s recommendation should be included D Deny If the Commission finds that the proposed request unacceptable it should recommend denial of the requested amendment With a denial, the basis of the action should be given Alternatives for all items A Forward the matter to the City Council without a recommendation from the planning commission The 60 day decision deadline for this matter is January 6, 2007 The Commission could table the matter until your December 11, 2006 meeting, however, due to publication requirements the Council would have to act on the application without the opportunity to table action unless the applicant agrees to an extension of the review 60-day deadline B Continue the public hearing until the December 11, 2006 Planning Commission meeting The 60 day decision deadline for the request is January 6, 2007 unless the applicant agrees to an extension If the Commission tables action to December 11, 2006 a final recommendation to the Council must be forwarded to the Council at your December 11, 2006 meeting PCP Case 06-53 Rosebud - ZAT, CPA, and ZAM Page 10 STAFF RECOMMENDATION Zoning Text Amendment 1 Recommend City Council approval of the Neighborhood Business District regulations as proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment 2 Recommend City Council approve an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map change from Single -Family Small Lot (SFSL) to Neighborhood Commercial (NC) for Lots 1, 3, 5, 7, 9,11,13,14, the east 1 foot of Lot 8, and the east 1 foot of the south 19 feet of Lot 6 subject to the following a The Comprehensive Plan amendment shall not become effective until after approval by the Metropolitan Council and an application is made and approved for a Conditional Use Permit by City Council b If the Metropolitan Council requires and significant modification to the Comprehensive Plan amendment as proposed, then the Comprehensive Plan amendment shall be reconsidered by the City c If the Metropolitan Council makes a funding that the Comprehensive Plan amendment has a substantial impact on, or contains a substantial departure from, and metropolitan system plan, that the Comprehensive Plan amendment shall be reconsidered by the City 3 Recommend City Council deny an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map from Single -Family Small Lot (SFSL) to Neighborhood Commercial (NC) for Lots 6, 8, 10, and 12 excluding the east 1 foot of Lot 8 and the east 1 foot of the south 19 feet of Lot 6 Zoning Map Amendment 4 Recommend City Council approve an amendment to the Zoning Map from Two -Family Residential (RB) to Neighborhood Business District (NB) for Lots 1, 3, 5, 7, 9,11,13, 14, the east 1 foot of Lot 8, and the east 1 foot of the south 19 feet of Lot 6 subject to the following a The Rezoning shall not become effective until after application is made and approved for a Conditional Use Permit b If the Metropolitan Council requires and significant modification to the Comprehensive Plan amendment as proposed, then the Rezoning shall be reconsidered by the City c If the Metropolitan Council makes a finding that the Comprehensive Plan amendment has a substantial impact on, or contains a substantial departure from, and metropolitan system plan, then the Rezoning shall be reconsidered by the City 5 Recommend City Council deny an amendment to the Zoning Map from Two -Family Residential (RB) to Neighborhood Business District (NB) for Lots 6, 8, 10, and 12 excluding the east 1 foot of Lot 8 and the east 1 foot of the south 19 feet of Lot 6 Subd 18 1 NB — NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS DISTRICT General Intent This District is designed to recognize certain existing non-residential uses/structures that are not in conformity with the regulations of the zoning district within which they are located Due to many decades of continued non-residential use, substantial economic investments, soundness of physical structure, vested property rights, or other similar considerations it is neither reasonable nor practical to continue to designate the uses as non -conforming Such existing non -conforming uses a) that are located on property that is re -zoned to NB, Neighborhood Business, and b) that pursuant to this Section 31-1, Subd 18 1 of the City Code are issued a Conditional Use Permit after rezoning to the NB district, shall be considered legal, conforming uses under conditions and regulations contained hereafter Since any property re -zoned to NB, Neighborhood Business is by its very nature surrounded by and in close proximity to residential uses, it is public policy to regulate the non-residential uses to minimize land use incompatibilities 2 Permitted Uses with Conditional Use Permit from the City Council All uses of structures and land in the NB, Neighborhood Business Zoning District require Conditional Use Permits A non -conforming business property owner may request a Conditional Use Permit, and the City Council may issue that Conditional Use Permit, only after review and recommendation by the Planning Commission and only if all of the following criteria are met a Only the following properties shall be eligible for rezoning to the NB district, [ LIST PROPERTIES - See Exhibit ` 51 However, it is not the intent of this section to require or automatically rezone an above listed property to the NB District b The use for which the Conditional Use Permit is being requested must be a legal non -conforming use at the time of the request, which is to say that the use must either have been in existence prior to adoption of the zoning regulations that resulted in the use's non -conforming status, or the use must have been specifically approved by the City Council or Planning Commission subsequent to adoption of said zoning regulations, c Together with the Conditional Use Permit request, the property owner must also request a rezoning of the property's base zoning district to NB, Neighborhood Business, i If the City Council determines that the Conditional Use Permit and the rezoning requests are both acceptable, then the City Council may approve the rezoning request concurrently with the Conditional Use Permit request, and d If the property is not currently designated Neighborhood Commercial on the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map then together with the Conditional Use Permit request, the property owner must also request a Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map amendment that reclassifies the future land use of the property to Neighborhood Commercial, i If the City Council determines that the Conditional Use Permit and the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map amendment are both acceptable, then the City Council may approve the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map amendment request concurrently with the Conditional Use Permit request No uses are allowed on an individual parcel of property within the NB, Neighborhood Business Zoning District except those uses that are specifically identified in the Conditional Use Permit approved by the City Council for that individual parcel of property All conditionally permitted uses within the NB, Neighborhood Business Zoning District are allowed to continue only at the size and in the manner of operation identified in the Conditional Use Permit approved by the City Council, unless an amendment to increase the size or change the manner of operation is requested of the City Council and approved by the City Council 3 Development Regulations a Area, Setback and Height regulations The area, setback, and height regulations of the property shall be specified in the Conditional Use Permit b Signs Signs in the NB District shall follow the CBD sign controls and shall require design review by the HPC 4 Other Uses Permitted By Conditional Use Permit Any of the following that are not specifically identified in the Conditional Use Permit approved by the City Council for an individual parcel of property may be allowed, but only if a Conditional Use Permit amendment is requested of the City Council and approved by the City Council a New signs, off-street parking, exterior lights, or other similar changes or alterations of those conditions permitted by Conditional Use Permit b Reconstruction following damage by normal wear and tear, fire, windstorm, explosion, or other catastrophic event c Uses deemed appropriate and compatible within the neighborhood by the City Council 5 Exceptions and Additions a Upon application for a Conditional Use Permit, but prior to the issuance of the Conditional Use Permit, the City Council may require reasonable conditions for immediate property improvements such as removal of junk and debris, installation of screening, building and yard maintenance, and conformity to the performance standards of the zoning ordinance 11/4/06 DRAFT b Any accessory use existing on the date of Conditional Use Permit issuance is a permitted accessory use c Lot areas, lot widths, and setback requirements, as existing on the date of Conditional Use Permit issuance shall be considered conforming d Parking, landscaping, signage and exterior lighting, as specifically described on the Conditional Use Permit are permitted 6 Amendments to existing NB Conditional Use Permits A proposed amendment to an existing NB Conditional Use Permit shall be considered as if it were a new Condition Use Permit The City Council shall review all amendments to a conditional use permit and shall approve or deny said amendments Amend section §31-1 Subd 30 (3) c related to design permits Add a new paragraph 3 that states the following 3 Any exterior remodeling or site alteration in the NB Distnct Maintenance of a building or site shall not be considered exterior remodeling or site alteration Exhibit ` A ALL OF LOT 4 & N 52 FT OF LOT 5 & 6 & N 50 FT LOTS 7 & 8 BLK 9 STAPLES & MAY'S ADD N 50FT S 52FT OF LT 3 BLK 3 CARLI &. SCHULENBURGS ADD S 15 FT OF LOT 12 & ALL OF LOT 14 BLK 7 GREELEY & SLAUGHTERS ADD 2ND WARD LOTS 1 3 5 7 & 9 ALSO E 1FT OF LOT 8 & E 1FT OF S 19FT OF LOT 6 ALL OF BLK 010 GREELEY & SLAUGHTERS ADD E 90 FT LOTS 11 & 13 BLK 010 GREELEY & SLAUGHTERS ADD ALL OF LOT 10 & N 25 FT OF LOT 12 BLK 4 THOMPSON PARKER & MOWERS 2ND ADD 2ND WARD ALL THAT PART OF SW1A SW 1/4 OF SECTION 28 TOWNSHIP 30 NORTH RANGE 20 WEST DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF SOUTH GREELEY STREET 30 FEET SOUTH OF THE NORTH LINE OF SAID QUARTER QUARTER SECTION THENCE EAST PARALLEL TO SAID NORTH LINE 117 16 FEET TO A POINT 136 FEET WEST OF THE WEST LINE OF SOUTH WILLIAM STREET AND APPROXIMATE PARALLEL TO SAID EAST LINE OF SOUTH GREELEY STREET 115 23 FEET TO THE NORTH LINE OF WEST OLIVE STREET THEN WEST ON SAID NORTH LINE 48 34 FEET TO A POINT 68 7 FEET EAST OF SAID EAST LINE OF SOUTH GREELEY STREET THENCE IN A NORTHWESTERLY DIRECTION ON A CURVED LINE TO THE RIGHT WITH A RADIUS OF 68 7 FEET TO A POINT ON SAID EAST LINE OF SOUTH GREELEY STREET 68 7 FEET NORTH OF SAID NORTH LINE OF WEST OLIVE STREET THENCE NORTH ALONG SAID EAST LINE OF SOUTH GREELEY STREET 46 53 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING SAID STREETS BEING LOCATED IN THE CITY OF STILLWATER IN SAID COUNTY AS HERETOFORE LAID OUT AND ESTABLISHED STILLWATER CITY ALL THAT PART OF THE SWIA SWIA OF SECTION 28 TOWNSHIP 30 RANGE 20 DE- SCRIBED AS FOLLOWS COMMENCE AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE SWIA SWIA OF SECTION 28 TOWNSHIP 30 RANGE 20 THENCE SOUTH ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID SW 1/4 SW 1/4 FOR 195 23 FEET TO ITS INTERSECTION WITH THE SOUTH LINE OF WEST OLIVE STREET THENCE WEST ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE OF WEST OLIVE STREET FOR 143 07 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THIS DESCRIPTION THENCE CONTINUING WEST ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE OF WEST OLIVE STREET FOR 71 3 FEET THENCE ON A CURVE TO THE LEFT CONCAVE TO THE SOUTHEAST CENTRAL ANGLE OF 90 DEGREES 26 MINUTES 30 SECONDS RADIUS OF 67 78 FEET FOR A DISTANCE OF 106 99 FEET TO ITS INTERSECTION WITH THE EAST LINE OF SOUTH GREELEY STREET THENCE SOUTH ALONG SAID EAST LINE OF SOUTH GREELEY STREET FOR 61 3 FEET THENCE EAST AND PARALLEL WITH SAID SOUTH LINE OF WEST OLIVE STREET FOR 140 FEET THENC NORTH AND PARALLEL WITH SAID EAST LINE OF SOUTH GREELEY STREET FOR 130 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING STILLWATER CITY, LOT 8 BLOCK 1 GRAY & SLAUGHTERS ADD LOT 28 BLOCK 14 CHURCHILL NELSON & SLAUGHTERS ADD ALL OF BLK 1 OF WEBSTER S 3RD ADD, LOT 5 AND 6 BLK 9 SUBJ TO RD EASE COOPERS ADDITION LOTS 20 & 21 BLK 3 SABIN'S ADD S 15 FT OF LOT 14 & ALL OF LOT 15 BLK 5 CHURCHILL NELSON & SLAUGHTERS ADD SABIN'S ADD ALL THAT PT OF BLOCK 12 SABINS ADDN TO STILLWATER DESC AS FOLL BEG AT THE NW CORNER OF LOT 20 OF SD BLK 12 THN N ALG THE E LN OF OWEN STREET DIST 40FT TO THE POB OF THE TRACT TO BE DESC THN E & PAR WITH THE N LN OF SD LOT 20 A DIST 113FT THN N & PAR WITH THE E LN OF OWEN STREET TO THE S LN OF THE LAND FORMERLY OWN BY THE STILLWATER WATER COMPANY THN WLY ALG THE S LN OF THE SD STILLWATER WATER COMPANY LAND TO THE E LN OF OWEN STREET THN S ALG THE E LN OF OWENS STREET A DIST OF 40FT TO THE POB ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF ON FILE & OF RECORD IN THE OFF OF THE COUNTY RECORDER -WASH CO MN SUBJECT TO EASEMENT, SABIN'S ADD ALL THAT PART OF BLOCK 12 OF SABIN'S ADDITION TO STILLWATER DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 20 OF SAID BLOCK 12 AND RUNNING THENCE ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT 20 TO THE EAST LINE OF OWEN STREET THENCE NORTH ON THE EAST LINE OF OWEN STREET A DISTANCE OF 40 FEET THENCE EASTERLY AND PARALLEL TO THE NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT 20 TO A POINT DIRECTLY NORTH OF THE STARTING POINT ABOVE NOTED THENCE SOUTH TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING SABIN S ADDITION TO STILLWATER STILLWATER CITY W 1/2 OF LOT 16 AND W 1/2 OF S 35 FT LOT 17 BLK 4 CHURCHILL NELSON & SLAUGHTERS ADD, E 1/2 OF LOT 16 & E 1/2 OF S 35 FT LOT 17 BLK 4 CHURCHILL NELSON SLAUGHTER ADD LOTS 26, 27, AND 28 BLOCK 13 CHURCHILL NELSON & SLAUGHTERS ADD LOTS 1 2 AND 3 BLK 12 CHURCHILL NELSON & SLAUGHTERS ADD #1 1 Address 808 4'h St N PIN 2803020210061 and 2803020210063 Zoning RB LUP SFSL Current Business Consolidated Lumber ' d Company (Since 1975) Planning Case Files 165, 178, 88-55, 93- 34, and 00-14 Legal Description ALL OF LOT 4 & N 52 FT OF LOT S&6&N50FT LOTS 7&8BLK9 STAPLES & MAY S ADD Previous Users Johnson Brothers Meat Market, Country Boy (Pre 1973) 1 Previous Users Antique Store (1970), Tailoring Business (1975), Heated Storage (1982) Note Property was zoned in 1970 to CA and changed back to RB in 1975 Previous Users Holiday Foods Previous Users Snowland Foods, Davian Building (1978 #5 l Address 112 Greeley St N Zoning RB LUP SFSL Current Business Just for Me ` The Spa" Planning Case Files 387, and 98-74 Legal Description E 90 FT LOTS 11 & 13 BLK 010 GREELEY & SLAUGHTERS ADD PIN 2803020320118 Previous Users Automobile Repair Shop (1980) Previous Users Cub Foods Panting and Sign Painting Shop(1980), Valley Co-op #7 1 Address 920 Olive St W PIN 2803020330003 Zoning RB LUP SFSL Current Business Nelson's Ice Cream Planning Case Files 93-8 Legal Description ALL THAT PART OF SW 1/4 SW IA OF SECTION 28 TOWNSHIP 30 NORTH RANGE 20 WEST DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF SOUTH GREELEY STREET 30 FEET SOUTH OF THE NORTH LINE OF SAID QUARTER QUARTER SECTION THENCE EAST PARALLEL TO SAID NORTH LINE 117 16 FEET TO A POINT 136 FEET WEST OF THE WEST LINE OF SOUTH WILLIAM STREET AND APPROXIMATE PARALLEL TO SAID EAST LINE OF SOUTH GREELEY STREET 115 23 FEET TO THE NORTH LINE OF WEST OLIVE STREET THEN WEST ON SAID NORTH LINE 48 34 FEET TO A POINT 68 7 FEET EAST OF SAID EAST LINE OF SOUTH GREELEY STREET THENCE IN A NORTHWESTERLY DIRECTION ON A CURVED LINE TO THE RIGHT WITH A RADIUS OF 68 7 FEET TO A POINT ON SAID EAST LINE OF SOUTH GREELEY STREET 68 7 FEET NORTH OF SAID NORTH LINE OF WEST OLIVE STREET THENCE NORTH ALONG SAID EAST LINE OF SOUTH GREELEY STREET 46 53 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING SAID STREETS BEING LOCATED IN THE CITY OF STILL WATER IN SAID COUNTY AS HERETOFORE LAID OUT AND ESTABLISHED STILLWATER CITY Previous Users Brown's Ice Cream #8 1 Address 305 Greeley St S PIN 2803020330002 Zoning RB 1 �_A%A T; LUP SFSL Current Business Multi -Tenant Building (Since 1987) Planning Case Files Legal Description ALL THAT PART OF THE SW1/4 SW1/4 OF SECTION 28 TOWNSHIP 30 RANGE 20 DE SCRIBED AS FOLLOWS COMMENCE AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE SW114 SW1/4 OF SECTION 28 TOWNSHIP 30 RANGE 20 THENCE SOUTH ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID SW1/4 SW1/4 FOR 195 23 FEET TO ITS INTERSECTION WITH THE SOUTH LINE OF WEST OLIVE STREET THENCE WEST ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE OF WEST OLIVE STREET FOR 143 07 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THIS DESCRIPTION THENCE CONTINUING WEST ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE OF WEST OLIVE STREET FOR 71 3 FEET THENCE ON A CURVE TO THE LEFT CONCAVE TO THE SOUTHEAST CENTRAL ANGLE OF 90 DEGREES 26 MINUTES 30 SECONDS RADIUS OF 67 78 FEET FOR A DISTANCE OF 106 99 FEET TO ITS INTERSECTION WITH THE EAST LINE OF SOUTH GREELEY STREET THENCE SOUTH ALONG SAID EAST LINE OF SOUTH GREELEY STREET FOR 61 3 FEET THENCE EAST AND PARALLEL WITH SAID SOUTH LINE OF WEST OLIVE STREET FOR 140 FEET THENC NORTH AND PARALLEL WITH SAID EAST LINE OF SOUTH GREELEY STREET FOR 130 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING STILLWATER CITY Previous Users Former clinic that was part of the nursing home #9 1 Address 413 Greeley St S Zoning RB LUP SFSL Current Business Valley Preschool (Montessori School) (1980) Planning Case Files 400 Legal Description LOT 8 BLOCK 1 GRAY & SLAUGHTERS ADD PIN 2803020330048 I Previous Users Felix Radio Repair (Prior to 1980) 1 #10 1 Address 901 3`d St S Zoning RB LUP SFSL Current Business Multi -tenant office Planning Case Files 632, 96-38, 04-51 (HPC), 04-72, 04-74, and 06-37 Legal Description LOT 28 BLOCK 14 CHURCHILL NELSON & SLAUGHTERS ADD PIN 3303020110109 Previous Users Labor Temple 3 —Local 957 Carpenters Union (1980), United Pentecostal Church(1986), and True Life Christian Church (1996) #11 Address 375 Orleans St E PIN 3303020410001, 3303020410002, 3303020410037,and 3303020410038 Zoning RB LUP SFSL Current Business Human Services Inc Planning Case Files 92-17, 04-25, and 04-76 Legal Description ALL OF BLK 1 OF WEBSTER S 3RD ADD Previous Users Stillwater Clinic (1980) - 1� ; vtners — Historic uommercial lsunainus Coned uommerciall #12 jAddress 1101 Owens St N PIN 2103020330037 and 2103020330038 Zoning CA LUP NC Current Business Oasis Market Planning Case Files Legal Description LOT 5 AND 6 BLK 9 SUBJ TO RD EASE COOPERS ADDITION Previous Users Legal Description LOTS 20 & 21 BLK 3 SABIN S ADD Previous Users Legal Description S 15 FT OF LOT 14 & ALL OF LOT 15 BLK 5 CHURCHILL NELSON & SLAUGHTERS ADD Previous Users #15 1 Address 515 and 517 Owens S N PIN 2803020230006 and 2803020230004 Zoning CA - f LUP NC Current Business'Y 515 - North Hill Liquors 517 — Harbor Bar _u ® u " Planning Case Filesa= 1 i r" Legal Description SABIN S ADD ALL THAT PT OF BLOCK 12 SABINS ADDN TO STILLWATER DESC AS FOLL BEG AT THE NW CORNER OF LOT 20 OF SD BLK 12 THN N ALG THE E LN OF OWEN STREET DIST 40FT TO THE POB OF THE TRACT TO BE DESC THN E & PAR WITH THE N LN OF SD LOT 20 A DIST 113FT THN N & PAR WITH THE E LN OF OWEN STREET TO THE S LN OF THE LAND FORMERLY OWN BY THE STILLWATER WATER COMPANY THN WLY ALG THE S LN OF THE SD STILLWATER WATER COMPANY LAND TO THE E LN OF OWEN STREET THN S ALG THE E LN OF OWENS STREET A DIST OF 40FT TO THE POB ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF ON FILE & OF RECORD IN THE OFF OF THE COUNTY RECORDER WASH CO MN SUBJECT TO EASEMENT AND SABIN'S ADD ALL THAT PART OF BLOCK 12 OF SABIN S ADDITION TO STILLWATER DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 20 OF SAID BLOCK 12 AND RUNNING THENCE ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT 20 TO THE EAST LINE OF OWEN STREET THENCE NORTH ON THE EAST LINE OF OWEN STREET A DISTANCE OF 40 FEET THENCE EASTERLY AND PARALLEL TO THE NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT 20 TO A POINT DIRECTLY NORTH OF THE STARTING POINT ABOVE NOTED THENCE SOUTH TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING SABIN S ADDITION TO STILLWATER STILLWATER CITY Previous Users #17 1 Address 114 Churchill St W Zoning CA LUP NC Current Business Charlsen Planning Case Files Legal Description E 1/2 OF LOT 16 & E 1/2 OF S 35 FT LOT 17 BLK 4 CHURCHILL NELSON SLAUGHTER ADD Previous Users #18 1 Address 901 4" St S Zoning CA LUP NC Current Business Jim Meister's Planning Case Files Legal Description LOTS 26 27 AND 28 BLOCK 13 CHURCHILL NELSON & SLAUGHTERS ADD Previous Users PIN 3303020110062 X i, , PIN 3303020110089 and 3303020110090 #19 I Address 902 4`' St S I PIN 3303020120141, 3303020120142, and 3303020120143 Zoning CA LUP NC Current Business Angel O'Malley's, Amanda's Attic, and others Planning Case Files Legal Description LOTS 1 2 AND 3 BLK 12 CHURCHILL NELSON & SLAUGHTERS ADD I Previous Users South Hill Hooley 1 U) Q) N N fn Q m U cr v— m O � � C •� C I■ Y rv° w mile Iti III■. mini 11111 ■■ .IIII IIII . ■■ 11■ 1■III 11r ■ ►� ■;i;:;il■ ��■ ■�; ��� illy 11E ■■I ■.-.����! 111111. will ■ �I ■ nl�l\ ■ _■ MINI 1z ■■ ■:, I� III■ ' ■= ■11=� �1 ■� .:1_ III■ ■■ ■_ ■1. ■:iM HE ■■ ■■ :■ !11■ Elm ■. - I I I I I I I I I m w Hlnos 3nN3VV Hljlj 76 0 Z Ty Y6. - HF f)O= 3nM3AV- IUMS y z � N r 1 W 1SLIIj H1nOS 133ri1S isaij H1nos !. N 3AV NtlVZO _ ■ ■�� IN ■i . � ■■111 II ��� II �1 11 11� �■ ■11.1 ■1111� �I�� ■III■ _ 11111NN Mill m■Ill■1 ■i �1 I ■■ 111■oil Hill ■mini■ IIII � ..■■1 � ' n11111111111 ■■I■IIII 1■IIII 11■11 ■1 11■11■1 m111 minion HIM E■II■ ■■ �� �■,:I■ ■■II 1 'llllli I,„IIIIII m a a H1boN 3nW Just for Me Retreat Homes Page 1 of 2 Just for Me the Spa 110 S Greeley St Stillwater, MN (651) 439-4662 ����31afl�e�(�3r�jS�res��S��R�clCa�zaS�S+�lort�(`3Speci�Is�Gitl��rds'.? p: Jot�s?M� 00 The Retreat at Just for Me Our on -site, 1870s-era home, comfortably modernized and beautifully decorated, is available for you to rent with any scheduled Spa service The Retreat sleeps up to eight people and is ideal for . bridal parties . slumber/bu-thday parties . "girls' night out" . reunions Our Retreat home features . three bedrooms -two w/queen beds, one w/king bed . two full baths . spacious living room with queen sofa bed . cozy den with electric fireplace . dinette and sunroom . fully -equipped kitchen Rates* are $295/night Sunday through Thursday, and $350/night for Fuday and Saturday For more information on availability and reservations, please contact our Concierge at (651) 439-4662 At least one Spa service per person per stay is required Rates do not include cost of Spa services 44 The Cottage at Just for Me Our on -site, two -bedroom cottage is perfect for a couples' romantic getaway, or as the destination for an "R & R" weekend for up to four people Our 1870 s Retreat home Take a home Have a customized workout at our on site fitness club when you stay with us' Pilates Yoga even a Stillwater Walk & Shop tour' http //wwwjustformespa com/VacationRetreat htm 11/8/2006 Just for Me Retreat Homes Page 2 of 2 Our Cottage features . two bedrooms with queen beds . one full bath with claw -foot tub e beautiful living room with oak floors and woodwork . lovely dining room . fully -equipped galley kitchen . three -season front screened porch . enclosed back porch off kitchen Rates* are $250/night Sunday through Thursday and $295/mght Friday and Saturday For more information on availability and reservations, please contact our Concierge at (651)439-4662 At least one Spa service per person per stay is required Rates do not include cost of Spa services Our country Cottage home Take a photo tour of our Cottage home The spacious screened porch welcomes you http //www justformespa comNacationRetreat htm 11/8/2006 November 5, 2006 Dear Mike, We are writing to you as a member of the Planning Commission in response to a letter we received from John and Susanna Patterson Quite frankly we are disappointed to know that there is opposition to Heidi Rosebud's plan for up -grading her business We have lived at 125 So Greeley, directly across from the present Spa, since 1968 and have lived through many changes in the properties now owned by Heidi We have seen the Stillwater Fitness building go from a creamery storage building, to a deserted building to a storage building for Junker Construction During those years the building also housed many rodents and was an eye -sore for the neighborhood The house that is now the Spa was a duplex and never was an attractive piece of property Some of that time a very good mechanic owned the house and repaired many cars in his garage and the property was often filled with cars waiting to be fixed We were never sure who the renters for the upstairs apartment were going to be and did not appreciate some of the more noisy party -going people who often rented the apartment The present Spa is attractive to look at as well as a quiet neighbor Since Heidi bought the property every change has been an improvement and we are certain that any future changes will also be improvements The letter we received said that Heidi plans to "remove" one of the houses In a recent conversation with Heidi it was our understanding that she has no such intention, but rather "move" a house to make room for a little more off-street parking With Len's and Nelson's also so close to us, this area is already somewhat commercial and we see no reason to block positive chances that Heidi has planned (We would like to see Nelson's make some positive changes on that property) We had intended to be at the next planning meeting, but find we will be out of town, thus we are writing to you to make our feelings known We hope this will help in your decision to allow Heidi Rosebud to proceed with her planned changes, once approved Sincerely, Mary CHarcey� rL.vC9 V C:U Dennis W Harcey NOV - 7 2006 ��� -� COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Planning Commission City of Stillwater 216 North Fourth Street Stillwater, MN 55082 November 1, 2006 Dear Commissioners, The members of the Planning Commission have received glowing letters of support for Heidi Rosebud s proposed rezoning from a dozen or so of the spa & fitness club employees While they express commendably loyal support for a good employer, they fail to address the relevant zoning question None of them live in the immediate vicinity of the spa & fitness club Ask any one of them "Would you like to see the house across the street from your home torn down and replaced with a parking lot9" You know what their answer would be Indeed, some of their comments support the idea that the spa & fitness club have outgrown the definition of a `Neighborhood Business" detailed in the `Neighborhood Business District" language As an employer of more than 100 people, with a payroll of $1 5 million, and clients who come in from California, North Dakota Wisconsin, and the entire Twin Cities area, this is not your typical "corner store" business The employees' letters somehow assume it is Heidi Rosebud's right to expand and develop her business in any way she sees fit and that her neighbors are attempting to deny her these rights when they oppose the commercialization of the houses along Owens Street When Heidi Rosebud purchased residentially - zoned property in a residentially zoned area, she had no reason to expect or to demand that the property be re -zoned to accommodate commercial use When we decided to buy a house in Stillwater we based our choice in large part on the character and quality of the neighborhood It seems to be a reasonable assumption that when buying a residential property in a well -established residential neighborhood, that the neighborhood will remain residential, both in character and in the actual zoning that governs land use in the area None of us was buying a pig in a poke here Homeowners have purchased residential property for residential use, Heidi Rosebud purchased residential property for commercial use It is she who has taken a risk It is our rights — the rights of the homeowners — that are protected by the zoning laws, and we would like that protection to continue Sin re JG` Wn & Susanna Patterson 1018 West Olive Street Stillwater, MN 55082 651-3 51-2004 spatterson@asgc-mall com, j-spatterson@peoplepc com E - 6 2006Y DEVELOPMENT October 12, 2006 Patricia Dillon ® 117 Birchwood Drive ®_ Stillwater, Minnesota 55082 Stillwater Planning Commission 216 North Fourth Street Stillwater, Minnesota 55082 �— Dear Members, I have been part of the Stillwater Community for thirty years and live in the area of Stillwater Fitness and Just For Me I am in favor of these properties being zoned commercially I have watched this business grow from a small home on Myrtle Street to a large campus Heidi Rosebud has beautified these _ properties and continues to on a regular basis I would surely hope that everyone involved including neighbors remember what this whole area looked like before all these major improvements ® Heidi Rosebud has invested her hard work and time into this community The growth of this e business is investing into the future of this community Thank you for your consideration, Sincerely, Patricia Dillon P.� OCT 1 7 2006 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PA October 15, 2006 To Whom It May Concern We are writing this letter on behalf of Heidi Rosebud and her contribution to the Stillwater community My husband and I moved to the Stillwater area from Minneapolis five years ago, seeking a community with a small-town yet progressive feel We became clients of JUST FOR ME SPA and were very impressed with friendly staff; excellent service, and unique environment When we learned the history of the salon/spa we were amazed at the transformation, impressed with Heidi's vision, and the charm in which she has designed her spa. Today, as Heidi expands her business I hope the community, especially the neighboring areas, realize how fortunate they are to have a business owner that can grow her company, provide jobs, serve the Stillwater community and actual improve the neighborhood In Minneapolis we experienced the demise of what once were charming neighborhoods due to lack of vision, planning, and money Stillwater should be thankful for Heidi's vision and the respect she has for this community Smcer�YC:) Bo & Ten Shellum 651-439-4853 OCT 1 7 2006 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT October 10, 2006 City Planning Commission 216 North Fourth St Stillwater, MN 55082 - Dear City Planning Commission, f _ I am writing to regards to the importance for the approval,of Heidi Rosebuds rezoning at the Just For Me Spa and Stillwater Fitness Club I have been fortunate enough to be employed at Just For Me Spa for over 10 years I started as a part -tune receptionist and with growth and successes of her business have now been employed full -tune for 6 years as a manager I have been lucky enough to grow up in ,Stillwater and have wttnessed first hand the growth of Heidi's businesses I believe with all my heart how important her businesses are to the Stillwater community and with continued growth can only benefit our community and surrounding communities I have been told time and time again the main reason our guests come to visit Stillwater is because of the small town feel and the friendliness of our businesses and others Heidi Rosebud has taken great care to creating such an environment I thank it's important for the city planning commission to be aware of how many local residents Heidi employs at Just For Me Spa and Stillwater Fitness, and how her success and future success directly affect these employees and their family's livelihood I am one of these employees and I strongly encourage you to re -zone Hetdt's properties as commercial to ensure her right to maintain and grow her businesses within this community, for the community I trust her business judgment and given her great success so far, you will too Sincerely, 5 � Jennifer Coffey Booking Manager Just For Me Spa 0CT 1 7 2006 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT October 13, 2006 City Planning Commission 216 North Fourth Street Stillwater, MN 55082 Dear Council members, I've been associated with Heidi Rosebud for 27 years personally and 16 years professionally Heidi has grown up in Stillwater, went to public school in Stillwater, and chose to start her business, build a home and serve the community here in Stillwater Just For Me Spa has employed hundreds of local people over the years and we would like the opportunity to continue to help support this great town We certainly have been shown what Just For Me SPA means to the community because we continue to grow, and be supported by the people who live here Just For Me SPA/Stillwater Fitness and Heidi Rosebud have a proven track record Even as a young person, Heidi always cared about others, her surroundings and how she could give back to her community, and I believe her business reflects this She has and will continue to do right by this community, the people she employs and the people she serves I am proud to be associated with this business professionally, and Heidi Rosebud personally Stillwater should be too I am asking you to vote in favor of her rezoning inc rely, Jennif iovmazzo I &® 16.1 OCT 1 7 2006 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT OCT-17-2006 08 00A FROM TO 6514309331 P 2 October 16, 2006 Mr Bill Tumblad Mr Mike Pogge Community Development Directors Planning Commissioners City of Stillwater 216 North Fourth Street Stillwater, MN 55082 OCT 1 7 2006 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT RE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT, ZONING MAP AMENDMENT AND ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT — Case No CPARAMrZAT/06-53 (Heidi Rosebud, dust For Me Spa) Dear Directors and Commissioners This letter is to commend the Development Directors (Staff) and Planning Commissioners for their efforts in pursuing competent due process and thoughtful and deliberate progressive action to provide new and needed zoning solutions for the City of Stillwater Thank you for your focus and diligence in dealing with and resolving a complicated issue Stillwater needs your help Your individual and combined abilities are being called on to guide our City into the future We need you to help create new policy to direct our inevitable growth and protect our collective interests I completely approve and support the above referenced application because, after carefully considering all the issues, I find that Ms Rosebud's comprehensive improvement and business development plan is by far preferable to any alternatives, even "doing nothing" (Please refer to my attached October 4, 2006 letter to the Community Development Directors) At the October a Planning Commission open meeting, a few neighborhood property owners spoke of their perceptions on what they thought might be concerns Whereas 1 personally believe those comments to be uninformed misconceptions, I do the courtesy of recounting them here and then stating the obvious - will (one of the residences in question) it be a "party house"? No, it wit be an upscale, carefully appointed destination location for carefully screened individual, family or small group users Usage would be specific and always known in advance It is planned that no alcohol or food would be sold/provided - will the exterior of the (same as above) house meet appearance standards? Yes, again, it would be an upscale structure designed, and heavily invested in, to be attractive, pleasant and "in style" (far exceeding ordinary, individual residential "standards") - is (providing for an additional off-street) parking tot necessary? Yes, and a professionally designed, landscaped and maintained off-street parking facility, including new trees privacy lilac shrubs and flowers would be a welcome addition to the neighborhood OCT-17-2006 08 01A FROM TO 6514309331 P 3 - "I think I miss the way things used to be " We all think we do until we experience changes that we experience are for the better then, we call these the "good old days" Speaking for myself, I don't like surprises or disappointments 1 like to have reasonable assurances that good things will happen, that things will get better not deteriorate I have, over a protracted period of time, observed the positive, constant and deliberate contribution the Just For Me Spa business has provided to my neighborhood, Stillwater and the surrounding area They are "a Gass act", they provide upscale services, they attract an upscale clientele and they support over 100 upscale employees They, in all ways, bring improvement to our community My feeling is that, for my neighborhood's best interests and for Stiitwater's best interests, for now and in the future, we need to protect and grow these, our most valuable assets We need to provide a reasonable, fertile and protective environment for them just as we would guide and protect our very families A proven, upscale, environmentally friendly, aesthetically pleasing seance business that actually contributes to the Crty's ambiance, good will and property values? Of course we would want to protect a business that has made such a dear, substantial and long term commitment to Stillwater Thank you again for your considerable efforts in creating the new, and uniform, legal framework necessary to accomplish "the right things to do" The extra effort you provide now will be a lasting legacy to the City of Stillwater Very sincerely yours, P U, Richard "Dick" Reed 118 South Owens Street Stillwater, MN 55082 651-274-6279 Richard Reed(&-aol com Planning Commission City of Stillwater 216 N Fourth Street Stillwater, MN 55082 October 16, 2006 To Whom It May Concern, G-W CCT 1 7 2006 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT I'm writing in support of Heidi Rosebud's request for rezoning and future expansion possibilities for Stillwater Fitness Club and Just For Me Spa I request this approval with an obvious bias as a seven-year employee of Stillwater Fitness Club and Just For Me Spa, I've had the good fortune of being part of a unique business in Stillwater I've seen our spa grow out of it's previous location within the health club facility and stand on its own in the form of a gorgeous and welcoming log cabin While I don't come to work every day and wonder what this business means to the Stillwater community, the Planning Commission meeting last week caused me to realize that it's something vital to consider — what we provide both as a service provider as well as an employer of our community As General Manager of the spa, I have the privilege of meeting the various clients that come through our door I'm often asked who our "typical" client is I m afraid I can't succinctly answer that, but I am able to give you a glimpse as to who is walking through our door on any given day The forty -something husband and wife from California who came to town to visit some family A relative set up a special day for them at our spa Margaret, a sweet resident from Boutwell's Landing, whose husband brings her to the salon every week for a shampoo/style Don and Joanne, a husband and wife who frequent the health club daily and take advantage of our Platinum membership by having facials every month The female staff from Ryan Companies, who annually come into Stillwater for the night and spend a day and a half receiving spa treatments as a gift from their employer Ashley, a Woodbury teen, who receives Microdermabrasion treatments to help relieve her acne The six ladles from North Dakota who've been friends for over 60 years Each year they pick a spot in the U S to meet, and last spring, they chose our spa as their destination Our need to expand directly correlates with the needs and demands of our diverse clientele As a local employer, Heidi Rosebud currently employs a staff of 106, with approximately 80% of the staff from the Stillwater community Our 2005 payroll was $1 5 million I'm honored to be a part of a small business that offers health and dental insurance, as well as paid vacation and continued education and training We believe that each employee's individual achievement is what ultimately adds to the success of our overall business For example, about five years ago, we hired two hairstylists who had just graduated from Aveda Today, they are each residing in Stillwater homes that they purchased on their own We take great pride in these personal accomplishments It's my hope that the city will keep an open mind when considering Heidi Rosebud's requests I've spoken about our business as a service - provider and as an employer, but another important item is Heidi's role as a neighbor While some of the neighbors seem skeptical and distrustful, I'd like to assure them that Heidi has been their constant advocate in our workplace Time and time again, Heidi Rosebud reminds the employees that we're "part of a neighborhood " She is a steward for them and for the community overall As Mr Hoffbeck noted in the meeting on October gcn let's please give her the opportunity to present her ideas Thank you for your consideration, ( r Heidi Watson General Manager, Just For Me Spa September 10 2006 Honorable Members Stillwater Planning Commission 216 N Foui th Street Stillwater MN 55082 Dear Members, I am in support of Stillwater Fitness/Just for Me request for a zoning amendment, proposal for expansion of the buildings and additional uses of the properties owned by the business Stillwater Fitness/Just for Me promotes and provides the facilities for improving the physical and psychological health of our citizens It is gathering place and sanctuary where quality and pampered service contributes to health and beauty It is truly an asset to the community The site is located on the busiest streets and intersections in the City of Stillwater These are Greeley/Mrytle Streets and Owens/Myrtle Streets Traffic on these streets create a barrier with the residential neighborhood uses to the east, west and north Expansion of Stillwater Fitness/Just for Me campus will not greatly impact the neighboring residential uses if sensitive site planning and design are considered Stillwater Fitness/Just for me also provides Jobs for many Stillwater residents My children are both employed by Stillwater Fitness and their Jobs have provided them valuable work experience, not to mention, the importance of exercise, health and beauty They are also very fortunate to have the experience of working for great people too Please consider any expansion of Stillwater Fitness/Just for Me as improving the health of the City of Stillwater With all the problems of obesity and drugs in today's society, this business provides the opportunity for healthier lifestyles Thank you for your consideration n RECEIVED OCT 1 7 2006 Ann Pung-Teiwe 1408 W Linden Street COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Stillwater DEPARTMFNT October 12, 2006 13201 North Ozark Trail Stillwater, MN 55082 Stillwater City Council City Hall Stillwater, MN 55082 Dear Council Members RECEIVED OCT 11 2006 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT I am an employee of Heidi Rosebud at Stillwater Fitness, and I am writing in support of her request for commercial zoning Prior to becoming an employee I have been a member of Stillwater Fitness since 1994 I would like to share my perspective of this business as a client, an employee and as a citizen of the greater Stillwater community I decided to bring my business as a consumer to Stillwater Fitness after several years at a White Bear Lake health club I did so because Stillwater Fitness went well out of their way to accommodate the special needs of my family, which the other facility would not consider The customer service and amazing sense of community and belonging at Stillwater Fitness provided an atmosphere that retained my family as clients for twelve years I will also point out that in those twelve years the other surrounding businesses such as Marathon gas station, Len's Family Foods, Cub Foods, and several downtown businesses have benefited from my membership at Stillwater Fitness I was no longer traveling out of Stillwater for something that is very important to my family, I was staying in town and contributing to local businesses and the local tax base Two years ago I became an employee of Stillwater Fitness and am very proud to be working for Heidi Rosebud She has established a business that has become a desired, respected, and highly enjoyable work place Her amazing business model of promoting health and wellness provides a safe, secure and rewarding environment for those of us wanting to share in her vision Her high standard of professionalism and customer service is entrusted to me and to all of her employees Heidi Rosebud has created a business that promotes the good health and wellness not only for the current members of Stillwater Fitness and Just For Me, but also for the greater community of Stillwater and indeed the Twin Cities On October 14, 2006, Stillwater Fitness will host its first annual "Race for a Safe Place" benefiting the Tubman Family Alliance The Tubman Family Alliance operates Hill Home in Lake Elmo, which is a shelter for women and their dependant children This event is gaining support and media attention throughout the Twin Cities and is directly benefiting our community This is merely one example of numerous events and activities she has sponsored or contributed to We have all watched this business positively grow and benefit an increasing number of people With every improvement and reinvestment, she has respected and considered the welfare and the beautification of the neighborhood It would be irresponsible and a great loss to Stillwater's economy and vitality to hold this business back or create an environment that was unsupportive of her business growth I would hope that the Stillwater City Council would recognize this business model and this businesswoman as an example of a successful and outstanding independent and self made commercial entity She has the admiration and respect of this client/employee and thousands who know her Her track record speaks loudly for itself and warrants a vote of confidence from those judging her Thank you for your time and thoughtful consideration of this important decision Sincerely, Susanna Sidoti Gorodisher OCT-17-2006 08 00A FROM TO 6514309331 P 1 October 14,2006 To City of Stillwater Planning Commission Re Just For Me Re -Zoning Request To Whom It May Concern, I am writing this letter in support of the re -zoning request made by Heidi Rosebud and Just For Me Spa. I have been employed at Just For Me for a little over 4 years now and I feel this particular business is an asset to the city of Stillwater Heidi is not only providing a wealth of services to the public, but she is also providing employment opportunities Our spa and fitness center promotes good health and wellness and all the while it is convenient to the River Valley area In addition to the local residents, many people travel to Stillwater to experience what our spa has to offer This is creating clientele to the many other businesses in Stillwater which only helps to keep this area successful The ability to grow has to be present in order for a business to survive I feel the re- zoning request will give Heidi the needed tools to grow her business and aid in the continual success of all businesses in Stillwater In addition to the growth of the spa and the new jobs it will create, she will be able to provide more off-street parking A larger parking lot will ensure safer parking conditions for all of our clients It will also alleviate some of the parking on our already busy streets I am grateful to Heidi Rosebud for providing me with a career that I not only enjoy, but a spa that I am proud to be employed at I feel Just For Me is a wonderful place to re- charge yourself and take a vacation from the stress of every day life I am very excited about her proposed changes and look forward to watching her business become even more of a staple in the city of Stillwater Sincerely, Laura Liehr Team Lead Nail Department OCT 1 7 2006 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT October 16, 2006 Stillwater Planning Commission 216 North Fourth Street Stillwater, MN 55082 Dear council members, OCT 1 7 2006 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT My name is Kelly Franz and I've been a resident of Stillwater for over 13 years now My husband, two children and myself reside at 1311 Dallager Court, which is only 1 2 miles away from Just For Me SPA and Stillwater Fitness I'm proud to call the area surrounding Just For Me SPA and Stillwater Fitness my neighborhood Both my children attended Valley Pre-school, on beautiful days we love walking to Lens for groceries or riding our bikes to Nelsons for ice cream Part of my morning routine is to jog through this neighborhood I'm also an employee at Just For Me Spa The opportunities for advancement Heidi and her staff have presented me with over the last four years have allowed me to live and work in this wonderful community, I have no need to look elsewhere Working in my community allows me to contribute greatly to it I shop at our local stores and patron Stillwater's business for most all of our household needs My husband and I feel blessed to work and live in Stillwater and we make it a priority to support our local businesses was present at the first City Council meeting where Heidi Rosebud's proposal for re- zoning was introduced, I'd like to comment on a couple things that were mentioned One gentleman from the neighborhood mentioned he would like to keep what is left residential, residential for the sake of his children While I can appreciate him wanting a residential feel, my main concern as a mother with children in this neighborhood is safety Allowing Heidi to re -zone will enable her to build a new parking lot, which will greatly alleviate traffic on Ramsey & Greeley streets, where my children ride their bikes and take walks The safety of our children and all pedestrians should over -ride anyone's aesthetic desires My position now at Just For Me Spa is to coordinate all group and corporate bookings for the spa, and to oversee and work with all individuals staying at the Retreat Home and Cottage On a daily basis I'm informing people from all over the metro area and state on where to eat, dine and find entertainment in Stillwater It goes without saying, Heidi's business promotes more business for Stillwater I would like to share with you one more thing, this is in regards to the letters that were sent from the city to each of the neighbors that the potential re -zoning would affect The day after those letters were received, Heidi was out on the sidewalk knocking on all her neighbors' doors to answer any questions or listen to any concerns they may have She wrote a letter to all of them letting them know why she needed this re -zoning and how they can contact her if they would like to discuss her plans She made it her top priority for almost four day's to reach as many of her neighbors as she could Let me ask you, does this sound like a person who has no regard for the neighborhood in which she conduct's her business in? I encourage you to pass the request for re -zoning Stillwater has become the birthplace of Minnesota because industry and business brought people and opportunity here Our city's growth is directly related to the success of businesses here in the past, present and future Let's keep our businesses here in Stillwater and give them the opportunity to grow and operate accordingly Thank you, Kelly Franz October 16, 2006 To Stillwater Planning Commission This letter is in regards to Heidi Rosebuds Just For Me/Stillwater Fitness Club re -zoning request As an employee for the last 13 years, I have seen many changes and watched her vision unfold The improvements to the property are to numerous to mention, and the asthetics of the exterior speaks for itself She has added a wonderful destination spa to the business community which we as Stillwater residents can only be proud of By grantmg her permission to ad a parking lot will be beneficial to both neighbors and patrons She is to be commended for all of her hard work building, nurturing and maintaining such a successful business Sincerely, Kin Brach 55a8Z DECEIVE® OCT 1 7 2006 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT October 13, 2006 Stillwater Planning Commission 216 North Fourth Street Stillwater, MN 55082 Dear Members, I have lived in the Stillwater area for over 44 years For the last 16 of those years I have also been fortunate enough to be employed in the city which I also reside in It has been exciting watching the well -planned growth of this unique river town It has also been a pleasure watching the constant improvements of the properties along the Greeley/Myrtle Street area, which are owned by Heidi Rosebud Heidi has always taken great pride in how her businesses are presented to those who frequent them and to those that just happen to drive by them This is very obvious by looking at the before and after photos that were provided at the October 9, 2006 meeting The Stillwater Fitness Club and Just for Me Spa are both highly respected businesses in this community These businesses promote health and wellness along with employment opportunities I am strongly in favor of the request for commercial zoning for these properties It would be unfortunate to limit future improvements and/or expansions considering the positive changes Heidi has made in the past Thank you for your time Sincerely, Debbie Preuss I UT ' 7 2006 i + GYNIFIUNITY DEVELOPMENT October 12 2006 City Planning Commission 216 North Fourth Street Stillwater MN 55082 Dear City Planning Commission Just For Me Spa/Stillwater Fitness Center Rezoning I ve been a massage therapist at Just For Me Spa for over two and a half years and have been leading the massage department for over a year and a half now Working at Just For Me has given me many opportunities to become well acclimated with the Stillwater area and get to know many wonderful people Ever since I have become employed at JFM I look forward to work everyday and am thrilled to meet and see knew people as well as familiar faces Stillwater residence have been clients of mine since I started working here and am now seeing how much our business is expanding out into the Twin Cities area as well as all of Minnesota and neighboring states Being a massage therapist I have the opportunity to help my clients with therapeutic needs and relaxation while providing them a safe and serene place to escape Every client of JFM informs me of how beautiful our spa is and how much he or she enjoys coming to visit they never fail mention the quality and beauty of the spa Our long time Stillwater residences mention how they have watched Heidi Rosebud s business grow into a beautiful and necessary part of Stillwater Clients really appreciate having a relaxing and comforting destination in their hometown and outside residence love being able to make their trip to JFM an all day Stillwater affair by exploring our many resources I feel it is important for the City of Stillwater to allow Heidi Rosebud the right to operate her business as needed and to have the opportunity to continue growing to meet the needs of our local and surrounding communities Sincerely Cayla M Perkuhn Massage Dept Team Lead a EIVE I `' T1 7 2006 elo i lUNITY DEVELOPMENT [water H 8 R i fi PLACE OF M I N N E ti 0 1 A DATE November 9, 2006 CASE NO 06-59 APPLICANT Robert Clark Lynskey & Clark Companies REQUEST Discuss Residential Development Concept Plans LOCATION 1902 N William Street Located on western end of Hazel Street COMPREHENSIVE PLAN SFLL, Single Family Large Lot ZONING RA, Single Family Residential PLANNING COMMISSION DATE November 13, 2006 REVIEWERS City Planner, Public Works Director, Fire Chief, Police Chief PREPARED BY Bill Turnblad, Community Development Director' BACKGROUND Lynskey & Clark Companies would like to purchase and develop land currently owned by Mary Ann Sandeen The approximately 7 acre site is located at the end of Hazel Street To its west and south is the Stillwater Country Club property and to the north is Brown's Creek A single family neighborhood is located to the east The development team analyzed the physical site conditions, City code standards and Browns Creek Watershed District rules Then they applied the massmg standards of the property's current zoning district classification, which is RA, Single-Fanuly Residential (10,000 square foot minimum lot size) Their analysis yielded 18 single-family lots Though the zoning and physical characteristics of the Sandeen property may support 18 large single-family homes, the development team would prefer a two-family project The two-family concept envisions 13 single story buildings with two households in each building The total number of households would therefore be 26 Lynskey & Clark November 9 2006 Page 2 SPECIFIC REQUEST Discuss the site development concept with Planning Commission and City Council, especially to determine whether the two-family scenario is acceptable EVALUATION OF REQUEST A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND CTTY CODE REVIEW Comprehensive Plan a City's comprehensive plan future land use map classifies the eastern half of the property as SFLL, Single Family Large Lot The classification for the western half is golf course i Staff believes the golf course designation is a cartographic error and should simply be changed to SFLL on the future land use map 1 The error seems to have occurred after the 1996 annexation of the abutting golf course property The zoning map shows the AP district in its proper location, which is limited to the golf course property But, for some unexplained reason the Comp Plari s future land use map included more than the annexed golf course property b SFLL classification is used for areas that will develop at 2 0 units/net acre or less City code does not define "net" acreage anywhere, though the Met Council does Their definition is that net acreage = (gross acreage) - (wetlands) -(public waters) -(parks and public open spaces) -(arterial road r-o-w)-(undevelopable property) 1 On the subject property, this formula yields about 6 7 net acres a Assumed 7 2 gross acres minus 0 5 acres of undevelopable slopes This yields 6 7 net acres b Undevelopable slopes includes slopes 25% or greater that have a horizontal run of at least 50 feet ii If the whole site were classified as SFLL, then the 6 7 net acres would yield 13 homes at 2 0 units/ net acre iii However, the SFLL density of 2 0 units/net acre is not consistent with most of the City's existing RA neighborhoods 1 The SFLL classification is used generally for properties that are zoned RA and LR (Lakeshore Residential) 2 LR properties meet the 2 units/acre density standard, since they are half acre lots at a minimum However, a significant Lynskey & Clark November 9 2006 Page 3 number of the existing RA neighborhoods do not meet the density standards since they are only required to have a size of 10,000 square feet (quarter acre lots) 3 To bring neighborhoods like Croixwood and Oak Glen into consistency with the SFLL classification of the Comprehensive Plan, either a the SFLL density has to be changed to something like 3 units/acre or less, or b a new land use category such as Single Family Medium Lot would have to be created in the Comp Plan for the RA properties, or c the City could recognize the inconsistency and by policy decision use 2 88 units per acre as the density for SFLL properties that are zoned RA i The Comp Plan on Page 3-2 states that the density for RA properties is 2 88 units per acre If the 2 88 density were used for this property, then the 6 7 net acres of the property would yield 19 homes d Staff believes the 2 88 units/acre density reflects past development practices in the City for RA zoned projects that were guided SFLL Consequently, it would be consistent to allow the same 2 88 unit/acre density on this RA zoned project as well c If the Planning Commission and City Council do not agree that a 2 88 units/ acre density could be applied to this SFLL site, then a Comprehensive Plan amendment reclassifying the property from SFLL to SFSL (Single Family Small Lot = 4 units/net acre) would be necessary for the single-family project It would be required in any case if the two-family scenario were developed II Zoning Code a The base zoning of the property is RA, Single Family Residential i The rrunimum lot size as zoned is 10,000 square feet The minimum lot width is 75 feet The single-family concept plan subrrutted does not specify whether these standards are met, but they appear to be met ii If the two-family scenario is developed, a rezoning to RB would be necessary b The overlay zoning for the northern portion of the western parcel is Browns Creek Shoreland Management District i This overlay district encompasses all land within 300 feet of the creek's floodplain I Lynskey & Clark November 9 2006 Page 4 ii Homes within this overlay district must have a 40 foot setback from the bluffline of the 25% slope This setback can be met by either concept plan in Physical barriers sometimes truncate a shoreland management district boundary line In this case, the railroad tracks may represent such a barrier If that is so, the 40 foot bluffline setback would not apply The DNR will need to be consulted on this c Slopes 1 The City's Zoning Code says that slopes of 25% or greater with a horizontal run of at least 50 feet are not buildable The northern edge of the site has such slopes 1 All buildings must be set at least 30 feet back from the bluffline of a 25% slope So, if the DNR waives the 40 foot shoreland bluff setback, the 30 foot setback will still apply ii Brown's Creek Watershed District rules say that an undevelopable slope is one that is 12% or greater If Brown's Creek Watershed District has Jurisdiction over this property, then considerably more of the site would be considered unbuildable Therefore, the applicant committed substantial resources to research, held verification and discussion with Brown's Creek Watershed District consultants The result of this effort seems to be that the railroad track and its berm near the northern property line of the site may constitute the limit of Brown's Creek Watershed District's Jurisdiction However, legal counsel for the two sides have not come utted to an agreement on the issue yet Ultimately, the watershed district board will need to review a specific development proposal and make a decision ui What is clear is that the City is responsible for admuustermg and enforcing its body of codes The watershed district is responsible for its own codes Therefore, though City staff acknowledges that the watershed district jurisdiction issue has not been absolutely resolved yet, this discussion memo will only analyze the concept plan in light of the body of codes for which we are responsible III Subdivision Code a Ch 32, Subd 6(3)1 states that a permanent cul-de-sac can be no longer than 600 feet City planning and engineering staff, as well as the City Attorney believe that to mean that the measurement of the new cul-de-sac length would be taken from the end of Hazel St The cul-de-sac length for the single-fanuly scenario is about 660 feet For the two-family scenario it is about 600 feet long b Stormwater management will be an important issue One of the key factors determining whether the railroad is the limit of the 12% slope restriction has to do with how stormwater runoff is managed from the site Lynskey & Clark November 9 2006 Page 5 B DISCUSSION POINTS • The applicant may be able to develop the 18 single-family homes shown in the one attached concept plan But they would much prefer to develop 13 twinhome buildings (26 households) • Advantages of the twinhome scenario o Less traffic ■ The demographics of the 26 twinhomes would create less of a traffic impact than 18 large single-farruly homes o Less building mass ■ From the outside, the two-family buildings would look like single- family homes But there would be five fewer buildings than a single- family development o Lower profile buildings ■ The one-story buildings in the two-fanuly scenario would hug the landscape better than 2+ story single-family home o Less impervious surface ■ The 13 two-family buildings would cover less ground surface than the 18 single-family homes o The housing type is well suited to the rapidly growing segment of society in their 50s and older who are still active cc Bob Clark Marc Putman attachments Location Map Comp Plan Land Use Map Zoning Map Concept Plan booklet 0N-, a! m� Ink , MEMO 11111HE C111111� Sol S�■ 1 Elm �� 1 DEMO li11lm11: ME 1 monism :111111■ C- Elm 11111111 11111111 DOMIMI miiiliuli' ����I���■I Elm loom ���� ,� i •�'� 1 Elm' HIS INE e � Ems' !M ■ o, ofMIN milli llllll Mai BE 111M' C■ �� r� ,W5 En im IM as V 01i'ot C'om munw. De%ckopment Department 0 Subject Property Railroad NBrown's Creek & Tributaries Comp Plan Future Land Use ® RR, Semi -Rural Residential SFLL, Single Family Large Lot SFSL, Single Family Small Lot ASF, Attached Single Family MF, Multi -Family CN, Neighborhood Commercial CC, Community Commercial ® BPC, Business Park Commercial A/O, Administrative/Office ® BPO, Business Park Office BPI, Business Park Industrial RDP, Research & Development Park r� OPS, Open Space 0 PC, Community Park CEM, Cemetery I� PG, Golf Course PM, Marina PN, Neighborhood Park LM ES, Elementary School ® SS, Secondary School 0 RAIL ROW WAT WET OUT PF, Public Works Facility •`;" Other jurisdictions B B Comp Plan Future Land Use Map Lynskey & Clark Site i�v =ui1 Exhibit 6 ga.1ei Lynskey & Clark Zoning Map Conimunit% De%donment Dcmtrtmrnt Subject Property Zoning District Classifications A-P, Agricultural Preservation 0 RA - Single Family Residential 0 RB - Two Family 0 TR, Traditional Residential LR, Lakeshore Residential ® CR, Cottage Residential - CTR, Cove Traditional Residential a ® CCR, Cove Cottage Residential ® CTHR, Cove Townhouse Residential ® Townhouse RCM - ❑ 1-1', RCM -Medium Density Residential RCH -High Density Residential ® VC, Village Commercial Ell] Ell CA -General Commercial CBD - Central Business District �. 0 BP-C, Business Park - Commercial BP-, Business Park - Office 7 aF ❑ � ] BP -I, Business Park -Industrial IB - Heavy Industrial CRD-Campus Research Development PA - ! PA -Public Administration I_j Public Works Facility �I Railroad WATER Exhibit C iM Property outside City limits ( it,, of ( Oannnuuty Dc%clopment Department Shoreland Mgmt District Lynskey & Clark Site Subject Property Brown' Creek & Tributaries 150 creek setback Property lines Railroad Stream Shoreland Management District 300' from creek banks 300' from floodplains Other jurisdictions Exhibit D PROPOSED CONCEPT SKETCH PLAN SITE PLAN The HAZ.ELSTREET Golf Course Ncigkkorkood A HIDDEN ENCLAVE OF HOMES OVERLOOKING STILLWATER COUNTRY CLU15 Stillwater, Minnesota for PRESENTATION TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION HAZEL STREET GOLD BOURSE NtIQIIDOR1100P LOCATION, IN S T I L L W A T E R, M I N N E 5 O T A PROPOSED NEIG SORHOOD _,maw 1 - dK 060 VA '� ♦ d J; �• � _ `K I� Via. I*' a — • ;fir ip 40, _-�` ,'� J 3 , s• - �• ate. �j �`i; t Y. .a' J" t ,--_.l - • �' �.t �'! - �s - • �'i'�` _, - __— --.- - - __,.. - _�__ L_ ate._ � ♦ t ' The proposed Hazel Street Golf Course Neighborhood is located on the 7.21 acre site, west of Hazel Street and Hazel Court, adjacent to the Stillwater Country Club. MAZE7L STREET Dear Members of the Planning Commission GOLF The following landscape architectural planning efforts, corresponding home designs and photographic examples compose a carefully considered and studied proposal These, for a very special parcel of land, accessed from Ha- zel Street, and adjacent to the Stillwater Country Club golf course This booklet includes two site plans One that shows a Single Family De- tached lot plan that adheres to the previous City policies and approach under current Comprehensive Plan and Zoning map uses The Concept Plan Pro- posal advances a second, and much preferred site plan showing structures that would enclose two homes, each The single family detached lot plan shows 18 structures, while the preferred two-family Concept Plan shows 13 structures There are 18 homes shown on the detached home plan, with 26 homes shown on the best -use, neighbor- hood -friendly, citizen -needed homebuyer-responsive & preferred two-fam- ily home site plan Lynskey & Clark Companies is a long-term local company Partners Mike Lynskey, Mick Lynskey and Bob Clark are committed to the community of Stillwater and to doing the best neighborhood possible The gross revenues generated between either site plan is nearly equal In fact, the preferred two- family neighborhood plan actually creates less revenue than the single-fam- ily detached plan • 18 home sites @ $200,000 = $3,600,000, vs • 13 structures (2 du/bldg ) @ $135,000 = $3,510,000 We show these figures to point out that this Single Family Detatched pro- posal is not requested for reasons of financial gain Rather, it is the applicants' sincere belief that the proposed Two -Family plan is truly the best plan for the site, for the City, for City residents and for its neighbors The Zoning Conforming Site Plan with 18 detached homes Home sites are 10,000 SF+ The preferred Concept Site Plan, with 13, Two family buildings fits the site and citizen needs NE:lQtiDORtiOOP IN SUMMARY A NEW SMALL NEIGHBORHOOD WITH VERY LOW IMPACT This planning effort proposes a neighborhood of build- ings that have the scale of large single-family homes They are the mass and detail of existing homes near by However, two-story walkout, 4 bedroom homes would be taller and more visible than the proposed one level walkout structures envisioned Compared to a Single Family Detached home neighborhood, the homes within the two-family struc- tures will have fewer children While added planting at the 12th tee will reduce errant shots, the two-family housing type will help de- crease the potential issue of kids in back yards and golf balls This will reduce complaints, and danger From a golf course -neighbor stand- point of two-family, one level, empty nester homeowners are a more harmonious fit Other Points This neighborhood of "Two family homes in one family clothes" will • Respect and respond to Watershed, DNR and City regulations • Protect natural resources Brown's Creek & buffering vegetation • Do no damage to the slopes to Brown's Creek or its environment • Manage rain water, snowmelt and water -borne pollutants and par- ticulates more carefully than past & adjacent neighborhoods' storm sewer systems • Have minimal vehicle impact with residents who (And, compared to single-family detached homes), make fewer trips per day, at slower pace, and further reduce traffic by being absent for months • Add distinctive traditionally styled architecture of high quality de- sign, variety, detail and construction • Add a beautiful landscape architectural, planted setting that, with- in perhaps 10 year's growth, would provide greater tree canopy cover than exists now • Add lifestyle, walking/sidewalk and public street scenic viewing opportunities not now available • There -by opening golf course and woodland vistas to the residents of the new and adjacent neighborhoods • Be an almost hidden enclave of homes, with new residents sharing similar values, interests, and with similar life -positions ZONINQ-�()NrORMAN�E �ON�EPT SITE PLAN H A Z E L ST R E E T G O L F C O U R S E N E I G H0 R H O 0 D - _4 •R vs t p � , LI f r,,t, r I r � �_ - - = � _- yam-f ,� '' � l f J � � •' �d�'� f . `� � ABOVE: Zoning -conforming Zoning -conforming site plan with 18, 10,000 + sq. ft. home sites. PROPO �P�ON��PT ITS PLAN 55 H A Z E L -5 T R E E T Q 0 L F- C O U R S E N E I G HO R H 0 0 D + Wj4 . pp A TWO Aw Proposed Coiwel t Site Plan:13 Two -Family strictures, 26 homes in "One Family Clothing." A nearly invisible enclave of homes selected to fit Stillwater residents' need for homes %\,i th less maintenance and not -so -big floor plans. 1. THOROUGH STUDIES OF APPLICABLE ORDINANCES: Early in the process of consideration of land purchase, the coun- sel of the City staff and others was sought regarding applicable City slope regulations. The field verified topography was used as a base, with City -supplied Brown's Creek topography, to do detail slope, ordinance review and ordinance applicability studies. On- going dialog with Brown's Creek Watershed District is proceeding. Meetings with City Staff have helped form the basis of the Concept Site Plan being presented. 2. THE CURRENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: To proceed, the proposed land use of two family homes would require an Amend- ment to the Comprehensive Plan. This is requested because this proposal provides the best balance of the values and issues of all parties involved. It brings smarter growth practices for infill land use. If allowed, it will recognize and respect, ten years' change to the needs and purchase capabilities of the citizens of Stillwater... the likely residents of this new neighborhood. 2a. In The Broad View: Most understand that the City's Compre- hensive plan is a guide to growth. This has been particularly true for the City of Stillwater over the last decade, where zoning and Planned Unit Development in particular have allowed critical free- doms to encourage and allow needed innovation... within the ex- isting Comprehensive Plan. As a guide, the Comprehensive Plan is not chiseled in stone. Writ- ten on paper, it can be overseen and edited by appointed and elect- ed officials for the expressed purpose to keep it current and re- sponsive to the people. 2b. Change, Impacting The People: In 10 years there has been significant change in home construction costs. The growing scar- city of land physically suitable for a new neighborhood is a given. However, this "natural" growing scarcity has been greatly compli- cated and delayed by expanded, multiple, overlapping levels of mandatory government approvals. Resultant added interest costs and higher per home site costs dramatically reduce the choices As art exception to the Phasing Schedule. the CuN mac annex pnrp — rtts not described in Muse, 1. II. of III h} Rcsoluncm if the ptopertt is adlacmi to the Cm. is pctrrim ed for he onehundred percent i I (l1I"O of the property o%7ias Nithin the area to hx annexed and if the — rcsuhing atim."tiim %ill ntA create a I.cC1 of Vo%111 Iha1 Cxcccds the one hued t%cnn I l.Oi duelling units per scar hnuuinon STT. CROIXRIVER / � Phase 1 1996 / Pre Phase I L - \ PROPOSED/ Cite Lfmitx \ NEIGHBORHOOD f - _ f $ - I s - t_- 95 — — — — —` 01N, of (41ggtel� C0NIPREHFISIYE PLAN Proposed Land Use Proposed Land Use (City): Acres: Percent: MI.. S Wk F-.1y Large l.n 1?t6.37 26.>•1•. SF'.SI--Sypgk Famh Snellla 72749 I5.1(2'., �•� A-SF-Aua.6i.2 CwgkFmh 7531 0w'. fi IUF-ttuln-Fanplt M6S Ill•.. C�nd/t S CTl-\ry0d.+f�uxf t'wmrincw7 I?'? a W. (t' - C-.iea`aswry Cumnrnul 44 Iw 0W . .iaioes hh: BPC Birtaes Pet C _-- W 141 Bf V - Bum Mc O[FKe 21.95 Y 5r. 111111it A.O - A.iiennWd» . (WrC 4561 0 W1 BPI - [4mme.c Part h.wr w I IX.?I ♦� RDF- Rc: etch A llk.ATiirni Park 2X 07 061•. fs SS - s iovidry &had 4496 696•. fs ES - t]cmerry &4-1 51.91) 1 13•. Iti C1:At-CaffrSry 1977 U.P. t� ru-Meer 14,00 0_LP. ti PN - Seitthbadeod PrL 91.39 2.03.. P -Ca®ry PUL 21.12 0.63•. PC 301.15 655.. Nam 610.13 1121% w • We+lead Ara e4.52 1 Q2 . UPS - 0" Srowr 10141 2 21P. RAIL.-Rslresd 29.74 00.5'. ROW - R44"-w v 105 10 15.34a TOTAL: 4.5".25 ISO M% Sxtion Lines Railroad / r C-in Lnruts Stream. Disc humer 77ie dulu re ptvvented tun the Pirgwsed Land Use ALI, drsplye+ flee current Inndlrc>rr crurtliiled hi WashingtonC'nrmh nv 5ut Dc711rrnnenr. Questiorra concerning the btiulhu:e slrnuld he directed to the Ci wwn Questions concerning ►he Lund Use Desibmuttons .should 17c directed in 0A. al Stilhrnter Planning Detwon mf OK1115M 1000 0 1000 2000 3000 FLIT ABOVE: Portion of Stillwater Comprehensive Plan. Since 1996, Large -Lot Single -Family (LLSF) has been used as "holding designa- tion" for lands not yet sewered, and particularly references "Areas in the URTPA" (Urban Rural Transition Planning Area). previously available to Stillwater residents... Particularly existing mature residents seeking new housing to bet- ter fit their changing needs and budgets. Housing values in Stillwater over the last four years have dramatically risen some 5217o. And property taxes are keeping pace. Few household incomes can claim such an increase. 2c Comp Plan Amendment Appropriate The available copy of the City's "Compre- hensive Plan 1995-2020" carries a date of August 15, 2000 However, the core docu- ment content was determined "current" in 1996 The focus then was annexation of properties bounded by Highway 15 (These lands now determine the western edge of Stillwater) For the property adjacent to Hazel Street & the Country Club, the City's Comprehen- sive Plan 1996 includes two relevant items 2 c 1 Inaccurate Mapping of Property Regarding the Comp Plan's "Proposed Land Use" map itself, the designation shows 1/2 of the subject property as golf course Unfortunately, this is an error The long -existing golf course boundary has never in- cluded this parcel and the line is incorrect In the Comprehensive Plan there were only two categories of Residential detached housing large lot and small lot Because more creative solutions were sought, the use of PUD's and planning districts motivated a broader zoning approach under the Comprehensive Plan This was done to encourage better plans The Comprehensive Plan was used as a policy guide, and the Zoning was used to look more closely at specific details 2 c 2 An Infill Site vs Urban Rural Transition Planning Area Note that the URTPA was on the City's West side (This geographic focus is identified on page 3-3 of the Comprehensive Plan's narrative See illustration at far right) It refers to the "Urban Rural Transition Planning Area Growth Area TH 36 (south), CR 15, Manning Av- enue (west), and TH 96, Dellwood Road (north) as the future growth area boundar- ies for the City of Stillwater" ) Regarding the Comprehensive Plan Narrative, Page 3-7 (See illustration at right) pro- vides a definition of "Single Family Large Lot Up to two dwellings per acre (net) This designation applies to areas in the URTPA away from the existing city boundar- ies where natural resources or environmental constraints dictate a lower density" Stillwater's historic mixture of uses presented quite a different circumstance than other more standard suburban areas Past practice in the use of the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning recognized these mixtures of apartments and duplexes within tradi- tionally sized lots in the residential areas beyond downtown The City of Stillwater planning area contains 5 544 acres 3 649 acres in the City of Stillwater and s outside Stillwater in the URTPA The r TPA is generally the lands west of the currenty boundary to CR 15 Manning Avenue as own on proposal land use map The existing city and URTPA Table 2 on the preceding page shows existing land use figures for the existing city and for the URTPA outside the city Table 3 shows City of Stillwater land use by percentage as compared with a typical city Stillwater's size Table 3 Percent Existing land Use Typical r -may Stillwater Industrial _� 6 1 Public (parks churches schools civic buildings) 14 28 Community Commercial L 3 6 Residential 32, 39 Vacant - `- 26 8 Streets & Highways J2 1$ Total - - 100` 100 As can be seen from the table Stillwater does not have a typical land use distribution Stillwater has much less industrial and vacant land twice as much public and community commercial lands more residential and about the same street and road right of way These land use proportions help define Stillwater s character Stillwater has more than its share of public lands This reflects Stillwater role as the central city for the surrounding greater Stillwater area The Washington County Government Center area churches schools and city and school district offices are located in Stillwater City neighborhood and community parks are also counted in this category Stillwater has twice as much commercial land proportionately to the typical city Stillwater has a strong tourist industry and is the retail center for market area The streets and highways category is typical and the vacant land percentage 8 percent is low compared to 25 percent for a typical city As of January 1995 there were 223 acres of vacant developable land within the City of Stillwater as shown in Table 4 1995 Table 4 Vacant Acreage by Zoning Classification Zonino Classification Agre Percent RA Single Family 74' 33 RB Duplex Residential 28 12 RCM Multifamily Medium _ Density 3 _�1 RCH Multifamily High Density _ 0 -0 CBD Central Business District 0 0 BP C Business Park _a Commercial 50 23 BP I Business Park Industrial 602 .27 BP-0 Business Park Office'it 73 �3 PA Pubhc Administration'-�- Office % - I ? Q 223=,�300- This amount of land could accommodate 370 residential units at existing zoning densities as shown below (fable 5) Residential Zonino Table 5 DUI crea A RA Single Family 74 2 88 10 57 RB Duplex Residential 28 4 99 40 38 ami ; Medium Density 3 563 20 5 105 370 100 To put this amount of vacant land and residential development capacity into perspective with recent residential development trends growth for the past 5 and 10 years and metropolitan council housing ' 10 acres in this zoning district is anticipated for a neighborhood park 'The City of Stillwater owns 8 acres of land in this zone distnct for a new armory 'The City of Stillwater owns 7 acres of land in this zon3e= district for a community facility ABOVE TEXT (Pg 3-3) FROM CITY OF STILLWATER COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (1995-2020) December 12, 1995 Based on participation in the AUAR process for the URTPA, and the Comprehensive Plan amendments of the time, the reason for the Single Family Large Lot (SFLL) desig- nation was as a holding category for areas not yet served by central sewer and water. The SFLL designation was applied to the Hazel Street area because, at that time, sewer and water was thought to not be available in the future. The circumstances changed with the central utilities becoming available to that area. Recall also that the specific reference in the Comprehensive Plan regarding both SFLL and the maximum lot size was limited to the western edge of the City expansion area. It would be unfortunate to return to a more conservative approach (selecting the most prescriptive and restrictive approaches and interpretations culled from Stillwater's, the Met Council's, the Watershed's or DNR's ordinances) when a performance based approach to encourage creativity is the trend in other cities. Especially since the use of a performance -based approach was pioneered in Stillwater. 2.d. Ten Years' Change: Thus, the Comprehensive Plan is based on home prices, land prices, household incomes, individual incomes and prevailing knowledge of house and land plan design of over ten years ago. Further, the Comprehensive Plan's fo- cus for discussions of "large lot" use was based on the context of being "away from City boundaries". The Hazel Street / Country Club site is not "away from existing City boundaries". It is an infill site within City boundaries, adjacent to a suitable capacity City street and adjacent to City sewer, water and storm sewer services. Therefore the land should be brought into conformance subject to existing zoning regulation. 2.e. Appropriate lot size limit. The single-family large lot (SFLL) category has been used in the URTPA. This site is not located within the URTPA so the 2 du / acre density is not appropriate to this context. 3. THE NATURAL RESOURCES HAVE BEEN AND WILL BE PROTECTED: While there are "natural resources" to the north, Brown's Creek and the slopes immediately above it have, for many decades, been bounded and protected by the Railroad road bed's flat grades. These grades and the reverse slopes, slow, turn, infiltrate, attenu- ate and manage the rain water and snow melt runoff. The in -place, good condition of the run-off management slopes and structures attests to high quality of historic and current protection. Thus, there is no factual or physical basis for "environmental con- straints" to "dictate lower density". service the development and the impact of new development on the city is minimized. Program (9) Explore methods of reducing the financial impact on annexed township residents who do not need or want city utility services at this time. Two methods are. use of rural taxing district and public utility assessment policy. Land Use Map The proposed land use map shows land use to the year 2020. The proposed land uses adopted in the plan to a large extent echo existing land use or are extensions of existing patterns. In 1988, a specific area plan for the downtown was adopted and in 1989 the West Business Park Plan was approved. Both plans provide specific land use direction the subject areas. Only a few notable land use changes have been proposed to exiting areas of the city. Those changes are described under the section titled Existing City Land Use Changes. Land use for the URTPA is shown on the proposed land use map and described in the URTPA Land Use section. Definition of Land Use Categories Listed below are land use plan categories, boundaries and definitions. For residential uses, the designations shown are maximum densities. For commercial and office park areas, the use describes the activities intended for the district. Semi -Rural Residential: An average of up to one dwelling unit per 2.5 acres. Very low intensity residential development that does not need city services. (This density is consistent with existing township development density.) Single Family Large Lot: Up to two dwelling units per acre (net). This designation applies to areas in the URTPA away from the existing city boundaries where natural resources or environmental constraints dictate a lower density. This density is less than Oak Glen density. Single Family Small Lot: Up to four dwelling units per acre (net). This is Stillwater's older typical residential density similar to residential areas developed before 1950. Single Family Attached: Up to 6 dwelling units per acre (net). This is the density found in recent townhouse developments in Oak Glen and along County Road 5. Multifamily Residential: Up to 15 dwelling units per acre (net). This designation is intended primarily for multifamily projects for three or more dwelling units on the same site. These sites are located on transit lines and in mixed use areas where city services are available. Neighborhood Commercial: Commercial uses that cater to the immediate residential area surrounding the activity. They are usually located at intersections of collector or arterial streets. The uses are a convenience to the adjacent areas and not for community -wide use. The areas are small 5 acres or less with wide setback buffer areas in developing areas to screen the use and minimize the impact on adjacent residential areas. Community Commercial: Large shopping areas and the city's central business district (downtown) that provide a range of goods and services not available in neighborhood shopping areas. Community Commercial areas shown on the land use map are located downtown and the West Stillwater Business Park. Business Park: Land use contained in the West Business Park Plan including office, commercial and industrial subdistricts. Research and Development Office Park: Light industrial and office use housed in a compact business park campus setting with an overall development concept. Commercial uses other than office are allowed only to the extent that they offer goods for employees of the office park. Wetlands, Lakes and Tributaries: Water bodies that meet thee definition of wetland contained in the Minnesota Wetlands Preservation Act. Parks and Open Space: Parks are designated ABOVE: TEXT (Pg 3-7) FROM CITY OF STILLWATER COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (1995-2020) December 12, 1995. 14 LJ 4. SMARTER GROWTH: To the contrary, detailed survey, civil engineering and landscape architectural study, by very experienced professionals, have created a plan that achieves all the performance and functional goals of the Watershed, the DNR and the City. This, and the plan finds a way for The People to have the choice of a "smarter growth" neighborhood. This infill location and the proposed plan provides benefits and protects existing resi- dents' values. 5. EXISTING ZONING: The City's zoning map designates the site for One Family, RA. This carries a 10,000 s.f. minimum lot size, with homes not built on slopes in excess of 25%. This detailed field survey review of the slopes, and extensive site plan study, has resulted in the "base" single family de- tached site plan of 18 home sites. The Zoning -Conformance Plan shows each lot is 10,000 sq. feet minimum and is 75' in minimum width at the selected building line. With typical working relationships maintained with staff and engineering, and customary standards applied, street widths, setbacks, emer- gency vehicle turn radii, ponding and infiltration, access and egress, grading and other standards can be met. This, at the preliminary plat stage. 6. PREFERRED ZONING. An approval of rezoning to a two family designa- tion (RB) is needed. This, to be able to build the neighborhood that will best fit the needs of Stillwater citizens ... for now and into the foreseeable future. The two family zoning, used in most traditional areas of old Stillwater, abuts the golf course immediately to the south of the proposed neighborhood. 7. DNR BLUFF LINE AND BLUFF SETBACK LINE: The Bluff line slope stops at the north edge of the railroad roadbed. As such the 30' setback from the top of the Bluff does not impact any of the building sites. The 300' Shoreline Zone is observed, as are the rules for 115' minimum two-family lot width. S. RESPECT FOR BROWN'S CREEK, THE ADJACENT SLOPES, TREES AND NEIGHBORHOOD: The site analysis phase of this landscape architec- tural land planning effort is the most exhaustive ever undertaken in the 30+ year experience of the Lynskey Clark Company, Cornerstone Land Survey, Humphrey Engineering or Putman Planning and Design. In-depth review of both City and Watershed district applicable rules has been pivotal to the plan preparation. PROPOSED NEIGHBORHOOD ,sT..a A2 mo- z (" AIM- Chy of t OAK ILL L Y - '. Browns ry _----t�ek- -, - l .,•r�;�ert:%�r �n�f 1)e�lxrrrmw�iyl Zoning Map �4 * - POPLAR� _ A<IRICLITLRE BUSINESS PARTS COMMERC-AL owl y @USINESSPAR)t 1►lDU6TRIA1 I F U t BUSINLSSPAW OfFICL. 1 U ti I GENERAL COMERCIAL CENTRAL BUSIIESS DISTRICT CRD a G+ENLAAL ►EAYY INDUSTS" rt _ f- .. ■ PL 3LIG ALIMMTR1TNE OFFICES [YvE FAMILY TWO FARu �. CDHIGH DENSITYFAM1Y MEDIUM DEN V rY FAMILY t ■. ' CO TAGE RESIDENTIAL TRADITONAL RESIDENTIAL MCi44tS1. 1c '> LAKLS140HL W-SCENTIAL YU-AGE COMMERCIAL �40 rd*ro ►+cx.SE 40 PLSLK•'H'OWS PAiCILITY W r Y _ 10 COVE TOWN Ii400SE RESIDENTIAL LLWOGD r — i `- � GO'.'E COTTAGE RESIDENTIAL � I CLAT TRADITIONAL RESIDENTIAL NMI }PPS w Lam ISO 1 1 I ®►,rt vM.l..�.titi Ilr.l,n.. utr4fto-4 Alto- N RNh.sl sullwakr l w': E mJ Plrrnm� t. � e.•.,°.'y R'du4twm Cue,iy5u+rrCkrVrn,ctf. D �- �-_:_- -- `-■ fi i-IL.uTVdMne, flenul�Rp,n.►•n '. ���4Lity '•�■ eau `' o goo 1600 Feet k. ABOVE: The existing zoning for the site is One Family; RA. Precedent for properties in this zone, with central sewer and water available prior to development have 10,000 sq. ft. minimum lot areas. Proposed re -zoning would be Two Family; RB. This zone abuts the golf course. chitecture and residence designs are extremely respectful of the site's environmental sensitivities. The detailed field verified tree survey, topography and on -site slope analy- From our first discussions and first line drawn on paper, & over the last 6 months of study and sis has provided the sound basis for careful and improved / innovative site consideration, we have been acutely aware and respectful of the important issues of home value planning, slope and vegetation protection with home design. Landscape ar- and setting aesthetics protection for adjacent, in -place Hazel residences. CROSS SECTIONS S40 rloRlra IITYARpCYFTA TIIra RaHl RouTH 71+ .8 TIR.a 9 �e7a ,d L CROSS SECTION T J 7"?-rl wmm lOIMABOQREH( >DIIIrH Teem r * TVs I �.Hwols . CROSS SECTION 3 RIK<HRL 7 aoE la1YAlbQpt = y � 1f ALA �01 CROu secTmN 3 0 D R;1 9 BZG R{° 70 KEY/NOTES 780 I'15 C m DNR RIVERISTREAM 3W SHOREINE ZONE - URBAN AND TRIBUTARY ^- ; 1, STREAM SIDE FLOOD BUFFER PER STREAM, WITH SEWER BLWD RULE CAN PUT BUILDINGS WITHIN NO 118 S. MAIN St. 0 MRVLMUMLO SIZE 750 BMCIWDRRULEg)TKUDDESSMtNS1ON STILLWATER, MN55W2 `-NUNDAUM L1TT WIDTH 115' TO NORTH SIDE OF RAILROAD SECT10N 5.13 OF LNJR SHOREAND 780 BROWNS CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT i00 TRACK$ IOO YBAi 17,p(,�7PLAW 1} ,2° MANAG�A�Iv-I' ORDBJANCE. JHOLE 19D9 TOP �O�F�SL�pPE,,DNR SHORELAND, TOP DO RAIL ROAD SYMBOL BY PMMAN 'J 1 1 1(ID-YFARitAOOPIABd OF BI.1 WtJNE J /------- -- OPt E RAIL CENTERLINE PER AUGNE. Z'i{JRE SETBACK FROM COEMMNEEM �j1 -- - - �% CURRIWAffiESWC HM1. ;/ '� 730 N. BuFFFx/ SURw YINGPRµOMDDEO T'1\ _ IF*hIFF(DNR) 1 %� VVfff ��s - MAPPING SITE OVERLOOKING _jW'BLUFF• RFI 5° (� t- � ygg3gg�,Tp STILLWATER 'StiORIDAND REGULAT10NS7 y _ 8�.�,_ / � �� -- -- ---._ F OM CITV�ST�LwATER 780' LMLFJDAD BED, AND / ` S i _,-� /�, - - - - - AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH COUNTRY CLUB 7so1TURN® .PAlTEDS'� ��O \�\ % -! " '. '� - TOPOPER CORN lsr I HAZEL STREET '� SURVEY. FIELD VERIFIED GOLF COURSE NHD. _ /6 — 74D� ZONING - CONFORMANCE ' 77o f - - J _ _ _ WATERiLOW LAiE ' SFD PLAN ----- O T - - - - 750 760 /� ; BROWN'S CREEK 100 YEAR FLOOD SECTION. LOCATION AND 770_� ELEVATIONBASEDONfEMA WATERSHED DISTRICT, _ _ 2 -FLDO0 INSURANCE RATE MWIFIA � r � `� � -�-I. (PERCORNERSTONESURIEY_7242M DNR, CITY RULES B- ---- T 7 ^A -� ` / - sraiw ucmr �JP-j. _,- ( a .., j r'P9p - :, '- 1 l -- _ THE EDGE OF BROWNS CRE EK FROM CITY OF 770 1 STILLWATER AERIAL PHOTO. THE CREEK BEDEDOEIS AN ESTIMATE Of THE ORDINARY HIGH WATER LEVEL APPLICATION 7� (PER HULPHREY ENGINEERING. 7.2J.X1�) O (IRUNCAT®! BY TOP OF BLUFF) II '; � - TEb BY TOP OF BLUFF) i ,., - - - -_ - ACWD MIDDLB<�1E r ��. I TOPOGRAPHY WITHIN PROPERTY BOUNDARY ""A _- = -_- f1ELD VFRRIED SVRYEr BY CORNERSTOFIE SURVEY DATED 7 N21rifiLINES) IF ---. - - a�QF 291i S117PE - � - "0 I RAILRMDBED AND SIDE SLOPED OP�RAPHY ci LIVE P®t 1TA15 THQRA ` n.. STJBjbCi PROPERTY BOUNDARY FROM CITY OF STILLWATER REPLIED AERIAL FMANADIT DNRJCr Y Xff /( '�` a i- _.� _.. P—, 0A0 PHOTOORMHY SNOT FIELD VERIFIED) I..d A•Srzd,•. 1— 4 h° a 0 EELAND SETBACX: •�; . O �� ` 810 NCAIMW4g,OPOFMAR" KBROWNS CREEK CONSERVATIONDISTRICTpR$: "� C. / - SUBJBCT9ITE PROPIIt1Y BO---- RY ID MIDDLE ONEGN 'EXTEF PER EEcxa�F1ftANNING G F1G�, wew<P.- 1 REMNANT ENJR MAPPED PLANT COAATUNnTW LINE INDUSTRY SLIP[ auuYSLCCONWNTur¢ ACRES (MIINCATFD HUMAN DI5RIRBANCE:RABRO_AD AO ax-smtjcmN TBuIBER HARVESTAREAm I . !}l 1 &T18RRUPTION BY RAILROAD BED. 36 SEIBAC7C FROM EDGE OFMAPPED 257i SLOPE 1MTH RUN 9�° 11 `Yt X y CO�UHI[iES. BCWD RULE o LESS THMI 59 `tIII P ' \! B_50D14ACM x DIRE NtD 7� 06 EN SII RdN NRI'li �Y•SIAPE AREA / 50 RlAlwmI259640PE c10CMD 7,25-0B 7:OOP.M DRAWS ` ! nAssarrrm BID O 2006 DUTU4N DLAMMG 8 DESIGN x IL�— / / - TI °` �'` ` ° ACERAGE OF LAND 721 ACRE n6 •• �•• / N 0 ,J: � �\� o � ARE0. 50 RUN. 25%.- 406 ACRE Psa'*'T.'=.�. •... SLOPE RUN IS MEASURED 90' TO TOPOGRAPHY LINE BS HAZEL ST ,ED N1 `� t �- /�\ ^ n ?f1 JO BO 720 R TIIlAw1aKEA RsIE H� TA1Tt maB .. 1 !3i CROSS SECTION S LJ 6 F-% ff--% ;D 880 900 890 /}lN 910 wo CORNERSTONE PLANNING LNG & DESIGN Ri - s..a<mI *ran $w+Hr JuhmamEy :1a��-RLR NI.iPI fi F NrI: P+lu�PnWnpLrwlnBwdG..lc^ b rw .ztrv.pins.nR.aAdewp.<.+n 8.90 CROSS SECTIONS IO11R 10RAI�CR¢A TlsaaoR NOI1F11 7 - _ CROSS SECTION T 0 +..Iro«I. alulx _ 791.1 �HTf,N-a A BZp BAD 810 830 780 ~ P,30 O DNR RIVER=EAM 3W SHORELINE ZONE 4a 1a0 770 � - -LAND TRIBITTARY STREAM, WITH SEWER - CAN PUT BUILDINGS W7i7-ffN NO 750 e,?p MINIMUM LOT S17E I - mRmAUM TAT WIDTH I IS t - SECTION 5.13 OF DNR SHORELAND 780 KRWPUrRICT 740 MANAG` �?a1ENTORDINANCE,JUNE1999 %TOPOF 0aMOF0ANO, TOP ' v `^ 100•YEAR FTDODPLAIN I OF BLU1� KEY/NOTES - 1W YEAR FLOOD PLAIN IFRW ' - 7fi0 - - - HUMPHREY ENGINEERING 7242M STREAM SIDE FLOOD BUFFER PER BCWD RULES 118 S. MAIN St. MID ZONE FLOOD BUFFER O'ER STILLWATER. MN 55082 BLIND RULES) INCLUDES EKTENBON AUM ASSUMED OHWL TO NORTH SLOE OF RAILROAD R PI.00DPIAIN 100YRA- ,30 1RACKS "7: - — RAIL ROAD SYMBOL BY PUTMAN rl,UA-. _ - _ CURRENTAS6Ul'iFD aliWC STRUCTURE / {71 . UCTURE SMACK FR019 — 730 {VTTI 1 `TOP OF*1 FF(DNR) a TOP-BLUFF'DNR 780 SHORELAND RFGUI.AT1IONS TURNS F BID. AND 760 _ 'IVRNID ADW` _ ` oil \ _ / �Ti•`r,_E x y ' 'ATERUYT BLUFF. 7700 750 - y 760 770 �7 at o .@Y TUP OF BLUFF) \ O 1.UP OF 7576 SLOPiiCIR/ E _ LQ.•E PFR SCAN 1 REMNANT DNR/CM 300- SHOREL AND SETBACK: r p (REUNiCAT EID 071 ' OP BL JIT) 40111H � O / ACYflS i b1' \-iJ 0 5 10 m 30 40 { Jul CROSS SECTION 3 \ 6 5 10 20 30 b 0 I& po Rso . 1TE(YnrANroneEisa-- S►iORELAND SETEA(9- Srxr�NrArED>3YTOP a 2 I _ o SUWBC'.I. 611E PROP PLANNING AND DESIGN ALIGNED OVER RAIL CENTFRLINE PER I®mom A[ )01)KA d STILLWATER AND CORNERSTONE SURVEYING PROVIDED TOPO. SITE OVERLOOKIN DNR/CTIY PAAPPING. STILLWATER !!ORE TOPO PER CORNERSTONE COUNTRY CLUB FROM Cm OF STILLWATER HAZEL STREET AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH - TOPO PER CORNERSTONE SURVEY. FIELD VERIFIED GOLF COURSE NHD. ZONING - CONFORMANCE CONCEPT TWO FAMILY (IN WATERFLOWUINE ONE FAMILY CLOTHING) PLAN BROWN'SCREEK I l 1W YEAR FLOOD YCTK1N. LOCATK)NL AND 1 ELEVATION BASED ON FEJAA FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP OTAIA) WATERSHED DISTRICT, ST1L WAIMIL=I..' (PER CORNERSTONE SURVEY.7.2UOON DNR, CITY RULES / THE EDGE OF BRDWNS CREEK FROM CITY OF APPLICATION 770 F STILLWATER AERIAL PHOTO. THE CREEK BED EDGES AN ESTIMATE OF THE ORDINARY HIGH WATER LEVEL 780 (PER HUMPHREY ENGINEERING., 72420014 TOPOGRAPHY WITHIN PROM RTY BOUNDARY FROM __ .�7.it -_- - ��_- FIELD VERIFIED SURVEY BYCORNERSTONE SURVEY DATED 7.242006(DASHED LINES) RAILROAD BED AND SIDE SLOPE TOPOGRAPHY IE_yeyF iR eh Nln ryn,r4.. e it IM i . /. FROM CITY OF STILLWATER SUPPLIED AERIAL V,�p�,�_ .l�R,(,V- PHOTOGRAPHY (NOT FIELD VERIFIED). 810 „-�� TL BROWNS CREEK CONSERVATION DISTRICT RULES. 527E PRDPlR'IY BZAINDARY_ MIDDLE ZONE'EKTENSDN• PER PUTMAN PLANNING B 70 AND DESIGN AND HUMPHREY ENGINEERING UTIUZIW. REMNANI DNR "MAPPED PLANT CO?dIJUNff1ES" I.BVE INDUSTRY SLOPE ANALYSIS CONVENTIONS r � (TRUNCATED HUMAN _ _ - --_ - qll /CDP75FHUC'IxN TDABER HARVEST AREA AND t�`^F• _ 7 ' �` 1 IDRERRup df BY RADvnanIM t Y i �lEMI+TAIJI' 30 giT3AIX FROM 1!D(nB Q , m c ) - >n� MAPM)CMA/UNITTS. BCWD RULE [f! II I �-✓ e -- M lit) A14%1¢I8S x 1NWRt7NWRH29%SLCIMAREA aunK roPrPlatea A1Q alw awTR 7c � I a�.]36gN / + t CR065 SECTION 5 � 0 • �B 25%SLOPE WITH RIFT III LESS THAN W / / 50 RUN WITH 25%SLOPE ��� DEiI-KI D 7--06 fHffKED 7-25ZS-067OOP M. 06 DFANC I ruusN)tTEG 0 2006 PUTMIN PLANKING 4 DESIGN a pdh.,. Srw C�.Ijv iw N.dn.. iu..wl � ACERAGE Of LAND 7 21 ACRES .b. •wr RF.. ,,,�,•, I•.,. AREA: 50 RUN, 25%-.406 ACRES u-�'Tm E.=•<,. SLOPE RUN IS MEASURED 90' TO TOPOGRAPHY LINE J� X i K<. HAZE_ ST � NI 0 20 40 BO 120 16D 86C 880 1 � �Rve•KS T•s m 900890 n:...K 910 M' =PUTWN �>^ CORNERSTONE PIIANNING f f1511RVFrIN�, ANC VDESIGN- - -,� Suke :hl 'a1Fr.. SquF * T tt5M'M Snvel. Ihdst.. Nl SJu:n E Yalt 2Fn+pa agivnvYlyddmp..;: n, 890 _L - © m av M SECTIOrJ FROM Z_Oi�NG-CD40RMAiJCE CDCEPT SITE PLf\rJ stcne+v e 5 n. ABOVE: The home outlined in red at right is an existing residence. Note that the two-story home masses in the Zoning -Conformance Site Plan are more exposed above preserved treelines. 9. THE BEST HOMES FOR THE TIMES, ALSO CREATE A LESS VISIBLE NEIGHBORHOOD: 9.a. Detached Single Family Homes Are Usually Two Story: Those seeking detached homes are almost always persuaded by the construction efficiencies of two story configura- tions to demand that the required bedrooms be placed upstairs. Needs of monitoring young children in their bedrooms cause most parents to seek bedrooms on the same floor as the owner's suite. Also, their children's anticipated full-time bedroom use precludes accep- tance of such bedrooms being limited to the lower walkout or look -out level of the home. These issues lead the vast majority of single-family detached home neighborhoods to be composed predominantly of two story homes. 9.b. Homes for a Lower Maintenance Lifestyle... Attached Single Family for 2 Families: In contrast, two family structures offer homes with ample main floor living and main floor owner's bedroom suite. Owners of such homes almost always are seeking "the not so big house", with less square feet, and lower maintenance. Thus, lot sizes should be reduced, but must retain outdoor entertainment spaces... less mowing is preferred. The reduced in- dividual home sizes encourage joining two homes together to create a building mass larger than most detached homes, and with a high level of architectural detail. Because their children are often of high school, college age, or older, the use of some of the lower level for bedrooms is acceptable. This, because the bedrooms are used less than full time, and proximity to the owner's suite is no longer as important as it is with younger children. This helps control the cost of the home for the buyer. However, when paired with another efficient home, the mass and detail create a distinctive structure. 9. c. Two Family Homes, in One Family Clothes: The cross -sections below compare the zoning -conforming, detached single-family plan to the preferred Concept Site Plan. The zoning -conforming plan is composed of two story homes, while the two-family Concept Plan shows the one -level, walk out homes. Note particularly that the homes in the Pro- posed Concept Plan in the second section have a lower building profile. Thus, the build- ings are better screened from the adjacent homes, behind the stands of existing trees pre- served on slopes. ABOVE: Divided lane roadway offers enhanced emergency vehicle access. Note that the large emergency/bus-sized vehicle is accommodated by the turn -around radius. 10.a. CUL-DE-SAC LENGTH & EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS. The site is such that the only physical way to serve the site is by a single access point on the abutting public street. Topography and ownership prevent any other choice. The Concept Plan shows 28' wide public streets, with one-way sections 24' wide. Parking at appropriate, designated and striped locations on one side of the street or on designated angled parking locations on enlarged islands is anticipated. The divided one-way streets were selected in part because they would offer emergency vehicles alternate accesses should one lane be blocked by debris or fallen trees. Thus, conformance to performance criteria for emergency vehicle access and egress is met. If rigid adherence to the 600' standard for cul-de-sac length is dictated, then a variance will be sought on the justifiable basis of hardship and a landlocked condition being created by a regulatory standard. It can be observed that the existing Hazel Street and it's terminating cul-de-sac exceeded the 600 foot length "limit" as well. The reasons for suspending the 600-foot limit for Hazel Street (another parcel land locked by topography) are the same for the Hazel Street/Golf Course site. At a time when there is criticism of traffic issues on the west side of the City, to make use of an exist- ing collector and in -place residential street system with good available capacity, it makes sense. To more efficiently utilize an in -fill site with attractive buildings is the essence of smart growth. This al- lows a neighborhood that invites a greater diversity of homeowners, with different work schedules and life -conditions enriches a neighborhood, and less- ens traffic conflicts. Such owners, of different ages put "more eyes on the street", making for safer set- tings. 10b. EMERGENCY VEHICLE TURN -AROUND DIAMETER: The Engineer's study below demon- strates the street system has sufficient size to ac- commodate bus and fire engine turn radii. 11. PONDING, RAIN GARDEN, & GRADING DESIGN FOR MINIMUM IMPACTS: A key aspect of the site and grading design is that there will be no greater flow rate of water off site after the neighborhood is finished, than exists today. The stability of the slopes and preservation of the vegetation is a critical issue to the environmental care of sustaining and protecting values. Ponding is shown. Rain gardens will be included to assist in storm flow management as well as particulate and pollutant cleaning and infiltration. We would encourage working together to add trails and con- nections to the existing city park. STILLWATER COUNTRY CLUB SITE COMPARISON CHART OF ALTERNATE SITE DENSITIES HOUSING TYPES SFD SFA TRAFFIC COUNT (trips per day) SFD 9.6 SFA 5.9 SCHOOL IMPACTS NUMBER OF CHILDREN #/SFD unit* 1.15 #/SFA unit 0.25 TAX REVENUE GENERATED % SFD SFA sq. ft./unit 4000 2500 value/sq.ft. $250 $200 overall value/unit $1,000,000 $500,000 city tax revenue/unit 0.4 $4,400 $2,200 county tax revenue/unit 0.3 $2,600 $1,300 school tax revenue/unit 0.3 $3,100 $1,550 TOTALS SANITARY SEWER/WATER USE bedrooms/unit 3.5 2.0 total bedrooms** 63 44 gallons/day *District 834 Consultant Data: Dean Reichow **Assumes 25% of bedrooms are only occupied for 7 months of the year. SFD 18 homes 172.8 20.7 $79,200 $46,800 SFA 26 12. NEIGHBORHOOD CONCEPT SITE PLANNING: 12.a. EXISTING ZONING -CONFORMANCE SITE PLAN: The 18 detached home site concept study site plan demonstrates our carefully researched under- standing of what the applicable City rules, regulations, ordinances and guidelines require. homes 12.b. The CONCEPT SITE PLAN: RESPECT FOR THE ENVIRONMENT, AND FOR WHAT PEOPLE, STILLWATER CITIZENS WILL NEED & AFFORD... There is a significant change taking place in the housing market. Standing inventories of 26 unsold 2 story, walkout, 5 bedroom, 2.5 bath homes is at record levels. Demand for new, standard single-family detached homes has fallen as much as 50%. While some of this may have resulted from investment exuberance stimulated by 153.4 unusually attractive mortgage terms, there is a core, long-term change in our pop- ulation age and family make up at work. Nationally, starting Jan. 1, 2001 through 2019, every 8 seconds, a person has and will turn 55 years old. This is having a seismic impact on home design and land use. We do our citizens, our economy, our city no favor dictating land use and home type construction when all the sig- 6.5 nals point to a different and better way. $57,200 $33,800 $55,800 $40,300 $181,800 $131,300 6,300 4,442 The Concept Site Plan considers what would be the best use for this property; recognizing the family make-up, age bracket and maintenance preferences most likely to describe the future residents in this new and small neighborhood. They will largely be "empty nesters", and active adults with grown children or kids in college. They may have a love for golf, or just a love to look at nature. And yet, be close to friends and neighbors to enhance a growing and renewed sense for com- munity and a "village feel"'. From a use and traffic standpoint, these buyers have fewer trips per day, and are often absent on trips or at other residences for as much as 5 months of the year. 12.c. RESPONSIVE HOME TYPES FRIENDLY TO THE LAND AND TO THE NEIGHBORS: The two family home type is evolving in the market... backwards. There are many stately homes in the Grand Ave. Summit Ave, or Kenwood areas of the Twin Cities and in Stillwater that are large structures, with more than one address plate. These are 2 family or more, in "one family clothes". The pages in this booklet that are titled " One Family Clothing for Low Maintenance Living" shows old and new homes that demonstrate how this is being done Also shown are some initial concept designs for the home sites In essence, there is variety and mass, detail and quality styling provided The structure density of 13 buildings in the Concept Site Plan would be 5 less buildings than the zoning -conformance plan and less traffic, but with as strong, or better residential architecture Concern about responding to citizens' changing needs and respecting what they want, causes the two family Concept Plan to be aesthetically, environmentally and demographically a superior solution LEFT The proposed neighborhood of Two Family homes in "One Family Clothing" will create a nearly hidden enclave adjacent to the golf course The site plan respects the sensitive Brown's Creek environment, will minimize traffic impacts, welcome residents of like -interests to the neighborhood, and offer Stillwater citizens a lower -main- tenance, "not -so -big" a house choice ONE -FAMILY "LOTtiWG" FOR LOB/ MAINTENANCE LIVING Zi�� l ' cit / vi 14 b.; %h,,Ak j � � •1 1� 44 k E - The above photographs show examples of how one attractive structure can provide attached homes for two families. >a.ry !.FM �f U i ' . - NE -FAMILY "LOTt11NG"FOR LOW MAINTENAN� LIVING k The above photographs show examples of how one attractive structure can provide attached homes for two families. CONCEPT RLYIPL11TIAL PLjIG/IYLeGRA/I HOMEY CONCEPT RLYIPL/ITIAL PLjIG/AjLeGRA/I HOMU Lynske��ark rv`PUTMAN PLAMNG & DESIGNInc. D.D.I. r (1wakt er H F 8 1 A T H P l A ( O F M I N N F' O I A PLANNING REPORT DATE November 8, 2006 CASE NO 06-05/ZAT APPLICANT City of Stillwater REQUEST Amend Height Overlay District Ordinance for Downtown REVIEWED BY Dave Magnuson, City Attorney, Cindy Shilts, Building Official, Mike Pogge, City Planner PREPARED BY Bill Turnblad, Community Development Director BACKGROUND This past summer the City Council directed staff to schedule a public hearing before the Planning Commission for the purpose of discussing a revision to the recently adopted downtown height ordinance On August 14, 2006 the Planning Commission conducted the public hearing Two motions resulted from the public hearing and discussion The first motion clarified ambiguity in the downtown height limits by adding the words "whichever is less" to standards in each of the five height zones This motion passed unanimously The second motion was to investigate whether the number of stories allowed for each downtown height district was even possible within the maximum height restriction in each of those districts For example, could a three story building actually be constructed within the 35 foot height allowed on Main Street? This motion failed on a 4-4 vote On September 19, 2006 the City Council opened a public hearing on the ordinance amendment and approved the first reading The motion to approve the first reading included a statement that the height lirrut in the historic portion of downtown should be increased to 37 feet This would allow for a taller ceiling in the first floor retail space Staff was also directed to bring back language to clarify what is meant by "adjacent buildings" for nnfill projects On October 3, 2006 the Council considered the second reading but delayed action on it Instead, it was referred back to the Planning Commission for further analysis of several topics Height Ord Amendment November 8 2006 Page 2 of 12 1 New freestanding buildings a What building height is appropriate in each of the five height districts given the number of stories allowed in each of those districts? 2 New infill buildings a Which proposed buildings, if any, should be required to abide by the infill height standard? b What should the infill standard be if a proposed building has existing buildings on each side of it? DISCUSSION OF TOPICS 1 New freestanding buildings a A proposed building downtown has to be either a freestanding building or an infill building i Mills on Main is an example of a freestanding building An entire site about the size of a block was cleared of buildings and in its place is a single building The new building adjoins no other buildings ii The Reeds Building is an example of an infill building The entire block of buildings was not cleared A new building simply replaced an existing structure (or two?) and the final product was a building that adjoined an existing building b If the proposed building is to be a freestanding building, the new downtown height limits would apply The infill standard would not apply c The height standards for new freestanding buildings proposed for each of the five downtown height overlay districts are discussed below i CBDR-Central Business District and RB Two Family District Riverside 1 This district includes property between the former Burlington Northern Railroad and the river from the Dock Cafe to the Minnesota Zephyr 2 The current height standard in this district is 15 stories or 20 feet 3 What building height is appropriate? a The 15 story building allowed in the CBDR district would likely fit reasonably within the current 20 foot height limit This would be especially true if the building had a flat roof (See Exhibit A) b It may not be necessary to adjust the existing height limit for this district Height Ord Amendment November 8, 2006 Page 3 of 12 ii CBDP-Central Business District Parkside 1 This district lies roughly between Water Street and the former Burlington Northern Railroad 2 The current height standard in this district is 2 5 stories or 30 feet 3 What building height is appropriate? a The 2 5 story building allowed in the CBDP district would likely fit reasonably within the current 30 foot height limit, especially if it had a flat roof Though, it may be a rather tight fit for some projects (See Exhibit A) b It may not be necessary to adjust the existing height limit for this district iii CBDH-Central Business District Historic? 1 This district is the core of the lustoric downtown area With a few exceptions it is located between Water Street and Second Street 2 The current height standard in this district is 3 stories or 35 feet 3 What building height is appropriate a In the historic district it is important for new buildings to be compatible with the height of existing buildings b The first floor of late 191h Century buildings in Stillwater typically had retail space with rather tall ceilings To replicate the first floor space, a ceiling of about 12 feet is needed c According to the City's Building Official, the average ceiling height today of non-residential space averages anywhere from 9 to 12 feet d The ceiling cavity requires an average of 2 feet of space e Residential space can get by with 8 feet of wall height f The nunimum parapet height by building code is 3 feet g As seen in Exhibit C, the dimensions mentioned above yield a minimum building height of 37 to 38 feet' ' The building height to the downtown overlay districts is measured to the top of the parapet, or the highest point of a pitched roof This is in contrast to height measurements everywhere else in the city Everywhere else, the height is measured to the lugh point of a flat roof (excluding parapet) and the mud point of a pitched roof Height Ord Amendment November 8, 2006 Page 4 of 12 i If the historic ceiling height of the first floor is eliminated, the minimum building height could be reduced to 35 to 36 feet ii If "Class A" space is desired, the building height may have to increase to 41 feet h Consequently, a building with historically correct first floor ceiling dimensions could not be built within the current 35 foot height limit and still have three stories as allowed in this district i To allow for a three story building the height lurut would have to be increased 1 The minimum height likely needed to accomplish this would be 37 or 38 feet iv CBDB-Central Business District Bluffside 1 This district lies both on the west side of Second Street between Myrtle and Nelson Street, and westward of Main Street roughly between Mulberry Street and Elm Street 2 The current height standard in this district is 4 stories or 45 feet 3 What building height is appropriate? a The 4 story building allowed in the CBDB district would likely fit reasonably within the current 45 foot height limit if a flat roof were used However, if a pitched roof were used, four stories would not fit within 45 feet of height About 52 feet would be necessary (See Exhibit D ) b If the City desires to have four story buildings with pitched roofs in the CBDB district, it would have to increase the height limit c In this part of the downtown area, flat roofed buildings are generally more appropriate Therefore, a height adjustment may not be necessary v CBDBT-Central Business District Blufftop 1 With a few exceptions, this district lies on the east side of Third Street between Myrtle Street and Oak Street 2 The current height standard in this district is 3 stories or 35 feet 3 What building height is appropriate? a The 3 story building allowed in the CBDBT district would likely fit reasonably within the current 35 foot height limit, but only if it had a flat roof (See Exhibit E) Height Ord Amendment November 8 2006 Page 5 of 12 b A 3 story building with a historically pitched roof would require about 42 feet of height c If the City desires to have 3 story buildings with pitched roofs in the CBDBT district, it would have to increase the height limit d In this part of the downtown area, both flat roofed buildings and pitched roof buildings are about equally common e Given this district's location along the bluffline, a steeply pitched roof on top of a 3 story building could be very visible both from downtown and from properties uphill to the west f Perhaps the City would prefer to encourage flat roofed buildings in this district and leave the height limit at 35 feet as it now is 2 New infill buildings a If the proposed building is to be an infill building, then the infill height standard would apply The new height standards would not apply unless they are more restrictive than the infill standard2 b Which proposed buildings, if any, should be required to abide by the infill height standard? i The purpose of the infill height standard was to preserve the historic massing and visual character of the downtown blocks of buildings This was done in 1989 by establishing both a rrunimum and maximum building height for the City's central business district The minimum height needed for an infill building is 10% less than the adjoining building The maximum height allowed is 10% more than the adjoining building ii To remain true to this intent, any infill building in the CBDH historic downtown height overlay district should be required to respect the massing of the adjoining buildings 1 Perhaps proposed buildings in the bluff top, bluffside, parkside, and riverside height districts would not need to maintain the infill standard These districts do not have the concentration of historic blocks of adjoining buildings that the CBDH district has c What should the infill standard be if a proposed building has existing buildings on each side of it, not just on one side? 'For example if an infill building were proposed today next to an existing 50 foot building the mfill height limit would allow a 45 foot tall building Since the new 35 foot height limit is more restrictive it would apply Height Ord Amendment November 8, 2006 Page 6 of 12 i To maintain the existing massing, staff suggests that if the infill building adjoins more than one existing building, then the height of the infill building should be within 10% (higher or lower) of the average height of the adjoining buildings ALTERNATIVES The Planning Commission has at least the following alternatives available 1 Recommend that the City Council leave the current downtown height ordinance as it is This would have the effect, for example, of allowing a three story building in the CBDH district, no matter how tall the three stories were 2 Recommend that the City Council revise the downtown height ordinance The Planning Commission could recommend a revision package as represented in the attached draft ordinance Or, it could recommend other revisions [Note The attached draft of ordinance revisions incorporates all of the conclusions found in this report Except, it does not eliminate the infill standard from all of the height overlay districts However, this could be accomplished easily if the Planning Commission so wishes 1 3 Continue the discussion at the December Planning Commission meeting attachments Height Overlay District Map Exhibits A-E Draft Ord 969 Revisions Excerpt from 8/14/06 Planning Commission Meeting Height Ord Amendment November 8 2006 Page 7 of 12 1�k _[All draft revisions are h ghlightea7 Deletions are shown in strikethrough ! Additions are -shown underlined] REVISIONS TO ORDINANCE NO 969 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE STILLWATER CODE, CHAPTER 31 ENTITLED ZONING ORDINANCE BY AMENDING "THE ZONING MAP OF THE CITY" TO REZONE PROPERTY WITHIN THE CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT (CBD) AND RB—TWO FAMILY DISTRICT (RB) BY CREATING OVERLAY DISTRICTS TO KNOWN AS THE CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT RIVERSIDE (CBDR), CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT PARKSIDE (CBDP), CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT HISTORIC (CBDH), CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT BLUFFSIDE (CBDB), AND CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT BLUFFTOP (CBDBT) The City Council of the City of Stillwater does ordain PURPOSE The City Council finds that the Central Business District (CBD) has been the core area of the City and its most identifiable resource Since 1930 when Lowell Park was established through the generosity of Elmore Lowell and the cooperation of the Federal Government WPA program, Lowell Park and the downtown have served as the gateway to the City The CBD has become a desirable place to work, shop, live and enjoy cultural and recreational activities and it is therefore apparent that regulations be adopted that will preserve and enhance the essential character of the downtown and that structures be limited in height in order that structures close to the nver not nse above the height of structures farther from the river 2 AMENDING A Section 31-1, Subd 10, Use districts, is amended by adding subsections 48-} that will hereafter read as follows (26� CBDR—Central Business District and RB Two Family District Riverside (f9) `27J CBDP—Central Business District Parkside 28 ' CBDH—Central Business Distnct Histonc 04) a9j CBDB—Central Business District Bluffside (� M CBDBT—Central Business District Blufftop Height Ord Amendment November 8 2006 Page 8 of 12 B Section 31-1, Subd 17, CBD—central business distract and RB— two family distract, are amended by adding subsection (6) a, b, c, and d that will read as follows "(6) Overlay distract regulations a In addition to, and not in lieu of other official controls, all buildings and uses hereafter proposed for construction, whether on existing vacant parcels or parcels being vacated because of demolition or destruction of an existing structure, are subject to the standards regulations and provision of the Central Business District Riverside ("CBDR") b In addition to, and not in lieu of other official controls, all buildings and uses hereafter proposed for construction, whether on existing vacant parcels or parcels being vacated because of demolition or destruction of an existing structure, are subject to the standards regulations and provision of the Central Business District Parkside ("CBDP") c In addition to, and not in lieu of other official controls, all buildings and uses hereafter proposed for construction, whether on existing vacant parcels or parcels being vacated because of demolition or destruction of an existing structure, are subject to the standards regulations and provision of the Central Business District Histonc ("CBDH") d In addition to, and not in lieu of other official controls, all buildings and uses hereafter proposed for construction, whether on existing vacant parcels or parcels being vacated because of demolition or destruction of an existing structure, are subject to the standards regulations and provision of the Central Business Distnct Bluffside ("CBDB") e In addition to, and not in lieu of other official controls, all buildings and uses hereafter proposed for construction, whether on existing vacant parcels or parcels being vacated because of demolition or destruction of an existing structure, are subject to the standards regulations and provision of the Central Business District Blufftop ("CBDBT) " Height Ord Amendment November 8 2006 Page 9 of 12 C Section 31-1, Subd 17(5), General regulations, is amended by adding a new subsection "a" that will hereafter read as follows a Height of buildings CBDR—Central Business District Riverside Freestaridinbutlding maximum height 1 5 stones[-not°to exceed e 20 feet, measured from the front street level Infill bu ldink }maxi mkand mimmumYheiSt Igor vacant lots immediately adjacent t03 an existing building the height of the mfill buildmg_is to be within 10% JJugher or lower of the � hei t�of tli( ad acent building or buildings If he rnfill,buildinu is 2 CBDP—Central Business District Parkside Freestandmp bwldmg maximum hg1 t 2 5 stones? of to exceed_&O 30 feet, measured from the front street level ,- � x-_- -�-� -�- " ' �._ --�-, , Infill building maximum and rmnunum height #For vacant lots immediately adjacent t03 an existing building the height of the infill building R to be within 10% Ngher or lower)' Omii of the edra6ent` P&Qlit,of thethe 1 3 CBDH—Central Business District Historic Freestanding building maximum height 3 stones; not t eo Xceed of M 38 feet measured from the front street level Infill building maximum and�mmunum height IFor vacant lots immediately adjacent t03 an existing building the Height of the inf 11 buildingis to be within 3 For purposes of calculating the height of an mfill building immediately adjacent to does not include buildings that are on the opposite side of a street alley or open space of any kind Height Ord Amendment November 8 2006 Page 10 of 12 4 5 10% (higher or lower) then of the `height fthe adlace t building br bwldmgs If the lnfillabulldmg is between` adj acent buildings, then the height of the infi l building is to be within 10% (higher or lower) of the average=height of the adjacent buildings on both sides CBDB—Central Business District Bluffside Fre se tandm bull g maximum height 4 stones[ —not- to exceed e 45 feet, measured from the front street level Infill bulldmg maximum and rmmmum hei It IFor vacant lots immediately adjacent too an existing building the h& ht7of the infill building is to be within 10% of ugher or lower t f the of the of the adiacent but ldings on both' sided CBDBT—Central Business District Blufftop Freestanding'building maximum hei t 3 stones not to exceed,IE ' 35 feet, measured from the front street level Infill building m lax mum and muiunum lght FFor vacant lots immediately adjacent too an existing building the Height -of the°infillfbuildin is to lie within 10% bhgher or lowerWui of the adjacent hei t of the adj ent building oilbuildings If the'infil building is is to C.TI D Section 31-1, Subd 12(5)a, Development regulations is amended by adding (5)a 8 , which will hereafter read as follows 8 Height limitations for parcels within the RB—two family district, subject to the CBDR Riverside overlay district Maximum 1 5 stonesnot to xe ceed of 20 feet, measured from front street level 4 For purposes of calculating the height of an infill building immediately adjacent to does not include buildings that are on the opposite side of a street alley or open space of any kind Height Ord Amendment November 8 2006 Page 11 of 12 E General regulations In all overlay districts created by this ordinance, the following regulations will apply a For flat roofed buildings, height will be measured from the lowest street curb level to the highest parapet wall of the proposed building b For peaked roofed buildings, height will be measured from the lowest curb level to the highest roof peak of the proposed building c In areas within the flood plain as depicted on the FEMA "Flood Insurance Rate Map," height will be measured starting from one (1) foot above the regional flood elevation of the property d All properties abutting on Main Street with frontage on more than one street must have height measurements taken from the Main Street side e All properties along Third Street must have height measured from the Third Street side f Buildings existing on April 18, 2006 will, for the purpose of this ordinance, will be in lawful height conformance for purposes of improvements, repairs, remodeling, or refinancing This provision will not apply to buildings that are intentionally demolished 3 SAVING In all other ways, the Stillwater City Code shall remain in full force and effect 4 EFFECTIVE DATE This Ordinance shall be effective upon its passage and publication according to law Enacted by the City Council of the City of Stillwater this 18`h day of April, 2006 Jay L Kimble, Mayor ATTEST Diane F Ward, City Clerk Height Ord Amendment November 8, 2006 Page 12 of 12 City of Stillwater Planning Commission August 14 2006 EXCERPT Present Chair Robert Gag Suzanne Block Gregg Carlsen Mike Dahlquist David Junker, Brad Memke Dave Middleton, David Peroceschi Others Community Development Director Bill Turnblad and Planner Mike Pogge Chairman Gag called the meeting to order at 7 p in Approval of Minutes Mr Peroceschi seconded by Mr Dahlquist moved approval of the rmnutes of July 10 2006, as presented Motion passed unanimously PUBLIC HEARINGS Case No ZAT/06 05 A zoning test amendment to the CBD Height Regulations City of Stillwater applicant Mr Tumblad explained the recent proposal submitted for 227 N Main St the Stefan project, raised a question about the interpretation of the new downtown height overlay district He noted the current language limits structures to a certain number of stones or a certain height in feet The question that came up in the Stefan proposal was whether that language was to be interpreted as the number of stones or height in feet, whichever is less or whichever is greater Mr Tumblad reviewed the arguments for the whichever is less and whichever is greater language Mr Gag opened the public hearing Vern Stefan 717 Sixth Ave S suggested putting a number, in height to eliminate misinterpretation Mr Stefan noted that it is not possible to have three floors and 35 feet and meet state codes — it shouldn t be three floors it should be two floors if that is the City s intent No other comments were received and the hearing was closed Mr Junker said in all the previous discussions and hearings the focus was height He said when he voted on the height overlay district he was under the assumption that the lirrut was the lesser of the allowable number of stones or height Mr Junker said the current language suggests that the greater number is allowable Mr Middleton suggested taking out the language specifying stones and just stating maximum height Ms Block suggested allowing 37 which would enable a three story structure to built and meet state code she asked whether 35 took into account that a three story building cannot be constructed and meet code Mr Gag said he would be comfortable with eliminating language stipulating stones and staying with height Mr Middleton pointed out that a three story building could be constructed at 35 , it just wouldn t have the historical feel of the high ceilings for retail space Ms Block spoke in favor of language that allows a building of three stones or 37 in height Mr Dahlquist said what was being suggested is some more research to verify that the height numbers are correct Mr Junker moved to add verbiage limiting stories and height to whichever is less in all five categories of the height overlay zones leaving everything else as is Mr Meinke seconded the motion Mr Tumblad asked that the motion include the housekeeping changes related to Section references Mr Junker agreed to include those changes in his motion Mr Memke agreed to second with those changes Motion passed unanimously Ms Block moved to review the numbers in the height overlay district to ensure that the stones indicated match an appropriate minimum number of feet required by Minnesota building codes to build each of the referenced number of stories Mr Dahlquist seconded the motion Mr Dahlquist also suggested that height of the existing buildings be documented Mr Dahlquist also said he would not favor having a flat line appearance to Main Street Motion failed on a 4-4 vote 'STREET O Z S�EEf02 GAS GHERRY 0 i Ln N • • PSI �1N0EN \ E � In, \1 tNVj N �;— ESZ GN\A Z W � G E�Oj� STREES NOGG � Na pZ ? "` • WEST Nm N� m m Its of, — -- 3. ter 1 Height Overlay District Height Height District Limit Riverside 1.5 Story/20' Parkside 2.5 Story/30' Historic 3 Story/35' Bluffside 4 Story/45' Bluff Top 3 Story/35' FLOOD PLAIN AREA 730' ELEVATION . REEj r� N " P �o� SAINT CROIX RIVER .m��EET NELSON `, C N `41ST CIP W =yos= E S 400 Feet Typical 1yLStary Histoi I(-,, CBD Building CB-D R - j2tvt7Z 51Pe A I I I I I I I NI I I I I I Erwterr- A 1 rdid peI IT[ 2foot mm" / jz 1 F(2-sT F�i2 ��SE/Id EA/ LLL=1 MOAX, ,tome 1 -5- 44 01- Zd c D lM.et,($ 1 o N S PE7z fgc L( D i/j4� 01=r, (G (A (— DlMEh 51-att-3 l'45?2- 1?kl[.Dtt,14 0r-F(C4A11 Typical4--Story Histot is CBD Building Erm I S tol"� /4 Ve/k4jV-- M l M tot ANC. D t M-t---N S eo N 5 C-% D Q — g L-upr— ,DC _ o0o" a s 7rL c. I I 2 foot -serirng I I � � I . l0 ` Pew -d r q f for r s = (4 4 3 V {'ate -��..� roo'f ParoP C 11 I l I 2 foot cawg I I - I `f 3 -&r Paif rw Z t To ✓ P }-eoi roo T 2 f o of errfrrrg� I I I I I I I I I Con",ont tovez, `f 4aAcm &,*x 1-5- ' "A&oAt-C;- Mok6 ti r ��,u sous PG12- 941(-bI/q c &v=ir--«tA` t in 1water- f F 8 1 A T 11 P A f[ O F M I N N F 4 0 1 A Planning Commission DATE November 8, 2006 ITEM Annual Bed and Breakfast Report to the Planning Commission PC DATE November 13, 2006 REVIEWERS Community Dev Director PREPARED BY Michel Pogge, City Planner 1W DISCUSSION As part of the bed and breakfast Ordinance, each establishment is to be reviewed annually by the Community Development Director and a written report is to be made to the Planning Commission and City Council in November of each year Each bed and breakfast was reviewed by staff and a copy of the annual report has been attached All of the bed and breakfasts are in compliance with their approved special use permits There have been no changes to the Bed and Breakfast's in the community since last year There are currently seven active B&B s which is the same as last year Staff has not received any complaints related to the bed and breakfasts in the community with the exception of the Elephant Inn Bed and Breakfast at 801 West Pme Street During 2006 the City received two written letters of complaint and five police reports regarding the Elephant Walk Bed and Breakfast Attached are copies of the letters and police reports for the Commission s information The Commission has two options in this case 1 Review the attached information, accept the annual report and take no further action 2 Request staff to set a public hearing to consider revoking the approved special use pernut related to the Elephant Inn Bed and Breakfast ALTERNATIVES The Planning Commission has the following options 1 Review the attached information, accept the annual report and take no further action 2 Request staff to set a public hearing to consider revoking the Elephant Inn Bed and Breakfast special use pernut For the other six bed and breakfasts review the attached information, accept the annual report and take no further action f Annual Report of Active B&B Is Name Owner Address Date Owned Current SUP Case # Ann Bean Mansion Jeremy and Erin Drews 319 West Pine Street 3/15/2005 2004 11 CPC Date Reviewed Comments Rooms Special Events 5 guest rooms A maximum of six (6) events (large functions defined as business meetings bus tours bridal and wedding showers anniversaries weddings and wedding receptions and church functions) over twenty (20) persons allowed per month 11/8/2006 Upon inspection the site is in compliance with its approved SUP The City has not received any complaints The health department has no issues per Angela Wheeler Washington County Health Department Aurora Staples Inn Cathy and Jerry Helmberger 5 guest rooms (4 in main A maximum of six (6) events 303 North Fourth Street 7/1/2002 house and 1 in carnage (large functions defined as house) business meetings bus tours 2003 23 CPC bridal and wedding showers anniversaries weddings and wedding receptions and church functions) over twenty (20) persons allowed per month Date Reviewed Comments 10/25/2006 Upon inspection the site is in compliance with its approved SUP The City has not received any complaints The health department has no issues per Angela Wheeler Washington County Health Department James Mulvey Inn Jill and Truett Lawson 7 guest rooms four in No 622 West Churchill Street 12/9/1991 the main home and three in the carnage 1997 26 CPC house Date Reviewed Comments 11/8/2006 Upon inspection the site is in compliance with its approved SUP The City has not received any complaints The health department has no issues per Angela Wheeler Washington County Health Department Wednesday Noiernber 08 2006 Page I oft Typica 13-Story Histor i . CBD Building CB-P 3T- A tfL--(4�ETZLA IJt 2 foot awW�g � / • �p - � Z' Moor 1 1 `/J lQ� /io f b�c I e ,( Coal�f ►OAC4WI ZU. 351 ( 2 foot c-e li g U Ik IL 1 ' P14Aed Loaf / 6(j 1 3 s 4*, ,' m a-.t to rz e✓ VC t z- f-- f WOuI� lot roerA Q�a041- �2 , M 2 foot ee lh" MI 1 1 1 nN fls IT AVeZ444 MrN(mum DtM�-T(S�oNS P1I�11e� 'Z H c4vw4e.� ,cocQe 3.�n�a &,�- 3S` -0 (A4&NSLdN S Pam- 914U-61N6L Qr=F(c(A L V Name Owner Rooms Special Events Address Date Owned Current SUP Case # Lady Goodwood Bed and Br Ron Hannig 3 guest rooms A maximum of six (6) events 704 South First Street 4/7/2003 (large functions defined asbusiness meetings bus tours 2003 33 CPC bridal and wedding showers anniversaries weddings and wedding receptions and church functions) over twenty (20) persons allowed per month Date Reviewed Comments 11/8/2006 Upon inspection the site is in compliance with its approved SUP The City has not received any complaints The health department has no issues per Angela Wheeler Washington County Health Department Rivertown Inn Jeff and Julie Anderson 9 guest rooms (7 in the Two special events a month with 306 West Olive Street 9/23/1999 main home and 2 in the a limit of 18 people staying at the carnage home) Inn and 18 other people totaling 2005-69 CPC 38 people per event Date Reviewed Comments 10/31/2006 Upon inspection the site is in compliance with its approved SUP The City has not received any complaints The City has not received any complaints The health department has no issues per Angela Wheeler Washington County Health Department The Elephant Walk Rita Graybill Four guest rooms No 801 West Pine Street 7/12/1992 2005 31 CPC Date Reviewed Comments 10/27/2006 During 2006 the City received a number of complaints regarding the Elephant Walk Bed and Breakfast Attached are an unsigned letter of complaint the city received on August 8 2006 and a signed letter from Joe Thompson dated October 18 2006 Based on the letter from Mr Thompson staff reviewed police reports related to the property and found 5 police reports in 2006 related to the Elephant Walk Finally the police report from July of 2004 reference in Mr Thompson s letter has also been attached There are only 4 guests rooms on site and is in compliance with its approved SUP The health department has no issues per Angela Wheeler Washington County Health Department William Sauntry Mansion Thomas and Sandra Lynum 6 guest rooms A maximum of six (6) events 626 North Fourth Street 10/21/1999 (large functions defined asbusiness meetings bus tours 1999 43 CPC bridal and wedding showers anniversaries weddings and wedding receptions and church functions) over twenty (20) persons allowed per month Date Reviewed Comments 10/31/2006 Upon inspection the site is in compliance with its approved SUP The City has not received any complaints The health department has no issues per Angela Wheeler Washington County Health Department Wednesday, Not ember 08, 2006 Page 2 of 2 i JOE R THOMPSON 828 W WILLARD STREET STILLWATER, MN 55082 October 18, 2006 City of Stillwater Attention Michel Pogge, City Planner 216 N 4`h Street Stillwater, Minnesota 55082 OCT 2 7 2006 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Re Request for Non-RenewaURevocation of Special Use Permit to Operate a Bed and Breakfast at 801 West Pine Street (The Elephant Walk Bed and Breakfast) Dear Mr Pogge This letter is in follow-up to our earlier conversation regarding the activities of Rita Graybill and Mike Robinson, the owners/operators of The Elephant Walk Bed and Breakfast, and to request the non-renewal/revocation of their special use permit to operate this business at 801 West Pine Street Described below are some of the activities that support this request Confrontation with Our Young Kids Shortly after moving into our home at 828 Willard Street, Mike Robinson, after complaining about the noise our kids were making while playing on a Friday afternoon, literally barked at our kids through the fence dividing our properties Our children were then ages 8, 6, and 4 He scared them to the point they no longer wanted to play in our backyard After I approached Mike and Rita about this, Rita apologized for his behavior and brought cookies to our kids Continuous Complaints A few months after that incident, Just when our kids were becoming comfortable playing in our backyard, Mike began calling our home complaining that the kids needed to be quiet for their guests These calls have always between noon and 8 00 p in We have not received complaints from any other neighbors Eventually, we advised Mike that if he felt our kids were too loud, he needed to file a complaint with the police We assumed this would cause him to think twice about making unreasonable demands and accept that kids will play in a neighborhood First Call to Police Mike took our advice on July 29, 2004 Heidi, my wife, is on the board of a nonprofit corporation with six other moms On that day, they met at our house while their children played in our backyard Mike first told the kids through the fence to be quiet When they didn't quiet down to his satisfaction, he called the police At approximately 2 00 p in that afternoon, an officer arrived at our home to investigate a noise complaint When the officer came to the door, he listened to the kids playing The officer's response was to tell the kids to have a good time, that's what kids are supposed to do More Complaints After this incident, we again didn't receive phone calls for a few months However, he eventually began to harass us with additional complaints We again advised him to call the police if he felt he had a legitimate complaint He would then hang up on us We didn't like to continuously respond to his complaints, but we hoped things would get better Doc# 2185637\1 P Second Police Call Things came to a head on September 2, 2006 My parents were in town from Iowa and my son was playing in the front yard while my daughters, their neighborhood friends and a friend from school were playing in our backyard At approximately 7 30 p in that night, Mike called our home and asked that I bring the kids inside because he wanted to serve dinner to their guests I responded that he lives in a residential neighborhood and that I was not going to ask my kids to come inside at 7 30 p m on a weekend He immediately responded that he was no longer going to contain my dog, went into his backyard, and proceeded to tear out a section of his fence while the kids watched He then called the police and filed a false report that I had hit him That night, with my parents in town, I had four police cars and four officers at my house The police interviewed all present and confirmed that, in fact, Mike had reported false information The officers promised me they would warn him about reporting false information and educate hum on the noise ordinance in Stillwater Needless to say, our kids and their neighborhood friends had no intention to go into our backyard again I told my kids I would build our own fence across the backyard so for him to get to them, he would have to go through our fence as well That preceded my call to you on Tuesday, September 5, to obtain a fence permit with the goal of keeping Mike out and our kids safe Request for Revocation/Non-Renewal We were prepared to move out of our home because of the fear Mike has instilled in our children to play in their own backyard and our becoming tired of his continued harassment However, after conversations with several of our neighbors and our desire to stay where we have made our home, we determined that it wouldn't be right for a family to be forced out of a residential neighborhood by a business Specifically, The Elephant Walk Bed and Breakfast is operating under a special use permit The purpose of a special use permit is to allow special consideration of uses that are not specifically permitted in the zoning classification Before granting a special use permit, the City must find that the use will not be injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare, and will be in harmony with the general purpose of the Zoning Ordinance (excerpted from Request for Special Use Permit published by the City of Stillwater) The Elephant Walk Bed and Breakfast has demonstrated that it is injurious to the neighborhood and its residents, and that its operations are not in harmony with the Zoning Ordinance Special use permits for bed and breakfasts are reviewed annually in November We request that the City revoke/not renew The Elephant Walk Bed and Breakfast's special use permit for 2007 I understand that all subsequent requests to operate a bed and breakfast at 801 West Pine Street would be subject to public comments At your convenience, Heidi and I would be happy to discuss our request in more detail and share more experiences justif}nng this request Thanks for your consideration S Doc# 2185637\1 �61 Gv X�� August 2006 Members of the City Council and Planning Commission City of Stillwater 216 North Fourth Street Stillwater, MN 55082 RE Elephant Walk Bed & Breakfast PARKING • PARKING • PARKING Back when Jon and Rita Graybill stood in front of the City Council applying for a Bed and Breakfast license they promised our neighborhood that they would only rent out 3 sleeping rooms, that they would not park guest or family cars on the street, that noise would be kept to a minimum and we would hardly know they were operating an Inn With some reluctance I voted yes Oh if I could redo that decision The parking of guest cars and family cars on the street has always been a problem but this summer it has become unbearably annoying Three, four, sometimes five vehicles parked out there - all night and into the next day, day after day Weekends are the worst It s a constant line of cars I m tired of the commercialization of our neighborhood, the guest traffic, the signage, the delivery trucks, the lights etc Please do something and put a stop to all this I have lived here almost my entire adult life and have patiently coped with all the problems this Bed and Breakfast has brought to our neighborhood and I am now running out of patience Thank you, A Pine Street Resident AUG - 8 2006 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CJGIUPRSW DATE 9/06/06 TIME 15 54 06 STILLWATER POLICE DEPARTMENT INITIAL COMPLAINT REPORT 106210973 DATE/TIME REPORTED 9/04/06 17 07 49 DISPATCHER DATE/TIME STAMP 9/04/06 17 08 51 ENTERED BY LOCATION OF INCIDENT 828 WILLARD ST W STILLWATER MN 55082 CJGIUPRSW STILLWATER POLICE DEPARTMENT DATE 9/05/06 TIME 12 02 49 INITIAL COMPLAINT REPORT 106210889 DATE/TIME REPORTED 9/02/06 19 42 23 DISPATCHER MJJOHNS DATE/TIME STAMP 9/02/06 19 43 02 ENTERED BY MJJOHNS LOCATION OF INCIDENT 801 PINE ST W GRID 207 STILLWATER, MN 55082 f CJGIUPRSW STILLWATER POLICE DEPARTMENT DATE 9/05/06 TIME 12 02 99 INITIAL COMPLAINT REPORT 106210889 DATE/TIME REPORTED 9/02/06 19 92 23 DISPATCHER MJJOHNS DATE/TIME STAMP 9/02/06 19 93 02 ENTERED BY MJJOHNS 7 CJGIUPRSW STILLWATER POLICE DEPARTMENT DATE 9/05/06 TIME 12 02 49 INITIAL COMPLAINT REPORT 106210889 DATE/TIME REPORTED 9/02/06 19 42 23 DISPATCHER MJJOHNS DATE/TIME STAMP 9/02/06 19 43 02 ENTERED BY MJJOHNS r .. CJGlUPRSW STILLWATER POLICE DEPARTMENT DATE 10/30/06 TIME 12 48 13 INITIAL COMPLAINT REPORT 106202452 DATE/TIME REPORTED 3/17/06 8 13 06 DISPATCHER LRTHOMP DATE/TIME STAMP 3/17/06 8 14 03 ENTERED BY LRTHOMP LOCATION OF INCIDENT 801 PINE ST W GRID 111 STILLWATER, MN 55082 OFFICER COMMENTS COMPLAINT OF NEIGHBOR BLOWING SNOW INTO ABOVE ADDRESS'S 215 3/18/06 YARD ATTEMPTED CONTACT, NO ONE WAS HOME CLRD 215 3/18/06 CLASSIFIED AS DISTURBANCE/DISPUTE 9810 It CJGlUPRSW STILLWATER POLICE DEPARTMENT DATE 10/30/06 TIME 12 48 16 INITIAL COMPLAINT REPORT 106202393 DATE/TIME REPORTED 3/15/06 14 26 06 DISPATCHER JAPELTI DATE/TIME STAMP 3/15/06 14 27 12 ENTERED BY JAPELTI LOCATION OF INCIDENT 801 PINE ST W GRID 111 STILLWATER, MN 55082 OFFICER COMMENTS ON GOING PROBLEM, SEE ICR 06202328 COMP STATED HIS NEIGH 209 3/15/06 BOR THREW SOME SNOW OVER A COMMON FENCE ONTO HIS PROPERTY 209 3/15/06 ATTEMPTES TO CONTACT THE NEIOGHBOR THUS FAR HAVE YEILDED NEG 209 3/15/06 RESULTS 209 3/15/06 CLASSIFIED AS DISTURBANCE/DISPUTE 9810 CJGIUPRSW STILLWATER POLICE DEPARTMENT DATE 10/30/06 TIME 12 48 21 INITIAL COMPLAINT REPORT 106202328 DATE/TIME REPORTED 3/13/06 15 55 54 DISPATCHER MFFERGU DATE/TIME STAMP 3/13/06 15 56 22 ENTERED BY MFFERGU LOCATION OF INCIDENT 801 PINE ST W STILLWATER, MN CLASSIFIED AS DISTURBANCE/DISPUTE 9810 CJGIUPRSW STILLWATER POLICE DEPARTMENT DATE 10/27/06 TIME 13:48:50 INITIAL COMPLAINT REPORT 104208214 DATE/TIME REPORTED: 7/29/04 13:19:48 DISPATCHER: DATE/TIME STAMP: 7/29/04 13:20:11 ENTERED BY: LOCATION OF INCIDENT: 801 PINE ST W STILLWATER, MN 55082 OFFICER COMMENTS: COMPLAINT OF KIDS PLAYING IN THE YARD BEHIND HIS HOUSE. THER E WERE KIDS PLAYING AGES 4 TO 9. NO POLICE ACTION. CLASSIFIED AS: LOUD NOISE/MUSIC JAPELTI JAPELTI GRID: 111 204 7/29/04 204 7/29/04 9804