Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007-05-14 CPC Packet4 • 1 ter THE BIRTHPLACE OF MINNESOTA CITY OF STILLWATER PLANNING COMMISSION NOTICE OF MEETING The City of Stillwater Planning Commission will meet on Monday, May 14, 2007, at 7 p m in the Fire Department Training Room of Stillwater City Hail, 216 North Fourth Street AGENDA 1 CALL TO ORDER 2 APPROVAL OF April 9, 2007 MINUTES 3 PUBLIC HEARINGS 3 01 Case No 07-20 A special use permit request for a rental car office (Avis Budget Car Rental) located at 1674 Market Drive in the BP-C, Business Park Commercial District Steve Erban, representing Avis, applicant 3 02 Case No ANN/ZAM/CPA 06-49 An annexation, zoning map amendment and comprehensive plan amendment request from Bruggeman Properties for development of 18 3 acres into 45 single family lots located at 13210 751h Street and 13129 and 13199 Boutwell Road Teresa Hegland and Greg Schlink, applicants 3 03 Case No 07-22 A variance to the front yard setback for the removal of a porch and replace with a 12'x 27' addition located at 1333 S 4th Street in the RB, Two Family Residential District Traci Brown, applicant 4 OTHER BUSINESS 4 01 Request from Sheila E Martin for an extension of an approved variance (Case No V/05-19) CITY HALL 216 NORTH FOURTH STREET STILLWATER MINNESOTA 55082 PHONE 651 430 8800 • WEBSITE wwwcl stillwatermn us City of Stillwater Planning Commission April 9 2007 Present Dave Middleton Chairperson Suzanne Block Gregg Carlsen Mike Dahlquist Dan Kalmon Brad Meinke Wally Milbrandt and Charles Wolden Staff present Planner Mike Pogge Absent David Peroceschi Mr Middleton called the meeting to order at 7 p m Approval of minutes Mr Carlsen seconded by Ms Block moved approval of the minutes of March 12 2007 Motion passed unanimously PUBLIC HEARINGS Case No 07-16 Request for a special use permit to locate wireless antennas on an existing communications monopole with the necessary group appurtenances at 1754 Washington Ave in the BP I Business Park Industrial District and any variances related thereto Verizon Wireless Jake Soper applicant The applicant was present Mr Pogge reviewed the request It was noted that the Commission had previously reviewed and approved this request However since the applicant did not begin construction within two years of the issuance of the permit the permit expired on Dec 13 2006 Ms Block asked why the Verizon equipment shelter is so much larger than T-Mobile s Mr Soper explained that Verizon s includes an enclosed generator which T-Mobile s does not Mr Soper also stated the size of the shelter is designed to accommodate changing technology and equipment Mr Middleton opened the public hearing No comments were received and the hearing was closed Mr Milbrandt recused himself from this case due to his employment with Qwest Communications although there is no conflict of interest he stated he felt there was no need for him to participate in this case Mr Middleton noted this is exactly the same request approved by the Commission two years ago Mr Wolden moved approval as conditioned Mr Dahlquist seconded the motion Motion passed unanimously with Mr Milbrandt abstaining Case No 07-17 A request for a variance for front yard setback for construction of an 8 x 10 wooden stoop at 1031 W Abbott St in the RA Single Family Residential District and any variances related thereto Jeanne and Mike Lyner applicant Mr Pogge reviewed the request noting the request involves two variances — a variance for the expansion of a non -conforming structure as the Lyner house currently does not meet the required front yard setback and one for the new stoop Mr Pogge noted that due to the curvature of the road in the area the new stoop will actually be about 46 from the paved roadway which is very similar to other properties in the RA District Mr Pogge said in evaluating the request staff believes the applicant has satisfied all of the requirements for the granting of the variances) and approval_is recommended Ms _Block_ asked_how_much_closer_ the- road _ could be to the structure should the City ever decide to reconstruct the road within the actual right-of-way Mr Pogge said in that event the road cold be about 10 closer to the structure Mr City of Stillwater Planning Commission April9 2007 Milbrandt pointed out that there is existing curb on the street and the likelihood of tearing out the curb and redesigning the roadway is not very great Mr Middleton opened the public hearing No comments were received and the hearing was closed Mr Dahlquist pointed out a variance would be required even in the applicant were just replacing the front step and said he had no issue with granting the request Mr Dahlquist moved approval Mr Carlsen seconded the motion motion passed unanimously Case No 07-18 Final PUD and final subdivision of Outlot A Liberty Village 3`d Addition and special use permit for a veterinary clinic located in the southeast corner of County Road 12 and County Road 15 in the VC Village Commercial District and any variances related thereto Contractor Property Development Co David Hempel and Krech O Brien Mueller & Associates Dan O Brien applicants Mr Pogge reviewed the request It was noted that this project involves three requests final plat replatting Outlot A of Liberty Village 3rd Addition into Liberty Village 4`h Addition approval of final PUD plans for Lot 1 Block 1 Liberty Village 4ch Addition and approval of a special use permit for a veterinary hospital on Lot 1 Block 1 of Liberty Village 4`h Addition Mr Pogge reviewed building height lot size and width and setback requirements for the PUD/Village Commercial area all of which are met by the proposal Regarding building design Mr Pogge noted the proposed building features a modified cross gable roof which is the preferred roof type in the development and is prairie craftsman style architecture a style seen throughout the residential area of the Liberty development Mr Pogge stated the City s Heritage Preservation Commission had reviewed and approved of the design plans at its April 5 meeting The Liberty on the Lake Architectural Review Committee reviewed and approved plans on March 23 Regarding the special use permit Mr Pogge noted that all uses within the Village Commercial District are allowed only with a special use permit While a veterinary clinic/animal hospital is not specifically listed as an allowed use medical and dental offices are uses allowed with a SUP The staff report also highlighted issues related to outdoor use and restrictive covenants Mr Kalmon asked about other businesses/uses in the area Mr Pogge reviewed the site and existing business locations Mr Wolden asked about the proposed replating and the possible future expansion Mr Pogge noted that any future expansion was not part of this approval and would have to come back before the Commission Mr Carlsen asked if plans had been reviewed/approved by the Liberty development association Mr Pogge pointed out there are several associations for the development The association for the commercial area did review and approve the plans with several conditions Mr Pogge stated David Hempel CPDC Dan O Brien Krech O Brien Mueller & Associates and Dr Ginger Garlie were present Mr Hempel reviewed the history of the Liberty development and the Village Commercial area Mr Hempel explained that CPDC is fee -holder of the retail area and remaining vacant lots and Newman Realty has no power to require architectural design as _ suggested in a letter to_Commission members —Mr -Hempel -also stated CP_DC does_not_need Newman Realty approval for site plan consideration - the architectural review committee reviews and approves all site plans Mr Hempel stated the developer believes the plans under consideration meet the intent and spirit of the Liberty architectural guidelines He suggested a City of Stillwater Planning Commission April 9 2007 veterinary clinic is a very neighborhood -oriented use and permitted under the Village Commercial Zoning as a professional/medical office that performs services for the neighborhood and surrounding area Mr Hempel also noted the use will general traffic that will support other neighboring retail uses as well Mr Hempel also spoke briefly of the inconsistency of the restrictive covenants which prohibit the boarding and keeping of animals but not the operation of a pet store He noted this site had been marketed for a number of years as a restaurant site However due to traffic projections for lunch business all potential buyers have backed out He said they will continue to market the remaining site for a restaurant use Dr Garlie reviewed her professional background She noted that 65 percent of households nationwide have pets and a community like Liberty is probably higher than that so her business could be serving 70 percent of the residents of Liberty and the surrounding Stillwater community She noted her business primarily takes care of dogs and cats so there won t be any horse trailers pulling up She briefly listed the types of services provided and noted the business is a high-tech medical facility for pets with high standards She stated the business is not a boarding facility and animals do not stay overnight with the exception of cats after de - clawing If the animal does require hospital stay it goes to a facility in Oakdale She described the outdoor exercise area odor waste and noise control measures that are planned Mr Middleton asked about the size of the current facility and number of patients served on a daily basis and whether the expectation is that the number of patients will double with this larger facility Mr Middleton said he thought a concern would be with people walking their animals outside while waiting for appointments and cleanup of waste Dr Garlie explained their plans to deal with that concern — providing receptacles and having staff clean up the immediate area and directing folks to green space on site where they would prefer the animals to be walked Dan O Brien architect talked of the design and the intent to have the building pedestrian - oriented an attractive building reminiscent of the New England style He stated in looking at design requirements they looked at the gas station the federal -style of the two-story retail stores as well as the residential area of the development He said they looked at colors roof pitch dormers and materials Mr Middleton opened the public hearing Todd Remely president of the Liberty on the Lake Master Board of Directors 3654 Tending Green stated there are a number of concerns regarding the proposal specifically the proposed use and the architecture of the building He referred to a letter from the homeowners association that was delivered to Commission members the day of the meeting The letter cited a concern about the projects inconsistencies with the neighborhoods ordinances the PUD and current zoning He stated that area was zoned for convenience stores and personal services such as barbershops What is being proposed he said is a large commercial business — a hospital And he said the association doesn t believe a hospital fits within the character of that particular part of the neighborhood He suggested that it certainly is not consistent with the spirit of the ordinances/PUD/zoning Regarding the appropriateness of land use the associations position is that the land was designed by the developers for convenience stores and personal services _ and the association does not believe than an animal hospital represents personal services Regarding building design as it relates to New England architecture the association does not feel the proposed building design fits with the character of the Village/Commercial area he City of Stillwater Planning Commission April 9 2007 stated Mr Remely said each of the buildings in the commercial corner was painstakingly designed with New England architecture While this proposed building may be consistent with some of the homes he said there is very specific language in the agreement between the developer and original landowner Newman Realty which specifies that the commercial area must be occupied by buildings that are consistent with the New England architecture He also said the proposal goes against the spirit of the various retail covenants which list uses in the commercial center as convenience stores and personal services not a hospital or clinic Mr Remely stated that none of the architectural review committees which represent the residents have reviewed or approved the project He reiterated that he had personally seen the agreement between the developer and original landowner which specifically states the original landowners have to approve the design and be involved in the design process and also specifically states the commercial center buildings must be New England style architecture He concluded the proposal does not fit the character of the neighborhood The resident of 148 Liberty Court Way chair of the Pine Hollow architectural review committee suggested that a veterinary hospital would be a minus for the existing small businesses in the commercial center and asked the Commission to deny the proposal Ms Johnson 229 Rutherford Road spoke in favor of the proposal stating that Dr Garlie provides high quality progressive care for small animals She said she thought it would be an asset to provide veterinary care for residents animals She suggested that those who question cleanliness smell or noise should visit Dr Garlie s existing facility where they can observe the cleanliness and lack of noise and odor Ms Johnson also said she thought the architecture of the proposed business would fit in nicely with the area Robert Kroening 213 Pine Hollow Green showed photos of various buildings in the area that are representative of the New England architecture He referenced the agreement between the developer and Newman Realty original owner of the property which requires the New England style architecture He also pointed out that the architectural review board that approved these plans has been taken over entirely by the developer and has not gone before the other owners He said Newman Realty requests that the Commission deny this proposal as it does not fit the intent of the commercial/retail center -- to provide personal services The resident of 1031 W Abbott St questioned the placement of New England architecture in the middle of Minnesota He pointed out there are few houses in the Liberty development that are New England style He also suggested the proposed use is a destination type business that will benefit the area Todd Remely reiterated the New England architecture for the commercial center is a contractual agreement between the developer and the original property owners He noted residents expended considerable resources to construct a gazebo of New England style in the City -owned park that centers the retail area He also pointed out the bank gas station and deli are all of New England architecture at considerable expense to the owners and said he thought it would be unfair to those business owners to approve this building_ _ Robert Kroening pointed out that reason for the New England architecture is based on the history of the Rutherford neighborhood which was inhabited by New England settlers City of Stillwater Planning Commission April9 2007 Dennis Doerr 901 W Maple St spoke of the need for more businesses such as Dr Garlie s clinic He also said this would not be a come -and -go type of business but one that would remain for a long time No other comments were received and the hearing was closed Dr Garlie responded to several of the comments She stated that her clinic doesn t just treat animals it serves people and families too — a personal service Mr Hempel and Mr O Brien responded to the issue of New England architecture Mr Pogge reviewed the Heritage Preservation Commission comments and vote Mr Middleton asked if the proposal had to go before any other review committees should the Commission approve the project The applicant noted the commercial center architectural review committee had approved the project with several conditions Mr Hempel enumerated the conditions of the architectural review committee and the finding that the proposed design of this building is a fine example of a modern interpretation of the craftsman style that can be found in New England towns Mr Middleton suggested the Liberty retail center needs a business at that location that is going to succeed and pointed out that one doesn t see veterinary clinics closing their doors Mr Milbrandt talked about the expectation that a restaurant was going into this location but noted this is a very successful business that wants to expand and appears to be a personal service Mr Milbrandt said he saw no reason why the use doesn t conform and suggested it would provide some stability to a quadrant of town that needs that Mr Carlsen said when he has driven by the area he doesn t notice architectural style -- he notices good architecture or bad architecture -- and said he thought this was an example of good architecture and in that respect meets the standards Mr Carlsen said he was a bit uneasy regarding the potential for noise and smells but was a little more comfortable with that after hearing the presentation Mr Dahlquist agreed with Mr Milbrandt s assessment of the business as a professional and personal services category and said he also puts a lot of weight in the opinion of the HPC on whether or not the building style is appropriate to that site Mr Dahlquist said his biggest concern was with pets coming in and owners not picking up waste and said he was comfortable that would be addressed based on Dr Garlie s other facility Mr Kalmon said as far of the architectural piece goes he would go with the recommendation of the HPC and agreed this is a service the larger community can use as well as residents of the area Mr Kalmon said he is concerned about the wash -down of the exercise area and suggested some type of drain system might be appropriate he also suggested emphasizing the educational piece of directing clients to a specific area on site where pets can be relieved rather than utilizing the park area Mr Kalmon also suggested specifying no outdoor kennels for any future business Mr Meinke agreed this is a personal service and the architecture of this building fits with the whole neighborhood scheme Ms Block pointed out this is a stable business with an established clientele that will benefit the existing businesses in the retail center regarding the architecture she said she valued the opinion of the HPC Mr Dahlquist moved to approve the three components of Case No 07-18 — final plat final PUD site plan and special use permit for a 6 223-square-foot veterinary hospital — with the 15 conditions of approval and three additional conditions 5 City of Stillwater Planning Commission Apr119 2007 * the exercise area shall include some means of composting or collecting/treating waste * that there be education of clients regarding the pet exercise area and where to relieve their animals and that the area including the area around the facility be cleaned up * and that indoor kennels as shown in the plans be the only kennels allowed Mr Kalmon seconded the motion There was discussion about the mechanics of the waste treatment for the outdoor exercise area It was consensus to direct the City engineer and community development director to work out the details of the condition regarding the collection/treatment of waste from the outdoor exercise area Motion passed unanimously OTHER BUSINESS Appointment to the Comprehensive Plan steering committee — Mr Middleton noted that Mr Kalmon previously indicated he would be interested in serving on a committee and Mr Peroceschi had indicated the same Mr Milbrandt noted that there are two separate committees — a general steering committee and downtown committee Mr Kalmon said he would be interested in serving on the general plan committee Ms Block expressed her interest in serving on the general plan committee but said she would be willing to serve on the downtown committee Mr Kalmon spoke of his priorities and what he would like to bring to the committee and comprehensive planning process he said if he could do that as a member of the Planning Commission he would be willing to forgo committee membership Mr Milbrandt suggested Mr Kalmon serve on the general plan committee and Ms Block on the downtown committee Ms Block said she would be comfortable with that arrangement Mr Milbrandt moved his suggested appointments Mr Dahlquist seconded the motion Mr Carlsen suggested that Mr Peroceschi be first alternate should either Mr Kalmon or Ms Block be unable to serve at some point Motion passed unanimously Mr Dahlquist asked about the opportunity for input into the process Mr Pogge noted a number of neighborhood meetings are scheduled and there will be lots of opportunity for input by the Planning Commission Ms Block seconded by Mr Carlsen moved to adjourn at 9 24 p m Motion passed unanimously Respectfully submitted Sharon Baker Recording Secretary A vt DATE APPLICANT REQUESTS LOCATION 1 water- H i 8 1 R 7 M P A 1 0 f M I N N I O 1 4 Planning Commission May 9, 2007 CASE NO 07-20 Jim Schulz, Avis Budget Group A special use permit for a rental car establishment 1674 Market Drive COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DISTRICT BP-C - Business Park - Commercial ZONING BP-C - Business Park - Commercial CPC DATE May 14, 2007 REVIEWERS Community Development Director PREPARED BY Michel Pogge, City Planner /;,;%? DISCUSSION Avis Budget Group is proposing to operate a Avis rental car office in the north half of the building at 1250 Frontage Road West Jiffy Lube who currently occupies the south half of the building, will remain in the building The current building is a 5400 square foot building (90 x 60) Avis rental car will occupy approximately 2,050 s f of the building The property is located within the West Stillwater Business Park The proposed use of the site as a rental car office with vehicle display is not specifically listed as a permitted use or a pernutted use with Special Use Permit (SUP) Therefore the applicant is requesting a use determination and Special Use Permit approval by the Planning Commission and City Council in order to operate from this site EVALUATION OF REQUEST A special use perrrut applicant 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 The Business Park - Commercial zoning district perrruts retail sales and business & office uses without a SUP Additionally the district allows for Auto Repair and related services with the SUP With an office in the front along Market Drive and a service area 1674 Market Drive Page 2 for cleaning returned vehicles in the rear, the proposed use appears to be sirrular to other uses in the district and the proposed use is compatible with the neighborhood 2 Any additional conditions necessary for the public interest have been imposed The Heritage Preservation Commission (HPC) reviewed a design review application for the signage on May 7, 2007 The HPC approved the application with the conditions in this report Since parking is limited and will be shared with an adjacent tenant the Commission could consider limiting the number of vehicles on display for rental on the site As shown on the proposed plan staff recommends that no more than 9 vehicles be on display outside on the site at any one time The public interest will be satisfied with these conditions 3 The use or structure will not constitute a nuisance or be detrimental to the public welfare of the community The change of use should not have any noticeable change from other uses that have been previously located at the site The proposed use will not constitute a nuisance to the public welfare of the community FINDINGS The proposed 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 Moreover the use is substantially sirrular to uses of those allowed in the BP-C district ACTION BY THE HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION The Heritage Preservation Commission (HPC) reviewed a design review application for the signage on May 7 2007 The HPC approved the application with the conditions listed below RECOMMENDATION Find that the satellite rental care office is similar to other uses allowed in the BP-C district and approve the Special Use Perrrut as conditioned CONDITIONS FOR APPROVAL 1 All revisions to the approved plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Heritage Preservation Commission 2 The sign on the east elevation facing Market Drive shall be at the same height as the Jiffy Lube sign 3 No more than 9 vehicles be on display outside on the site at any one time 4 No additional signage Attachments Applicant s Form and Site Plan PLANNING ADMINISTRATION APPLICATION FORM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY OF STILLWATER 216 NORTH FOURTH STREET STILLWATER MN 55082 Case No Date Filed Fee Paid Receipt No ACTION REQUESTED Special/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 (i e , photos, sketches, etc ) submitted with application becomes the propertyof the C►tyof Stillwater Sixteen (16) copies of supporting materialis required If apphcation is submitted to the City Council, twelve (12) copies of supporting material is required A site plan showing drainage and setbacks ►srequired 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 *14 MA12,N4r--T ORIV E- Assessor s Parcel No L01 OO5 E3LOcc-K. OW (GEO Code) Zoning DistrictCo_ Description of Protect Q2-rTTkL CAV -- C91=-1CX 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 G Property OWnerkne, Q(.310GE.T CAT RUN TA L Representative � IAIT�CT ,11a)F' WRAt4 Mailing AddressG 5q1_ViS-N \VA\J CTabL)? Mailing Address V260 /� L-LWA-M-Z D City State Zip Pwasj DoAw. . N J (3-705 ' City State ZipAV--V- t LAAO . Telephone (, o 23- 3f - 41 - 8$Telephone No 6- —111579 Signature 1 14 Signature (Signature Is req fired) a u is required) Lot Size (dimensions) Land Area Height of Buildings Principal Accessory SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION Stories Feet Total Building floor area square feet Existing square feet Proposed square feet Paved Impervious Area square feet No of off street parking spaces H \mrnam�)ra\chair\PI ANAPP FIRM June 9 2006 AVIS City of Stillwater MN. The AVIS Budget Group operates two of the most recognized brands in the global vehicle rental industry through AVIS Rent a Car Systems, LLC and Budget Rent A Car Systems. AVIS is the leading supplier to the premium commercial and leisure segments of the travel industry and Budget is a leading supplier to the price -conscious rental segments. Our current operations have an extended global reach that includes approximately 6,600 car and truck rental agencies. Our intended Stillwater MN agency operation will service the Stillwater and surrounding area customer base for both commercial and leisure car rental use. It is our desire to park 14 cars at the 1674 Market Drive location. We will operate a small office for rental car transactions as well as a backroom area for cleaning cars before they return to the return to the ready line for rental. All service work oil changes, minor repairs, etc will be completed at the Minneapolis MN Airport AVIS/Budget distribution center. A typical Agency operation will operate 7 days per week, usually 8:OOam to 6:OOpm per day with Sunday hours usually 10:00am to 3:OOpm. Most agency operations have a manager as well as 1 employee. We hope that what is being presented today will meet with your approval and allow us to operate our car rental agency and service the Stillwater MN customers. Sincerely Yours, Jim E Schulz Al S Q (STING BUILDING USE TAIL 511 S F ORAGE 1539 S F ?AL 2050 S F ARCHITECT STEVE E"AN LAKE ELMO, MINNESOTA 651 748 1078 651 748 1272 (F) I hereby certify that this an specification or report was prepared red or under my d'rect supervision a at I am a duly registered architect u lo Ws of the state of Minnesota011IN it STEVEN EDWARD ER AIA M REG #10035 DATE DRAWN DRAWN BY C W E DATE SIGNED DATE REVISED O AVIS CAR RENTAL STILLWATER, MINNESOTA SITE & FLOOR PLANS A-1 l IWA der T H E R 1 R I H P I A f E O F M I N N E S 0 1 A DATE May 9, 2007 CASE NO 06-49 TO Planning Commission APPLICANT Bruggeman Properties LAND OWNER Bruggeman Construction Company REQUEST 1) Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map Amendment from RR, Serru-Rural Residential to SFSL, Single Family Small Lot Residential 2) Rezoning from A-P, Agricultural Preservation to CCR, Cove Cottage Residential 3) Annexation LOCATION Between Boutwell Rd and Myrtle St at Newberry Court COMPREHENSIVE PLAN RR, Semi -Rural Residential ZONING A-P, Agricultural Preservation (upon annexation) HEARING DATE May 14, 2007 PREPARED BY Bill Turnblad, Community Development Director�� BACKGROUND Bruggeman Properties is proposing to develop their land on Boutwell Road at Newberry Court At this point in the public review process the developer is asking for approval of a comprehensive plan land use map amendment, rezoning of the property and approval of their annexation petition If approved, then the developers would make application for the preliminary plat review The 18 3 acre parcel' is proposed to be developed into 45 single family lots with a gross density of 2 46 lots per acre More details are available m the attached concept site plan ' Excluding all current right-of-ways Bruggeman Properties May 9 2007 Page 2 of 3 The property is located within the Phase IV annexation area as identified in the Orderly Annexation Agreement Phase IV annexation will automatically occur in 2015 But it may occur earlier than that at the City's discretion if specific criteria are met SPECIFIC REQUESTS In order to develop the property at an urban density the applicant has requested the following 1 Approval of annexation petition 2 Approval of rezoning from A-P, Agricultural Preservation, to CCR, Cove Cottage Residential 3 Approval of a Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map change from RR, Serru-Rural Residential to SFSL Single Family Small Lot EVALUATION OF REQUEST The request is the same as was submitted to the City last fall The chronology of action on the request last year is as follows • August 2006 - Application submitted for annexation, rezoning and comp plan land use map amendment • August 29, 2006 - Joint Planning Board considered the request and approved the annexation on a 3-1 vote Action on the rezoning and comp plan amendment were deferred until after the City Council acted on the annexation request • September 5, 2006 - Applicant appeared on the City Council agenda for discussion of the annexation timing and subdivision concept The Council tabled the discussion and directed City staff to study potential alignments for a north/south collector street in the area • September 11, 2006 - Applicant requested removal of the project from the Plannmg Comnussion agenda in order to allow staff time to respond to the City Council directive to study potential alignments of a north/south collector street • September 19, 2006 - Request before the Council postponed by applicant • November 21, 2006 - City Council continued its discussion of September 19 and staff presented a report on alternative collector street alignments The Council directed staff to file the report and added that the Council would get back to the request in 20 months The 20 month time period referred to the likely amount of time it would take to adopt an updated comprehensive plan Though only 6 months have elapsed since the last Council discussion, the developer has resubnutted their request Prior to accepting the application, City staff pointed out to the developer that the Comprehensive Plan has not been updated yet and that the Council would surely consider the application premature None the less, the developer had standing to subirut the request, since among other factorg-they own the tand, the land s located m the Phase IV Annexation Area, it abuts land already annexed into the City, and City utilities are Bruggeman Properties May 9, 2007 Page 3 of 3 available Moreover, the application package was complete Therefore staff felt compelled to accept the application An analysis of the request itself is included in the attached staff report from last year RECOMMENDATIONS lomt Board recommendation The Joint Board was split on the timeliness of annexation The City representatives on the board felt reluctant to approve an annexation at this time The principle reason was the need for a direct connection between Neal Avenue and County Road 12 prior to approvmg any more annexation None the less, the annexation request was approved on a 3-1 vote However, no action was taken on either the Comprehensive Plan land use map amendment or the rezoning Both of these requests would have to return to the Joint Board for action if the City Council approves the requested annexation Staff recommendation The Orderly Annexation Agreement states that annexation of the Bruggeman property is a discretionary decision for the City Moreover staff finds that the proposed rezoning and Comprehensive Plan land use map amendment are consistent with the City Code and all adopted planning documents Therefore, if the Planning Commission finds the annexation timing to be satisfactory, staff would recommend approval of the requests attachments City Council and Joint Board Minutes September 6 2006 Planning Report Excerpts from Application Package (Supplemental to Application w/ appendix A, K) (Orderly Annexation Agreement) (Boutwell South Area Plan) (Revised Boutwell South Area Plan) (Concept Plan, color) (Regional Plan, color) (Comp Plan Map) (Zonmg Map) cc Bruggeman Properties CITY OF STILLWATER CITY COUNCIL MEETING NO 06-18 September 5, 2006 REGULAR MEETING 430PM Mayor Kimble called the meeting to order at 4 30 p m Present Councilmembers Harycki, Junker, Milbrandt, Polehna and Mayor Kimble Staff present City Administrator Hansen City Attorney Magnuson Community Development Director Turnblad Interim Public Works Director Sanders Finance Director Harrison Fire Chief Glaser City Clerk Ward {VERBATIM EXCERPT} Bruggeman Properties discussion of a sketch plan and annexation timing for property located between Boutwell Avenue and County Road 12 at Newberry Court Community Development Director explamed that the request from Bruggeman Properties was for the Council to review the concept development plans and also to discuss the timing of annexation Mr Tumblad explamed the site is about 18 5 acres and is located between Boutwell and County Road 12 He noted the sketch plan provides for a good street layout with a four -legged intersection with Boutwell and Newberry Court, internally streets would provide for future connections with properties to the west He said the street layout is consisted with the revised South Boutwell Area Plan, which states there shall be no direct connection between Neal Avenue and Northland The timing of Phase 4 annexation properties, he noted, has been debated both by the Council and Planning Commission In those discussions, he said two primary issues have been identified — the need for a comprehensive vision for development of all those properties not yet annexed and the need for transportation infrastructure to be in place before development In terms of a comprehensive vision, he noted there is a vision for land use in the South Boutwell Area Plan Regarding transportation infrastructure, he said staff believes this proposal is consistent with the transportation requirements outlined in the South Boutwell Plan as it provides for a Neal Avenue extension alignment, a future touchdown point and roadway design to MSA standards Councilmember Junker said his major concern is that the concept plan provides for Just one way in and one way out of a development of 40+ homes and said he thought the Neal Avenue connection has to be more solidified to provide an actual plan, not Just a hope, for carrying traffic from County Road 12 to Boutwell Councilmember Milbrandt agreed, suggesting this concept plan essentially creates a 45-home cul-de-sac and is creating another Deer Path situation Councilmember Milbrandt also expressed a concern about the lack of vision for the potential number of small developments in the area Councilmember Harycki suggested that this proposal fits in with the upcoming Comprehensive Plan update/revision Councilmember Junker said the key issue is the third recommendation in the South Boutwell Study — that a plan be developed for the Neal Avenue extension Mayor Kimble pointed out that the first priorities identified in the Boutwell Study were the installation of a stop light at County Road 12 and improvements to Boutwell both of which have been completed Mayor Kimble also suggested that the only reason a Neal Avenue extension hasn't been made is due to inaction by the Council/City and said additional study isn't the answer Councilmember Junker and Councilmember Polehna agreed that additional study isn't needed, the issue is getting Neal Avenue completed Mayor Kimble suggested that staff be directed to develop a plan for the Neal Avenue extension Councilmember Harycki asked what would be necessary to move the Neal Avenue connection forward Engineer Sanders responded that the City would have to acquire property outside of the Bruggeman property, about five or six individual property owners are involved, he noted Councilmember Harycki, seconded by Councilmember Milbrandt, moved to table consideration of the sketch plan and direct staff to prepare a Neal Avenue extension plan Mr Turnblad asked for direction on what alignment to pursue it was consensus that both potential alignments be looked at Councilmember Milbrandt spoke in favor of a more direct route rather than a meandering alignment There was discussion regarding tabling the sketch plan and whether the 60-day rule would apply, City Attorney Magnuson said the 60-day rule would not be involved Motion by Councilmember Polehna, seconded by Councilmember Junker to table consideration of the sketch plan and prepare a Neal Avenue extension plan All in favor CITY COUNCIL MEETING NO 06-26 November 21, 2006 SPECIAL MEETING Vice Mayor Junker called the meeting to order at 4 30 p m Present Councilmembers Harycki, Junker, Milbrandt and Polehna Absent Mayor Kimble Staff present City Administrator Hansen City Attorney Magnuson Public Works Director Sanders City Clerk Ward {VERBATIM EXCERPT} Discussion of their concept plan and annexation timelme - Bruggeman Homes 430PM Community Development Director Turnblad noted that decisions were not required at this meeting He noted that during the earlier discussion on this application, on Sept 5, staff was directed to look at other potential alignments in the area for the north -south connector street and to invite Northland Avenue residents to the meeting where the staff findings on the potential alignments would be discussed Public Works Director Sanders reviewed alignment options and funding mechanisms The Newberry Court to Northland Drive, the route identified in the South Boutwell Area Plan and SRF traffic study, includes two alignment options In the Newberry -Northland alignment, a more direct route from Boutwell to County Road 12 would be about 1600 feet in length and would cross four separate properties The Newberry -Northland alignment proposed by Bruggeman is a more circuitous route, Mr Sanders said about 2400 feet in length, also crossing four separate properties The other alignment option is the Neal Avenue to Northland route Mr Sanders reviewed the advantages and disadvantages of each option Disadvantages of each option, as reviewed by Mr Sanders included the reluctance of property owners, other than Bruggeman, to sell and the potential cost of land acquisition Mr Sanders reviewed the possible intersection at Northland, which the Boutwell South Area Plan indicates would be constructed with a raised center median However, he said Washington County has indicated such a median is not part of its future improvement plan and such an intersection would be expensive to construct He noted that a right -in, right -out median would have to be approved by the County, but would not be as expensive to construct as a raised center median Potential funding mechanisms reviewed by Mr Sanders included the City's recently implemented Transportation Adequacy Fund, which will build up as development occurs, Municipal State Aid, which has been depleted to do the Boutwell Road project or general revenue taxes, which would take away from other road improvement projects in the City Councilmember Harycki suggested there is another option — leave things as is Councilmember Milbrandt noted this is at least the fourth time this annexation request has come before the Council and there is still no solution for the Northland issue, no money for land acquisition, and there are three landowners who have no interest in coming into the City before 2015 He noted that 200+ homes are about to built in the City and suggested there is no shortage of housing stock Councilmember Milbrandt said he would not go through adverse possession just to make a cul-de-sac not a cul-de-sac for the Bruggeman development and annex land that has been turned down on four previous occasions, he agreed with Councilmember Harycki that thmgs should be left as is Councilmember Harycki suggested that the Newberry alignment option could result in another Deerpath situation Councilmember Milbrandt pointed out that this whole quadrant of town will be looked at in the upcoming Comprehensive Plan update and that process might come to the conclusion that there is no reason for a Neal Avenue extension Councilmembers Junker and Polehna also spoke in favor of taking a comprehensive look at the issues rather than taking action at this time It was consensus to direct staff to file the report and Council will get back to it in the next 20 months Stillwater City and Town Joint Board August 29, 2006 Present David Johnson and Linda Countryman, Stillwater Township David Junker and Mike Polehna (7 50 p m ), City of Stillwater Others Stillwater Community Development Director Bill Tumblad and Stillwater City Attorney David Magnuson Chair Johnson called the meeting to order at 7 p m {VERBATIM EXCERPT) Case No 06-49 A request by Bruggeman Properties for annexation, zoning map amendment and comprehensive plan amendment for concept development plan of 45 single-family lots located between Boutwell Road and Country Road 12 at Newberry Court Mr Turnblad introduced the request He noted this property is in the South Boutwell Plan area, which is in the Phase 4 annexation area where early annexation is discretionary if certain criteria are met Mr Turnblad said this request does meet the criteria for early annexation He pointed out that the Stillwater City Council and Planning Commission have been debating the appropriateness of several recent requests for early annexation, both bodies identifying a concern for developing a vision for the area in the upcoming Comprehensive Plan update before allowing any additional annexations However, Mr Turnblad suggested that this request is different in that it is in the South Boutwell Plan area where there is a plan in place, a plan developed after extensive study The second issue of concern to the Council and Planning Commission, Mr Turnblad said, is the transportation infrastructure The South Boutwell Area Plan and associated traffic studies, he said, called for a revised intersection of Boutwell and County Road 12, signalization of Manning/12 intersection, improvements to Boutwell Road and Deer Path before annexation would be considered All of those transportation elements have been satisfied, Mr Turnblad stated Mr Turnblad explained that the action needed of the Joint Board was a yes or no decision on annexation and a recommendation regarding the comprehensive plan amendment The proposal then will go to the City's Planning Commission for a recommendation to the City Council Preliminary plans and final plat would both come back to the Joint Board for review, he noted Mr Johnson opened the public hearing Steve Fisher, Bruggeman Properties, noted they have been working with the City for the past six years and have participated in studies at every level He noted the necessary traffic improvements have been made, sewer and water is available, the proposed zoning is consistent with the South Boutwell Plan and both the County and Watershed District have commented positively on the development plans He concluded that they believe the time is right for the City to consider annexation Mr Johnson asked about park plans Mr Turnblad pointed out the City's Park Board has not reviewed plans at this time A spokesman for Bruggeman Properties noted these are concept plans and details regarding the park have not been ironed out The Bruggeman spokesperson said trails are envisioned, as well as a connection to the westerly neighbor, for perhaps a Joint park Mr Johnson encouraged developers to consider active recreational uses There was considerable discussion about the City's need for a north/south connector street, likely Neal Avenue, and how that need affects this property It was noted that in South Boutwell Plan discussions, there was a concern that there be no direct through connection at Neal/Northland, a concern that resulted in plans for a median at a future Neal/County Road 12 intersection Mr Polehna said he had a concern about how this development ties to County Road 12 (Myrtle Street) and said he wasn't sure that the C►ty's Planning Commission has had enough time to review how this development ties to properties to the west He stated he was a proponent of addressing transportation concerns first, before annexation Mr Junker noted that a future Neal Avenue extension will have a big impact on this site He also noted the City is beginning to work on updating its Comprehensive Plan He expressed a concern that the proposed CCR (Cottage Cove Residential) for this development is too dense and said he would be hesitant to consider the zoning component until the Comprehensive Plan update is complete He also pointed out that until a Neal Avenue connection is provided, there is only one way in and one way to exit this development of 40+ lots Mr Johnson pointed out that the proposed density is consistent with the Boutwell South Plan Mr Turnblad also noted that the density is consistent with the number of units used for the transportation figures in the South Boutwell area studies Mr Johnson also pointed out that the proposed development plan offers flexibility in providing for future Neal Avenue connections and connections with properties to the west Mr Johnson suggested that the Joint Board could agree that the request qualifies for consideration of annexation and let the City determine what happens regarding zoning and other considerations From the Township's view, he said he could see no reason not to vote for annexation and allow the plans to move forward to the next level It was agreed to take action on this request in three separate motions Mr Junker moved to deny the request for annexation, expressing a concern about the lack or a Neal Avenue connection and a concern about the need to develop a vision regarding zoning and how zoning might fit in with each future development in the Comprehensive Plan update Mr Polehna seconded the motion to deny annexation, saying he was concerned that the City did not have its whole act together until the Neal Avenue connection is settled Mr Junker agreed that once Neal Avenue is more defined there would be no reason not to annex the parcel Mr Johnson stated that from the Township's standpoint, the proposal meets the requirements for annexation, and he pointed out that the Neal Avenue connection will be made on a different parcel of property out of the C►ty's control There was some discussion regarding tabling the issue, but Mr Junker noted the City will not be in any better position regarding the Neal Avenue issue in 90 days Steve Fisher reiterated that the developer has identified a Neal Avenue connection with consultants and reviewed the proposed layout in view of that issue Streets will be constructed to MSA standards, Mr Fisher pointed out, and the layout is flexible for the City to be able to iron out where the Neal connection is made Mr Johnson noted that even if the Joint Board approves the request for consideration of annexation, the plans do not have to go any further, it moves the development proposal to the City and takes the Township out of those considerations Motion to deny the request for annexation failed 1-3, with Mr Junker in favor of denial and Mr Johnson, Mr Polehna and Ms Countryman against Mr Johnson, seconded by Ms Countryman, moved to approve the annexation request Motion passed 3-1, with Mr Johnson, Ms Countryman and Mr Polehna voting in favor and Mr Junker against It was the consensus to take no action on the other requests Mr Turnblad pointed out that those action would go to the Council with no recommendation Mr Johnson noted that the other requests would have to come back to the Joint Board if the City Council aaaroves the annexation DATE September 6, 2006 CASE NO 06-49 TO Planning Commission APPLICANT Bruggeman Properties LAND OWNER Bruggeman Construction Company REQUEST 1) Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map Amendment from RR, Semi -Rural Residential to SFSL, Single Fanuly Small Lot Residential 2) Rezoning from A-P, Agricultural Preservation to CCR, Cove Cottage Residential 3) Annexation LOCATION Between Boutwell Rd and Myrtle St at Newberry Court COMPREHENSIVE PLAN RR, Semi -Rural Residential ZONING A-P, Agricultural Preservation (upon annexation) HEARING DATE September 11, 2006 REVIEWERS Interim Public Works Director, Deputy Fire Chief, Brown's Creek Watershed District, Washington County Highway Department, Joint Board PREPARED BY Bill Turnblad, Community Development Director BACKGROUND Bruggeman Properties is proposing to develop their land on Boutwell Road at Newberry Court (See Exhibit A for location of the project) At this point in the public review process the developer is asking for approval of a comprehensive plan land use map amendment, rezoning of the property and approval of their annexation petitionif approved, then the _ developers would make application for the preliminary plat review Bruggeman Properties September 6, 2006 Page 2 of 5 The 18 3 acre parcel] is proposed to be developed into 45 single fanuly lots, with a gross density of 2 45 lots per acre More details are available in the attached concept site plan The property is located within the Phase IV annexation area as identified in the Orderly Annexation Agreement Phase IV annexation will automatically occur in 2015 But it may occur earlier than that if specific criteria are met SPECIFIC REQUESTS In order to develop the property at an urban density the applicant has requested the following 1 Approval of annexation petition 2 Approval of rezoning from A-P Agricultural Preservation, to CCR, Cove Cottage Residential 3 Approval of a Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map change from RR, Semi -Rural Residential to SFSL, Single Family Small Lot EVALUATION OF REQUEST CONCEPT SITE PLAN Though the development layout needs no action by the Planning Conumssion at this time, a review of the conceptual site plan is helpful (See attached site plan) • The proposed street layout is good It provides a four -legged mtersection on Boutwell Road with Newberry Court It also provides street improvements right up to the abutting properties to the west to allow for future development and to allow for an eventual connection to County Road 12 at Northland Avenue • The proposed street layout is consistent with the Revised South Boutwell Area (RSBA) Plan as approved by the Joint Board on August 25 2004 and adopted by the City Council on October 5, 2004 The RSBA Plan is attached for reference As can be seen in Figure 3 of the plan, a concept design for the Neal Avenue extension' was included Its key design features are o Connections to Boutwell Road and County Road 12 to accommodate north/south through traffic However, no direct connection to existing Neal Avenue on Boutwell Road Neighbors were very clear that they did not want the traffic volumes that would be encouraged by a direct connection The City Council honored the neighbors desire for a meandering route ■ The proposed roadway on the Bruggeman property meanders between Boutwell R9ad-and_CQunty-Roadl2 as-the-RSBA-Plan-requires ' Excluding all current right of ways Bruggeman Properties September 6 2006 Page 3 of 5 ■ The intersection point with Boutwell Road is Newberry Court This is necessary because the property west of the subject site is not developing at this time o Neighbors were equally clear that the Neal Avenue extension' should not generate traffic through the Croixwood neighborhood south of County Road 12 To prevent this, a median in County Road 12 is shown in Figure 3 of the RSBA Plan ■ The Bruggeman sketch plan should be modified to show the median in County Road 12 ■ The segment of the Neal Avenue extension that is not located on the Bruggeman property will have to be developed either by the City or by the abutting landowners when they develop • The Bruggeman concept site plan muumizes the amount of damage to existing trees and avoids all of the wetlands and their buffer areas • A combination of land and cash is proposed for park dedication • The current homes in the northeast and southeast corners of the property will be kept The southeastern home s driveway to County Road 12 will be realigned so it comes off the Neal Avenue extension • Comments by the Washington County Highway Department Brown's Creek Watershed District, and the Interim Public Works Director are attached II COMP PLAN LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT & REZONING Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map Amendment The future land use map of the Stillwater Comprehensive Plan shows the site classified as RR, Serru-Rural Residential All land within Stillwater Township shows up in the City s Comprehensive Plan as RR, Senu-Rural Residential This is the case since it was believed in 1995 when the Comprehensive Plan was adopted, that Phase IV area properties would not be annexed until 2015 And 2015 was beyond the planning horizon of the 1995 Comprehensive Plan Therefore, as annexation within the Phase IV area occurs, the Comprehensive Plan's land use map needs to be amended for each annexation property To help with the review of these land use map amendments a future land use plan was adopted together with the RSBA Plan That future land use plan can be seen in the attached RSBA Plan as Figure 2 The RSBA Plan land use map guides development of the Bruggeman property as 'Single Farruly/Low Density' The density associated with this land use category is 3 homes per net acre z The modified gross acreage3 of the project is 18 34 acres The estimated net acreage with the conceptual layout shown may be 14 8 acres So the 45 planned lots could yield a net density z Net acre defined in the RSBA Plan as total acreage minus roads wetlands and steeply sloped areas 3 Gross mmus existing right of ways only Bruggeman Properties September 6 2006 Page 4 of 5 of 3 04 homes per net acre This density is slightly higher than the 3 0 units/acre envisioned by the RSBA Plan Therefore care will need to be taken during prelinunary plan design by the developers to keep the density at 3 0 units/net acre The future land use map category consistent with the proposed 3 units/acre of the RSBA Plan is SFSL, Single Faintly Small Lot Residential (2-4 units/acre) Therefore the requested amendment from RR, Semi -Rural Residential to SFSL Single Family Small Lot would be appropriate Zoning Currently the property is located within Stillwater Township Upon annexation it would automatically be zoned A-P, Agricultural Preservation by Minnesota Municipal Board action To develop the property as proposed, it would have to be rezoned from A-P to an urban zoning district classification The developer is proposmg to have the property rezoned to CCR, Cove Cottage Residential The average lot size in the CCR zoning district must be at least 10 000 square feet This would be consistent with a SFSL land use map classification, and the proposed concept site plan III ANNEXATION The property is located within the Phase IV annexation area, which provides for annexation in 2015 There is however a provision that allows the City the discretion to approve earlier annexation if several criteria are met Those criteria include 1) The property has to be contiguous with property already annexed into the City, 2) Urban utilities must be available, 3) No more than 120 building pernuts per year can be issued in the orderly annexation area, and 4) The Joint Board has to approve of the annexation All four of the criteria are satisfied Consequently if the City desires it could approve the petitioned annexation As was identified during sketch plan discussions for the Manning Station project and other projects on McKusick Road near Manning Avenue, the proper timing for annexation and urban development in the Phase IV area is still debated by the City Council and City Planning Commission The most critical issues identified by both groups in this regard are 1) a comprehensive vision of future development for the area is needed, and 2) satisfactory transportation infrastructure must be provided prior to approval of additional annexation petitions With regard to the first critical issue a comprehensive vision fQr futuT_eAevelopment is available for the neighborhood surrounding the Bruggeman property After34monthsot Bruggeman Properties September 6, 2006 Page 5 of 5 public input and study the South Boutwell Area Plan was adopted by the City in October of 2004 A summary of the public process for the plan adoption is attached, as is the plan itself Regarding the second critical issue, a clear majority of the City Council feels that until a more specific plan is available for the segment of the Neal Avenue extension that would be located west of the Bruggeman land, adding more traffic to the arterial transportation system is not acceptable Consequently, on September 5, 2006 the Council tabled their discussion of the sketch plan and annexation timing until City staff has had time to study the non-Bruggeman segment of the Neal Avenue extension RECOMMENDATIONS Joint Board recommendation The Joint Board was split on the timeliness of annexation The City representatives felt reluctant to approve an annexation at this time The principle reason was the need for a direct connection between Neal Avenue and Northland Avenue prior to approving any more annexation None the less the annexation request was approved on a 3-1 vote However, no action was taken on either the Comprehensive Plan land use map amendment or the rezoning Both of these requests would have to return to the Joint Board for action if the City Council approves the requested annexation Staff recommendation The City Council discussed the question of annexation tuning at their September 5 2006 meeting They tabled the discussion for more information on the segment of the Neal Avenue extension that would be located on property that is not owned by Bruggeman Construction Company Therefore, staff recommends tabling this annexation request as well as the comprehensive plan amendment and rezoning until after the City Council has finished their discussion on the annexation timing attachments Location Map (See Application Materials) Comp Plan Map (See Application Materials) Zoning Map (See Application Materials) Revised South Boutwell Area Plan (See Application Materials) RSBA Plan timehne Developer s Narrative Concept Plans (See Application Materials) Memo from Interim Public Works Director Email from Brown's Creek Watershed District Letter from Washington County Highway Department cc Bruggeman Properties BRUGGEMAN PROPERTIES -I B u i I d i n g C o m m u n i t i e s S i n c e 1 9 5 9 August 22 2006 Honorable City Council Members Town Joint Board Planning Commission Members City of Stillwater MN RE Concept Plan Submittal and Annexation Request Dear Members Bruggeman Construction Co requests concept development review and approval of our project so that we may move forward with the city on annexation of our property Our 18 acre parcel currently in the township is located north of CSAH 12 south of Boutwell Road We are requesting annexation of our property into the City of Stillwater comprehensive plan amendment and rezoning of the parcel to the Cottage Cove Residential (CCR) Zoning District Summary of Our Proposal A Project meets City s 3 annexation requirements • Property must be adjacent to the City — our project abuts the city on the north and south side • Is petitioned for by 100% of the property owners within the area to annexed — we own the property to be annexed • Will not create a level of growth that exceeds the 120 dwelling units per year limitation (City currently has a reserve of 180 units +/- per conversations with city staff) B Our proposed development plan is consistent with the recommendations found in the Boutwell South Area Plan, revised and adopted by the City in 2004 (Boutwell Plan) L \Projects\Stillwater\Boutwell\04 Approvals\A1tnexatlon\J01ntBoardAmendedlNarrati�eSketchPlan082206 doc 3564 ROLLING VIEW DRIVE WHITE BEAR LAKE MINNESOTA 551 10 651 770 2981 FAX 651 770 9273 • The Boutwell Plan is a comprehensive planning document that contains the following elements Executive Summary I Project Summary II Existing Conditions and Issues III Planning Process W Recommendations ■ Land Use ■ Roadways ■ Stormwater Management ■ Integration of Stormwater and Circulation ■ Sewer and Water Services V Implementation Attachments (Including Boutwell Transportation Study) • The intersection at Boutwell road and CSAH 12 has been improved • Improvements on Boutwell road are complete and are adjacent to our property including installation of municipal sewer and water • Traffic signal at Manning and Hwy 12 has been installed • Traffic Improvements have been made to Deer Path including traffic calming and right -in / right out at Olive Street • Our roadway will be considered a north/south connector will be classified as a minor collector and will be built to MSA standards (30 MPH design with min 300 radius) After conferring with city staff we are confident that our parcel and proposed roadway layout provides a critical piece of the solution for a north/south connector between Boutwell and Hwy 12 • The Boutwell Plan V Implementation states the following Timing will be based on landowner interest availability of services and public improvements market demand for development and City ability to accommodate development All of these elements are now met to consider our site for annexation C Proposed layout is consistent with City Plans and Ordinances We propose to develop the site within the guidelines of the Cottage Cove Residential (CCR) Zoning District with Village homes located on narrow lots with association maintained common spaces We will meet the Low Density Single Family land use density of 3 units per acre as identified in the Boutwell Plan and our proposed land use is consistent with other land uses in this area •_ Qi r sketch plan offers the flrstlmk_Qf_a_noAb-aoufh mad way connection between Boutwell Road and CSAH 12 You will note that the roadway anticipates and dovetails nicely into a variety of options for this planned north -south roadway connection L \Projects\Sttllwater\Boutwell\04 Approvals\Annexation\TouitBoardAmendedlN-irrattveSketchPlan082206 doc Our proposal respects natural features of the site We look forward to working with you on annexation and development of this project If you have any questions please do not hesitative to contact me Sincerely Steve Fisher AICP Bruggeman Properties L \Projects\Stillwater\Bout e11\04 ApproNals\Annexation\JointBoardAmendedlNarrati%eSketchPlan082206 doc Bruggeman Construction Co Boutwell Road Project Historical Background 1 In the year 2000 Bruggeman Construction proposed a development in the subject area Bruggeman Construction was under the assumption that we could successfully petition the City of Stillwater for annexation as City orderly annexation policies allow landowners in areas adjacent to the existing city limits to petition for annexation (Boutwell South Area Plan Sept 2002 pg 3) 2 On January 10 2000 Bruggeman Properties submitted a petition for annexation and paid the $2000 fee It is our recollection that the petition received unanimous approval from the Stillwater Planning Commission and the Stillwater Joint Board Shortly thereafter we purchased the property 3 The project was delayed as the City of Stillwater opted to do a study of the Boutwell South Area a neighborhood within the Stillwater Annexation Area On December 6 2001 Bruggeman Properties agreed to contribute money towards this study 4 In September of 2002 the Report for the Boutwell South Area Plan was published by Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik & Associates 5 Following the Plan a second traffic study was ordered and conducted This traffic study was prepared by SRF Consulting and published on November 12 2003 6 The Stillwater Planning Commission and Council approved the Boutwell Plan June of 2004 Note A timeline is also attached L \Projects\Stillwater\Bout�kell\04 ApproNals\Annexation\lointBoardAmendedlNarratrveSketchPlan082206 doc Memorandum To Bill Turnblad, Commumtt Development Director From Shawn Sanders, Intenfri Public Works Director Date 8/8/2006 Re Bruggeman Properties Concept Plan The concept plan for the Bruggeman Properties is complete with the following comments 1 The North/South Connector is proposed as a Municipal State Aid Streets, street widths options are as follows a 26 feet wide- No parking both sides b 32 feet wide- Parking on one side c 38 feet wide- Parking on both sides A discussion should be held on what the street widths should be for this connector 2 No information was given with regard to storm sewer design or ponds 3 Temporary cul-de-sacs should be installed at the two street termini From Karen Kill [klkill@mnwcd org] Sent Monday, August 07, 2006 12 20 PM To Bill Turnblad Subject FW Boutwell South Area - Bruggeman Property Attachments Brg jpg Bill Please see Camilla s initial comments on the Bruggeman Property on behalf of Brown s Creek Watershed District Karen From Camilla Correll [mailto ccorrell@eorinc com] Sent Monday, August 07, 2006 10 16 AM To Karen Kill Cc Lisa Tilman, Ryan Fleming Subject Boutwell South Area - Bruggeman Property Karen In reviewing the concept plan dated July 21 2006 I have the followmg preliminary comments 1 The proposed development incorporates open space into the site plan very well The way the lots are laid out in relation to the open space and stormwater management features will provide the opportunity to route runoff to the ponds overland vs collecting it m the stormsewer system and discharging directly to the ponds If a portion of the stormwater runoff is routed overland to the ponds this can be designed to provide water quality treatment (pretreatment) and can result m reduced stormsewer mfrastructure costs 2 The wetlands on site were not inventoried under the Second Generation WMP nor the Wetland Function and Value Assessment due to their size According to the NWI there are 5 wetlands on the site (three within the immediate project area) See the attached map for the wetland locations according to the NWI The wetland types on the NWI do not appear to be the same type that they are now These wetlands will need to be delineated and typed before the application of Rule 2 0 3 The proposed development site is located in Phase IV of the Orderly Annexation Area so it is exempt from the BCWD's volume control standard All of the other components of Rule 2 0 will apply to the site According to the Washington County Soil Survey the site is located m HSG B soils so the potential to infiltrate stormwater runoff is good if the developer is interested m incorporating alternative stormwater management practices m an attempt to meet the water quality standards using a treatment tram approach vs in one regional stormwater management facility From what I reviewed this looks like a pretty straight forward residential development site If there is anythmg else I can provide you or the City with prior to the meeting please let me know Sincerely Camilla Correll P E Emmons & Olivier Resources Inc 651 Hale Avenue North Phone (651) 770-8448 FAX (651) 770 2552 email ccorrell@eorinc com file //\\Sw fileserv\Home\turnblad\Bruggeman\FW Boutwell South Area - Bruggeman Pro 8/10/2006 W.. a..§lCounty unon August 8 2006 Bill Turnblad Community Development Director City of Stillwater 216 N Fourth St Stillwater MN 55082 Department of Transportation and Physical Development Donald J Theisen P E Director/County Engineer Wayne H Sandberg P E Deputy Director/Asst County Engineer BOUTWELL RESIDENTIAL CONCEPT SITE PLAN, ADJACENT TO WASHINGTON COUNTY STATE AID HIGHWAY 12 (75T" STREET NORTH, CSAH 12) Dear Bill We have reviewed the concept site plan of the Boutwell South Area prepared by Bruggeman Properties The plan shown is consistent with the findings of the Boutwell Area Traffic Study During the Boutwell Area Traffic Study the need for north/south collector streets in the City was identified Reserving right of way in the area labeled potential connection would preserve options for future connections whichwe would support One critical finding of the Boutwell Area Traffic Study was that safe access to CSAH 12 could not be provided at a location between Northland Avenue and Maryknoll Avenue due to sight distance restrictions and the lack of space to fit full-length center left -turn lanes If a connection is made we will work with the City to safely accommodate it At this time there is 75 feet of right of way north of the CSAH 12 centerline with access control in the area of the proposed development This is adequate for all anticipated needs Washington County s policy is to assist local governments in promoting compatibility between land use and highways Residential uses located adjacent to highways often result in complaints about traffic noise Traffic noise from this highway could exceed noise standards established by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) the U S Department of Housing and Urban Development and the U S Department of Transportation Minnesota Rule 7030 0030 states that municipalities are responsible for taking all reasonable measures to prevent land use activities listed in the MPCAs Noise Area Classification (NAC) where the establishment of the land use would result in violations of established noise standards Minnesota Statute 116 07 Subpart 2a exempts County Roads and County State Aid Highways from noise thresholds County policy regarding development adjacent to existing highways prohibits the expenditure of highway funds for noise mitigation measures in such areas The developer should assess the noise situation and take any action outside of County right of way deemed necessary to minimize the impact of any highway noise Please contact me at 651-430-4312 or by e-mail at loe Iux(d�co washington mn us if you have questions or comments Sincerely Joseph Lux Senior Transportation Planner N 1WORMPlat Review Stillweter\Boutwell Residential Concept CSAH 12 8-8-06 doc Revised doc Date Group Meeting Subject of Meeting Action Dec 6, 2001 CC Council directs staff to prepare a Boutwell South Area Plan Jan 2002 CC Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik & Associates chosen to begin Boutwell South Area Plan Jan Mar CPC Neighborhood Staff and BRA conduct 2002 Mtgs neighborhood meetings on planning area develop 1st draft of plan Apr 8 2002 CPC Discussion Meetmg focused on land use consensus Neal Ave not a direct options and road Neal Ave connection from existing Neal CR 12 extension alignment options about 2 units per acre east of LL Creek July 22 2002 Joint Bd Discussion Boutwell South Area Plan Approve concept plan Sept 17 CC Discussion Boutwell South Area Plan Tabled and directed staff to further study 2002 the traffic issues Sept 24, CPC Workshop Input from public on Boutwell Area 2004 Transportation Study Oct 13 2003 CPC Workshop Input from public on Boutwell Area Transportation Stud Nov 17 CPC Public Boutwell Area Transportation Boutwell Area Transportation Study 2003 Hearmg Stud Dec 18 2003 CPC Workshop Follow up to l 1/17/03 public hearing Jan 12 2004 CPC Public Continued hearing from 11/17/02 Tabled to hold a workshop on 1/22/04 Hearin Jan 22 2004 CPC Workshop Follow up to 11/17/03 public hearing Feb 9 2004 CPC Discussion Boutwell Area Transportation Approved all 10 recommendations Study Review 10 CPC amended 2 by striking collector recommendations to the CC designation Apr 20 2004 CC Public Boutwell Area Transportation A) Approved 4 1 (Junker nay) Heanng Study recommendations Deerpath right out only onto Olive designate Brick Street the collector and upgrade it have further study done on intersection of Neal and CR 12 as well as other mtersections on CR 12 B) Approved 5 0 implement SRF short range recommendations 1 3 and 4 Frontage Road should be implemented asap @ at least 35 mph design C) No long range recommendations acted on Short range rec s 2 and 5 9 not acted on July 20 2004 CC Public Revised Boutwell South Area Plan Opened hearing for comments but Hearing continued to 9/7/04 to allow Jt Board review first Aug 9 2004 CPC Discussion Revised Boutwell South Area Plan Consensus revisions represented their position/concerns, mcludmg changes to rec No 3 and a concept sketch for Neal Ave intersection at Northland Avenue Aug 25 Joint Bd Public Revised Boutwell South Area Plan Plan approved on a 4 0 vote Added 2004 Hearmg condition that City take aggressive stance with County on Manning Ave improvements OrA5 2004 r1f, n-blie Hearing --Revised Boutvvefl South Plan continuation of public hearing Plan appiuved on 4 1 vote (Krlesel against) Millbrandt in favor of amended Rec No 3, Juker in favor of connecting Neal Ave to CR 12, Kriesel against until traffic issue is addressed Rheinberger in favor Department of Transportation and Physical Development Donald J Theisen P E Director/County Engineer Wayne H Sandberg P E Deputy Director/Ass t County Engineer August 8 2006 Bill Turnblad Community Development Director City of Stillwater 216 N Fourth St Stillwater MN 55082 BOUTWELL RESIDENTIAL CONCEPT SITE PLAN, ADJACENT TO WASHINGTON COUNTY STATE AID HIGHWAY 12 (75TH STREET NORTH, CSAH 12) Dear Bill We have reviewed the concept site plan of the Boutwell South Area prepared by Bruggeman Properties The plan shown is consistent with the findings of the Boutwell Area Traffic Study During the Boutwell Area Traffic Study the need for north/south collector streets in the City was identified Reserving right of way in the area labeled potential connection would preserve options for future connections whichwe would support One critical finding of the Boutwell Area Traffic Study was that safe access to CSAH 12 could not be provided at a location between Northland Avenue and Maryknoll Avenue due to sight distance restrictions and the lack of space to fit full-length center left turn lanes If a connection is made we will work with the City to safely accommodate it At this time there is 75 feet of right of way north of the CSAH 12 centerline with access control in the area of the proposed development This is adequate for all anticipated needs Washington County s policy is to assist local governments in promoting compatibility between land use and highways Residential uses located adjacent to highways often result in complaints about traffic noise Traffic noise from this highway could exceed noise standards established by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) the U S Department of Housing and Urban Development and the U S Department of Transportation Minnesota Rule 7030 0030 states that municipalities are responsible for taking all reasonable measures to prevent land use activities listed in the MPCA s Noise Area Classification (NAC) where the establishment of the land use would result in violations of established noise standards Minnesota Statute 116 07 Subpart 2a exempts County Roads and County State Aid Highways from noise thresholds County policy regarding development adjacent to existing highways ttl ul ufilLS the cxNai tuiture of h.ghv�ay funds fot noise mitigation pleasures it, such areas The developer should assess the noise situation and take any action outside of County right of way deemed necessary to minimize the impact of any highway noise Please contact me at 651 430 4312 or by e mail at toe lux(@co washington mn us if you have questions or comments Sincerely✓✓]j 41 s� oseph Lux Senior Transportation Planner c bhawn Sanders Stillwater City Engineer N \WORD\Plat Review Slillwater\Bou(well Residential Concept CSAH 12 8 8 06 doc Revised doc SUPPLEMENTAL TO APPLICATION Bruggeman's Request Bruggeman Construction Co ("Bruggeman") is requesting the City of Stillwater (the "City") take the following actions regarding the property located between Boutwell Road and Myrtle Street at Newberry Court, legally described on Exhibit A of the Petition for Annexation (the "Property") 1 Annex the Property into the City of Stillwater The Property is currently Phase IV property located in Stillwater Township Bruggeman requests annexation into the City pursuant to Section 4 09 of Stillwater's Orderly Annexation Agreement 2 Comprehensive Plan Amendment The Property is currently designated Semi - Rural Residential on Stillwater's future land use map Bruggeman requests the City amend the future use map designation of the property from Semi -Rural Residential to Single Family Small Lot Residential 3 Zoning Amendment Following annexation, the property will be automatically zoned A-P, Agricultural Preservation Bruggeman requests the City amend the zoning designation of the property to CCR, Cottage Cove Residential 4 Project Design Review Bruggeman offers a sketch plan that provides a development proposal compatible with the area and surrounding properties Bruggeman requests the City review and approve its enclosed sketch plan History of Bruggeman's Requests Bruggeman has worked with the City and City staff on annexing and developing the Property since 1999 A timeline of events regarding Bruggeman's requests is attached as Appendix A Letters from the original property owners of the Property are attached as Appendix B Bruggeman submitted its original petition for annexation of the Property on January 10, 2000 Along with that petition, Bruggeman paid a $2,000 application fee On February 17, 2000, the Stillwater Joint Board voted to delay consideration of Bruggeman's request until early 2001 due to the City staffs lack of availability On March 21, 2000, the City Council moved to do the same On December 5, 2000, the City Council voted to delay Bruggeman's request for an additional period of one year Following the one-year delay, Bruggeman again brought its request before the City Council on December 6, 2001 Rather than rule on Bruggeman's request, the City Council determined that the Boutwell South Area needed a traffic study and again tabled consideration Bruggeman agreed to contribute to the traffic study, and in response to a December 6, 2001 letter from the City, attached as Appendix C, Bruggeman paid $4,597 50 toward the traffic study Shortly thereafter, City staff communicated to Bruggeman in a January 10, 2002 letter that they anticipated a Boutwell South Plan would be adopted in May 2002 The City tabled Bruggeman's request once again In September 2002, the Boutwell South area traffic study was completed Its results are summarized in the Report for Boutwell South Area Plan (the "BSAP Report") dated September 9, 2002, prepared by Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Associates A copy of the BSAP Report is included with this application Among other findings, the report concluded on page 12 that if the entire Boutwell South Area were fully developed at a density of 3 0 dwelling units per developable area, "[t]he number of [increased traffic] trips would be well within the capacity of existing area roadways " The City Council then ordered City staff to conduct a second traffic study The City again tabled Bruggeman's request for the duration of the second study The second traffic study was completed on November 12, 2003 A copy of the second traffic study report is included with this application Based on the results of the traffic studies, a Revised Boutwell South Area Plan was prepared The City Council approved the Revised Boutwell South Area Plan (the "RSBA Plan") on October 5, 2004 A copy of the RSBA Plan is included with this application The RSBA Plan recommended several road improvements be completed around the Boutwell South Area and a Neal Avenue extension plan be determined prior to annexation and development The RSBA Plan also, however, agreed with the traffic studies concluding that any expected increases in road traffic that would be generated if the Boutwell South Area is fully developed at the maximum density of 3 units per developable acre were well within the capacity of existing roadways The County of Washington Department of Transportation and Physical Development (the "WDOT") issued an August 23, 2002 letter in response to a RSBA Plan draft The letter has since been included as an attachment to the RSBA Plan In its letter, the WDOT indicated that it disagreed with local residents who were concerned that proposed development of the Boutwell South Area and a proposed Neal Avenue extension would have an adverse impact on north -south traffic on residential streets such as Northland Avenue and Maryknoll Avenue To the contrary, the WDOT felt that proposed development would have little to no impact on those streets In the period following the City's adoption of the RSBA Plan, traffic improvements recommended by the RSBA Plan were completed, including (i) improvement of the intersection of Boutwell Road and CSAH 12, (n) installation of municipal water and sewer on Boutwell Road adjacent to the Property, (iii) installation of a traffic light at Manning Avenue and CSAH 12, and (iv) traffic improvements to and installation of traffic calming devises on Deer Path Road These improvements are outlined in an August 22, 2006 letter from Steve Fisher attached as Appendix D Following the completion of those improvements, Bruggeman once again submitted its requests to the City on August 10, 2006 City staff prepared an August 24, 2006 report, attached as Appendix E, recommending approval of Bruggeman's requests The Stillwater Joint Board voted 3-1 to recommend approval of annexation on August 29, 2006 The minutes from this meeting are attached as Appendix F The City Council, however, once again voted on September 5, 2006 to table consideration of Bruggeman's request, this time its sketch plan, until City staff prepared a Neal Avenue extension plan The minutes from this meeting are attached as Appendix G Bruggeman removed its other requests from the September 11, 2006 Planning Commission agenda in light of the City Council's decision `a After Bruggeman removed its requests, the City Council administratively denied Bruggeman's requests on September 19, 2006 without prejudice The minutes from this meeting are attached as Appendix H At the same meeting, the City Council unanimously approved annexation of the Brown's Creek Addition Phase IV property amid council members' vocalized concerns that doing so was inconsistent with denying Bruggeman's requests At the City Council's direction, City staff prepared a November 15, 2006 memorandum, attached as Appendix I, detailing proposed Neal Avenue connection plan options The memorandum and Bruggeman's request were discussed at a City Council meeting on November 21, 2006 The minutes from this meeting are attached as Appendix J The City Council determined not to take action of any kind Instead, the City Council indicated that, regarding possible Neal Avenue extensions, things should be left as is Bruggeman is now requesting that the City Council approve its requests for annexation, comprehensive plan amendment, zoning amendment, and project design review Approval of Bruggeman's request is appropriate in light of the facts that (i) the City Council has determined not to take action regarding a Neal Avenue extension, (n) traffic studies have shown that existing roads are more than capable of handling traffic resulting from developing the Property, (in) the City has annexed similar Phase IV property while refusing to annex the Property, (1v) Bruggeman has complied with each request the City has made over the past seven years, and (v) Bruggeman is in compliance with all City requirements for the Property Denying Bruggeman's request is inconsistent with the City's treatment of other similar property owners Annexation Request Annexation of the Property pursuant to Section 4 09 of the Orderly Annexation Agreement Bruggeman petitions for annexation of the Property into the City in accordance with Section 4 09 of the Orderly Annexation Agreement A copy of the Orderly Annexation Agreement is included with this application Annexation is appropriate because Bruggeman's request satisfies each of the conditions set forth in Section 4 09 In addition, City traffic studies have concluded that existing roadways can easily handle traffic increases caused by the annexation and development of the Property Finally, Bruggeman's request for annexation is similar to and consistent with other Phase IV annexation requests the City has already approved Bruggeman's request meets the conditions of Section 4 09 of the Orderly Annexation Agreement Section 4 09 of the Orderly Annexation Agreement allows annexation of Phase IV property if (1) the property is adjacent to the City, (ii) annexation is petitioned by one hundred percent (100%) of the property owners of the property to be annexed, and (in) annexation does not result in a level of growth that exceeds one hundred twenty (120) dwelling units per year limitation The Property borders the City on its North and South boundaries and hence is adjacent to the City Bruggeman is the sole owner of the Property and has petitioned for annexation, hence the one hundred percent (100%) of property owners requirement is met Finally, the Property currently only has two dwelling units located on it and Bruggeman's development plans limit overall dwelling unit development to a maximum of forty-five (45) dwelling units As of August 22, 2006, Stillwater had a reserve of +/- 180 dwelling units Existing roadways can handle additional traffic caused by development of the Property In December 2001, the City requested and Bruggeman agreed to jointly pay for a traffic study of the Boutwell South area Bruggeman contributed $4,597 50 toward the study Resulting traffic analysis is detailed in part in the BSAP Report and the RSBA Plan The RSBA Plan set forth recommendations for improving existing roadways Those recommended road improvements have been completed Bruggeman and City staff have presented the City Council with a number of viable options for a Neal Avenue extension, and the City Council has determined to leave things as is Both the BSAP Report and the RSBA Plan indicate that, even if the entire 120 acres of the Boutwell South Area is developed at its full 3 unit per acre capacity, resulting increases in traffic are well within the capacity of existing roadways The WDOT, in its August 23, 2002 letter, expressed a similar view The WDOT noted that local residents expressed frustration and concern over potential increased traffic issues that may stem from development of the area and by proposed Neal Avenue connections The WDOT determined that these concerns were misplaced Instead, the WDOT indicated that potential cut - through north -south traffic is minimized by the circuitous nature of roads such as Northland or Maryknoll The WDOT concluded that development of the area will have little to no impact on potential Northland, Maryknoll and other cut -through routes The City has approved early annexation of similar Phase X property Bruggeman is not the first Phase IV property owner to petition for annexation To the contrary, the City has approved annexation of several Phase IV properties In 2006 alone, the City approved annexation of three other Phase IV properties and one Phase III property and denied none (other than Bruggeman's administrative denial), while refusing to even vote on Bruggeman's requests for annexation The City Council also discussed sketch plans and annexation timing for three other Phase IV properties in 2006 None of these discussions required a vote, but in each case, the City Council indicated that traffic infrastructural improvements should be addressed before annexation would be considered Additionally, on February 6, 2007 the City Council tabled another Phase IV property owner's request for annexation The City Council reasoned that the property owner had not yet determined road access to the property, and resolved that road/access issues should be discussed before annexation was appropriate Bruggeman's request is distinguished from these because two traffic studies have already been completed for the Property, and several traffic improvements have been completed A chart listing other properties that the City has recently annexed is attached to this supplement as Appendix K, along with applicable City Council minutes attached as Appendix L Comprehensive Plan Chanze Land Use Map classification to Single Family Small Lot Residential Bruggeman requests a Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map Amendment to change the future land use for the 4 Property from Semi -Rural Residential ("RR") to Single Family Small Lot Residential ("SFSL") This request is consistent with the City's overall comprehensive plan in three respects (i) the City's 1995 Comprehensive Plan recognizes SFSL as a valid future use of the Property, (n) the City's practice when annexing land is to change the future land use designation from RR to another classification, and (in) Bruggeman's request is consistent with the Revised Boutwell South Area Plan land use designation for the Property The 1995 Comprehensive Plan recognizes SFSL as a valid future designation Applicable excerpts from the City's Comprehensive Plan are attached to this supplement as Appendix M The City's Comprehensive Plan, on page 3-4, recognizes Township land such as the Property as an important part of future growth On page 3-5, the Comprehensive Plan indicates that under maximum growth conditions, the City would annex land such as the Property between the years 2005 and 2010 Essentially, the Comprehensive Plan recognized the Property as an important area for future growth that may become a part of the City before 2010 In addition, on page 3-3, the Comprehensive Plan acknowledges that the City's current public facilities such as roads, sewer and water have been sized and constructed anticipating the future development of Township land such as the Property Furthermore, on pages 3-9 and 3-10, the Comprehensive Plan listed various land use designations approved by both the City and the Township for annexation land such as the Property Included in this list is the land designation "small lot single family areas " Changing the future land use classification of the Property to SFSL is consistent with each of these, and therefore is consistent with the City's overall comprehensive plan The City regularly amends the future land use map for newly annexed land The future land use map currently shows the Property classified as RR In fact, the future land use map as originally adopted with the Comprehensive Plan in 1995 classified virtually all Stillwater Township land as RR The City has routinely amended RR designations and its future land use map to other residential designations such as SFSL when it annexes Township land A recent example of the City's practice is the Brown's Creek Reserve annexation approved by the City Council on September 19, 2006 The Brown's Creek Reserve property is located at Neal Avenue and McKusick Road The Brown's Creek Reserve property was designated as RR on the future land use map The property owner requested, among other things, early annexation into the City and a comprehensive plan amendment Relying in part on the fact that adjacent property to the north-west was Phase III Annexation property, the City Council unanimously approved all requests At all times prior to annexation, the Brown's Creek property was Phase IV Annexation Property In addition, adjacent properties to the North and West of the Browns Creek property continue to be Phase IV Annexation properties located in the Township City Council members verbally noted during the meeting the inconsistency of approving the Brown's Creek annexation request while denying Bruggeman's requests This example and the other properties shown on Appendix K of this supplemental provide evidence of the City's practice of amending its future land use map Denying Bruggeman's request would be inconsistent with this practice Bruggeman's request is consistent with the Revised Boutwell South Area Plan The RSBA Plan land use map guides development of the Property as "Single Family/Low Density " The RSBA Plan defines Single Family/Low Density as containing three (3) dwelling units per net acre' The Comprehensive Plan defines "Single Family Small Lot" as property on which up to four dwelling units per acre may be located This designation most closely matches the density requirements necessary for future development of the Property in accordance with the RSBA Plan Zoning Amendment Rezone Property to CCR Cove Cottage Residential Bruggeman requests the City rezone the Property following annexation from A-P, Agricultural Preservation to CCR Cove Cottage Residential Pursuant to Stillwater Ordinance § 3 1 -1 Subdiv 6 (8), upon annexation the Property is automatically zoned as A-P, Agricultural Preservation Rezoning the property to CCR Cove Cottage Residential is consistent in the keeping of the City's overall comprehensive plan for the same reasons indicated with Bruggeman's comprehensive plan amendment request Additionally, rezoning the Property is also consistent with the RSBA Plan The gross acreage of the Property, less existing right of ways, is 18 34 acres Bruggeman's proposed 45-lot development will consequently yield a density of less than 2 7 dwelling units per acre This density easily meets the RSBA Plan's density requirement of no more than 3 dwelling units per net acre Therefore, Bruggeman's request is consistent with the RSBA Plan Project Design Review Review and Approve Sketch Plan of Future Development o the Property Bruggeman requests the City review and approve the sketch plan layout of its proposed development of the Property The sketch plan is consistent with the RSBA Plan In his August 29, 2006 letter to the City Council, Community Development Director Bill Turnblad found Bruggeman's sketch plan desirable for, among other reasons, (i) the plan's provision of street connections for future development of abutting properties, (it) the plan's design of a meandering and indirect route, (in) the plan's minimizing of damage to existing trees, (iv) the plan's avoidance of developing on any wetlands and their buffer areas, and (v) the plan's proposal for park dedication 359828 ' Net acre is defined in the RSBA Plan as total acreage minus roads wetlands and steeply sloped areas ' APPENDIX A TYW,i.I NF, Boutwell Project History Stillwater, Minnesota Bruggeman Construction Rev Apnl19 2007 August 16, 1996 Effective date of - Agreement between the City of Stillwater and the Town of Stillwater for Growth Management, Orderly Annexation and the exercise of Joint Powers for Planning and Land Use Control -sect 4 09 of Agreement states "As an exception to the Phasing Schedule, the City may annex property not described in Phases 1, 11 or 111 by Resolution if 1 the property is adjacent to the City, 2 is petitioned for by one hundred percent (100%) of the property owners within the area to be annexed and 3 the resulting annexation will not create a level of growth that exceeds the one hundred twenty (120) dwelling units per year limitation " November 1, 1999 Landowners - LaVenture, Miller, and Low - request immediate annexation of their properties -prior to Bruggeman purchasing their properties -individual letters sent to Steve Russell Community Dev Dir January 10, 2000 Bruggeman submits Annexation Petition -requests annexation of 3 parcels of land -$2 000 application fee Paid January 17, 2000 Lows, Laventures and Millers send letters to Mayor and Council requesting to be taken out of Phase IV Annexation Area -they strongly request Council approve Bruggeman's proposal to be annexed into the City -they had requested previously in a letter to Steve Russell Community Dev Dir - to be taken out of Phase IV of the City's Comprehensive Landuse Plan and be allowed to annex immediately -Lows stated in their letter they 'never had a voice in the annexation schedule" January 18, 2000 City Council meeting — Bruggeman's first request for annexation -referred to Joint Board for review and comment January 19, 2000 Stillwater Gazette Steve Russell Community Dev Dir - "we would have to extend utilities that are not there now Extending utilities would be expensive because Al there would not be enough other developers to defray the costs as there are in the phases being developed now Klayton Eckles City Engineer states the City's small staff is already stretched to its limit 'It taxes staff to stay on top of what we have so it rases a question to start a new phase ' "Phases 2 and 3 are in the near future, and its hard to keep a hd on it all January 20, 2000 Bruggeman sends letter to Mayor and Council -letter stated "understanding staff concerns for time demand" Bruggeman offers to undertake study of area between Boutwell Ave CSAH 12 and the trunk sewer line February 9, 2000 Community Development Director sends Letter to Joint Board "Discussion of Phase IV Area Annexation Requests" Steve Russell states -City received requests for annexation of five areas over past two years -3 of the 5 were approved for annexation -A Neal road extension should be studied between Boutwell and CR 12 -concern about safety of Boutwell Road and CR 12 intersection -U S Homes plans to start their development in 2000 (have preliminary and final plat approval for 750 single family and attached homes 104 building permits issued) -Staff recommended a study for the entire Phase IV area before annexation of areas north of CR 12 -in Phase IV study - greenway design/location land use townhouse sites utility services roads environmental impacts can be considered February 17, 2000 Joint Board Meeting - general discussion of Phase IV area annexation requests -Joint Board Supervisor David Johnson states the City should respect the Orderly Annexation Agreement that states property owners are not restricted to a specific t►meframe that reasonable consideration will be given to early annexation requests" -Steve Russell states 'staff has no time to either do the study required or oversee outside consultants Staff recommends Council defer the request until Phase 11 is complete City Administrator Kriesel supports staff recommendation' -motion made and seconded to delay the consideration for annexation (of the 14 acre site) until 2001 All were in favor February 18, 2000 Bruggeman purchases the LaVenture property -4 1 acres March 21, 2000 City Council meeting - Bruggeman requests annexation of property -motion by Councilmember Terrence Zoller and seconded to continue annexation request until early 2001 July 20, 2000 Bruggeman purchases the Low property -5 2 acres A November 29, 2000 Bruggeman sends letter to Mayor Kimble and City Council requesting annexation -letter dated 11 /29/00 -letter stated Bruggeman Homes requested annexation earlier in the year but was delayed due to availability of staff to review our request -U S Homes application being the primary contributor to the lack of staff review time -City Council said earlier in the year they would look at our request after things loosened up at the staff level - around the first of the year (2001) December 5, 2000 City Council meeting City Engineer Eckles — states in staff report -- he received a letter from Paul Bruggeman asking City to again start to move forward on his request to annex property into the City Mr Eckles stated 1 it was decided that this request was to be reviewed in a year 2 the request was dependent on the Staff workload - at this time with the current development and the Staff time involved - it would not be possible at this time to annex this property December 6, 2001 Council suggests a Study of Boutwell South Area is needed -Bruggeman agrees to contribute money towards the study -Bruggeman contributes $4 597 50 on 3/11 /03 (check #15010) -project delayed while study prepared January 10, 2002 Steve Russell, Community Dev Dir sends South Boutwell Area Plan Introduction Memo to Planning Commission -"Over the next 6 months the Planning Commission will be the focal point for the plan development" -anticipated Council adoption of the South of Boutwell Area Plan in May 2002 March 11, 2002 Planning Commission holds public meeting to discuss existing conditions, planning issues and future land use for the Boutwell South Planning Area as an element of the Stillwater Comprehensive Plan -City preparing an Area Plan for the Boutwell South Planning Area This plan will provide direction for land/use zoning parks trails circulation system for cars and pedestrians public utilities and storm water management for the future in the planning area August 6, 2002 Bruggeman purchases the Miller property -9 0 acres September 2002 Boutwell South Area Plan completed by Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik & Associates -study concludes Boutwell Road has enough capacity to handle the projected development November 12, 2003 SRF completes a second traffic study A -study concludes Boutwell Road has enough capacity to handle the projected development June 2004 Revised Boutwell South Area Plan prepared by Bonestroo July 20, 2004 City Council meeting — Bruggeman sends letter to the City Council -letter dated 8/20/04 -recommends City Council approve the Boutwell South Area Plan and allow Bruggeman to immediately proceed with annexation of their property August 25, 2004 Joint Board meeting — Bruggeman sends letter to the Joint Board -letter dated August 25 2004 -recommends Joint Board and Stillwater City Council approve the Boutwell South Area Plan with the provision that landowners with properties in the study area adjacent to the City be allowed to annex into the City and to allow Bruggeman Properties to immediately proceed with annexation of their property September 21, 2004 City Council meeting — Bruggeman sends letter to Mayor Kimble and Members of the Council -letter dated September 13,2004 -recommends City Council approve the Boutwell South Area Plan with the provision that landowners with properties in the study area adjacent to the city be allowed to immediately annex into the City of Stillwater October 5, 2004 Stillwater Planning Commission and Council approve the Boutwell South Area Plan -Page 11 of the Plan states "the number of projected trips generated In the study area at the maximum density of 3 units per developable acre is well within the capacity of existing roadways 2004 Deerpath traffic restriction completed Signal at Manning and Hwy 12 in place 2005 East portion of Boutwell Road and intersection at Boutwell and Highway 12 improvements completed -improvements include urban section road storm sewer san sewer water and trail January 10, 2005 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes "Mr Teske and Mr Junker both spoke in favor of adhering to the Commission s adopted recommendations/polices for the South Boutwell Area Mr Teske pointed out that the Commission's final response was that "it wanted traffic Issues addressed and Infrastructure in place before development proceeds, ' March 15, 2005 City Council Meeting Minutes - Request for consideration of development in Boutwell South Area by Manchester Homes Councilmember Junker states "the Council owes it to the people to abide by the policy of the Boutwell South Plan a plan that was only A recently approved and put in place after many months of work and discussions with residents Councilmember Milbrandt also spoke of the need to abide by the Boutwell Plan as well as the Orderly Annexation Agreement Councilmember Polehna agreed with the need to follow the Boutwell Area Plan that was just put in place" March 15, 2005 Resolution 2005-64, A Resolution Annexing Munkelwitz Property To The City Of Stillwater Pursuant To The Joint Resolution Of The City And Town Of Stillwater As To Orderly Annexation - Dated August 16 1996 -6 94 acres -for city parkland -in Phase IV Annexation Area (2015) July 21, 2006 Bruggeman submits Application for Project Design Review -request to develop 18 3 acres under CCR Cove Cottage Residential zoning as 45 single family lots -Request annexation into the City a Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Rezoning of the property August 10, 2006 Planning Commission Report -prepared by Bill Turnblad Community Dev Dir dated August 10 2006 -evaluation of request for Rezoning Comprehensive Plan Amendment Sketch Plan Layout and Annexation timing August 11, 2006 Bruggeman submits second Petition to the City for Annexation of Property August 14, 2006 Planning Commission Agenda -sketch proposal for development of 18 3 acres into 45 single family lots August 14, 2006 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes - Bruggeman requests Concept Plan Review and Annexation Timing Discussion -Planning Commission ' doesn t want piecemeal development - with zoning that's chosen by the developer They want a study that looks at the entire annexation area - then they will prepare a master plan -recommendation was made for a comprehensive study of the entire Boutwell area -City Councilmember-Liaison to the Planning Commission Junker moved to not take action on the request for consideration of early annexation -passed unanimously August 15, 2006 City Council Minutes - Council approved annexation of 132 +/- acres (in phase III-2002) for 270 Home US Homes Development August 24, 2006 Joint Planning Board Staff Report -prepared for 8/29/06 Joint Planning Board meeting -staff recommends that the Joint Board 1 Approve the Annexation Petition A 2 Recommend that the City Council approve the rezoning from A-P Agricultural Preservation to CCR Cove Cottage Residential 3 Recommend that the City Council approve the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map change from RR Semi - Rural Residential to SFSL Single Family Small Lot August 29, 2006 Joint Planning Board meeting - Bruggeman requests 1 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map Amendment from RR Semi -Rural Residential to SFSL Single Family Small Lot Residential 2 Rezoning from A-P Agricultural Preservation to CCR Cove Cottage Residential 3 Annexation -Joint Board recommended approval of annexation (3 1 — with Joint Board Member and City Council Member Junker voting against) September 5, 2006 City Council Meeting Minutes -Councilmember Junker states "the key issue is the third recommendation in the South Boutwell Study - that a plan be developed for the Neal Avenue extension ' -motion by Councilmember Polehna seconded by Councilmember Junker to table consideration of the sketch plan and prepare a Neal Avenue extension plan — all were in favor September 11, 2006 Planning Commission meeting (Bruggeman sends letter to Staff - requests to be removed from 9/11/06 meeting agenda) letter dated 9/06/06 -Public Hearing (notice mailed August 30 2006) agenda states - An Annexation Zoning Map Amendment and Comprehensive Plan Amendment request from Bruggeman for Development of 18 3 acres into 45 Single Family Lots September 19, 2006 City Council minutes (Bruggeman item removed from agenda) -Public Hearing -request for An Annexation Zoning Amendment and Comprehensive Plan Amendment -motion by Councilmember Harycki seconded by Councilmember Milbrandt to deny the application without prejudice Council Approves Annexation of Brown's Creek Reserve development -property in Phase IV Annexation Area -9 5 acres (50% +/- developable — per Bill Turnblad 1/11/07) -3 2 units/acre +/- density -15 lot subdivision (min - 80 wide 10 000 s f — per Bill Turnblad 1/11/07 September 29, 2006 Bruggeman sends letter to City requesting to proceed with application for Concept Site Plan Review and Annexation Timing Discussion November 21, 2006 City Council meeting A - City Engineer Shawn Sanders presents potential road connections between Boutwell Road and Co Rd 12 and funding options - City Planner discusses recent meeting with landowners that would be impacted by Neal Ave extension - Council was to discuss Bruggeman conceptual development plan January 8, 2007 Planning Commission meeting (Bruggeman item removed from agenda) December 11, 2006 Planning Commission approves annexation of Kemal Schankereli property (Trolley Trail Acres) -2 3 acres -2 lot subdivision proposed -in Phase IV Annexation Area (2015) February 6, 2007 City Council tables request for Kemal Schankereli Annexation -in Phase IV Annexation Area (2015) City Council approves Final Plat and Final Planned Unit Development for Brown's Creek Reserve -a 15 lot development on 8 9 acres -motion by Councilmember Milbrandt for approval -all were in favor - Abstention Councilmember Nyberg -(Annexation was approved on September 19 2006) April 20, 2007 Bruggeman submits current Application and Petition -request for annexation of the Property -request for comprehensive plan amendment -request for zoning amendment -request for project design review A APPENDIX K RECENTLY ANNEXED PROPERTIES Property Owner Property Size Post- Density Annexation Date Type Address / acres Annexation (proposed) City Council Approval PIN Development Pro osed 12764 May 16 2006 Boutwell Scott Junker Phase IV 23 TBD TBD Joint Board approved Road acres Planning Comrmssion recommended approval Staff recommended approval w/condition of final plat City Council approved 3 1 1 abstained 7979 Neal February 6 2007 Avenue Kemal Phase IV 23 TBD TBD Planning Commission recommended North Schankereli acres approval Staff recommended approval City Council tabled request w/out vote Council members indicated want to see traffic & road location discussion w/neighbors before deciding to annex March 15 2005 Munkelwitz Phase IV 694 City Park City Park City Council unanimous approval (former) acres Property purchased by the City & annexed as part of purchase City of Stillwater 7135 — January 3 2006 7143 Croix Capital Phase IV 8 0 20-lot Joint Board approved Manning Group acres residential 6 000 sq ft Planning Commission recommended Avenue development avg lot approval Liberty size Staff recommended approval West Parcel was designated rural residential in Comp Plan prior to amendment approval K1 8602 Neal September 19 2006 Avenue Tim Freeman Phase IV 95 15-lot 3 0 units Planning Comrmssion recommended North acres residential per acre approval Brown s development Staff recommended approval 8528 Neal Creek 50% of the 10 000 sq City Council unanimous approval Avenue Addition property ft lot size Council member expressed concern North developable over inconsistency of approving this request & denying Bruggeman s request Parcels to north and west remain Phase IV Proposed development includes greater dwelling unit per acre than Bruggeman Location August 15 2006 South of US Homes Phase III 132 +/- Residential Planning Commission recommended TH 96 acres development Varies approval West of Millbrook consisting of from high- Staff recommended approval Neal Development density City Council unanimous approval Avenue 172 single townhomes Property is not adjacent to City North of family homes to single Instead is surrounded by Phase IV Brown s family lots properties (some have since been Creek 98 townhomes annexed) East of Manning Avenue 360039 K2 ORIGINAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF STILLWATER AND THE TOWN OF STILLWATER FOR GROWTH MANAGEMENT ORDERLY ANNEXATION AND THE EXERCISE OF JOINT POWERS FOR PLANNING AND LAND USE CONTROL THIS AGREEMENT is made this � . &,t—r day of U.-wc , 1996, ("Effective Date") between the City of Stillwater, Washington County, Mulne to ("City") and the Town of Stillwater, Washington County, Minnesota ("Town") and is an agreement relating to growth management and constitutes a "Joint Resolution" between the City and Town authorized by Minnesota Statutes §414 0325 providing for a procedure and a framework for orderly annexation of a part of the Town to the City This Agreement also provides for the joint exercise by the City and Town of their respective planning and land use control authority pursuant to Minn Stat 47159 and Minn Stat 414 0325 (Subd 5) SECTION ONE INTRODUCTION 101 Certain land owners within the Town have petitioned the City for annexation and for the extension of municipal utilities Since receiving the petition, the City has undertaken a review of its Comprehensive Plan and has studied the ability of the City to provide services to the area and has concluded that if the area requesting services is developed into urban uses the City would ultimately be benefited by a broadened tax base and a more vital community and that urban growth in the annexation area would benefit the City The Town has participated m a review of the City's Comprehensive Plan and has concluded that it would be beneficial to the Town, and to property owners remaining m the Town after annexation, to enter this Agreement with the City so that the area to be annexed will be developed in an orderly fashion and with the least possible impact on the people of the Town INTENT 102 The parties to this agreement intend it to be binding with all the rights, privileges, and obligations attached thereto Both parties intend to be bound by this agreement and shall not violate its terms Neither party shall exercise any legislative authority either now existing or which may be later created m a way which violates the terms of the agreement Both parties understand that they may not limit the power of the legislature over annexation, and such is not their intent Instead, the parties agree to refrain from exercising any legislative authority, now or into the future, in a way that would violate the terms of this agreement 35667 O1P 05/23/96 -1- INCLUSION INTO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 103 Within sixty (60) days of the City's adoption of this Joint Resolution, the City shall adopt and forward to the Metropolitan Council a Comprehensive Plan Amendment incorporating the Orderly Annexation Agreement into the City's Comprehensive Plan SECTION TWO ORDERLY ANNEXATION AREA 201 The property described in Exhibit "A" that is subject to annexation by the City pursuant to this Agreement will constitute the "Orderly Annexation Area" This area includes all that area of the Town not now within the City that lies North of Highway 36, East of County Road 15 and South of Highway 96, except for that portion of the Town that lies North of the right-of-way of the Minnesota Zephyr Track and East of the Oak Glen development The Orderly Annexation Area is designated as in need of orderly annexation and no consideration by the Minnesota Municipal Board is necessary, no alteration of the boundaries is appropriate, and all conditions of annexation have been provided for in this Resolution and the Minnesota Municipal Board may review and comment only and within thirty (30) days of receipt of this Resolution and each subsequent phase as described in this Agreement upon the filing of a Resolution as described in this Agreement SECTION THREE PHASING SCHEDULE 301 The Town and City agree that phasing the growth envisioned for the annexation area would benefit the City by reducing the financial risk of extending core facilities into the Orderly Annexation Area by extending such facilities gradually rather than at one time This would also allow for the burden imposed by the growth to be gradually born by the City so that the level of services needed by the new development could be supplied on a gradual and phased basis The Town has agreed that a phased development plan as envisioned by this Agreement would benefit the Town by phasing the impact of lost tax base on the remaining Town government and easing financial and lifestyle burdens that an immediate annexation of the entire area would impose on Town residents For the purposes of this Agreement, the Orderly Annexation Area will be divided into four (4) phases described as follows Phase I Descnptlon 302 Phase I contains that property described in Exhibit "B", generally described as that part of the Town that is South of County Road 12, East of County Road 15 and North of Highway 36, except for the following property that will remain as Phase IV property unless Annexation is requested by the property owner pursuant to Section 4 08 herein 35667 01F 05/23/96 -2- a The Bergman Farm, 1205 - 60th Street North Parcel Numbers 31-030-20-32-0001 and 31-030-20-34-0001 Owners Alvin and Helen Bergman b 1223 - 62nd Street North Parcel Number 31-030-20-34-0002 Owner Paul Bergman c 7143 Manning Avenue Parcel Number 30-030-20-33-0001 Owners Robert M and Ann S Jordan d 7135 Manning Avenue Parcel Number 30-030-20-33-0002 Owners Ralph E and Kunberly A Stowell 6731 Manning Avenue Parcel Number 31-030-20-23-0001 Owner Rosalie Gadient The Phase I also includes the Stillwater Golf Course The approximate population of the Phase I area is Phase II Description 3 03 The Phase II property is the property described in Exhibit "C" commonly referred to as the Abramowicz Farm property, Rivard property and Newman property Phase III Description 3 04 The Phase III property is the property described m Exhibit "D" and commonly referred to as the Palmer Farm property This Agreement will not obligate the City to provide adjacency between the present City and the Palmer property and it will be the obligation of the Developer to provide adjacency before the Resolution on Phase III is enacted Phase IV Description 3 05 The Phase IV property is that portion of the Orderly Annexation Area that is not included in Phases I, II or III 35667 O1F 05/23/96 -3- SECTION FOUR TUNING OF ANNEXATION OF PHASES 401 Under no circumstances will the growth in the Orderly Annexation Area exceed a cumulative total of 120 dwelling units per calendar year measured from the year 1996 as year one This limitation shall apply to the issuance of building permits The City shall provide a written report to the Joint Board on July 15 and January 15 of each year commencing in 1997 identifying the number and location of building permits for new residential dwelling units issued during the previous six months 4 02 Phase I property will be annexed to the City after the execution of this Agreement The Municipal Board shall order annexation of the Phase I property within thirty (30) days following receipt of this Joint Resolution 4 03 Phase II property may be annexed by the City filing a Resolution with the Minnesota Municipal Board any time after January 1, 1999 4 04 Phase III property may be annexed by the City filing a Resolution with the Minnesota Municipal Board any time after January 1, 2002 4 05 Phase IV property may be annexed by the City filing a Resolution with the Minnesota Municipal Board any time after January 1, 2015 4 06 The City may annex Phase II property prior to January 1, 1999 provided that the accelerated growth does not exceed the one hundred twenty (120) dwelling units per year lumtation 407 The City may annex Phase III property prior to January 1, 2002 provided that a) the accelerated growth does not exceed the one hundred and twenty (120) dwelling units per year Imutation, and b) that seventy-five percent (75 %) of the net developable area of Phase I property annexed to the City has been platted and developed into occupied residential dwellings 4 08 The City is free to deny an annexation or extend the tuning of a phase at any time at its sole discretion This Agreement does not confer any rights upon any individual property owner to require the City to annex his or her property 409 As an exception to the Phasing Schedule, the City may annex property not described in Phases I, II or III by Resolution if the property is adjacent to the City, is petitioned for by one hundred percent (100 %) of the property owners within the area to be annexed and if the resulting annexation will not create a level of growth that exceeds the one hundred twenty (120) dwelling units per year limitation 35667 01F 05/23/96 !' SECTION FIVE CONRAERML AND OTHER DEVELOPMENT 501 Commercial Development within the Annexation Area will be limited to the 6 3 acres of commercial property at the southeast quadrant of C S A H 12 and C S A H 15, and the Bergman and Bradshaw property along Highway 36 between County Road 5 and County Road 15 These are the only properties designated for commercial use m the City's Comprehensive Plan 502 Within sixty (60) days of the City's adoption of this Joint Resolution, the City will amend its Zoning Ordinance to include a separate zoning classification that will be described as "Village Commercial Zoning" or "Neighborhood Commercial" with separate guidelines, standards and design criteria designed to meld the 6 3 acre commercial area into the rural setting of the adjacent residential property remaining in the development and the Town as described in Exhibit "E" 503 Within sixty (60) days of the City's adoption of this Joint Resolution, the City will amend its Zoning Ordinance to include a separate zoning classification for the Bergman and Bradshaw properties to be known as the "Research and Development District" that will have standards and criteria consistent with the classification described in the Comprehensive Plan The district will house office, light industrial and service uses in a coordmated planned unit development campus setting 5 04 Agriculture will continue to be a permitted use in the areas re -zoned pursuant to this Section SECTION SIX ASSESSMENT AND UTILITY POLICY 601 Concurrent with the adoption of this "Joint Resolution", the City Council will adopt an assessment policy that will protect new City property owners who are neither subdividing their property nor requesting municipal services from special assessments and utility charges for sanitary sewer, storm sewer, water and street upgrading The policy shall be as follows a Except as set forth in Section 6 04, no property will be assessed for sanitary sewer or required to pay sanitary sewer hook-up or utility charges if the property is not connected to public sanitary sewer b Except as set forth in Section 6 04, no property will be assessed for municipal water or required to pay water hook-up or utility charges if the property is not connected to the municipal water system c No property will be assessed for storm water improvements or required to pay storm water hook-up or utility charges prior to subdivision of the property 35667 01F 05/23/96 -5- d Any property which hooks -up to City sanitary sewer shall pay a hook-up charge which will not exceed Twenty -Five Hundred Dollars ($2,500 00) The $2,500 limit shall be inclusive of all trunk or core facilities, laterals and other public costs associated with the installation of and hook-up to the system e Any property which hooks -up to City municipal water system shall pay a hook-up charge which will not exceed Twenty -Five Hundred Dollars ($2,500 00) The $2,500 limit shall be inclusive of all trunk or core facilities, laterals and other public costs associated with the installation of and hook-up to the system f Property which is not being subdivided will not be assessed for the cost of street improvements necessitated by development occuinng within the orderly annexation area However, if the street is substandard at the time of the improvement, the property may be assessed an amount equal to the assessment that would have been levied by the Town, if any, under the Town assessment policy in effect prior to the annexation of Phase One The property may be subject to additional deferred assessments payable if and when the property is subdivided "Substandard" is determined by Township standards in effect pnor to the annexation of Phase I g If a property hooks up to City sewer or water it will be charged for one hook- up as per Section 6 01 d and a regardless of whether the property can be further subdivided Additional hook-up charges will be due at the time the property is subdivided based upon the hook-up charges in effect at that time 6 02 Concurrent with the City's adoption of this "Joint Resolution", the City will adopt a sanitary sewer and water hook-up policy which includes the following provisions relating to property within the orderly annexation area a Pnor to subdivision of the property, no property owner will be required to hook-up to the City's municipal water system b Prior to subdivision of the property, no property owner will be required to hook-up to the City's sanitary sewer system unless hook-up is mandated by State Statute or Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MICA) regulation and enforcement action is initiated A property owner will be permitted to upgrade or replace a failing system in accordance with MPCA standards The City ordinance will not impose regulations that are more stringent than those required by the MPCA 603 This section does not require the City, if requested to by a Property Owner, to extend sanitary sewer service to property which has a failed on -site system if the extension is not feasible or cost effective 6 04 The benefits and limitations set forth in this Section do not apply nor are they for the benefit of owners who subdivide their property 35667 01F 05/23/96 6 05 The limitations in Sections 6 01 d and a will be annually adjusted commencing January 1, 1997 based upon the Consumer Price Index for Urban Consumers (CP-U) SECTION SEVEN REAL ESTATE TAXATION 701 Rural Tax Rate Adjustment It is recognized that there is a significant difference between the City's municipal percent of tax capacity rate, which is approximately 35 percent for the calendar year 1996, and the Town's existing percent of tax capacity rate of 17 percent and that to require property that is brought into the City against the wishes of a property owner to pay the full municipal rate would be burdensome The City, therefore, will concurrent with the City's adoption of this "Joint Resolution" amend, subject to the second reading required by City Charter, its Rural Service Taxing District Ordinance to include a A rural service district that will include only parcels that are not connected to municipal sewer or water services b A rural service tax rate that will be set at seventy-five percent (75 %) of the City Urban Service District rate c Pursuant to Minn Stat 414 035, for parcels that have not requested annexation, the initial rural service tax rate in the year of annexation will be Fifty percent (50%) of the urban rate, with the percentage being increased five percent (5 %) each year to the seventy-five percent (75 %) rural service rate 702 Tax Rate Adjustment for Parcels Not Requesting Annexation Pursuant to Minn Stat 414 035, for parcels that have not requested annexation and do not qualify for the rural service taxing district, the initial urban tax rate in the year of annexation will be fifty percent (50%) of the urban rate, with the percentage being increased 10 percent (10%) each year for five (5) years to the full urban rate 7 03 Tax Payment to Town During the term of this Agreement, taxes received by the City based upon the tax capacity generated from any area annexed in the year of annexation will be paid over to the Town and thereafter the amount to be paid to the Town will be reduced by twenty percent (20 %) each year until the amount reaches zero (0), when taxes based upon the full tax capacity will remain with the City For the purpose of this section, any increase in tax capacity over the tax capacity generated in the year of annexation will remain with the City 704 Year of Annexation If the annexation becomes effective on or before August 1 of any year, the City may levy on the annexed area beginning with that year If the annexation becomes effective after August 1 of any year, the Town may continue to levy on the annexed area for that year, and the City may not levy in the annexed area until the following year 35667 01F 05/23/96 -7- SECTION EIGHT JOINT PLANNING AND LAND USE CONTROL 801 The purpose of this section of the Agreement is to provide for the joint exercise of governmental authority by the City and Town pursuant to Minn Stat 47159 and 414 0325, Subd 5 in order to insure orderly development within the annexation area in accordance with this Orderly Annexation Agreement and the City's Comprehensive Plan 8 02 The powers set forth herem shall be exercised by a four (4) member board consisting of two (2) City Council members appointed by the City and two (2) Town Board members appointed by the Town Board of Supervisors 803 The Joint Board will review official controls necessary to regulate development of property and development applications within the Orderly Annexation Area before its annexation by the City in order to insure that the property remains in a status available for development into urban density residential uses in accordance with the City's Comprehensive Plan The area north of the railroad tracks and east of the Oak Glen development and south of Highway 96 shall remain in the present conservency zoning classification now in effect in the area A zoning classification for the Bergman farm that is the same as the City's Research and Development Zoning District will be adopted in order to protect the area from development that would prevent or frustrate the eventual urban development of the farm as an Urban Research and Development Center Nothing in this subsection shall preclude the Town's approval of a subdivision of a parcel of land into three or fewer lots with a minimum lot size of 2 5 acres 8 04 As to property within the Orderly Annexation Area after its annexation into the City, the Joint Board shall have the following delegated powers Approve amendments to the City's Comprehensive Plan relating to the Orderly Annexation Area, b Approve the untial adoption of, amendments to, or variances from the City's official controls relatmg to the Orderly Annexation Area c Approve any special assessment and sanitary sewer and water hook-up ordinance or policy and any amendments for consistency with Section Six d Approve the Rural Service Taxing District ordinance or any amendments thereto, for consistency with Section Seven herein Review and comment on the consistency of any development application with City's Comprehensive Plan and Orderly Annexation Agreement All matters subject to approval by the Joint Board as set forth in §8 04 (a), (b) or (c) shall be processed in the same manner by the City as any other such 35667 01F 0523/96 -8- matter Any required public hearing before the City Planning Commission or City Council shall also be noticed as a public hearing before the Joint Board g Final action by the City relating to matters described in §8 04, Subd (a), (b), (c) or (d) may not be taken unless the Joint Board certifies approval of the action If the Joint Board fails to certify approval, the Joint Board Members shall designate a qualified neutral from the Minnesota Supreme Court Certified Neutrals list to conduct Alternative Dispute Resolution ("ADR") in the form of mediation/arbitration ("Med-Arb") or such other agreed upon ADR format If mediation fails, the Neutral will issue a recommended decision The Joint Board will adopt Findings of Fact and Decision consistent with the Neutral's recommendation and supported by the administrative record developed by the City and Joint Board The Neutral shall base the recommended decision on the City and Joint Board administrative record, any applicable provision of the Orderly Annexation Agreement and legal principles which the Joint Board and City are required to follow in determining the matter at issue h Development applications subject only to review and comment by the Joint Board pursuant to Paragraph 8 04(e) herein shall be processed in the same manner as all other development applications except as follows (1) The Joint Board shall meet before the Planning Commission completes its consideration of the application Minutes of the Joint Board's discussion of the application shall be included in materials submitted to the Planning Commission No public hearmg need be conducted at the Joint Board meeting, (2) The Town Board representatives on the Joint Board shall be ex officio members of the City Planning Commission when any development application subject to the Joint Board's review and comment is being considered, and shall be provided with all staff reports and other documentation provided to City Planning Commission members 8 05 "Official controls" means ordinances, regulations and policies which control the physical development of the city and use of land, or any detail thereof and implement the general objectives of the comprehensive plan, including ordinances establishing zoning, subdivision controls, site plan regulations and official maps 806 The Joint Board will not be responsible for any staff time, consultant expenses or other costs incurred by the City and Town in connection with the processing and review of any matter which requires approval by the Joint Board The Town and City will be responsible for paying their own employees, consultants and Joint Board members Any expenditure incurred by the Joint Board, including the appointment of a Neutral to conduct ADR proceedings, if necessary, shall be apportioned seventy-five percent (75 %) to the City and twenty-five percent (25 %) to the Town 35667 01F 05/23/96 -9- 807 This Joint Powers Agreement shall terminate concurrently with the Orderly Annexation Agreement on January 1, 2020, except as follows As to the matters set forth in Section 8 04 (b), (c) and (d) herein, the Joint Powers Agreement shall remain in effect so long as there are any Phase IV properties that are still entitled to the protection of Sections Six and Seven herein, pursuant to Section 16 01 herein 808 Concurrent with the City's adoption of this Joint Resolution, the City shall amend, subject to the second reading required by City Charter, its zoning ordinance to provide that property is zoned agricultural upon its initial inclusion into the City upon annexation The Agricultural zone shall not allow any non-agricultural commercial use The owner of any property proposed to be annexed pursuant to Section 4 09 which has an existing non-agricultural use shall agree to terminate the use as a condition of annexation Nothing herein precludes the City, subject to Joint Board approval pursuant to Section 8 04 (b) herein, from rezoning the property to another use at the time of or subsequent to its annexation SECTION NINE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS 901 The City agrees to develop Performance Standards for developers who work within the Orderly Annexation Area The standards will measure developer performance in the areas of financial responsibility, protection of the environment during construction, construction traffic management, compliance with established time tables and responsiveness to citizen complaints Each developer will be reviewed annually for compliance with these standards and the City will develop a system to sanction developers who fail to meet standards SECTION TEN INCLUSION OF JOINT TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATIONS 10 01 To the extent feasible and permitted by law, the City agrees to include the recommendations of the Joint City/Town Planning Task Force within the ordinances and policies of the City These recommendations are adopted and made a part of this Agreement as Exhibit "F" SECTION ELEVEN ENVIRONMENTAL AND OPEN SPACE PRESERVATION 1101 The City agrees that environmental assessment worksheets will be required at each critical stage of any development review process as required by the Rules of the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board Further, the recommendations developed by the Stillwater Area Open Space Committee will be implemented when feasible and the guidelines for protection of open space and the environment within the Orderly Annexation Area will be followed when feasible or when permitted by law The Stillwater Area Open Space Committee Report prepared by Kathryn Malody, 35667 01F 05/23/96 -10- Botanical Consultant, dated August 1995 is adopted and made a part of this agreement as Exlubit "G", and the recommendation set forth m the study for sites within the Orderly Annexation Area must be made available to the Planning commission and City Council when any planning review is made of any proposed development within the Orderly Annexation Area SECTION TWELVE INFRASTRUCTURE INSTALLATION WITHIN THE TOWNSHIP 12 01 When sewer and water trunk facilities will be extended through Town area in order to serve phases of the Orderly Annexation Area that are ready for urban development, the City agrees to notify the Town Board of the development plans The City will copy the Town Board on any correspondence with Town property owners relating to easements or right-of-way acquisitions SECTION THIRTEEN MAINTENANCE OF EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE WITHIN TOWN 1301 The Town will continue to maintain streets and other public improvements in the Annexation Area so long as they remain in the Town If improvements are required in this area which are not necessitated by growth in the City Annexation Areas, the City will pay to the Town a portion of the cost of the improvement which extends the useful life of the improvement beyond the tune at which the street or other improvements is projected to be annexed into the City The City's portion of the cost will be prorated based upon the following formula Useful Life After Cost of Improvement x Projected Annexation Date = City's Share Total Useful Life 13 02 If public improvements are required in the Orderly Annexation Area that remain in the Town and are necessitated by the growth occurring in an area annexed pursuant to tlus Agreement, the City shall pay the cost of the improvements, except for an amount approximating the cost of mamtammg (e g patching, sealcoating, and overlays) the street to a Townslup rural standard under the policy in effect prior to the annexation of Phase One based upon average daily traffic that existed prior to Phase One This amount will be the Town's responsibility 13 03 Road maintenance costs for the Orderly Annexation Area remaining in the Town will be shared based upon the City assuming road maintenance cost increases over the base year 1995 The amount of maintenance costs equal to the base year 1995, annually adjusted by the appropriate construction cost index, will continue to be the responsibility of the Town 35667 01F 05/23/96 -11- SECTION FOURTEEN MODIFICATION 14 01 This Agreement may be modified at any time by written agreement approved by both the City and the Town, provided that the Resolution approving the modification be approved by 4/5ths vote of both the City and the Town SECTION FIFTEEN GENERAL PROVISIONS 15 01 The words "shall" or "will" are mandatory The word "may" is permissive 15 02 If any provision of this agreement is declared invalid, for any reason, by a court of competent jurisdiction, the validity of the remaining terms and provisions shall not be effected and the agreement shall be construed and enforced as if the agreement did not contain the particular term or provision held to be invalid SECTION SIXTEEN I RM NATION 16 01 This Agreement will terminate on January 1, 2020 in all respects, except that any Phase IV properties annexed subsequent to January 1, 2015, shall be entitled to the protection of the provisions of Sections Six and Seven for a period of five (5) years after the year of annexation CITY OF STILLWATER ATTEST TOWN OF STILLWATER >Amble,'Its Mayor ALai=rman of Its BoajrVbf Supervisors w li[J Morli eldon, Its Clerk 35667 01F 05/23/96 ATTEST pa,y (1;cd Pat Bantli, Town Clerk -12- Ii: fi; McCombs Frank Roos Rssociates, Inc CITY & TOWNSHIP I5050 23rd N OF STIALWRTER Plymouth, MNAI 55447 Engineers 612.476-gall!) Planners ORDERLY RNNFXRTTON r i I Jun 10 1996_ 1 31PM„r,.MCr^VBS FRANK ROSS __.No 6168,MM„P 4/6 EXHIBIT C McCombs Frank Roos Rssociates. Inc CITY & TOWNSHIP 15050 23rd Rve N OF STILLWRTER PlymothatJ,.Iur- ntn N 5544? 01..naeEngirs ORDERLY RNNEXRTION .111111111 !gin 10 1996— 1 32PM—`9CC0'(4S FRAY ROSS 6168m7P 5/6-- 33CO .DEL _ TH #96 ellwood Road} _= _•-A, H� 25 PerT lag ail 1 Y i � I 6tlllAr � pl� 5 7.50 !McCombs Frank Roos fissx,ates, Inc E5050 23rd Are. N Plyowth, NN 55447 Engineers 612/476—MIO Planners I C iO�Q d EXHIBIT D CITY & TOWNSHIP OF STILLWRTER ORDERLY RNNEXRTION Exhibit "E" Country Village Architectural and Site Design Guidelines Goal Create high -quality country village consisting of country store with fuel, country school (daycare) and other village scale professional services The building shall have a related though not identical village residential character Architectural Style Gable roofs are preferred Architectural detailing should be consistent with the style of the structure selected Materials Brick, stone, painted or natural architectural cedar or red wood siding are to be used as exterior matenals or high grade reduced maintenance materials that will achieve the same exterior appearance goals as natural materials may be used The roofing shall be heavier weight asphalt shingles or cedar shingles or high-grade reduced maintenance materials that will achieve the same exterior appearance goals as the natural materials may be used Building Design No franchise or prototypical commercial building design shall be allowed The village area shall have a unique rural character related to its surroundings Canopies Pump area canopies shall be of a subdued design consistent with the building design and materials Any under -canopied lighting shall be recessed and not show the light source from off the service area Building Onentation The country village will be visually and functionally connected to the immediate neighborhood, be accessible but not visually prominent from County Road 12 and 15 Building Setback 50' from County Road 12 or 15 Parking or paved Streets or Driveways 20' from public right of way for County Road 12 or 15 (if bermed and landscaped) Lot Coverage 60 percent maximum building and hard surface coverage EXHIBIT E Building Height 35' to gable peek Road and Parking Configuration The preferred configuration is one of curved and angled orientation Landscaping 40 percent minimum of the land area shall be in permanent maintained landscaping, open spaces and natural wetlands Areas around building shall be planted with hearty species of deciduous and coniferous stock and should assists in blocking sight lines of parking facilities and highlight attractive architectural features in a landscaped setting Screening Parking areas that can be viewed from adjacent roads or residential areas shall be screened with a combination of deciduous and coniferous planting and berming Signage Commercial signs are to be placed on linear walls, composed of the same matenals and bearing a similar design theme to the building being identified Interchangeable tenant identification will be provided but if internally lit must show lit letters only, not letter backgrounds Preferred budding identity signage is by cut out letters of durable materials, mounted on the above mentioned walls, lit with internal backfacing lighting or reflective lighting from ground, wall or tree mounted spots Spotlights must not provide glare to adjacent roadways or perimeter residential uses Identity monument type freestanding country village signs without tenant identification consistent with the village design and matenal may be allowed along County Road 12 and 15 and at the residential roadway entrance Utilities Ail utilities will be underground and HVAC equipment will be screened from view Roof mounted units will be screened via roof configuration, wall extensions either vertical or horizontal All trash areas shall be completely enclosed and screened from view by a structure of a design compatible in design to village building and perimeter landscape Lighting Site lighting selected to minimize visibility and glare from residential areas Overall site light levels will be achieved by a blend of streets and parking lights not to exceed 20' in height Walkway lighting, building lighting, site amenity, sign lighting and vegetation lighting shall be reviewed to make sure it is compatible with the residential quality of the neighborhood Pedestnan Access The country village shall be linked to surrounding residential areas, the elementary school and trails along County Road 12 and 15 by sidewalks and pathways STILLWATER/STILLWATER TOWNSHIP JOINT TASK FORCE RECONIlvENDATION REGARDING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN It is the recommendation of the Ad Hoc Committee that the City and Township establish a joint planning committee that would at a minimum include two City Council members and two Town Board members for the purpose of addressing the specific concerns and remaining unresolved issues, and to co-ordinate the implementation of the updated City Comprehensive Plan as it relates to the URPTA Planning Area fizz EXHIBIT F JOINT TASK FORCE The Stillwater/Stillwater Township Joint Task Force was formed one year ago to discuss common issues regarding the URTPA area. Through a series of monthly and bi-moathly meetings, the group developed the guidepost document (as attached) which is a common framework for future development of the area regardless of which Jurisdiction the area will ultimately be under The Joint Task Force Members included Kurt Roetman, Stillwater Don Valsvik, Stillwater Jay Kunble/I'erry Zoller, Stillwater Dave Johnson, Stillwater Township Diane O'Bryan/Louise Bergeron, Stillwater Township Kann Reidt, Stillwater Township Jeff Pratt, Stillwater Township Alternates included Jerry Hicks, Stillwater Township Jack Takemoto, Stillwater Township Jerry Fontaine, Stillwater Other interested individuals included Hans Hagen, Hagen Homes Marc Putnam, Charles Cudd Co Rick Packer, Arcon Development Art Palmer The Kroenrngs At the last meeting of the task force, a statement was endorsed (attached) which supports further coordination to address unresolved issues as it relates to the updated comprehensive plan RESULTS FROM STILLWATERISTILLWATER TOWNSHIP JOINT TASK FORCE MEETINGS Guideposts for Joint Planning The following policies and principles were discussed and considered by the joint talk force as planning guideposts for cooperation between the city and township The guideposts are the result of sic -months of meetings and discussion and reflects a consensus of direction, although neither the City of Stillwater nor Stillwater Township have offncnall) endorse the statements ON erall Planning Determine the desired growth rate and phasing of urban services to accommodate planned for growth as needed for the urban -rural transition planning area (URTPA) for the 25-year planning period 1995 - 2020 NOTE The urban -rural transition planning area (URTPA) is the area west of Stillwater currently in Stillwater Township bordered by Dellwood Road (TH 96), on the north, Manning Avenue (CR 15) on the west and Highway 36 on the south. This area represents the ultimate future planning area for the City of Stillwater Skeleton Framework New development will respect the environmental framework of the plan This framework includes wetlands, woodlands, windbreaks and sloped areas Natural drainage systems shall be used in new development areas to promote the recharge of water tables and to reduce the speed and amount of run off Views from major public roads of new development in the URTPA shall be screened by existing ,% egetatnon and land forms, new landscaping, wetlands and greenways Major public roads include Dellwood Road, Manning Avenue, McKusnck Road, Boutwell Avenue and Highway 36 Any new non-residential development shall be buffered from all adjacent residential uses, connected by trails to residential areas and appear visually subdued in a landscaped setting as viewed from public roads Design new subdivisions to minimize through traffic and when necessary design neighborhood collector streets with greater setbacks, landscaping and pedestrian and bike trails - Create new neighborhoods in city growth areas that retain elements of Stillwater's small town identity, appearance and character Deg elop special design guidelines and performance standards using the planned unit development process to implement ,,isual screening, park, open space and traihvay and natural resource policies Available Areas for Development There are apprommately 500 acres of vacant land in the URTPA to be developed at either to«mslup and city densities Preserve historic resources and unique land forms in growth area to maintain elements of the areas past and provide and identity to new development. Park, Recreation, Open Space Development Develop an overall trail system for the URTPA areas that connects new residential development areas to existing and proposed teals on McKusick Road, Myrtle Street and County Road 5 and connects all residential areas 2n the URTPA from Dellwood Road to 62nd Street_ New residential development areas should include desirable design elements from existing city neighborhoods including a mix of housing types, landscaped streets, accessible neighborhood parks and open space areas and a unique neighborhood images Require new development to provide 10 percent of the development residential land area or its equivalent for neighborhood (7 percent) and community parks (3 percent) City/Townslup Land Use Try to locate within the planning area an elementary school site, 10 acres, and community park, 25 acres (Good planning in either case ) Require a detailed environmental assessment of physical site conditions including plant and animal communities, topography, soil, drainage and wetlands before land development planning begins Density Use new development concepts, where appropriate, such as mixed use development and cluster housing to provide life cycle housing opportunities, minimize the need for and use of the automobile and maintain open space Use ghost platting and cluster development to allow some initial growth with the opportunity for r� urban density development in the future when desired and planned Establish lot size and other development standards for the URTPA areas in the township that accommodate future urban development according to the Stillwater comprehensive plan -� If new residential development areas are developed at city densities, design elements from existing city neighborhoods including a mix of housing types landscaped streets, accessible neighborhood parts and open space areas and unique neighborhood images Coordination and Implementation Structure Establish Joint Planning Board to coordinate planning bet♦veen the City of Stillwrater and Stillwater Township so both city and township plans for the URTPA are consistent. Use orderly annexation agreements , Joint power agreements and municipal urban service area extension agreements to coordinate and implement comprehensive plan growth phasing policy Elements of these agreements may include - Defining a rural taxing district so existing residents will be protected from unreasonable taxes - No adverse economic affects to existing township residents by MUSA extension into the URTPA for urban development. - Establish 5-year planning periods for overall growth phasing - Any implementation of Comp Plan for the URTPA shall have input from the township and city Key Planning Concepts for URTPA The following key planting concepts provide direction for the preparation of thu comprehensive plan The concepts will be a part of the comprehensive plan for the city and township and shall be used to guide special area planning Greenways/Open Space Definition Greenways shall be established along Manning Ave, Dellwood Blvd, Myrtle Street, McKusick Road and Boutwell Drive The greenways shall be 100 - 200 feet in width depending on the location and site conditions The purpose of the greenway is pnmanly to preserve the natural semi -rural character of the transition area by screening new development from major public roads The greenway shall appear informal and natural using native indigenous plant material adapted to existing topographic conditions Enhancement of existing topographic or vegetative 3 conditions is encouraged to the eetent the enhancement appears natural Wetland mitigation sites may be used as part of the greenway Pathways may be located along side or in the greens} but not appear as a primary design element of the greenway The green way will provide a landscape separation between newly developing residential areas and high volume traffic corridors Trailways, Paris and Open Space Areas Trailways, neighborhood and community park and open space areas will be provided throughout the URTPA The extensive Brown's Creek Wetland systems shall provide the framework for park and open space resources preservation in the north portion of the transition area Long Lake and emstincr woodlands and windbreaks shall be used in the southern portion of the site for trail locations An overall system of trails connecting new neighborhoods from Dellwood Blvd to 62nd Streets shall be planned along wetlands, new natural drainage ways and wooded areas Within neighborhoods pathways shall conveniently connect residents to neighborhood park and open space areas separated from auto traffic Any active community park, convenience commercial use or school site shall be clearly connected to surrounding residential areas by «ralkways and bike path, utilize and preserve natural areas for trail locations Development Pattern and Density The overall character of the transition areas shall be single family with selected locations of compact clustered attached housing The existing semi -rural character of the areas north of McKusick Road (Random Creek) and south of Boutwell (Spring Creek) shall remain with some in fill at rural densities Newly developed areas shall be large lot (1 to 1 5 dwelling units per acres DU/Acre), small lot (2 to 3 DU/Acre) or higher density attached housing at 4 - 6 DU/Acre Large lot single family areas are located in areas of sensitive sites Because of topography wetlands, lakes or timberland conditions the amount of site disruption is limited These areas tend to be located on steeply sloped or wooded shorelands or adjacent to sensitive wetlands or open space areas A cluster development concept could work in this area to minimize the impact on the land. Small, lot single family areas tend to be in areas that are less environmentally sensitive These sites can be interior to the large lot area or setback form open space areas These sites are the flatter corn or hay fields of the URTPA. The development density of the small lot area is typical of the existing city Attached or compact housingareas are located in pockets separated visually and physically from single family areas These locations have good direct access to major roads and are more closely tied to existing urbanized areas Sites for compact housing area located on County Road 5, 62nd near 15 Myrtle Street south and west of Long Lake, possibly McKusick Road (west of 4 mitigration site) and pockets south of Dellwood Blvd. Convenience Commercial Locations The purpose of this use is to provide services and products for the surrounding residential areas to reduce auto use The sites should be clearly connected by pathways to adjacent residential areas, be of a residential scale and style compatible with the — adjacent residential areas Office nark or research and development areas These locations provide a Job base for the surrounding residential areas and tax base for the community These sites should have convenient access to major roads, be visually and physically separated from residential areas, be attractively designed and landscaped to fit into the site conditions The plan will respect current uses as they relate to assessment policy and any required land use changes 5 STILLWATER OPEN SPACE REPORT by Kathryn Malody, Botanical Consultant August, 1995 EXHIBIT G EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Stillwater Open Space Report Survey of Plant Communities Stillwater, Minnesota October 1995 The Stillwater Area Citizens Open Space Committee selected and evaluated fifteen open space properties within the city of Stillwater and Stillwater township for the purpose of identifying unique plant communities that may warrant future protection and preservation Site visits were completed in July and August 1995 by an independent professional consultant working under the direction of the committee The results of the evaluation are detailed in the Stillwater Open Space Report. Properties were ranked into four categories as 1) high priority, 2) moderate priority, 3) low priority and 4) eliminate, depending on the unique or rare nature of the natural plant communities The results of the survey found three properties that ranked as high priority to include the old stone bridge, the Department of Transportation property (north of the old prison), and the Jaycee ball field Three properties were ranked as moderate priority to include Long Lake west, Browns Creek west and the McKusick Road site The Stillwater Open Space Report was submitted to the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources to be included in the Minnesota County Biological Survey 8 STILLWATER OPEN SPACE REPORT by Kathryn Malody, Botanical Consultant August, 1995 Field work was completed between the dates of 20 July, 1995 and 10 August 1995 The sites were surveyed for plant community type and condition The sites were then ranked according to quality potential and natural history importance Thirteen sites were surveyed on foot and two were assessed as "dnveby" (Table 1) The sites surveyed can be divided into four pnontized categones high pnonty sites (rank A and/or B) large moderate pnonty sites (rank B/C) low pnonty sites (rank C/D) eliminated (F and NA) The high pnonry sites and the large, moderate pnonty sites will be discussed at length Traascnptions of the site surveys are located in the appendix. Table 1 Survey summary and log Site Site Name Date Site Description Rank A Long Lake Nest 7/26 9/10 Emergent marsh edge Hardwood swamp Mixed Site-B/C Oak B Co -Rd 12 W Eliminate NA C Co.Rd 12E Eliminate NA D McKusick Rd 7/20 8110 Old field, Maple/basswood. Sedge meadow, Shrub Site-C/D/F swamp E Browns Creek West 8/10/95 Sedge meadow Shrub swamp Hardwood swamp Site-B/C F Hwy 96 Driveby (didn't see much) NA 8/7 G Old Stoae Bridge 7/20195 Maple/basswood Site-B H Brick Pond 7/26/95 Hardwood swamp Sedge meadow. Emergent marsh Site-D I Holcomb Add 7120195 Maple/ basswood Site-F J Our Savior's Luth Ch 7/26/95 Old fields Emergent marsh. Aspen/birch Site-C/D K Dwtn Ravines and Eliminate NA L Dept of 8/7/95 Bluff praine Site-B Transportation M North Ffill Ravine 7/26195 Hardwood swamp, Maple/basswood Site-D Dist 834 N Admundson Prop 7/26/95 Old field Emergent marsh Pine plantation Site-D O Jaycee Ball Fields 7/24/95 Emergent marsh Bluff prairie Decodon Site-B verucillatus £OR -A P Coopers Add Driveby (wetland) NA 917 - Q Stillwater Country 8/7195 Old field Site-D Club R. Abuts Country Club 8/7/95 Old field Site-F 1 High Priority Sites SITE G THE OLD STONE BRIDGE (Figure 1) This site represents a small jewel that should provide an amazing annual display of springtime wildflowers The site has an old stone bridge which is currently Iisted on the Histoncal Registry The site is characterized by steep slopes (-75%) that lead down to the narrow creek bottom The north and south facing slopes support a Maple/Basswood (cast central section) plant community This site is High pnonty because of the Stone Bridge, the healthy plant diversity, and the proximity to properties of equally high quality downstream along Brown's Creek In 1987. the Minnesota Natural Heritage program recommended that the entire stretch of Brown's Creek east of the stone bridge be preserved as a natural area and actively managed It was noted that this ravine is a native trout fishery (Almendinger, 1987) There is a distressing amount of buckthorn on this site If buckthorn is allowed to continue to take over. the typical tree species of the Maple/ Basswood plant community will not be able to regenerate The diversity of springtime wildflowers will be eliminated Management concerns for this site include a concerted effort to control the encroachment of buckthorn This can be accomplished by carefully applying a potent herbicide (i a Roundup) to the leaves or the cut stem/stump Another concern is the foot traffic which, uncontrolled is causing erosion problems around the bridge and on the slope A possible solution is to construct a stairway down to a railed viewing platform on the southeast side of the bridge and a similar sort of arrangement on the north slope in place of the trail access northwest of the bridge Trees should be cleared from the top of the bridge and a boardwalk/pathway constructed to preserve the integrity of the structure All foot traffic should be restricted to these managed areas SITE L TERRITORIAL PRISON (Figure 2) This site is a small representative of a dry bedrock bluff prairie Bedrock bluff prairies once had a distnbution primarily on south- and west -facing slopes of the Mississippi River valley of Ramsey county as well as some occurrences in the St Croix river valley of Washington county (Minnesota's St. Croix River VailCy and Anoka Sandplain. a Guide to Native Habitats. 1995) These praines are now relatively rare and are threatened by urban development and encroachment of woody vegetation The Territorial Prison site is a south -facing approx 100% slope of sandstone bluff The plant community is dominated by side -oats grama There is also a good diversity of flowering plants such as lead plant, gray goldenrod, harebell, purple prairie clover and thimbleweed The sheer sandstone faces support cliff brake and columbine This is pnme habitat for kitten tails (Bessya bullet) a state endangered plant though none was found at this time This site is chosen as a High priority site due to its rarity and high quality, despite its small size The main management concern is limiting foot traffic which due to the slope is not only hazardous for the plant community but also hazardous for the trespasser There is some buckthorn present (see previous management approach) gray dogwood and wild plum shrubs that will need to be controlled Residences at the top of the bluff have allowed yard wastes to slip down the bluff slope and there are some escaped cultivars (r a bearded ins) 2 Figure 1 Map of Site G "The Old Stone Bridge Figure 2 Map of Site L "Territorial Prison" P z: rf __Its vb 0 1 � r o U — — i ,tiN _ 3 Figure 3 Map of Site D "Jaycee Ball Fields" I %� 3000 \ ,\tee w "tl -' I +• �J/ •moo , 1 o N '•�4f,J t . •� •` 9029- u � �— � R6 cam'" 305Q2� OUTLOT F POrl of- 9029-3100 r 185 P>zo pot, ILIcKUS�CK ` -- 9029 - 29 2950 L,Q KE e o /fuTZrs AX77169-1 cJ � MED 25 E i I 18 47 H " E ,C // Emergent i •�� -' 20�9 - - y• 16� '^ '' l Marsh 27 a�2J • . �� f h • • R im < ••• • / MF.q� 29 13a • I `uv0 SCHOOL DISTRICT 834 PR PERTY • • ��q 2 %'12 I-��� + o - N 1 9029 -2100 Aspen Clone Rk ' T C6, 1 \ 0/1- �. _ Prai ric 9 , Regeneration — t0 tl ; 12 13 v 2 • 1 r 14 3 2 t 1 C ... C LIJI at 9029-2120\ 1 4 „ WES"f � V � L L • •Y4., . Cc a I C . 3i 2 43 44 �902g� i Bali Fields l _ A R rN r " 41 - I t- 1 Cr OF STILLWATER PROpEA7y 0 w r. 39 -Center of 1 / 4 _'�M—L-OOKO_UT— Sec 29`W ES T 4 SITE O JAYCEE BALL FIELDS (Figure 3) This site is dominated by an emergent marsh surrounded by mixed oak forest (including an aspen clone on the northeast edge) and a dry prairie on the southeaste-n side There is a healthy population of water willow (Decodon verricillarus) in the Jaycee's Ball field pond as well as in the adjacent bay of L,,1cKusick Lake (visible from the old trolley track) This site is chosen as a High priority site due to its diversity of good quality habitats which make it ideal for maintaining a diversity of wildlife It is also considered High priority due to the presence of water willow (Decodon verricillatus) listed as a species of special concern" in the state of Minnesota Water willow (Decodon verticillarus) is the sole member of its genus It is not a willow but belongs to the loosestrife farnily Unlike its more infamous, European cousin (purple loosestrife) it is found only in eastern North Amenea It is common in bogs south of the tension zone", but is rare in Minnesota, Michigan and Wisconsin (Andreas and Bryan, 1990) A "tension zone" is defined as a boundary between floristic provinces The Twin Cities resides in the middle of the tension zone that runs diagonally through Minnesota to the northwest corner of the Sate following the border of the praine and the hardwoods Figure 4 Water Willow (Decodon verticillatus) 5 Water willow (Decodon verticillatus) is a perennial with somewhat woody recurving four to six angled, stems (Figure 4) The magenta flowers are found in dense clusters in the upper axils of the leaves The fruit is a dry capsule The lance -shaped leaves are in whorls of three (sometimes 2 or 4) The whorls tend to concentrate on the upper side of the stem Water willow has a stoloniferous growth habit with subsequent adventitious root formation which consequently forms a dense root -stem matrix approximately 30 cm in thickness This typically forms a floating mat that extends into open water The D N R Natural Heritage Program has been conducting a Minnesota County Biological Survey since 1987 The data base being compiled contains the most complete record of the occurrences of natural communities and plants of special concern in the state The data base contains eleven water willow sites (Table 2) Due to the results of this study two other sites will be added to the data base (*) Table 2 The occurrence of water willow (Decodon verticillams) in Minnesota. Site Data source (date) NW Pine County U of MN Herbarium Twin Lakes, SE Isanti Co DNR Nat. Her Prog (1990) N Hennipen County U of MN Herbarium NW Hennipen County DNR Nat. Her Prog (1990) NW Washington County U of MN Herbarium Cedar Creek NHA, N Anoka Co U of MN Herbarium (1986) Boot Lake SNA, NE Anoka Co U of MN Herbarium (1989) Coon Lake, Mid E Anoka Co U of MN Herbarium (1989) Rondo Lake, SE Anoka Co DNR Nat. Her Prog (1990) Carlson's Mussa N Ramsey Co DNR Nat. Her Prog (1990) Wilkinson Lake, N Ramsey Co Kathryn Malody (1992) Jaycee's Ball Field Pond, E Wash Co Kathryn Malody (1995)* McKusick Lake E Wasbangton Co Kathryn Malody 1995 * Management suggestions for the Jaycee's Ball Field site include the careful monitoring of water quality and levels in the pond and adjacent McKusick Lake The patch of prairie could benefit from a schedule of controlled bums to stem the encroachment of sumac and increase the vigor of the native prairie plant species This might be an ideal site to setup a small nature center to educate people about wetlands, prairies, and woodlands of Minnesota and the wildlife that utilize these ecosystems Large Moderate Priority Sites SITE A LONG LAKE WEST (Figure 5) The western shore of Long Lake has four plant community types Starting at the lake shore and traversing westward and upland there are narrow bands of cattail emergent marsh and hardwood swamp mature oak woods with pot -hole ponds, and degenerated oak savanna. The diversity of habitats and the presence of dead wood and snags are important for maintaining a diversity of wildlife (i a water fowl, foxes. deer) The mixed oak woods of the mideastern portion (Staloch property) canopy is composed of pin oak , white oak, red maple and an occasional pin cherry There is good oak regeneration The under story has occasional elder berry. buckthorn gray dogwood and hazelnut. The north- and cast- facing Ii Figure 5 Map of Site A "Long Lake West" slopes are covered with various ferns. such as interrupted fern and lady fern Flowering plants include jack-in-the-pulpit starflower and Canada mayflower The peninsula on the northeastern shore (Jackson Estates) has a drier version of oak woods There are less ferns present and wild indigo can be found on the point The point provides an excellent view of the island nestled in the western bay as well as the western shoreline The canopy of trees along the shore appears to be contiguous with the previously described woods of the Staloch property Birding opportunities would be great from this point There are some serious management concerns The degenerated oak savanna in the midwestern part of the site (Gadient property) has an understory that is comprised of nearly 100% buckthorn (see previous management concerns) There is no evidence of oak regeneration for the past 20 years The flowering plant diversity is very poor The agricultural fields in the southern part have been cultivated as close to the slope as possible There is much evidence of soil erosion throughout the hardwood swamp of that area This has negatively affected the plant diversity and may also affect water quality A park -like trail system, that is restricted to foot traffic only, would not only be a pleasant addition to this tract of land but may also assist in reducing the erosion problems of the southern shore (i a retaining walls and plantings) SITE E BROWNS CREEK WEST (Figure 6) This section of Brown's creek has its origin in an extensive wetland system north west of Highway 96 and Manning Rd The site surveyed comprised of the section south cast of this intersection. The northwestern third of this site is a nice sedge meadow with very few shrubs The middle third of this site has a narrower creek bottom with fairly steep slopes down to the creek bottom The plant community is characterized as a hardwood swamp, seepage subtype The southern third is a shrub swamp The north side of the middle third appears to have been cultivated right up to the slope The pnvate lots on the southern third are also mowed and landscaped up to the slope Throughout this site there is only minor evidence of exotic plants There is some buckthorn on the upper slopes Treatment of wetlands such as this one need to be considered in the scope of a watershed (see comments concerning the Old Stone Bridge site) The treatment of this area will have direct effects on the habitats downstream Fertilizers from residential lots will flow into the watershed and speed up the eutrophication (greening) of the pond areas This greening will decrease the available oxygen for fish to survive Soils of these areas are also highly susceptible to soil erosion Roads that are planned to span the creek will also constrain its natural flood management abilities This site is Iisted as a moderate priority site due to its all around good quality and the presence of a state listed plant downstream (in McKusick Lake) as well as high prionty sites downstream SITE D MCKUSICK ROAD (Figure 7) The southern portion of this site is bordered on the south by a creek with a narrow band of shrub swamp There is a good diversity of flowering plants The mideast and west portions _ including the high knoll are old fields with very poor regeneration to prairie - vegetation Between the old fields is a wooded area dominated by open grown maples with nearly 100% regeneration in all age classes There is supnsing lack of flowering plants in this maple woods The eastern portion is a nice sedge meadow The portion north of the railroad tracks has been completely plowed Poor quality fill with chucks of asphalt was brought in There 0 Figure 6 Map of Site E 'Browns Creek WC -SC Figure 2 Map of Site D, "McKusick Road" a Il I YL, IL I L (gel- 9-m 2 1 6 McKU ICK 22550 ;� Z= 2= 20� (9a 93019- Dao I I �j - C1 1 2670 20 O U 21 oQ _ 2650 l ' — .•I;'Map1e; . . •: Old Feld Shrub Swamp z1 2 170 2250 v Sedge I zow Meadow 6 appears to be an aborted attempt at the construction of an abatement pond The result is a small mud flat with a flock of Canadian geese and no natural vegetation The high diversity of habitats has a positive influence on animal populations There are numerous deer bedding sites and gopher mounds in the old fields Birds, amphibians and reptiles are also abundant. A large (7 inch shell) female painted turtle was assisted crossing the road at this site This site is classified as moderate priority due to its diversity of habitats and the obvious benefit to wildlife despite to poor quality of some of the plant communities REFERENCES Almendinger, John (1987) Minnesota Natural Heritage Program Project Evaluation Brown's Creek. MN DNR. Andreas, B K. and G R. Bryan (1990) The vegetation of three Sphagnum- - dominated basin -type bogs in northern Ohio Ohio J Sci 90(3) 54-66 Wovcha, D S , B C Delaney, and G.E Nordquist (1995) Minnesota's St. Croix River Valley and Anoka Sandplain a Guide to Native Habitats State of Minnesota Department of Natural Resources 10 4 APPENDIX TRANSCRIPTIONS OF SITE SURVEYS A 'Long Lake West " "Oak Savanna" (Gadient's property) - Canopy of Pir Oak and White Oak with interrupted canopy Oaks are mature and open grown indicating a savanna Iike habitat at one time The shrub -layer is nearly continuous buckthorn with occasional gray dogwood (C racemosa) and hazelnut Occasional paper birch near pot -hole ponds and Quaking Aspen on the western edge Ground layer contains a few oak seedlings and numerous buck thorn Lady fern is common with occasional sensitive fern in openings Other forbs present include Tick trefoil (Desmodium glurinosum) Enchanter's Nightshade (Circae quadrisulcata) Also present are grapes and Virginia creeper and some poison ivy Old field borders are dominated by brome grass and Kentucky bluegrass Also present are spotted knapweed spotted St. John'swort goldenrod and birdsfoot trefoil "SW shore" (Staloch's property)- The lake has extensive Nymphea tuberosa There is a narrow margins of cattails The banks have boxelder on the lower edge and open grown mature/old oaks (burr and pin) There are cultivated fields to the top of the bank Erosion from the fields is evident. Open areas on the margin have stinging nettles and touch -me -pots The understory compnses of buckthorn Ribes cynosban and elderberry The pond at the northeastern portion of the property has a raised mound (not floating) of rushes sedges and arrow -leaf The pond is surrounded by red maples and white oak The ground is covered by Canada mayflower and starflower The north western portion of the property is mixed oak. The canopy consists of pin oak, red maple boxelder, white oak and occasional black cherry The north and cast facing slopes have extensive fem cover (interrupted lady, sensitive) The shrub layer consists of elderberry with some buckthorn "Jackson estates peninsula" - Nice habitat for birding The canopy consists of oaks (red, white, pin and burr) red maple The understory has buckthorn and Ribies cynosban There is wild indigo at the bench on the peninsula tip Rank = B/C/D B NA C NA D "McKusick Rd " - The south portion of D, "McKusick Rd" is bordered on the south by a creek with a narrow band of shrub swamp The shrub swamp is dominated by red osier dogwood and reed canary grass There are also sedge hummocks (Cares stricra) There is a good diversity of forbs swamp milkweed, spotted Joe-pye weed, sensitive fern, marsh fern (Thelyptris palustris) Jerusalem artichoke, Stachys palustris and touch-mc-nots The cast and west portions, including the high knoll are old fields with poor regeneration There is a marked lack of native bunch grasses I saw one bunch of big blue stem among the brome grass and Kentucky blue The forbs are dominated by goldenrod (Solidago giganrea) with abundant spotted knapweed wild bergamot and flowering spurge The ground is covered in areas by creeping Charlie and wild strawberries Between the old fields is a wooded area dominated by open grown maples (Ater saccharum and A saccharinum) There is nearly 100% regeneration of the maples in all age classes The shrub -layer also includes some elderberry and gooseberries Except for an amazing specimen of 11 Solomon's seal and a few hemp, the forbs are sparse There are some juniper and buckthorn invading the western old field which threaten the prairie regeneration Buckthorn seedlings are also evident in the wooded area The diversity of habitats has a positive influence on animal populations - there are numerous active gopher mounds, deer bedding sites and trails birds amphibians reptiles One large —7 inch shell female painted turtle was observed The north side of the tracks have been completely trashed for dumping old fill and a wetlands "reclamation" project E "Brown's Creek West" - The north end of the creek is a nice sedge meadow with emergent vegetation The muddle third is cultivated nght up to the northern slope and the southern slope has small pnvate residential lots also up to the slope The creek bed at this point is narrow and of hardwood swamp circumneural seep subtype The southern third is shrub swamp Minor influence of exotics Heat exhaustion curtailed this visit. Rank = C F "Hwy 69' - dnveby - didn't see much. G 'Old Stone Bridge" - The north side of the creek is Maple -Basswood with an amazingly nch forb layer Actea rubra and A alba (in fruit), Caullophyllum, Trillium, Jack-in-the-pulpit, wild ginger, bloodroot and ferns (shield, lady, fragile) The canopy consists of basswood and boxelder The shrub -layer contains a distressing amount of buckthorn and some prickly ash, but it has not negatively affected the forb layer yet Abundant and healthy poison ivy indicates foot -traffic disturbance This is a beautiful site Repeat visit for photos Rank = B H "Bnck pond" - There is a hardwood swamp on the S E side of the property Boxelder dominates the canopy Shrubs include Japanese honeysuckle, elderberry, gray dogwood and buckthorn Forbs are sparse The wetlands along the creek are nearly 100% reed canary grass wtth some rushes There is a stand of slender willow invading the SX portion Bnck pond is lined with cattails and has some duckweed. There are some mature red oak on the upper slopes There appears to be fair regeneration in the ground layer but heavy deer browse may affect the middle age classes Deer signs are plentiful and also some possible fox dens Rank = D I "Holcomb addition"- Site I is a small ravine remnant. There is no evidence of water flow, though the ground is well saturated The sparse herb layer consists pnmanly of Jack-in-the-pulpit, violets, creeping Charlie, occasional patches of lily -of -the -valley and daylillies at the western edge The shrub - layer consists of gooseberries (Ribes eynosban and R hirrellum) and elderberry The canopy of green ash elm and boxelder is continuous There is a black locust located in the west central portion This site has evidence of a high level of disturbance Dumping is a problem at this site- yard wastes, compost wheel rims broken glass plasuc bags Buckthorn is not a common understory shrub but there is evidence of numerous seedlings with will be a problem in the near future Rank = F IWA J "Our Savior's Lutheran Church" - There is an aspen clone on the S W side of the emergent marsh The ground cover is dominated by Kentucky bluegrass There is a healthy populauon of Hooker's Orchis in fruit. There are also goldenrod and some red maple seedlings. Indian tobacco, Geum, and Virginia creeper Shrubs include many honeysuckle borelder, dewberries and gray dogwood The old fields have a carpet of Kentucky bluegrass and in some places brome grass too, with clones of solidago There are scattered Solomon's seal and clumps of wild plums and massive smooth sumac clones There is spotted St John'swort and spotted knapweed Evidence of animal activity include deer trails, fox scat, and gopher mounds Rank = C/D K- NA L 'Dept- of Transportation" - The south facing slope of sandstone bluff contains a bluff prairie This is characterized by big bluestem, side oats grams bastard toadflax, gray goldenrod, Amorpha canescence, Panicum sp, thimbleweed, Viola pedatafida, Petalostemum purpureum, and virgin's bower at the western edge Cliff brake and columbine grow on the sheer sandstone faces This is a nice bluff prame It is a perfect habitat for kittentads, Bessya bullet (a state listed plant), but none were found Threats to this site include leafy spurge, shrub patches of buckthorn. Juniper, and dogwood (Corpus rugosa) Residences at eastern top of the bluff have let some yard wastes slip down the bluff slope and there are some escaped cultivars Rank = B M "North Hill Ravine, Dist. 834" - North facing slope of the ravine outlet from Lake McKusick Creek bed is sandy bottom Lower slope is hardwood swamp with ashes as the dominant canopy tree The shrub -layer comprises of gooseberries (Ribes hirtellum), blackberries, buckthorn, and prickly ash The forb layer has large patches of naturalized daylillies and lily -of -the -valley on the upper slopes There are also touch-me-nots, harry willow -herb (Epilobium hirsutum) and some Jack-in-the-pulpit and poison ivy The openuigs of the upper slope are dominated by Kentucky bluegrass and smooth sumac Pin oaks and some sugar maples are on the upper slopes There is evidence of numerous deer bedding sites and birds There is evidence of some dumping taking place (tires, broken glass, cement slabs ) Rank = D N " Admundson Property" - This site is north of the Stonebndge school The upland eastern portion has a couple acres of planted red pine (approx 30-50 years old) with an occasional spruce The understory/shrub-layer is predominantly elderberry, with some thimbleberry, gooseberries and occasional saplings of black cherry and boxelder The forb layer is sparse with occasional poison ivy Also present are grapes and Virginia creeper A shallow pond is located in the center of the site It is ringed with reed canary grass and has no notable emergent vegetation The old fields on the west and north end are dominated by brome grass Kentucky bluegrass and milkweed (Asclepta syiaca) There is evidence of deer activity in the fields and diverse _ birds (nuthatches chickadee, goldfinch, bluebirds) due to the diverse habitats There are also large holes in the slope cast of the pond possibly fox dens Rank = D 13 0 " Jaycee Ball Fields" - The emergent marsh dominates the north central and northwestern portion of the site Cattails provide nearly 100% cover except for open areas of water which are edged with abundant Decodon verticillatus (EOR) and some swamp milkweed The open water has duckweed and common bladderwort (m flower) Care should be taken when dealing with the hydrology of this site The prairie on the knoll east of the emergent march includes big bluestem and little bluestem with some Kentucky bluegrass The forbs include goldenrod (Solidago altissima) and whorled milkwort. bastard toadflax and culver's root. Smooth sumac and dogwood are invading The green herons are very active Rank = B (EOR = A) P " Cooper's Addition" - Dnveby The emergent marsh is dominated by cattails with some duckweed and large leafed dock The residents have mounted wood duck houses Are these active? The emergent marsh is surrounded by hardwood swamp of boxelder and quaking aspen Rank = none Q "Stillwater Country Club" - Old field covered by a mat of mosses There are orchis There is a thick Solidago clone Ann's lace, with occasional black-eyed sorrel and thtmbleweed The dominant Rank = D regenerating to prairie The soil is numerous pussy toes and Hooker's (S canadensts) and plentiful Queen Susan, rough -fruited cinquefoil, sheep grass is Kentucky bluegrass R "Abuts Country Club" - The fields are cultivated with corn, timothy hay and some cabbage relative Rank = F 14 In Re The Orderly Annexation Agreement Between the City and Town of Stillwater Effective August 16, 1996 THE AREA DESIGNATED AS IN NEED OF ORDERLY ANNEXATION Beginning at a point where the centerline of 62nd Street North (formerly the Long Lake Road) intersects the Westerly tight -of -way line of C S A H No 5 (formerly the Stillwater St Paul Road) thence South along the Westerly right-of-way line of C S A H No 5 to the South line of the Southeast Quarter of Section 31, T30 R20, thence West along the South line of Sections 32 and 31 T30, R20 to the Southwest corner of Section 31, T30 R20 thence North along the West line of Sections 31, 30 and 19, T30 R20 (winch line is the centerline of C S A H 15 also known as Manning Avenue North) to the Northwest corner of Section 19, T30 R20 (a point in the centerline of State Highway 95 also known as Dellwood Road North), thence East along the centerline of State Highway 95 to a point where the West line of Lot 1, Block One, Oak Glen loth Addition extended to the North intersects the centerline on State Highway 95 thence South along the East line of Block 1 Oak Glen loth Addition to the Northeasterly corner of Lot 13, Block 1 Oak Glen 8th Addition, thence west along the North line of Lots 13 11 and 10 Block One Oak Glen 8th Addition to the Northwest comer of Lot 10 Block 1, Oak Glen 8th Addition thence South along the West line of Block One and Block 2 Oak Glen 8th Addition to a point where the line intersects the North line of Lot 6, Block 2, Oak Glen 5th Addition, thence West along the North line of Lots 6 5, 4, 3, 2, and One Block 2, Oak Glen 5th Addition to a point where the line as extended to the West intersects with the West right-of-way line of Neal Avenue North thence South along the West right-of-way line of Neal Avenue North to a point where the Westerly right-of-way of Neal Avenue North is intersected by a Westerly extension of the North line of Lot 1 Block One, Trolley Trail Acres, thence East along the North lines of Block One, Trolley Trail Acres and Valley High Estates to the Northeast corner of Block One Valley High Estates thence South along the Easterly line of Block 1 One Valley High Estates to a point where the East line is intersected by the Southwest corner of Outlot X Oak Glen thence Southeasterly along the Southwesterly Imes of Outlot X Oak Glen and Lot 1 Block 1, Oak Glen 4th Addition to a point where the line is intersected by the West lute of Lot 17, Block One Wild Pme 4th Addition, thence South along the West line of Block One Wild Pines 4th Addition and Outlot A, Wildwood Fifth Addition to the centerline of Boutwell Road North, thence Southeasterly along the centerline of Boutwell Road North the North Iine of Lot One Block One Pine Hill Estates extended Easterly, thence West along the North line and South along the West line of Block One Pme Hill Estates to the South right-of-way line of C S A H No 12, thence West along the South right-of-way line of C S A H No 12 to a point in the East half of the East Half of the Northeast Quarter of Section 30 T30, R20, where the South right-of-way line is intersected by the following described line beginning at the Southwest coiner of the East Half of the East Half thence on an assumed bearing North 89° 03 minutes 06 seconds East along the South line of the East half a distance of 185 feet, thence North 2° 40 minutes East 100 feet thence North 21 ° 40 minutes East 90 feet, thence North 49° 40 minutes West to the South right-of-way line of C S A H No 12 (which is the point of intersection) thence continuing along the bearing North 49° 40 minutes West a distance of 200 feet thence North 30° 10 mintites West to the North line of C S A H No 12 to a point intersected by the East line of the East 80 feet of the East half of the East Half of the Northeast Quarter of Section 30 T30 R20, thence North along the East line of the West 80 feet a distance of 720 feet, thence West a distance of 80 feet to the West line of the East Half of the East half of the Northeast Quarter thence North along the East line to a point 1410 25 North of the South line of Northeast comer of Sec 30, T30, R20 thence West a distance of 70 feet to a point on the east line of Lot 5 Block Two Boutwell Valley Estates thence South along the East line of Block Two, Boutwell Valley Estates as extended to the North right-of-way line of C S A H No 12, thence West to a point where the North line of C S A H No 12 intersects the following described line beginning at the Southeast corner of the West half of the East half of the Northeast Quarter of Section 2 30 thence West along the South line a distance of 425 feet thence North 300 00 minutes East 240 feet, thence North 60° 40 minutes East 175 feet thence North 430 40 minutes to the North right-of-way line (which is the point of intersection) thence South and West along the line just described to a pouit on the South line of the Northeast Quarter that is 425 feet East of the Southeast corner thereof thence East along the South line of the North Half of Section 30, T30 R20 to the Northwesterly corner of Outlot B Croixwood 7th Addition, thence Southwesterly along the Westerly line of Outlot B, as extended to a point where this line intersects an Easterly extension of the North lme of Cochrane s Long Lake Addition thence West along the North line of this addition to the centerline of Mid Oaks Avenue North thence Southwesterly along the centerline of Mid (Yaks Avenue North to a point where the centerline intersects a Northerly extension of the West line of Lot 8 Block One, Cochrane s Long Lake Addition, thence South along the West line of Lot 8 to the South line of Section 30, T30, R20, thence West along the South line to the West line of the East half of the North half of Section 31 T30,R20 thence South along the West line to the South line of the North half of Section 31 thence East along the South line of the North Half (this line also being the North line of Long Lake Estates, and Long Lake Estates Second Addition) to the Westerly nght-of-way line of C S A H No 5, thence Southwesterly along the Westerly line of C S A H No 5 to a point intersected by a line described as follows beginning 130 90 feet South of the Northeast comer of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter (SE 1/4 of SE 114), thence North 82° 58 minutes West 1337 70 feet to a point 33 feet North of the Northwest corner of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter (SE 1/4 of SE 1/4) of Section 31, thence Northwesterly along the line just described until this line intersects the North line of the SE 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of Section 31, thence South and parallel to the West line of the Quarter Section to the centerline of 62nd Street North (formerly known as the Long Lake Road), thence Southeasterly along the centerline of this road to the Westerly right-of-way line of C S A H No 5 the point of beginning 3 That part of the East half of Section 20, T30, R20 lying Easterly of the centerline of C S A H No 5 (also known as Stone Bridge Trail North), that lies South of the Northerly right-of-way line of the Minnesota Zephyr Railroad right-of-way, and That part of the West Half of Section 21, T30, R20 described as follows beginning at a point where the centerline of C S A H No 5 intersects the North line of Cooper s Addition extended to the West, thence East along the North line of Cooper's Addition to the East line of Minnesota Street extended to the North, thence North along the East line of Owens Street as extended to the North line of the South Half of Section 21, thence East along the North line to a point 36125 feet West of the East lute of the Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter (SW 1/4 of NW 1/4) thence North along a lme extended Northerly from that point to the Northerly right-of-way line of the Minnesota Zephyr Railroad nght-of- way, thence West along the North right-of-way line to the West line of Section 21 T30, R20, thence South along the West line to the ceinerlme of C S A H No 5 thence Southeasterly along the centerline to the point of begin_niig and That part of the Southwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter (SW 1/4 o NE 1/4) of Section Twenty (20) in Township Thirty (30) North of Range Twenty (20) West, Washington County Minnesota described as follows Commencmg at a point on C S A H No 5 centerline where the centerline is intersected by the North right-of-way line of the Minnesota Zephyr Railroad Tracks, thence South along the centerline of C S A H No 5 to the intersection with an Easterly extension of the North line of Lot 4 Block One Oak Glen, thence West along the North line of Block One, Oak Glen to a point 170 feet West of the West right-of-way line of C S A H No 5, thence North 28 degrees 31 minutes 20 seconds West to the North right-of-way line of the Minnesota Zephyr Railroad 4 Tracks, thence East along the North right-of-way Ime to the centerline of C S A H No 5 which is the point of beginning The area designated as "In Need of Orderly Annexation Area is 1190 acres In Re The Orderly Annexation Agreement Between the City and Town of Stillwater Effective August 16, 1996 9 0.- ;IV_ —f V Beginning at a point where the centerline of 62nd Street North (formerly the Long Lake Road) intersects the Westerly right-of-way line of C S A H No 5 (formerly the Stillwater St Paul Road), thence South along the Westerly right-of-way line of C S A H No 5 to the South line of the Southeast Quarter of Section 31 T30, R20, thence West along the South line of Sections 32 and 31 T30, R20 to the Southwest comer of Section 31, T30, R20, thence North along the West line of Sections 31 and 30 (which line is the centerline of C S A H 15 also known as Manning Avenue North) the North nght-of- way line of C S A H No 12 (also known as 75th Street North) then East along the North right-of-way line to a point where the North lure of C S A H No 12 intersects the following described line beginning at the Southeast comer of the West half of the East half of the Northeast Quarter of Section 30, thence West along the South line a distance of 425 feet thence North 300 00 minutes East 240 feet thence North 60° 40 minutes East 175 feet, thence North 43° 40 minutes to the North right-of-way line (which is the point of intersection), thence South and West along the line just described to a point on the South line of the Northeast Quarter that is 425 feet East of the Southeast corner thereof thence East along the South line of the North Half of Section 30, T30, R20 to the Northwesterly comer of Outlot B, Croixwood 7th Addition, thence Southwesterly along the Westerly line of Oudot B as extended to a point where this line intersects an Easterly extension of the North line of Cochrane's Long Lake Addition thence West along the North line of this addition to the centerline of Mid Oaks Avenue North thence Southwesterly along the centerline of Mid Oaks Avenue North to a point where the centerline intersects a Northerly extension of the West line of Lot 8, Block One, Cochrane s Long Lake Addition thence South along the West line of Lot 8 to the South line of Section 30, T30 R20, thence West along the South line to the West line of the East half of the North half of Section 31, T30,R20, thence South along the West line 1 to the South line of the North half of Section 31. thence East along the South line of the North Half (this line also being the North line of Long Lake Estates and Long Lake Estates Second Addition) to the Westerly right-of-way line of C S A H No 5, thence Southwesterly along the Westerly line of C S A H No 5 to a point intersected by a line described as follows beginning 130 90 feet South of the Northeast comer of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter (SE 1/4 of SE 1/4) thence North 82° 58 minutes West 1337 70 feet to a point 33 feet North of the Northwest corner of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter (SE 1/4 of SE 1/4) of Section 31, thence Northwesterly along the line lust described until this line intersects the North line of the Se 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of Section 31, thence South and parallel to the West line of the Quarter Section to the centerline of 62nd Street North (formerly known as the Long Lake Road), thence Southeasterly along the centerline of this road to the Westerly right-of-way line of C S A H No 5, the point of beginning, and That part of the East half of Section 20, T30, R20 lying Easterly of the centerline of C S A H No 5 (also known as Stone Bridge Trail North) and South of the Northerly right-of-way line of the Minnesota Transportation Museum Railroad Tracks and That part of the West Half of Section 21, T30 R20 described as follows beginning at a point where the centerline of C S A H No 5 intersects the North line of Cooper's Addttion extended to the West thence East along the North line of Cooper's Addition to the East line of Minnesota Street extended to the North, thence North along the East line of Owens Street as extended to the North line of the South Half of Section 21 thence East along the North line to a point 36125 feet West of the East line of the Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter (SW 1/4 of NW 1/4) thence North along a line extended Northerly from that point to the Northerly right -of --way line of the Minnesota Zephyr Railroad right of - way thence West along the North right-of-way line to the West line of Section 21 T30 R20 thence 0P South along the West line to the centerline of C S A H No 5, thence Southeasterly along the centerline to the point of beginning Except for the following described property a The Bergman Farm 1205 - 60th Street North Parcel Numbers 31-030-20-32-0001 and 31-030-20-34-0001 Owners Alvin and Helen Bergman Described as The Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter (SE 1/4 of SW 1/4) of Section 31, T30, R20 and the West half of the Southwest Quarter (W 1/2 of SW 1/4) of Section 31, T30, R20 West b 1223 - 62nd Street North Parcel Number 31-030-20-34-0002 Owner Paul Bergman Described as The East Two hundred seventy (270) feet of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter (SW 1/4 of SW 1/4) and the West three hundred Thirty (330) feet of the Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter (SE 1/4 of SW 1/4) lying North of a line parallel to and Seven Hundred (700) feet North of the South line of Section Thrty-one (31), Township Thirty (30) North, Range Twenty (20) West, Stillwater Township, Washington County 7143 Manning Avenue Parcel Number 30-030-20-33-0001 Owners Robert M and Ann S Jordan Described as All that part of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter, Section 30, Township 30 North, Range 20 West of the 4th Principal Meridian, described as follows Commencing at the southwest corner of said Section 30, thence North 00 degrees 46 minutes 51 seconds West, grid bearing Minnesota State Coordinate system Southern zone, (recorded as N 00037 00" E) along the west line of said Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter, a distance of 390 00 feet, thence South 89 degrees 31 minutes 26 seconds East, (recorded as S 88*07 32" E) a distance of 60 00 feet, thence North 18 degrees 02 minutes 04 seconds East, (recorded as N 19"25'28 E) a distance of 160 00 feet to the point of beginning of the parcel to be described thence North 73 degrees 41 minutes 36 seconds West (recorded as N 72°17'42" W) a distance of 210 30 feet thence North 59 degrees 16 minutes 08 seconds West (recorded as N 57°52 10" W) a distance of 277 77 feet to the west line of said Section 30, thence North 00 degrees 46 minutes 54 seconds West along said west line, a distance of 310 43 feet thence North 89 degrees 13 minutes 06 seconds East, a distance of 550 88 feet, thence South 11 degrees 32 minutes 29 seconds West, a distance of 529 72 feet to the point of beginning 3 d 7135 Manning Avenue Parcel Number 30-030-20-33-0002 Owners Ralph E and Kimberly A Stowell Described as A tract of land in the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter (SW 1/4 of SW 1/4) of Section Thirty (30), in Township Thirty (30) North of Range Twenty (20) West, in Washington County, Minnesota, said tract of land being described as follows Starting at the Southwest Corner of Section Thirty (30 and proceeding north along the westerly line of Section Thirty (30) whose bearing is N 00 degrees 37 minutes 00 seconds East, a distance of Three Hundred Ninety (390 00) feet to the point of beguuung, thence S 88 degrees 07 minutes 32 seconds East, a distance of Three Hundred Eighty-five (385 00) feet, thence N 01 degrees 52 minutes 38 seconds East a distance of Sixty (60 00) feet, thence N 01 degrees 52 minutes 28 seconds East a distance of One hundred Sixty (160 00) feet, thence N 72 degrees 17 minutes 42 seconds W a distance of Two Hundred Ten and Thirty Hundredths (210 30) feet, thence N 57 degrees 52 minutes 10 seconds W a distance of Two Hundred Seventy-seven and Seventy-seven Hundredths (277 77) feet to a point on the westerly line of Section Thirty (30), thence S 00 degrees 37 mutates 00 seconds W along the westerly line of Section Thirty (30) a distance of Four Hundred Ten (410 00) feet to the point of beginning 6731 Manning Avenue Parcel Number 31-030-20-23-0001 Owner Rosalie Gadient Described as The Southwest Quarter of Northwest Quarter (SW 1/4 of NW 1/4) of Section 31, T30, R20 The area in Phase I is 61174 acres 4 P, Report for Boutwell South Area Plan Stillwater, Minnesota. September, �00,1 File No. 510-01.-1ff') i" Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik & - - Associates Engineers & Architects Bonestroo JA/ Bonestroo. Rosene. Anderlik and Associates, Inc. is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Employer and Employee Owned ,y MEM Rosene e Principals: Otto G. Bonestroo, P.E. • Mervin L. Sorv,Jd. PC-. • Glenn R. Cook, P.C. • RoUerc G. Schurncht. PE. Jerry A. Bourdon. PE. J9 kyderlik . rf :13,.1 senlor consultants: Robert W. Rosene. OF. • Joseph C. Andernk. PE. • Ricnard E. furner. P.E. • Susan M. Eberlin, C.PA. Assn ,.7 ates* Associate Principals: Keith A. Gordon. PE. • Robert R. Pfefterle. PE. • Richard W. Foster, RE David O Loskota, PE. Mark A. Hanson, PE. • Michael T. Raubrnann, PE. • Ted K. Field, P.E. • Kenneth P. Anderson, PE. • Mark R. Rolfs, P.E. David A. Bonestroo. M B.A. • Sidney P Williamson. P.E., L.S. • Agnes M. Ring, M.B.A. • Allan Rick Schmidt. PE. �, ` „�,�,�,�. � Engineers Thornas W. Peterson. PE. • Jdmes R. bialand. P.E. • Miles B. lensen, P.E. • L. Phillip Gravel III, RE. • Daniel J. Edgerton, RE Isindel Mdrunee. PE. • Thomas A. Syfko, PC, • Sheldon J Johnson • Dale A. Grove. PE. • Thomas A. Roushar, P.E. Robert 1. Devery, P.E. Offices: St. Paul, St. Cloud, Rochester and 'Willmar. MN • Milwaukee, WI • Chicago. IL Website: wwvi bonesirou. com September 9, 2002 Steve Russell, Community Development Director City of Stillwater 216 N. 4" St. Stillwater, 'M`N 55082 Dear Steve: It has been a pleasure to work with you, Klayton, and the Planning Commission members to complete the Boutwell South Area Plan. We have had some challenging issues to deal with in this project, particularly related to the roadway elements of the plan. These challenges have helped us to develop some nontraditional solutions to planning issues in the area, and work to integrate the roadway, trail"; stormwater management and open space elements of the plan in some creative ways. We have also worked closely with residents of the area, who participated actively in the planning meetings and public hearings. Their thoughts are reflected in the land use, circulation, and open space recommendations in the plan. We hope that as the plan moves toward implementation, the proposed land uses and location and design of infrastructure will preserve and showcase the character of the area, create a smooth transition to the City, and create connections and amenities that will add value and enhance the natural resources of the area. Thank you for the opportunity to work with you and the residents of the area on this planning study. Sincerely, Sherri A. Buss, M.L.A. Project Manager 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul, MN 55113 - 651-636-4600 , Fax: 651-636-1311 Table of Contents ❑ Executive Summary ❑ 1 Project Summary ❑ II Existing Conditions and Issues ❑ III Planning Process ❑ IV Recommendations Land Use Roadways Trails Stormwater Management Integration of Stormwater and Circulation Sewer and Water Services ❑ V Implementation ❑ Attachments 2 3 4 8 9 9 10 13 15 19 19 21 23 City of Stillwater —Bout -well South Area Plan 1 Executive Summary This plan provides recommendations for the Boutwell South planning area a neighborhood within the Stillwater Annexation Area The area is approximately 350 acres in size and current land use is largely rural residential in character The plan proposes that as the area becomes part of the City of Stillwater approximately 120 acres be allowed to develop as low -density single-family residential areas These areas are largely in the eastern portion of the planning area The western portion of the area is recommended to remain largely rural residential In addition to land use recommendations the plan also includes recommendations for circulation public utilities storm water management and integration of these systems The plan recommends that Neal Avenue be extended as a parkway through the area and that trails be completed along the creeks and roadways to make connections identified in the City s Comprehensive Trail Plan The City will need to work with Washington County in developing pans for the extension of Neal Avenue as the County controls access to County Road 12 and has expressed concerns related to access management and safety along County 12 The plan analyzes traffic and stormwater impacts from the development proposed for the South Boutwell Area and updates the analysis completed in the Stillwater AUAR (199 7) for these issues The residents of the area the Stillwater Planning Commission Washington County and others participated actively in development of this plan The City Council adopted the plan on September _ 2002 City of Stillwater—Boutwell South Area Plan 2 Boutwell South Planning Study I. Project Summary This plan was developed to provide a comprehensive framework that will guide land use, development, circulation, storm water management, parks, trails, greenways and other infrastructure decisions in the Boutwell South Planning Area. The area is slightly more than 350 acres in size, and is bounded by Boutwell Avenue, County Road 15 (Manning Avenue), and County Road 12. The area is currently located within Stillwater Township, but proposed for annexation to the City of Stillwater after 2015. Figure 1 identifies the boundaries of the planning area and existing conditions. The City of Stillwater's Comprehensive Plan (1995) identified the majority of land use in the Boutwell South Planning Area as "rural residential" through 2015. The Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) for the annexation area assumed rural residential land use in the Boutwell South area when it analyzed the environmental impacts of proposed development in the Annexation Area, and developed the mitigation plan to address these impacts. Both the Comprehensive Plan and AUAR assumed that no urban services would be provided in the area before 2015. However, two property owners in the Boutwell South area have expressed interest in developing their land in the near future at urban densities. City orderly annexation policies allow landowners in areas adjacent to the existing city limits to petition for annexation. One of the properties is located at the corner of Manning Avenue and County Road 12, and the other is in the eastern half of the planning area, south of Newberry Court (see Figure 1). Other landowners in the Boutwell South area also expressed interest in annexation during the course of this planning study. The City prepared this Area Plan for the Boutwell South area to coordinate and guide land use, zoning, parks, trails, circulation systems, public utilities and storm water management in the area. The City will then consider the property owners' request for annexation and changes in land use based on this overall plan. The plan also reviews the environmental impacts identified in the AUAR, analyzes the potential impacts of the proposed land use and utility plans for the area, and discusses mitigation strategies. City ofStillwater—Boutwell South Area Plan 3 II Existing Conditions and Issues The City's staff and Planning Commission met with residents in the area and Washington County to identify important existing conditions and issues to be considered in developing the area plan These issues included the following Roadways, Streets, and Trails Manning Avenue (County Road 15) Washington County s current Capital Improvement Plan identifies reconstruction of Manning Avenue from Trunk Highway 35 to CSAH 12 as a 2006 project It is likely that this project may include creation of a four -lane roadway in this area adding a traffic signal if warrants are met (probably at the County Road 12 intersection) and adding a bike and pedestrian trail on the Stillwater side of the county road The County will control access to this roadway including driveways and new streets The County is planning to construct center left turn lanes on Manning Avenue at the Boutwell intersection in summer 2002 and may add a temporary traffic light There is no current timeframe for upgrading Manning Avenue to a 4-lane roadway north of County 12 County staff indicated that the earliest time that federal funding could be available for an upgrade of Manning Avenue north of County 12 is 2008 Neal Avenue The City is considering options to connect Neal Avenue with County Road 12 Issues related to this proposal include the following o Improvement of the existing Boutwell Road - County Road 12 intersection which is poorly configured o If a new route for Neal/Boutwell is identified access to Boutwell Avenue would need to be maintained for homes east of Neal o The existing steep grade on County Road 12 makes sight lines problematic for locating a new intersection east of Northland Avenue Potential connections require discussion with the County o The County has purchased the access rights of all CSAH 12 right of way between Boutwell Road and Manning Avenue (Openings exist to accommodate existing private driveways and streets ) Access spacing standards and needs Citv of Stillwater—Boutwc11 South Area Plan 4 11 Alm, PR PIE 1 „il ��► y _ _ ` ,,� j �+y /���� ��' '� •tit iore L for turn lanes need to be considered in the design of any proposed Neal Avenue connection. o A variety of options for the new Neal Avenue route are available. Each has potential traffic and land use impacts. (Figure 3 and Attachments) o Residents in the area are concerned about potential traffic impacts of connecting Neal Avenue to residential streets to the south of County Road 12. o Residents expressed concerns about increased traffic on Boutwell, Minar and other local streets due to the Settlers' Glen development (north of the Boutwell South planning area). o Residents are also concerned about speeds on County Road 12, and would like the State Commissioner of Transportation to reduce the speed limit on this road. Existing Traffic. Many local residents expressed frustration concerning existing poor circulation in the area, and the potential for these problems to worsen with additional development. They also expressed concerns that a Neal connection near Maryknoll Road or Northland Avenue would route unacceptable volumes of traffic to these residential streets in the Croixwood area. Trails. The City's Comprehensive Trail Plan identifies a number of existing and proposed trails within and around the study area. Issues for the planning study include: c Creating good pedestrian connections through the study area and among the proposed trails. o Providing safe trail access from the Boutwell South Area and other residential areas to the north to the parks on the south side of County Road 12. c Residents on the west side of the planning area expressed a preference for locating trails along County Road 15 rather than along the Brown's Creek tributary. o The County suggested that trails along the Creek may be significantly safer and offer trail users a more pleasing route than a trail along Manning Avenue. Stormwater Management and Wetlands • Stormwater management. The AUAR proposed that Stormwater in the Annexation Area (including the City of Stillwater—Boum,ell South Area Plan Boutwell South area) be diverted away from Brown s Creek to protect the designated trout stream and associated resources The City is currently constructing this diversion system Land use changes proposed for the Boutwell South Area could increase the rate and volume of stormwater runoff from this area beyond the level identified in the AUAR Related issues include the following o The AUAR proposed storm water ponding in several existing basins in the South Boutwell Area to manage runoff The size of these ponds may need to be increased or other storm water management strategies required if land use changes in the area o The $5 000 per acre impact fee that is being assessed to new development in the Annexation Area to pay for the cost of the stormwater diversion would be assessed to new development in the Boutwell South area o Storm water facilities in the area could be designed to serve as amenities for development in the area and provide multiple benefits such as open space buffers among land uses and trail corrrdors Wetland Buffers The Brown s Creek Watershed District requires that 100 undisturbed vegetative buffers be established along the Brown s Creek tributaries and wetlands in this area This will affect the size and configuration of developable areas Land Use Existing Land Use Much of the Boutwell South area is currently occupied by large lot single family residences Many of these residents indicated that they plan to maintain this land use for the foreseeable future Issues related to the future land use in the area include the following o Identify appropriate long-term land use designations in the Boutwell South area o Evaluate which land use(s) would be compatible with existing development in the area and identify needs for buffers or separation between some land use types o Evaluate which land uses are compatible with roadways and storm water infrastructure capacity available for the area o Identify an appropriate land use transition from the city limits going westward City ofStillwater—Boutwell South Area Plan 6 o Existing residents in the area expressed strong concerns about increased densities proposed for the area Many were opposed to any change in land use designations before 2015 Single family housing that is compatible with existing homes in the area was preferred over attached housing and other land uses • Parks and open space Additional open space and neighborhood park areas should be identified in the Boutwell South area as development occurs Open space areas may also be designed to serve storm water management functions and provide transitions among land uses Open space corridors and trails in the South Boutwell areas should connect with those in surrounding areas o Phasing issues The City has a limit of 120 new residential permits per year within the whole annexation area The timing of new development in the Boutwell South area may be affect by these limits City of Stillwater—Boutwell South Area Plait 7 III Planning Process The development of this plan included meetings with affected parties including city residents in and around the planning area the City s Planning Commission City -Township Joint Board Washington County and the City Council The plan was also reviewed by the Brown s Creek Watershed District Discussions included the following Planning Commission and Public Input The City s Planning Commission considered the plan at four meetings including a public hearing on April 8 2002 A large number of residents from the Boutwell South planning area and surrounding neighborhoods attended these meetings and identified their issues and concerns Issues discussed at these meetings are listed in the previous section The plan includes the Commissions recommendations regarding land use stormwater management public utilities circulation and overall design City -Township Joint Board The Joint Board reviewed the draft plan and Planning Commission recommendations on July 24 2002 The discussion and comments focused on roadway and land use issues The Joint Board voted to approve the draft plan at this meeting Washington County City staff and consultants met with staff from the Washington County Physical Development Department several times during the planning process to discuss issues related to roadways and trails County concerns and recommendations are described in Section IV and copies of letters received from the County are included in the Attachments Brown's Creek Watershed District (Paragraph to be completed following response on plan ) City Council (Paragraph to be completed following City Council consideration of plan ) Ory of Snllwatel—Boutwell South Area Plan IV. Recommendations for the Boutwell South Planning Area A. Land Use Recommendation 1: Figure 2 identifies the proposed land uses for the Boutwell South Area. Most of the existing Rural Residential land use areas in the western half of the Area should be maintained in rural residential use, with densities of one unit per 2.5 acres. Two areas (corner of County 15 and County 12, and County 15 and Boutwell Avenue), plus the area east of the creek, should be identified as areas for Low Density Single Family land use. Net densities up to 3 units per acre would be allowed in these areas. Recommendation 2: Development proposals for the area should be in the form of Planned Unit Developments. The areas identified for Low -density Single Family land use will extend the existing land uses from the City Limits to the creek that bisects the planning area. The creek tributary and its wide corridor will provide a transition from these new land uses to the existing larger -lot areas to the west. While the proposed land use designation is a higher density than the existing Rural Residential land uses, it is still of relatively low density and should be compatible with existing uses to the west of the creek. The new low -density single-family areas will be compatible with existing areas to the east. Two small areas identified for Low -density Single Family land uses are also located at the western corners of the planning area. These areas are adjacent to major transportation routes. the City's Public Works Facility, and denser development south of County Road 12. The designation of these land uses will allow for a wider range of housing types in the area, and may help the City to meet the housing goals identified in its Comprehensive Plan. Low - density Single Family uses may include both attached and detached forms of single-family housing. The proposed densities allow for "clustering" of units on sites where this will protect natural resources. Clustered designs could be designed to make the proposed developments more compatible with rural residential land uses in the area. City of Stillwater—Boutwell South Area Plan 9 i Land Use j City Public Works Facility Park / Open Space / Cemetery Rural Residential Single Family / Low Density 22.013 `<� 800 0 800 16.923 Feet 36.881 I 7N .080 19.482 7-70 0.031 147. 15 0.282 060.092 �! 0.754 0.052 1.55 Q 0.108 V.352 0 :231 ---------_ a.22s 14.322 ��..�-----•-" -- 6.276 i I i i Boutwell south Planning Area Bonestroo �—� Rosene Anderlik & Proposed Land Uses and Acreage Figure 2 Associates Engineers 6 Architects \510\51001109\cad\gis\Iuse.apr June 2002 R The distribution and amount of land designated for each land use type in the Boutwell South Area is as follows: Rural Residential 167 acres Single Family, Low -density 120 acres Parks/open space/wetlands 48 acres City (Public Works Bldg.) 17 acres TOTAL 352 acres B. Roadways Recommendation 3: Neal Avenue should be extended to County Road 12 midway between Northland and Maryknoll Avenues. Figures 3 identifies the City's preferred route for this extension. The route shown in Figure 3 would connect with County 12, but would not provide a direct through connection to residential streets to the south. This route was discussed with Washington County, and the County noted strong concerns regarding needs to limit access to County Road 12 to protect the safety of roadway users. Since the right-of-way of CSAH 12 includes access control, approval of the County Board is required for any connection to be made in the accessed -controlled portion. Based on discussions with the County, providing an additional access to Highway 12 at this location will require construction of a median at Northland Avenue. This median will limit access to County 12 at Northland to right in/right out turns only. The County recommended that a design that includes a median and access limitations be presented to residents in the Northland Avenue area at a public hearing. Design of the proposed modifications should be completed in collaboration with Washington County. The County noted that it does not have a project programmed or funds available in the current Capital Improvement Program for this median. The County expects that the development creating the need for this improvement would bear the cost of the needed work. County comments on this plan indicated that the County prefers that Neal Avenue be connected with Northland or Maryknoll Avenues. The City recommended the connection midway between these streets based on concerns that a direct connection will direct an unacceptable level of traffic onto local streets. In the future, as land use in the South Boutwell area becomes more urban in character, speeds on County Road 12 may be reduced. This could allow for an additional access from Neal City of Stillwater—Bourivell South Area Plan 10 (.J"fy III > I-{�� •'$t�� \ f! -pU�� E19 //`°�4/ Rio J q'i� ' $fIlJI4AlQP.zr _�Y�i+-F Pf 10 i�``"�..( I � ; fj J � I 1 .,✓ p Y ToRNyI1P b� F l \j 211 I ��� f � 1 � # N ° ,�•• n ' � i Pam'} \ ` ><}���� q Q 6 D =_I '��[j ==� =��J�` _ � — -•-�- �i� C �� o%II1�,`,�I { �`- F./C z LJ`yf� oU"`-4 �e i � � I}I I a � I PI �,� ��� `�1 �`I i s�� ' I, j � � 1 � ° tl ° `✓l° r'1 u { /"�✓°r E iY Ili' R IV ii �� � i ��5� E �� i - IY"1 ✓ fj F Ip ` � m� � ( � ilC� 3 �` 2 LI 6 f �/ /TILLWATER TOANSHIP ° ¢�,,� $ ° �-"( p WYs'iIP �r o 6- '� 1 , l � � � I F ..'„ iTl sn�`i�h ° ����+� � �—�L����°"•%r°ti� ( � � � � q � � o � � s � r 15, \ \ � � /r;;+ '� � �� ,{T•��I-�-•- �< < � 1 , �\ � II � � � / �I � �S` � ti\ v\� �7 n.y � di _ A�.1 � \ � I l ✓l / ` jri I n Jh T'yyI `/ PA4. p`p�, 1 } �= �l [ [�1 I ! C Boutwell South Planning Area - Proposed Neal Ave Extension Ali City of Stillwater Figure 3 Parkway to County 12 at Northland Avenue, and removal of the median at Northland. The City has recommended this alignment for Neal Avenue though the Boutwell South Area for the following reasons: • It provides good access to collector roads for all developable properties in the Boutwell South area. The proposed parkway may be constructed in phases as the properties in the Boutwell South area develop. • It will consolidate access to County 12, and reduce needs for individual accesses along this roadway for each property in the Boutwell South area. • It will provide access to County 12 for developed areas to the north, and remove traffic from the problematic Boutwell-County 12 intersection. • The mid -point connection between Northland and Maryknoll will spread traffic among residential streets to the south, rather than concentrating traffic on one local street. A design with broad curves may require reduced speeds and help to calm traffic through the area. The route may be designed with a "parkway" or "greenway" appearance that includes plantings and a trail, and compliments storm water management strategies for the area. (Figure 6) A variety of options were developed for the proposed Neal Avenue -County Road 12 connection. Drawings of these options and County comments related to the options are included in the attachments to this report. Washington County indicated that that its preferred alignment for the Neal Avenue extension is a connection with Northland Avenue. The County indicated that if the Northland alignment is not used, or traffic from Northland cannot be restricted by the proposed median, that no connection should be made from the property proposed for development in the South Boutwell area to CSAH 12 at this time. The County suggested that this property should outlet to Boutwell Avenue, and the Neal connection be made at Northland when properties to the west are developed. Recommendation 4 : The Boutwell-County Road 12 intersection should be modified to improve safety. Figure 4 provides several design options for the proposed improvement. The County noted that reconstruction of the Boutwell Road/County 12 intersection must meet sight distance standards. The County also indicated that the proposed guardrail must be warranted according to Federal City of Stillwater=Bouttivcll South Area Plan 11 � I v b 1f11 S 1 vs+ u-1axi VV--LM7 Vl y I `w" LW I rn U 41 Llil�hnl III II, � I� + ,1 f Q.{D117 i At I,: tit, T Q V _ Highway Administration standards before it can be recommended in the northeast quadrant of the Boutwell Road/CSAH 12 intersection. Additional engineering analyses and cost estimates need to be completed to recommend the best alternative. Boutwell Road The city of Stillwater has scheduled improvements for Boutwell Road to be completed by 2005, including a new 26' roadway and a trail. Storm water management improvements should be completed at the same time. Traffic Analvsis The new Low -density Single Family land use areas proposed in this plan could generate up to 3,445 total daily trips on area roads, if the 120 acres are fully developed at the maximum 3 units per net developable acre The number of trips would be well within the capacity of existing area roadways, particularly when Manning Avenue (County 15) is upgraded, and planned improvements have been completed to Boutwell Road. County 15 in this area currently carries nearly 14,000 trips on an average weekday. Washington County noted that the combination of new traffic from the Boutwell South Area with new traffic from the Settler's Glen development north of Boutwell may create traffic problems and delays at intersections (Boutwell/Manning and County 12/Manning). The County has indicated that a new traffic signal at the County 12/Manning intersection is likely, though no specific plan has been proposed (the project may be constructed in 2006). During discussions related to this plan, the County indicated that it may consider addition of a traffic signal at the Boutwell/County Road 15 intersection as well, subject to the standards of the County's Traffic Signal Ranking System and its cost participation policies. County 15 will be the focus of many of the work and shopping - related trips from the new residential areas. The City will construct a new Frontage Road (extension of Curve Crest Boulevard) from the intersection of County 15 and 62"d Street, parallel to Highway 36, to the Curve Crest intersection at County 5, as development occurs in the area along Highway 36. This will provide a convenient connection for residents from the Settler's Glen and Boutwell South Areas to this retail City of'Stillwater—Boutwell South Area Plan 12 area (See map Concept Plan for 62Id Street Frontage Road in the Attachments ) Trips that do not use County 15 will be dispersed among other area roadways —primarily Boutwell Road and County 12 The proposed alignment for the Neal Avenue connection to County 12 connects is at a point midway between residential streets to the south to encourage the use of County 15 and disperse traffic among other streets rather than creating a direct connection and higher traffic volumes on residential streets to the south Connection of Neal Avenue at the location recommended in this plan is expected to affect local streets in the area as follows (vs no Neal connection) • Reduce traffic on Minar Northland and Boutwell (east of the proposed Neal extension) • Maryknoll and Deer Path will probably have the same traffic impacts with or without the Neal extension Trails Recommendation 5 Trails should he developed in the study area as shown on Figures 9 and 6, and include the following • East side of Manning Avenue • North side of Boutwell Road • South side of County Road 12 (existing) • Brown s Creek tributaries connecting with existing trails to the Brown s Creek Open Space site and Long Lake • Proposed Neal Avenue connection Recommendation 6 An underpass should complete the trail connection under County Road 12 near Northland Avenue The underpass is proposed to allow a safe crossing to the park and elementary school on the south side of County Road 12 The exact location of the underpass will be determined in the future and will depend on potential alteration of the grade of County Road 12 and soils in the area The County has indicated strong support for this underpass (letter dated July 2 2002) Trails should be physically separated from roadways to provide a safe and pleasant experience for trail users The route of an historic trolley route from Como Lake in St Paul to Stillwater is still visible within the study area and in Citv of Stillwater—Boutwell South Area Plan 13 other portions of Washington County Consideration should be given to preservation and use of this feature particularly if it can be used to make trail or habitat connections to other areas within the County City of Stillwater—Botaw ll South Ai ea Plan 14 C Stormwater Management Recommendation 7 The two existing landlocked depressions within the planning area should be used to provide flood control for the surrounding development and moderate water level fluctuations Outlets are recommended for both depressions The City will require developers to provide water quality ponds use infiltration or filtration strategies or other feasible management strategies to provide water quality treatment within local development sites and to control volumes and rates of flow to protect the functions of these two regional ponds Recommendation 8 When Boutwell Road is reconstructed, the roadway and culverts should be constructed as described in the analysis below, to prevent flooding of Boutwell Road Stormwater Analvsis The Boutwell South Area includes subdistricts S208 3209 and S206 of the Stillwater Drainage District described in the 1997 Alternative Urbarr Areawide Review (AUAR) Figure 5 identified the boundaries of these subdistricts When the AUAR analysis was completed these subdistricts were proposed to remain in rural residential land uses (1 unit per 2 5 acres) through the year 2015 This plan suggests that portions of the area be designated for Low Density Single Family uses at a density of up to 3 units per acre The change in proposed densities requires that the AUAR analysis be reviewed potential impacts identified and recommendations developed to avoid or mitigate for potential impacts The AUAR proposed to avoid impacts of proposed development in the Stillwater Annexation Area by diverting storm water away from Brown s Creek a state -designated trout stream to McKusick Lake and a ravine downstream The diversion system included in the AUAR Mitigation Plan was sized to divert 100 percent of the runoff from events up to a 3- inch 24-hour event The recommendations for the Boutwell South Planning Area include the rate control necessary to maintain the storm water management goals of the AUAR Mitigation Plan Stormwater Analysis Assumptions During development of this plan the drainage system for the area was reviewed from a regional perspective In modeling Czty of Stillwater—Boutwell South Area Plan 15 West Crossing_, East Crossing 777� T 7_7 S206 L SIM 4 1, S207 S 207 -P208.2 S-P208.1 S208 -7­__ 7 - ------ 77; - LEGEND T Redevelopment locaflpns Mop- 'duteshed Bw,)dufy 4b Regional Pond 600 1200 Scale in feet '7'00-CH Pi_An:NING AREA -SORFACC Wp.lt_ �tEt I:\51 0\51 0011 09\CAD\DWG\510011 09GIS2.6WG JUNE 2002 the subwatersheds in the Boutwell South Area two assumptions were made 1 Development of the Boutwell South area was assumed to occur at the maximum proposed densities 2 The contributions of local water quality/quantity ponds or infiltration approaches within local development sites were not included Only the completed retention ponds in the Public Works Facility have been modeled Therefore the results are conservative Subdistrict S208 Recommendations There are two landlocked depressions within S208 The Tables and accompanying text below summarize the analysis completed to identify impacts to these ponds from the development proposed in the Boutwell South Area To provide flood control for the surrounding development and moderate water level fluctuation outlets are recommended for both depressions The change in proposed land uses (represented by the curve number on the tables) is associated with only a minor change in High Water Level from the existing conditions for the two depressions This is due to the addition of the outlets Table 3 provides the summary of the proposed pond characteristics Regional Pond S-P208 1 The farthest upstream depression designated S-P208 1 has the following characteristics • Drainage area = 24 75 acres • Surface area at NWL (903 2 based on 1996 aerial topography) = 0 72 acres • Estimated existing watershed curve number = 65 • Proposed watershed curve number = 75 • Proposed outlet to be restricted by a 6-inch orifice • Table 1 provides HWL comparisons between existing and proposed conditions (assuming a starting water surface elevation of 903 2 ) Table 1 - Regional Pond S-P208 1 Storm Event 24-Dour Existing HWL Proposed HWL 1-year 9039 9040 2-year 9043 9043 100-year 9071 9072 ON of Stillwater—Boutwell South Area Plan 16 Regional Pond S-P208 2 The outlet from regional pond S-P208 1 was routed downstream to depression S-P208 2 The drainage characteristics of S-P208 2 are as follows • Drainage area = 19 66 acres • Surface area at NWL (896 0 based on 1996 aerial topography) = 0 41 acres • Existing watershed curve number = 65 • Proposed watershed curve number = 75 • Proposed outlet to restricted by an 8-inch orifice • Table 2 provides HWL comparisons between existing and proposed conditions (assuming a starting water surface elevation of 896 ) Table 2 - Regional Pond S-P208 2 Storm Event 24-hour Existing HWL Proposed HWL 1-year 8968 8973 2-year 8971 8978 100- ear 900 3 901 1 Table 3- Pond S-P208 1& S-P208 2 Summary Pond NWL 100-Year HWL Peak Storage Discharge Volume (acre - Ws) feet S-P208 1 9032 9072 18 49 S-P208 2 8960 9011 21 50 Boutwell Road Recommendations Boutwell Road frequently floods where the road crosses two channels The road is expected to be rebuilt in the near future due to its age and condition There are two primary culvert crossings along Boutwell that were evaluated in this study The west crossing occurs in subdistrict S206 the east crossing in subdistrict S209 The 1997 AUAR Feasibility Study recommended improvements for flood protection at these culvert crossings These recommendations were re-evaluated and have been revised as discussed below The revised recommendations were developed to restrict flow rates under Boutwell Road to provide a system that meets the AUAR mitigation strategy The Boutwell City of Stillwater—Boutwell South Area Plan 17 Road improvements are needed regardless of the potential for redevelopment upstream of Boutwell Road Boutwell Road East Boutwell Road east crossing receives flows from its direct drainage area (subdistrict S209) Long Lake channel and subdistrict S208 The proposed culvert is a 36-inch pipe (estimated upstream invert 879 0) The modeled 100-year storm HWL along the road is 883 0 with a peak flow of 53 cfs The existing road elevation of 885 6 provides sufficient freeboard Boutwell Road West Boutwell Road west crossing receives flow from subdistrict S206 and areas in Stillwater south of CSAH 12 and from the City of Grant (west of Manning Ave ) This road crossing is the most susceptible to flooding due to its low profile at the crossing and insufficient culvert capacity One 36-inch and two 24-inch culverts at staggered elevations are recommended The 36-inch outlet is proposed to convey channel flow (estimated upstream invert elevation = 878 5 ) The 36-inch culvert will provide rate control for the 3-year and smaller storm events The two 24-inch outlets with upstream invert elevation of 881 0 will be used only during high flow events The modeled 100-year storm HWL along the road is 885 6 with a peak flow of 126 cfs The HWL and peak discharge assumes ponding in Grant as proposed in the AUAR Without ponding in Grant the HWL will rise to 888 9 feet (unless the road is allowed to flood periodically though at a lower frequency or additional culverts are added) The existing road has a low point elevation of 882 9 feet The road profile will need to be raised to provide flood storage volume upstream of the road cover over the proposed culverts and freeboard protection for the road The recommendations for Boutwell Road may be modified when Boutwell Road is reconstructed As stated previously the recommendations assume a conservative scenario were future local water quantity and quality ponds within the redevelopment areas City of Stillivatei—Boutwell South Area Plan 18 directly draining to the road crossings were not taken into account Integration of Storm Water and Circulation Systems The location and design of infrastructure systems in the Boutwell South area provides opportunities to create connections and amenities that will add value to the area Figure 6 suggests a conceptual design for the Neal Avenue extension and adjacent storm water facilities as a `prairie parkway that showcases the character of the local landscape connects wetland and upland habitat patches and provides areas for storm water management and recreation The concept design includes the following • A curved parkway that emphasizes the rolling nature of the landscape and provides views of the ponds and upland open space areas The curves and plantings could be designed to reduce speeds on the parkway • A wide boulevard along the parkway with groups of trees and wide swales planted with native grasses and wildflowers The swales may be used to infiltrate storm water runoff from the roadway and adjacent areas • Ponds planted with native wetland and meadow plants and preservation of existing wooded areas that serve storm water management and habitat functions Open space areas that provide opportunities for passive recreation and casual play A recreational trail that connects the proposed trail on Boutwell Road with the existing trail on County Road 12 The proposed underpass for trail connections under County 12 is just west of the proposed parkway Design elements of the parkway such as curves and plantings could be continued along new residential streets in the Boutwell South area to emphasize the character of the local landscape and give the area a unique signature among Stillwater neighborhoods D Sewer and Water Services Recommendation 9 City sewer and water services should be provided to the areas proposed for Single Family land uses in this plan The areas in the eastern half of the Boutwell South area can be served from existing City services at the current Neal-Boutwell Avenue intersection City of Stillwater—Boutwell South Al ea Plan 19 H�"�L- ftF-WA-y PFAI WE 5wA-W mr�> Foew 6 oft:gq -iPnr ?Ft-fo,"6D -rmL. vwpes4ft5 Boutwell South Planning Area — Neal Parkway Concept Design g -- —Figure 6� Aas9nr, City of Stillwater mates Fn0- d Ar4M - Areas in the western half of the Boutwell South area that are proposed for Single Family land uses can be served from existing service lines to the north or south City service capacity is available to meet demands estimated for the proposed land uses in this area City ofSnlhti atei —Bozim ell South Atea Plun ?Q IV Implementation This plan may be implemented over a decade or more Timing will be based on landowner interest in selling property in the area and market demand for development Steps that will be needed to implement the plan include the following Land Use • Those proposing development apply for annexation to the City Proposed developments must be in the form of Planned Unit Developments (PUDs) • If annexation is approved the property is annexed with Agricultural Preserve zoning designation • Developer makes an application to re zone the property Re -zoning must be approved by the Planning Commission Joint Board and City Council Roadway, Utility and Stormwater Improvements • Proposed Neal Parkway may be developed in phases based on the timing of development on various parcels in the Boutwell South Area • City presents proposed Neal Parkway design including connections to CSAH 12 to the County The City collaborates with the County to complete final designs • Public hearing scheduled with area residents to discuss proposed changes to CSAH 12 including median and access changes at Northland Avenue • County Board must approve connection to CSAH 12 • Boutwell Road and related trail and stormwater improvements completed in 2004-05 This includes reconfiguration of Boutwell/County 12 intersection • Regional ponds and local storm water management strategies are designed as part of the PUD process and implemented as development occurs • County completes improvements to County Road 15 beginning in 2006 Trails Trails are completed as development occurs The City and County may participate in development of some trails and in completion of the underpass at County Road 12 City of Stillwater—Bouhtell South Area Plan 21 City of Stillwater —Bothwell South Area Plan 22 ATTACHMENTS City of Stillwater—Boutwell South Area Plan 23 Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik and Associates Inc is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Employer and Employee Owned 19 Bonestroo Principals Otto G Bonestroo P E Marvin L Sorvala P E Glenn R Cook P E Robert G Schunicht P E Jerry A Bourdon P E 4" Rosene Senior Consultants Rober W Rosene P E Joseph C Anderlik P E Richard E Turner P E Susan M Eberlin C P A erlik A dp�.�ler And Associate Principals Keith A Gordon P E Robert R Ptetferle P E Richard W Foster P E David O Loskota P E Mark A. Hanson P E Michael T Rautmenn P E Ted K Associates Associates Field P E Kenneth P Anderson P E Mark R Rolls P E David A Bonestroo M B A Sidney P Williamson P E L S Agnes M Ring M B A Allan Rick Schrrudt P E Thomas W Peterson P E James R Malar4 P E Mlles B Jensen P E L Phillip Gravel III P E Engineers & Architects Daniel J Edgerton P E Ismael Martinez P E Thomas A. Syfko P E Sheldon J Johnson Dale A Grove P E Thomas A Roushar P E Robert J Devery P E Offices St Paul St Cloud Rochester and Willmar MN Milwaukee WI Chicago IL Website www bonestroo com --.i. -11 TO. Steve Russell Community Development Director FROM: Sheldon J Johnsop J1�'4 1$ DATE: June 28, 2002 RE e Settlers Glen — Neal Avenue Extension Project 510-01-109 Neal Avenue is being proposed for extension from Boutwell to County Road 12, through the Boutwell planning area The extension is proposed to intersect with County Road 12 between the existing County Road 12 intersections with Northland Avenue and MaryKnoll Drive The City Planning Commission has raised questions regarding this extension and how it may relate to traffic generated by the Settlers Glen housing development on the following streets Manning Avenue ® Boutwell ® MaryKnoll Drive Northland Avenue Deer Path Nfinar Avenue The Settlers Glen development will provide 220 single-family residential units and 160 town home units Directional distribution of trips generated by the development, at build out is that provided in a previous analysis of the project The development will generate approximately 3,000 vehicle trips per day (1 500 in, 1 500 out) The assumed directiondl distribution is generally as follows 13 55 percent to the Metro area to the east 20 percent to the south to the commercial area along Highway 36 east of TH5 5 percent south on County Road 5 15 percent to the east to Stillwater destinations 5 percent to the north 2335 West Highway 36 e St Paul, MN 55113 a 651-636-4600 o Fax 651-636-1311 Given the above assumptions an assignment of Settlers Glen generated trips has been conducted The traffic assignment is shown on the attached graphic The volumes shown are two-way daily volume estimates Washington County has recently conducted some volume counts on many of the area roadways The results of these 24-hour counts are shown on the attached graphic From the information on the graphics the following points can be noted 13 Northland MaryKnoll, Deer Path and Nlinar will all experience some increase in traffic as generated from the build -out of Settlers Glen These increases should not create any capacity problems along these roadways The Neal Extension from Boutwell to County 12 will be beneficial in reducing traffic along Minar, Northland and Boutwell from County 12 to extended Neal Without the extension, the volumes generated by Settlers Glen would be even greater along those three roadways MaryKnoll would probably be impacted to the same degree with or without the Neal Extension The additional volumes on Deer Path would probably be greater without a Neal extension but the difference would not be substantial The segment of Boutwell, from County 12 to the connection with the Neal extension, will benefit greatly from the provision of that roadway The 2 400 daily vehicles on Boutwell would be reduced by half and maybe even more The Neal extension, and its intersection location, will help to disperse traffic over a series of roadways south of County 12 rather than increasing traffic loads a substantial volume on one roadway Attachment 2335 West Highway 36 • St Paul, MN 55113 a 651-636-4600 ® Fax 651-636-1311 hc- kms le, z 9 � z 8m� GDIANTS eV WASOIV6701') (fob-NTY — mAy1I-kN-, VbLbtmYA are )FnwrL VALIq —S 7 Z,4D 30.0 ox}15�N&) 2I-ROWr7- 712AFfIC VOLUME 64PAN -5 15P jS'T) rn A T ES ClientPage EISIonestroo eneProject erlik & oaates Prod No Calculations For rchltecu Prepared By Date Reviewed By Date I_?rop0si., N� �x"rnyron ny or ay.+oc.+r t 11 UPJ'�+tgl S+9A7 0,5{?{nGt f-0 °r rLkSf Rho✓i +M�I�r % 25t- o,xralrn b` QLIa- f� s�' ir1 j appr.,,,, , +rIM 7h� Fi+S� c25� aws�,} �nU i tL va1561) J �Or GOmp4rnSPn , rqr;(cnojl Pr k4s q UGr4tco( r,y��- Q 514nc0- pt gbouT 600' fe 6 0 �n f� e- fAsf Ar ) f� e- _ Wdsf ✓s r n9 +- e, 36 61- M4/,D0T Roga 50 mek I . mp� I �r 5+5i,� Q+{r MoijakAOIJ'Dr �' pryos-d - 40rf%p� /g bS01 Y •J�+s�nnc_ G2� 11%� �>l+'�sr0n an a�o.�✓�� 10r 35 mp1, 5 ► 0' ® 35 Mp', 30r^pk Li0o' RASy;,2 iooi - ^ rGv� Joo — L �n jAhr, q, 55�� �i9r n_t5 r��qq z EST -- v L1)5 a g5mp SDo qr/ mlLY yq �, I- 9I1� I�5�,/1..� �� 14r)kn.il Pr J I 35 flP� PO AI 30 W Gu1r K+,v� dRi+J� �D/sq r on .n_ zs 1n) ItIf 1 spe-Js h A SDI io aa_�i s Sl,r AAA a �� r ,li slur) o 0-1 rl atL yaP dp-4,-_,— ern r; 10-2 `i1r T'�i�5°r %,,,Ajj . Mgr Pg `�r�r1 l2n �Q5 on9 a s/Me— `^� approa i� 9rhds5 9n (Y?AqknO`j %r 2n) f� pro,66-) (i+,( X_tI5 117 arm I�ssa,� 3%a , WASHINGTON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION & PHYSICAL DEVELOPMENT 11660 MYERON ROAD NORTH STILI=WATE�-MINNESOTA 55082 9573 651-430-4300 Fc unde.Machine651-430-4350 ,�}t 31 Jp0l July 29 2002 Steve Russell Community Development Director City of Stillwater 216 N 4" St Stillwater MN 55082 BOUTWELL SOUTH AREA PLAN Dear Steve Donald C Wtsniewskl P E. Director Donald J Thelsen P E Deputy Director/County Engineer James D Luger RLA Parks Director Vrgmka S Chace Administrative Senvlces Division Manager Larry S Nybec k, PLS{ounty Surveyor Deputy Director Survey and Land Management Drvmon Mama Erickson Faalihes Manager We appreciate your, Klayton's and the City's consultants' time in meeting with us on July 23'd to discuss the Draft Boutwell South Area Plan Draft Report With the Stillwater City and Township Joint Board's approval of the Draft Report on July 24"', we want to provide you with our comments on this report and the recommended Neal Avenue alignment as the City Council considers final approval This area has several challenges for providing a local road system that works with our County highway system These include vertical grades current City street spacing current traffic patterns and their affect on neighborhoods and adjacent properties that will develop in different timeframes We all know that traffic on City streets and along County State Aid Highway 12 (CSAH 12) will only increase with time While neither the amount nor the pace of this increase is exactly known planning for this increase in this difficult area is needed The County s investment in access control when CSAH 12 was constructed in the mid -seventies was a step to assist in the future planning of developments The existing access openings on the north side of CSAH 12 are generally 30 feet wide and therefore, do not accommodate a City street There is no access opening that aligns with the proposed Neal Avenue connection Any changes to this access control will require County Board approval We appreciate that the proposed alignment of Neal Avenue addresses some local concerns However, transferring or creating problems on the regional highway system to adaress local concerns is not reasonable We know from our experience in operating our highway system that the proposed location for connecting Neal Avenue to CSAH 12 will create operational problems on the County highway There simply is not enough length between the adjacent intersections (Northland Avenue and Maryknoll Drive) to develop appropriate left turn lanes It would be irresponsible for us to allow construction of an intersection that will create a situation that affects the safety of current and future highway users While further analysis is needed, the proposed Neal Avenue connection location may be acceptable if Northland Avenue and possibly Maryknoll Drive are restricted to nght-ininght-out movement only This would require a raised median on CSAH 12 The County does not have any project programmed or funds available in the current Capital Improvement Program for this work We would expect that the development creating the need for this improvement would bear the cost of the needed work H I N G TO N C O U N W Wisniewski P E V AS Director DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DonaidJ Theisen PE Deputy D rector/County Engineer & PHYSICAL DEVELOPMENT James Luger PL.A 11660 MYERON ROAD NORTH STILLWATER MINNESOTA 55082 9573 Parks Director 651-430-4300 Facsimile Machine 651-430-4350 Virg, -„a S Chace Administrative Services Division Manager Larry S Nybeck PLS-County Surveyor Deputy Director Survey and Land Management Division Marvin Erickson Facgi ies Manager August 23 2002 Shem Buss BRAA Inc 2335 W Highway 36 St Paul MN 55113 BOUTWELL SOUTH AREA PLAN DRAFT REPORT- AUGUST 2002 Dear Sherri We have reviewed the latest draft of the Boutwell South area Plan and generally feel that it fairly represents the County s positions We do have several comments Section II Existing Conditions and Issues, Roadways, Streets, and Trails- Manning Avenue- We suggest changing the term "stoplight to traffic signal" The reference to a temporary traffic signal at the Boutwell/Manning intersection could be misconstrued- it is too late to add that to the turn lane project, but one could be considered at that intersection if signal warrants are met We plan to add that intersection to our Traffic Signal Ranking System but would not ordinarily install a signal until the conditions at the intersection place it in a position in the rankings to get funding At that time a signal would be installed in accordance with our cost participation policies Realistically it could be many years before this intersection would rise high enough in the rankings to be funded Also the last sentence in the Manning Avenue section contains a typo and it could be clearer- the earliest that we could get federal funding for an upgrade of Manning Avenue north of CSAH 12 is 2008 Section II Existing Conditions and Issues, Existing Traffic -The frustration expressed by local residents about poor circulation and about increased traffic on Northland and Maryknoll illustrates a classic sense of frustration of residents in growing areas- they can t have it both ways Good circulation Will in most cases increase traffic Nevertheless we do not feel that aligning a Neal Avenue connection to CSAH 12 with either Northland or Maryknoll will lead to significant cut -through traffic- the routes are simply too circuitous We feel that it is necessary to align Neal Avenue With an existing street to create a safe intersection Our collective opinion is that nearly all of the drivers wishing to go to the commercial areas around County Road 5 and Highway 36 will use Deer Path as a cut -through route as drivers are doing today We feel that development of the Boutwell South area will increase traffic on Deer Path significantly because that is the shortest, most direct route and that drivers will not choose Maryknoll or Northland because they are longer and less direct O Section IV Recommendations for the Boutwell South Planning Area B Roadways, Recommendation 3 Neal Avenue should be extended to County Road 12 midway between Northland and Maryknoll Avenues - As we have discussed since the right of Page two Letter to Shem Buss — Boutwell August 23 2002 way of CSAH 12 includes access control approval of the County Board is required for any connection to be made in the access controlled portion Our discussions of medians centered on raised medians creating a physical bamer to prohibited turning movements and therefore being the only way to enforce 'right-in/right-out" restrictions It would be difficult and very expensive to design medians that effectively limit movements and allow a safe location for the inevitable U-tums that will occur Moreover, the restriction of Northland Maryknoll, or both to nght-in/nght-out movements would likely be very unpopular with the residents of those streets Under some conditions we might be able to recommend a plan such as this to the Board, but we feel that lining the Neal Avenue connection up with either Northland or Maryknoll is very important Under any circumstance we could not allow restriction of the streets to the south without a public hearing Section IV Recommendations for the Boutwell South Planning Area B Roadways, Recommendation 3 Neal Avenue should be extended to County Road 12 midway between Northland and Maryknoll Avenues - The comments on lowered speed limits in this section are speculative and may give residents who view speeds as too high a false sense that development along CSAH 12 will lower the speed limit when that is rarely the case In any event lowered speed limits do not correlate to increased access Section IV Recommendations for the Boutwell South Planning Area B Roadways, Recommendation 3 Neat Avenue should be extended to County Road 12 midway between Northland and Maryknoll Avenues - The City's recommendations for the recommended Neal Avenue alignment are illogical Access to collector roads would be better if intersections with the arterial road (CSAH 12) were consolidated at fewer intersections This plan does not consolidate access, it spreads it out to more locations than necessary and more than can safely be accommodated Fewer intersections along the arterial would reduce the number of turning movements necessary to get on and off of the arterial and the intersections could be controlled with traffic signals or all -way stop signs if necessary The recommended alignment will result in more intersections, none of them easily controlled The mid -point location of Neal Avenue would not necessarily spread traffic among the residential streets to the south since few of them offer a direct route anywhere- it would likely perpetuate the already contentious cut -through traffic on Deer Path Section IV Recommendations for the Boutwell South Planning Area B Roadways, Recommendation 4 The Boutwell-County Road 12 intersection should be modified to improve safety Traffic Analysis- The comments on traffic signals at the CSAH 12/15 intersection and at the CSAH 15/Boutwell intersection should be clarified It is highly likely that the reconstruction plans for CSAH 15 will include a traffic signal at CSAH 12 but nothing specific has yet been proposed It is certainly an option and very likely, but at this time there are no plans A signal at CSAH 15/Boutwell intersection is a possibility but it would be treated as all other County road intersections are- it would be subject to the standards of the County's Traffic Signal Ranking System and our cost participation policies Section IV Recommendations for the Boutwell South Planning Area B Roadways, Recommendation 4 The Boutwell-County Road 12 intersection should be modified to improve safety Traffic Analysis- We disagree somewhat wth the wording of the section that states that "The proposed alignment for the Neal Avenue connection to County 12 at a point midway between residential streets to the south to encourage the use of County 15 and disperse traffic among other streets, rather than creating a direct connection and higher Page three Letter to Shem Buss — Boutwell August 23, 2002 traffic volumes on residential streets to the south " This sentence is grammatically unclear and suggests that drivers will continue south through any street that lines up with Neal Avenue whether it is a direct route to any destination or not Very few drivers will cut through residential areas unless they find that it is a quicker route to their destination Neither Northland nor Maryknoll is an efficient route to anywhere but the residential areas that surround them Section IV Recommendations for the Boutwell South Planning Area B Roadways, Recommendation 4 The Boutwell-County Road 12 intersection should be modified to improve safety Traffic Analysis- The final bullet in this section contains a typo and we also disagree with its content We feel that development of the Boutwell South area will have minimal traffic impact on Maryknoll Avenue and Northland Avenue, but will perpetuate the pattern of drivers using Deer Path as a cut -through route We appreciate your efforts to include our comments in the report I hope that these comments clarify the County s positions Please call me at 651-430-4312 if you have any questions or comments Sincerely, uc X"x seph Lux Senior Transportation Planner c Steve Russell, Stillwater Community Development Director Klayton Eckles Stillwater City Engineer Don Theisen County Engineer/Transportation Division Director Wally Abrahamson Washington County Commissioner Distnct 3 Jim Schug Washington County Administrator R USERSTMFLUMORMPlat Rwew- SAvateffioutweA South August 2002 Dratdoc eonestroo In STILLWATER MN ene ® Andertlk & + ��� AndAssoctates nineTu of Anir`nnir: ARFA (--ONCFPT PLANS Eng)nee a Alchtreccs oo(iou 4a FQAAM DWAAWbw AT* to fzp iz Go " l2 AT r vlw G L , CbP4'P Wc,T ( UA*D ff ML,A-r N e ctotieK. WAfiD Wft OM otJ 4-A W ro & f7AVVAVOV2 w" -tv p-N t,fiN ES Omtw * 7N brvxWeit, AT tZANT`') PID 12- ADD LW 'NON LRr1E (^N9rWGT (r Ar-V WLL orn oN 4b 'Orvurw u. Ornw g oe 2 ?C1s�t1 NN-5B&-n o f--I J �'� — (�'�------=/ — 4 �' I � �17-- N T° ps _ _ it I _ 1 l am-- g'_`° Cr ✓ �'�'f f� �y� JD ol ILrx� Liqus %?,A' i I I �_� «� I °oD\° t An\o\\\ Fo 1/ Sj,/ r ,I Jp ° ° "` f _ ' y °__.cD o° ° / / - o rDo �L 7 ((, 1' o D 00� r�1DV�vO"— ° -.�—/ opl (�b °°° pN° p\\ 1/Z LL D O cc� D D i o I co J 4 DIM Em Sjh..�i Lei Z _Cc I� rb� b � �� D G0710, p j t rr' J I�'�f ru o ° /—�—I 55 I 3 90- 0, o f p F we 91Y^r f / 1 1 I D VATLS - I / t _r hill or i 7 d`61NC Ltx�7L5 R— p 3YY7�.5 -- - _ Orr- _ _ / 5 i cv o SnI.-ATER TOni.ry y � ` /ltypyi,P I 44f// 'n- LLrutt� - — 1 i r� JCL r� t _' fr-/-��S✓ ;�. / '� i � � a — ° 1 p rCdY' o f ° � // _ +i ° - I .Ile 3 dy �f rl�L�` e �� Si LtdLt LI isJT_11-•--/'� S i'! 151111 1 IlTy�c oli i �7ab 2 �i 4,�(1 / U0 YC%V $its �i // ! I \ \ o .S� -oo•-a ° i /\cc1al -a� 1_7� { ° o a ,acy /r o jilt I Ii +moo o o o[ I` m L o ty a \ . O ` a AA40 � ° J o°o o -q�} do o _ fy`mttl 08 u t 0 o ` I h °O° ° o ° o ° r o r-b�1'� cra°s I j 1D ° o a a `�LPO ap-'T� y `O /of \ ? a° o ° a a ° ° ° �BoQ °�✓ r VVV.� oAr�° I 3 °_B f oa a//e�� - for �g ° 1 a- - att f 1 p�� ° ° o ° _° k t I-° Id lS"ilN ^LlT °� I �f ®' a \ -�-% L I c c' mo - Qa a N� I �nl•OC/� ° coJ 0 ° of 1/At 1\u O ` �'■r I 2 t^ �� f o jl 1 Q' \ r y� 5 v ° +� jr UntDo DE1QPIt55 - _ ° I i ff '- 517 F.R f ® ® ° ° M1 I l II� o f A ` °° �� o 0000h i— �i r ooa:oo oa0000_ IL `�-- or-nN 2 U r�l7 {{7 a / �— /N1 V \ y C--��1 oO yid — - � rs �� b' - - _co- \ a sA . QwJP� 1 T SR.I.AAFA TI11N911P d`��°� � �� \\' ''i �Zo��1 \ — C . IL ' , mxa l y"' r� I °2 it ° �_ j s� r , Y J-�8 it �I7 g F' Egg CAL LtU YC80II , C,a , g ss ....t�O�_a�����! \ ° �� c4D Oo� It n� oo�co °O I; rm Ply oo o ao 9 1°a- \ ° � a— , d-2ior7 - I 1'aa d i/!, /mtip_ya `4 1 ° I ° - f) ""- d °°- 7 -- I ` - ,!r icy // < {,�>� ? r° ` 1!-Z� �aa°� I ° Ii ) 5 a o o a ° a/� \ ll ae o `' ° 0 ° �� f °.7 r ° �f {�J f \\ �e �ilIL fit a ®•y °° S o p I Un ° a ald �,. Y/ da>7 \ + tq,�Ct ° f q //y - ° �LL + OOP^ I` Or ° °Nc 2 -Wq'L VN ' b a c _ � a ELI T°'AN _ "� lYA a f—1 lft der• ao \ - OTY G SfA�WIEA - ® I I iiI sy-. °I \ l L o ° / / r v JM1- � ) ' -_ - ,L �I `, - - -ate -ter'-- - - t� is„�--- ' ����✓.,r � I _ a It to / rco��aa t °i °° a 3 / i + / r �°a -• `�-....r � t�'���t err I I/ l � r. � F � \ a ° � ap li ri ad a ✓j�'�1�2� _ ty a i\ °_-�-r�T.` I c � REVISED . : \ (\ }/ \ } } SOUTH AREA RE\ PLAN (\N um� z4A,p-7= -'/ REVISED BOUTWELL SOUTH AREA PLAN June 2004 ( 1 J Table of Contents ❑ Executive Summary Z ❑ 1 Project Summary 3 ❑ II Existing Conditions and Issues 4 ❑ III Planning Process ❑ IV Recommendations E'3 9 Land Use 9 Roadways 10 Stormwater Management 13 Integration of Stormwater and Circulation 17 Sewer and Water Services 17 ❑ V Implementation 1 ❑ Attachments 21 City ofShllwater—Boutwell South Area Plan 1 Executive Summary This plan provides recommendations for the Boutwell South Planning Area a neighborhood within the Stillwater Expansion Area The area is part of the Phase IV annexation area scheduled for annexation after 2015 Areas within the planning area can be annexed earlier if petitioned by property owner(s) and determined to be of benefit by the City The Boutwell South Planning Area contains approximately 350 acres The current land use is large lot rural residential and vacant land The plan proposes that as the area becomes part of the City of Stillwater approximately 120 acres a third of the area be developed as urban low -density single-family residential The proposed development areas are mostly in the eastern portion of the Planning Area The western portion of the area is recommended to remain rural residential at this time with two areas of exception located at the corner of CR 15 and CR 12 and CR 15 and Boutwell Road The plan recommends that road improvements (Neal, Boutwell CR 15) be considered before any Phase IV expansion development occur In addition to land use recommendations the plan includes recommendations for circulation parks trails and open space public utilities and storm water management The plan recommends that Neal Avenue be extended as a collector parkway through the planning area and connect to CR 12 at Northland Avenue and that trails be completed along creeks and roadways to implement trail connections identified in the City's Comprehensive Trail Plan The plan calls for the City to work with Washington County and the Croixwood neighborhood in developing a specific design for the extension of Neal Avenue The County controls access to County Road 12, and has expressed concerns related to access management and safety The plan analyzes development traffic and stormwater impacts from the South Boutwell Area and updates the Stillwater Alternative Urban Areawide Review AUAR, (1997) for these issues The residents of the area the Stillwater Planning Commission Washington County, and others participated actively in developing this plan during the 2002 plan preparation process City ojStillwater—Boutwell South Area Plan 2 Boutwell South Planning Study Project Summary This plan provides a comprehensive planning framework that will guide land use development circulation, storm water management, parks trails, greenways and other development decisions in the Boutwell South Planning Area Plan preparation began in January 2002 In 2003, a comprehensive traffic study for the city expansion area provided additional information that is incorporated into this final plan and used as a basis for land use recommendations The area contains slightly more than 350 acres in size, and is bounded by Boutwell Avenue County Road 15 (Manning Avenue), and County Road 12 Most of the area is currently located within Stillwater Township and scheduled for annexation to the City of Stillwater after 2015 Figure 1 identifies the boundaries of the planning area and shows existing conditions The City of Stillwater's Comprehensive Plan (1995) identified the majority of land use in the Boutwell South Planning Area as "rural residential" through 2015 The Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) for the annexation area assumed rural residential land use in the Boutwell South area when it analyzed the environmental impacts of proposed development in the Annexation Area, and developed the mitigation plan to address these impacts Both the 1995 Comprehensive Plan and AUAR assumed that no urban services would be provided in the area before 2015 However, since 1995 several property owners in the Boutwell South area expressed interest in annexing to the City and developing their land at urban densities before 2015 City orderly annexation policies allow landowners in areas adjacent to the existing city limits to petition for early annexation One landowner interested in annexation is located at the corner of Manning Avenue and County Road 12, another is located south of Newberry Court (see Figure 1) Other landowners in the Boutwell South area expressed interest in annexation during this planning study The Boutwell South Area Plan is prepared to coordinate and guide land use, zoning, parks, trails, circulation systems, public utilities and storm water management in the area when development occurs Once adopted, the City will consider City ojSttllwater—Boutwell South Area Plan 3 U T alm JgV 1 Pik, i individual property owner requests for annexation and change in land use based on this overall plan The plan also reviews the environmental impacts identified in the AUAR, analyzes the potential impacts of the proposed land use and utility plans for the area and discusses possible mitigation strategies II Existing Conditions and Issues Initially, the City's Planning Staff consultants and Planning Commission met with plan area residents and Washington County Public Works to review existing conditions and identify issues to be considered in developing the area plan Issues identified are listed below Roadways, Streets, and Trails • Manning Avenue (County Road 15) Washington Pw BAIT - gore County s current Capital Improvement Plan identifies A reconstruction of Manning Avenue from Trunk Highway 36 to CSAH 12 in 2007 This protect will include a four- rVAW lane roadway traffic signals abike/pedestrian trail on the Stillwater side of the road The County controls 6 access to CR 15 including driveways and new streets P4 There is no timeframe for upgrading Manning Avenue to a 4-lane roadway north of County 12 to TH 96 County staff indicated that the earliest time for this upgrade is 2008 Neal Avenue The City is considering options to connect Neal Avenue with County Road 12 Issues related to this proposal include the following o Improvement of the existing Boutwell Road/County Road 12 intersection o Access to Boutwell Avenue homes east of Neal o The existing steep grade on County Road 12 at Maryknoll makes sight Imes difficult for locating a new intersection east of Northland Avenue o The County has purchased the access rights of CSAH 12 right of way between Boutwell Road and Manning Avenue (Openings exist to accommodate existing private driveways and streets ) Access spacing standards and need for turn lanes will be considered in the design of any proposed Neal Avenue connection o A variety of options for the new Neal Avenue route were studied Each has potential traffic and land use impacts as described in attached Expansion Area Traffic Study City oJShllwater—Boutwell South Area Plan 4 o Residents in the area are concerned about potential traffic impacts of connecting Neal Avenue to residential streets in Croixwood to the south of County Road 12 o Residents expressed concerns about increased traffic on Boutwell Minar and other local streets due to the Settlers Glen Development north of the Boutwell South planning area o Residents expressed concern for speeds on County Road 12, and would like the State Commissioner of Transportation to reduce the speed limit on this road o Boutwell Road residents expressed concerns for condition, pedestrian conflict and speeds of travel on Boutwell Road since Settlers Glen Development o The Boutwell Road CR 12 intersection is difficult and access from Boutwell Road to Manning Avenue experience delays o Concern was expressed for the traffic impact on Neal Avenue of Phase III (Palmer Development Property) Existing Traffic Many residents expressed frustration concerning existing poor circulation in the area and the potential for these problems to worsen with additional development They also expressed concerns that a Neal connection near Maryknoll Road or Northland Avenue would route unacceptable volumes of traffic onto residential streets in the Croixwood area Trails The City s Comprehensive Trail Plan identifies a number of existing and proposed trails within and around the study area Issues for the planning study include o Creating good pedestrian connections through the study area linking the proposed trails o Provide trail access to natural areas for enjoyment of natural areas while connecting to exwshng trails in the area o Residents on the west side of the planning area expressed concern for trails along their property Imes Stormwater Management and Wetlands Stormwater management The AUAR proposed that stormwater in the Annexation Area (including the Boutwell South area) be diverted away from Brown s Creek to protect the designated trout stream and associated resources The City is currently constructing this diversion system Land use changes City of Stillwater—Boutwell South Area Plan 5 proposed for the Boutwell South Area could increase the rate and volume of stormwater runoff from this area beyond the level identified in the AUAR Related issues include the following o The AUAR proposed storm water ponding in several existing basins in the South Boutwell Area to manage runoff The size of these ponds may need to be increased, or other storm water management strategies required if land use changes in the area o An impact fee is being assessed to new development in the Annexation Area to pay for the cost of the stormwater diversion would be assessed to new development in the Boutwell South area o Storm water facilities in the area could be designed to serve as amenities for development in the area, and provide multiple benefits such as open space, buffers among land uses and trail corridors o Ponds to manage runoff will be required for all new development Wetland Buffers The Brown's Creek Watershed District requires that 150 undisturbed vegetative buffers be established along the Brown s Creek tributaries and wetlands in this area This will affect the size and configuration of developable areas Land Use Existing Land Use Much of the Boutwell South area is currently occupied by large lot single family residences Many of these residents indicated that they plan to maintain this large lot development pattern for the foreseeable future Issues related to the future land use in the area include the following o Identify appropriate long-term land use designations in the Boutwell South area o Evaluate which land use(s) would be compatible with existing development in the area, and identify needs for buffers or separation between some land use types o Evaluate which land uses are compatible with roadways and storm water infrastructure capacity available for the area o Identify an appropriate land use transition from the city limits going westward o Existing residents in the area expressed strong concerns about increased densities proposed City of Stillwater—Boutwell South Area Plan 6 for the area Many were opposed to any change in land use designations before 2015 Single family housing compatible with existing homes in the area was preferred over attached housing Parks and open space Additional open space and neighborhood park areas should be identified in the Boutwell South area as development occurs Open space areas may also be designed and located to serve storm water management functions and provide transitions between land uses Open space corridors and trails in the South Boutwell areas should connect with those in surrounding areas Phasing issues The City has a limit of 120 new residential permits per year within the entire annexation area The timing of new development in the Boutwell South area may be affect by these limits City of Stillwater—Boutwell South Area Plan 7 III Planning Process The development of the plan included meetings with affected parties including city residents in and around the planning area the City s Planning Commission City -Township Joint Board, Washington County Public Works Staff and the City Council The plan was also reviewed by the Brown s Creek Watershed District The final plan being presented for approval has incorporated the results and approved recommendations from the Expansion Area Traffic Study as they related to the Boutwell South Planning Area Discussions included the following Planning Commission and Public Input The City s Planning Commission considered the plan at four meetings including a public hearing on April 8 2002 A large number of residents from the Boutwell South planning area and surrounding neighborhoods attended these meetings and identified their issues and concerns Issues discussed at these meetings are listed in the previous section The plan includes the Commission's recommendations regarding land use stormwater management, public utilities circulation and overall design City -Township Joint Board The Joint Board reviewed the draft plan and Planning Commission recommendations on July 24, 2002 The discussion and comments focused on roadway and land use issues Washington County City staff and consultants met with staff from the Washington County Physical Development Department several times during the planning process to discuss issues related to roadways and trails County concerns and recommendations are descnbed in Section IV, and copies of letters received from the County are included in the Attachmmee —, i .„ City Council On September 13, 2004 he't City Council held a public heanng on the plan At that meeting, traffic impact of study area development on Deerpath was identified as a concern for the study A separate expansion area traffic study was then conducted The results of that traffic study has been incorporated into this plan Major new policies deal with Deerpath/Brick and Neal Avenue City of Stillwater—Boutwell South Area Plan 8 IV Recommendations for the Boutwell South Planning Area A Land Use Recommendation 9 Figure 2 identifies proposed land uses for the Boutwell South Area Land use for the eastern portion of the planning area is designated urban low -density single family (3 DU's per net developable acre)' Most of the existing Rural Residential land use areas in the western half of the Area are maintained in rural residential use, with densities of one unit per 2 5 acres Two areas, corner of County 95 and County 92, and County 95 and Boutwell Avenue are designated tow Density Single Family Recommendation 2 Development proposals for the area should be in the form of Planned Unit Developments to provide flexibility in project design and design review The areas identified for Low -density Single Family land use will extend existing land uses from the City Limits to Long Lake Creek that bisects the planning area from north to south The creek corridor will provide a transition between new land uses and the existing larger -lot areas to the west While the proposed land use designation is a higher density than the existing Rural Residential land uses it is a relatively low urban density and should be compatible with existing uses to the west of the creek The new low -density single-family areas should also be compatible with existing urban developed areas to the east Two areas identified for Low -density Single Family are located at the western corners of the planning area These areas are adjacent to CR 15 at CR 12 and Boutwell Road The two sites are adjacent Setters Glen and Liberty commercial The designation of the land uses will allow for a range of housing types and help the City to meet its housing goals Low- density Single Family development may include either clustered attached and single lot detached single-family housing The proposed densities allows for "clustering" of units on sites to protect natural resources ' Net developable land equals total acreage minus roads, wetlands and steeply sloped area City of Stillwater—Bounvell South Area Plan 9 Land Use [-_ City Public Works Facility I Park / Open Space / Cemetery _ -- — [� Rural Residential Single Family / Low Density 22.013I � ' � ���� �� - , sao o aoo 16.923 --- ��-- \ Feet ---- - � 36-1384— *110 � 19:482 j — — F— -7.70 ' i 0.03$ — —' - - 0.282 14 .31 6 q.092 — 0.754 . 0.052 �. 52 0. -- -\�— 0.231 108 0.226 14.322 — L Boutwell South Planning Area0 roo WAMRose Bonestst Anderiik & Propused Land Uses and Acrea a Figure 2 � Associates g Engineers &Architects 15101510011091caftiMiuse.apr June 2002 The distribution and amount of land designated for each land use type in the Boutwell South Area is as follows Rural Residential (1 DU/2 5 AC) 167 acres Single Family, Low -density (3 DU/Net Ac) 120 acres Parks/open space/wetlands 48 acres City (Public Works Bldg) 17 acres TOTAL 352 acres Recommendation 3 Annexation and development of lands in the South of Boutwell Planning area should not occur until a specific Neal Avenue connection location and design has been determined The Planning Commission continues to recommend that Neal Avenue be extended from Boutwell Road and connected at Northland Avenue They continue to have concerns for allowing discretionary Phase IV development before Manning Avenue (Washington County) and Boutwell Road improvements are made B Roadways Recommendation 3 Neal Avenue should be extended from Boutwell to County Road 92 and intersect County Road 92 at Northland Further study is necessary to ensure that Neal traffic does not significantly impact the Croixwood neighborhood Because the land on the north side of CR 12 across from Northland is not in the City and this property owner is not currently interested in annexing to the City it may be some time before the street improvement is possible It is further recommended that Neal Avenue between Boutwell and CR12, it be designed as a parkway with landscaped median larger budding setbacks and trails The street should be designed to fit into the landscape with gradual turns with access to local streets The road design could also incorporate stormwater management measures Washington County strongly supports a Neal connection to CR 12 at Northland for traffic management reasons (Washington County controls access to CR 12 and have purchased access rights along that stretch of road) Recommendation 4 The Boutwell-County Road 92 intersection should be studies with the extension of Neal Avenue City of Stillwater—Boutwell South Area Plan 10 Possible improvements include turn control The expansion area transportation plan recommended limiting left turn movements from Boutwell to Cr 12 when Neal is connected to CR 12 Boutwell Road The City of Stillwater has scheduled improvements for Boutwell Road to be completed by 2005, including a new 26 roadway and trail in the existing right of way The complete Expansion Area Transportation Study is attached along with the City Council recommendations Traffic Analvsis The new Low -density Single Family land use areas proposed in this plan could generate up to 3 445 total daily trips on area roads, if the 120 acres are fully developed at the maximum 3 units per net developable acre The number of trips would be well within the capacity of existing area roadways, particularly when Manning Avenue (County 15) is upgraded, and planned improvements have been completed to Boutwell Road County 15 in this area currently carries nearly 14,000 trips on an average weekday Washington County noted that the combination of new traffic from the Boutwell South Area with new traffic from the Settlers Glen development north of Boutwell may create traffic problems and delays at intersections (Boutwell/Manning and County 12/Manning) The County has indicated that a new traffic signal at the County 12/Manning intersection is likely, though no specific plan has been proposed (the project may be constructed in 2006) During discussions related to this plan, the County indicated that it may consider addition of a traffic signal at the Boutwell/County Road 15 intersection as well, subject to the standards of the County's Traffic Signal Ranking System and its cost participation policies County 15 will be the focus of many of the work and shopping - related trips from the new residential areas The City will construct a new Frontage Road (extension of Curve Crest Boulevard) from the intersection of County 15 and 62nd Street, parallel to Highway 36, to the Curve Crest intersection at County 5, as development occurs in the area along Highway 36 This will provide a convenient connection for residents from the Settler's Glen and Boutwell South Areas to this retail area (See map Concept Plan for 62"d Street Frontage Road in the Attachments ) City of Stillwater—Boutwell South Area Plan 11 Igw, aENA powic _OPT N bi'A,-6 �11 MA 00' 1 LIaPJ FA 1 lb�fi�tA AV¢.;/YT�/ 2 ANC \ 'l�Dl!F(1 f-,1-L 6a UT44 'n JOIN i h r, txco-A - - - , cortch-ft 3-vStgN iT �Pogjj� R Trips that do not use County 15 will be dispersed among other area roadways —primarily Boutwell Road and County 12 and Deerpath and Brick Street (see attached Expansion Area Traffic Study for comprehensive discussion of expansion area traffic) Trails Recommendation 5 Trails should be developed in the study area as shown on Figures 1 and 6, and include the following • East side of Manning Avenue • North side of Boutwell Road • South side of County Road 12 (existing) • Brown's Creek tributanes, connecting with existing trails to the Brown's Creek Open Space site and Long Lake • Proposed Neal Avenue connection Recommendation 6 An underpass should complete the trail connection under County Road 12 near Northland Avenue The underpass is proposed to allow a safe crossing to the park and elementary school on the south side of County Road 12 The exact location of the underpass will be determined in the future and will depend on potential alteration of the grade of County Road 12 and sods in the area The County has indicated strong support for this underpass (letter dated July 2, 2002) Trails should be physically separated from roadways to provide a safe and pleasant experience for trail users The route of an historic trolley route from Como Lake in St Paul to Stillwater is still visible within the study area and in other portions of Washington County Consideration should be given to preservation and use of this feature, particularly if it can be used to make trail or habitat connections to other areas within the County City of Stillwater Boutwell South Area Plan 12 o " ON hD0 �p ►VCWSL{. INTEl1/ ,�N AV cp P-D 12_ 0. Al- Rt� + v-%eW LRN &.�, w � 1= 12 A-F Da W VU, 06N54-iti()GT (fGtA7tiD cam,► �-. .t r �_....tr . ^�':li: O-n o N 4 r1GIV A.t- GoW`3t'7 F-Q Iz_ ADD LFFr VAN Ght�E LeNy(�1�fi (�hrD R-fiL AT 11 $ l,w 16Y— z „ - ti 01-n O>-4 fb -CrtmWf; . o oF� goy 2 )per fA.� G0 n�.J7 1 ' ' o�1 4-0. W lb S ttaU► t,9 W MA -TV P-N LANE-, t� �--t7��:—. +�"SYIEn�'c�c A"�41Fa�sdk�Q �k.fa1•£,c'I �.t��z^���,Sj :}-Cr .. ;€,*4 'S�,�p G �� I� C Stormwater Manaaement Recommendation 7 The two existing landlocked depressions within the planning area should be used to provide flood control for the surrounding development and moderate water level fluctuations Outlets are recommended for both depressions The City will require developers to provide water quality ponds, use infiltration or filtration strategies, or other feasible management strategies to provide water quality treatment within local development sites and to control volumes and rates of flow to protect the functions of these two regional ponds Recommendation 8 When Boutwell Road is reconstructed, the roadway and culverts should be constructed as described in the analysis below, to prevent flooding of Boutwell Road Stormwater Analysis The Boutwell South Area includes subdistricts S208 S209 and S206 of the Stillwater Drainage District described in the 1997 Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) Figure 5 identified the boundaries of these subdistricts When the AUAR analysis was completed, these subdistricts were proposed to remain in rural residential land uses (1 unit per 2 5 acres) through the year 2015 This plan suggests that portions of the area be designated for Low Density Single Family uses at a density of up to 3 units per acre The change in proposed densities requires that the AUAR analysis be reviewed, potential impacts identified, and recommendations developed to avoid or mitigate for potential impacts The AUAR proposed to avoid impacts of proposed development in the Stillwater Annexation Area by diverting storm water away from Brown's Creek, a state -designated trout stream to McKusick Lake and a ravine downstream The diversion system included in the AUAR Mitigation Plan was sized to divert 100 percent of the runoff from events up to a 3- inch, 24-hour event The recommendations for the Boutwell South Planning Area include the rate control necessary to maintain the storm water management goals of the AUAR Mitigation Plan Stormwater Analysis Assumptions During development of this plan, the drainage system for the area was reviewed from a regional perspective In modeling the subwatersheds in the Boutwell South Area two assumptions were made City ojShIlwater—Boutwell South Area Plan 13 SOUTWELL SOM PLANNING AREA - SURFACE WATER ELEMEM7 8 FIGURE 6 Bonestroo '" Rosem CITY OF STILLWATER AndarlY,Associates 1:\510\51001 109\CA0\DWQ\$10011090MOM JUW 2W2 1 Development of the Boutwell South area was assumed to occur at the maximum proposed densities 2 The contributions of local water quality/quantity ponds or infiltration approaches within local development sites were not included Only the completed retention ponds in the Public Works Facility have been modeled Therefore the results are conservative Subdistrict S208 Recommendations There are two landlocked depressions within S208 The Tables and accompanying text below summarize the analysis completed to identify impacts to these ponds from the development proposed in the Boutwell South Area To provide flood control for the surrounding development and moderate water level fluctuation outlets are recommended for both depressions The change in proposed land uses (represented by the curve number on the tables) is associated with only a minor change in High Water Level from the existing conditions for the two depressions This is due to the addition of the outlets Table 3 provides the summary of the proposed pond characteristics Regional Pond S-P208 1 The farthest upstream depression designated S-P208 1 has the following characteristics • Drainage area = 24 75 acres • Surface area at NWL (903 2 based on 1996 aerial topography) = 0 72 acres • Estimated existing watershed curve number = 65 • Proposed watershed curve number = 75 • Proposed outlet to be restncted by a 6-inch orifice • Table 1 provides HWL comparisons between existing and proposed conditions (assuming a starting water surface elevation of 903 2 ) Table 1- Regional Pond S-P208 1 Storm Event 24-hour Existing HWL Proposed HWL 1- ear 9039 9040 2-year 9043 9043 100-year 9071 9072 5-00 ycav 2 9 Regional Pond S-P208 2 The outlet from regional pond S-P208 1 was routed downstream to depression City of Stillwater—Boutwell South Area Plan 14 S-P208 2 The drainage characteristics of S-P208 2 are as follows • Drainage area = 19 66 acres • Surface area at NWL (896 0 based on 1996 aerial topography) = 0 41 acres • Existing watershed curve number = 65 • Proposed watershed curve number = 75 • Proposed outlet to restricted by an 8-inch orifice • Table 2 provides HWL comparisons between existing and proposed conditions (assuming a starting water surface elevation of 896 ) Table 2 - Regional Pond S-P208 2 Storm Event 24-hour Existing HWL Proposed HWL 1-year 8968 8973 2-year 8971 8978 100 year 9003 9011 Table 3- PnnH S-P9nR 1 R C-P9nR 9 C►rmm�ra Pond NWL 100-Year HWL Peak Stom,, Discharge Volume (acr cfs) feet S-P208 1 9032 9072 18 49 S-P208 2 8960 9011 21 50 Boutwell Road Recommendations Boutwell Road frequently floods where the road crosses two channels The road is expected to be rebuilt in the near future due to its age and condition There are two primary culvert crossings along Boutwell that were evaluated in this study The west crossing occurs in subdistnct S206, the east crossing to subdistrict S209 The 1997 AUAR Feasibility Study recommended improvements for flood protection at these culvert crossings These recommendations were re-evaluated and have been revised as discussed below The revised recommendations were developed to restrict flow rates under Boutwell Road, to provide a system that meets the AUAR mitigation strategy The Boutwell Road improvements are needed regardless of the City of Stillwater—Boutwell South Area Plan 15 potential for redevelopment upstream of Boutwell Road Boutwell Road East Boutwell Road east crossing receives flows from its direct drainage area (subdistrict S209) Long Lake channel and subdistrict S208 The proposed culvert is a 36-inch pipe (estimated upstream invert 879 0) The modeled 100-year storm HWL along the road is 883 0 with a peak flow of 53 cfs The existing road elevation of 885 6 provides sufficient freeboard Boutwell Road West Boutwell Road west crossing receives flow from subdistrict S206 and areas in Stillwater south of CSAH 12 and from the City of Grant (west of Manning Ave ) This road crossing is the most susceptible to flooding due to its low profile at the crossing and insufficient culvert capacity One 36-inch and two 24-inch culverts at staggered elevations are recommended The 36-inch outlet is proposed to convey channel flow (estimated upstream invert elevation = 878 5) The 36-inch culvert will provide rate control for the 3-year and smaller storm events The two 24-inch outlets with upstream invert elevation of 881 0 will be used only during high flow events The modeled 100-year storm HWL along the road is 885 6 with a peak flow of 126 cfs The HWL and peak discharge assumes ponding in Grant as proposed in the AUAR Without ponding in Grant the HWL will rise to 888 9 feet (unless the road is allowed to flood periodically, though at a lower frequency or additional culverts are added) The existing road has a low point elevation of 882 9 feet The road profile will need to be raised to provide flood storage volume upstream of the road, cover over the proposed culverts and freeboard protection for the road The recommendations for Boutwell Road may be modified when Boutwell Road is reconstructed As stated previously the recommendations assume a conservative scenario were future local water quantity and quality ponds within the redevelopment areas City of Stillwater—Bouhvell South Area Plan 16 directly draining to the road crossings were not taken into account Integration of Storm Water and Circulation Systems The location and design of infrastructure systems in the Boutwell South area provides opportunities to create connections and amenities that will add value to the area Figure 6 suggests a conceptual design for the Neal Avenue extension and adjacent storm water facilities as a "prairie parkway" that showcases the character of the local landscape connects wetland and upland habitat patches and provides areas for storm water management and recreation The concept design includes the following • A curved parkway that emphasizes the roiling nature of the landscape and provides views of the ponds and upland open space areas The curves and plantings could be designed to reduce speeds on the parkway • A wide boulevard along the parkway with groups of trees and wide swales planted with native grasses and wildflowers The swales may be used to infiltrate storm water runoff from the roadway and adjacent areas • Ponds planted with native wetland and meadow plants, and preservation of existing wooded areas that serve storm water management and habitat functions • Open space areas that provide opportunities for passive recreation and casual play • A recreational trail that connects the proposed trail on Boutwell Road with the existing trail on County Road 12 The proposed underpass for trail connections under County 12 is lust west of the proposed parkway Design elements of the parkway, such as curves and plantings, could be continued along new residential streets in the Boutwell South area, to emphasize the character of the local landscape and give the area a unique signature among Stillwater neighborhoods D Sewer and Water Services Recommendation 9 City sewer and water services should be provided to the areas proposed for Single Family land uses in this plan The areas in the eastern half of the Boutwell South area can be served from existing City services at the current Neal-Boutwell Avenue intersection City of Stillwater—Boutwell South Area Plan 17 o Areas in the western half of the Boutwell South area that are proposed for Single Family land uses can be served from existing service lines to the north or south City service capacity is available to meet demands estimated for the proposed land uses in this area City of Stillwater—Boutwell South Area Plan 18 IV Implementation This plan will be implemented over time Timing will be based on landowner interest availability of services and public improvements market demand for development and City ability to accommodate development Steps needed to implement the plan include the following Land Use • Apply for annexation to the City Annexation requests should be accompanied by Planned Unit Development concept • If annexation is approved the property is annexed with Agricultural Preserve zoning designation • Make application to re -zone the property Re -zoning must be approved by the Planning Commission Joint Board and City Council consistent with area plan land use and PUD • Phase III expansion area development should direct access and traffic to the maximum extent, through road design and location to TH 96 and CR 15 Roadway, Utility and Stormwater Improvements • Neal Parkway between Boutwell Road and CR 12 may be developed in phases based on the timing of development on various parcels in the Boutwell South Area • City presents proposed Neal Parkway design, including connections to CSAH 12, to the County The City coordinates with the County to complete final designs • Public hearing scheduled with area residents to discuss proposed changes to CSAH 12 including access changes at Northland Avenue • County Board must approve connection to CSAH 12 • Boutwell Road and related trail and stormwater improvements completed by the City in 2005-2006 This may include reconfiguration of Boutwell/County 12 intersection • Regional ponds and local storm water management strategies are designed as part of the PUD process and implemented as development occurs • County completes improvements to County Road 15 from TH 36 to CR 12 (2007) Trails • Trails are completed as development occurs The City and County may participate in development of City of Stillwater—Boutwell South Area Plan 19 some trails and in completion of the underpass at County Road 12 City of Stillwater—Boutwell South Area Plan 20 ATTACHMENT'S Attachment A Approved Expansion Area Study Recommendation City Council, April 20, 2004 Attachment B Washington County Public Works Letters regarding CR 12 and Boutwell South Area Plan (July 29, 2002 and August 23, 2002) Attachment C North 62"d Planning Area Concept Plan (Curve Crest Extension to CR 15) Attachment D Boutwell Area Transportation Study, November 12, 2003 City of Stillwater—Boutwell South Area Plan 21 f Attachment A City of Stillwater City Council Minutes Apn120 2004 Motion by Councilmember Knesel, seconded by Councilmember Rheinberger to make Deerpath right out only onto Olive Street make Brick Street the collector street and upgraded, and have further study done on the intersection of Neal Avenue at County Road 12, along with other intersections along County Road 12 Ayes Councilmembers Knesel, Mdbrandt, Rheinberger and Mayor Kimble Nays Councilmember Junker Motion by Councilmember Milbrandt, seconded by Councilmember Knesel directing staff to implement the SRF Consulting Short Range Recommendations 1) Encourage the development teams to onent planned streets and access points to encourage new development generated traffic to use Manning Avenue 3) The agencies should work together to manage access to Manning Avenue between Highway 36 and Highway 96 and actively support improvements that provide a high level of mobility on this important arterial facility 4) The City should actively work with Stillwater Township to plan for and implement a north frontage road connection along Highway 36 between Manning Avenue and Stillwater Boulevard The frontage road should be implemented as soon as possible and be designed to a minimum of 35 MPH All in favor July 29 2002 WASHINGT'ON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION & PHYSICAL DEVELOPMENT 11660 MYERON ROAD NORTH $11LL-WATEf2 1MIM NNESOTA 55082 9573 651-430-4300 acsl��¢Ma�chme651-430-4350 c ilC 1?t� f tf i BcT- Steve Russell Community Development Director City of Stillwater 216 N 4" St, Stillwater MN 55082 BOUTWELL SOUTH AREA PLAN Dear Steve Donald C ws Attachment I D•rector Donald J Theisen, P E. Deputy D rector/County Eng James D Luger RLA Parks Director Virginia S Chace Admrustmtrve Services Drviswn Manager Larry S Nybeck. PLSLounty Surveyor Deputy Director Survey and Land Management Division Marvin Erickson Faorlres Manager We appreciate your Klayton's, and the City's consultants' time in meeting with us on July 23'd to discuss the Draft Boutwell South Area Plan Draft Report With the Stillwater City and Township Joint Board's approval of the Draft Report on July 24'', we want to provide you with our comments on this report and the recommended Neal Avenue alignment as the City Council considers final approval This area has several challenges for providing a local road system that works with our County highway system These include vertical grades, current City street spacing, current traffic patterns and their affect on neighborhoods, and adjacent properties that will develop in different timeframes We all know that traffic on City streets and along County State Aid Highway 12 (CSAH 12) will only increase with time While neither the amount nor the pace of this increase is exactly known, planning for this increase in this difficult area is needed The CounVs; investment in access control when CSAH 12 was constructed in the mid -seventies was a step to assist in the future planning of developments The existing access openings on the north side of CSAH 12 are generally 30 feet wide and therefore do not accommodate a City street There is no access opening that aligns with the proposed Neal Avenue connection Any changes to this access control will require County Board approval We appreciate that the proposed alignment of Neal Avenue addresses some local concerns However, transfemng or creating problems on the regional highway system to adoress local concerns is not reasonable We know from our experience in operating our highway system that the Proposed location for connecting Neal Avenue to CSAH 12 will create operational problems on the County highway There simply is not enough length between the adjacent intersections (Northland Avenue and Maryknoll Drive) to develop appropriate left turn lanes It would be irresponsible for us to allow construction of an intersection that will create a situation that affects the safety of current and future highway users While further analysis is needed, the proposed Neal Avenue connection location may be acceptable if Northland Avenue and possibly Maryknoll Drive are restricted to right-in/right-out movement only MIS would require a raised median on CSAH 12 The County does not have any project programmed or funds available in the current Capital Improvement Program for this work We would expect that the development creating the need for this improvement would bear the cost of the needed work Add ( P41,e, 5 GTON COG 3e 2'at I i r a a��tIRT P0.a�PESS August 23 2002 WASHINGTON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION & PHYSICAL DEVELOPMENT 11660 MYERON ROAD NORTH STILLWATER MINNESOTA 55082 9573 651430-4300 Facsimile Machine 651-430,4350 Shern Buss BRAA Inc 2335 W Highway 36 St Paul, MN 55113 BOUTWELL SOUTH AREA PLAN DRAFT REPORT- AUGUST 2002 Dear Sherri Donald C W sn easkr P E D rector Donald J The sen P E Deputy D rector/County Eng neer James D Luger RLA Parks Director Virginia S Chace Adorn slrat,ve Services Dims on Manager Larry S Nybeck, PLS-County Surveyor Deputy D rector Survey and Land Management Division Marvin Erickson Facilities Manager We have reviewed the latest draft of the Boutwell South area Plan and generally feel that it fairly represents the County's positions We do have several comments Section II Existing Conditions and Issues, Roadways, Streets, and Trails- Manning Avenue- We suggest changing the term "stoplight to "traffic signal" The reference to a temporary traffic signal at the BoutwelVManning intersection could be misconstrued- it is too late to add that to the turn lane project but one could be considered at that intersection if signal warrants are met. We plan to add that intersection to our Traffic Signal Ranking System but would not ordinarily install a signal until the conditions at the intersection place it in a position in the rankings to get funding At that time a signal would be installed in accordance with our cost participation policies Realistically, it could be many years before this intersection would rise high enough in the rankings to be funded Also, the last sentence in the Manning Avenue section contains a typo and it could be clearer- the earliest that we could get federal funding for an upgrade of Manning Avenue north of CSAH 12 is 2008 Section II Existing Conditions and Issues, Existing Traffic -The frustration expressed by local residents about poor circulation and about increased traffic on Northland and Maryknoll illustrates a classic sense of frustration of residents in growing areas- they can't have it both ways Good circulation will, in most cases, increase traffic Nevertheless, we do not feel that aligning a Neal Avenue munpchnn to rSAH 12 With either Northland or Maryknoll will Al lead to significant a ►t-thr t gh frog+ fhP iris tteS are simply too circuitous We feel that it is necessary to align Neal Avenue with an existing street to create a safe intersection Our collective opinion is that nearly all of the drivers wishing to go to the commercial areas around County Road 5 and Highway 36 will use Deer Path as a cut -through route as drivers are doing today We feel that development of the Boutwell South area will increase traffic on Deer Path significantly because that is the shortest most direct route and that drivers will not choose Maryknoll or Northland because they are longer and less direct • Section IV Recommendations for the Boutwell South Planning Area B Roadways, Recommendation 3 Neal Avenue should be extended to County Road 12 midway between Northland and Maryknoll Avenues - As we have discussed since the right of Page two Letter to Shem Buss — Boutwell August 23 2002 way of CSAH 12 includes access control approval of the County Board is required for any connection to be made in the access controlled portion Our discussions of medians centered on raised medians creating a physical bamer to prohibited tuming movements and, therefore being the only way to enforce 'nght-in/nght-out' restrictions It would be difficult and very expensive to design medians that effectively limit movements and allow a safe location for the inevitable U-tums that will occur Moreover, the restriction of Northland, Maryknoll, or both to nght-in/nght-out movements would likely be very unpopular with the residents of those streets Under some conditions, we might be able to recommend a plan such as this to the Board but we feel that lining the Neal Avenue connection up with either Northland or Maryknoll is very important Under any circumstance we could not allow restriction of the streets to the south without a public hearing Section IV Recommendations for the Boutwell South Planning Area B Roadways, Recommendation 3 Neal Avenue should be extended to County Road 12 midway between Northland and Maryknoll Avenues - The comments on lowered speed limits in this section are speculative and may give residents who view speeds as too high a false sense that development along CSAH 12 will lower the speed limit when that is rarely the case In any event lowered speed limits do not correlate to increased access Section IV Recommendations for the Boutwell South Planning Area B Roadways, Recommendation 3 Neal Avenue should be extended to County Road 12 midway between Northland and Maryknoll Avenues -The City's recommendations for the recommended Neal Avenue alignment are illogical Access to collector roads would be better if intersections with the arterial road (CSAH 12) were consolidated at fewer intersections This plan does not consolidate access, it spreads it out to more locations than necessary and more than can safely be accommodated Fewer intersections along the arterial would reduce the number of turning movements necessary to get on and off of the artenal and the intersections could be controlled with traffic signals or ail -way stop signs, if necessary The recommended alignment will result in more intersections, none of them easily controlled The mid -point location of Neal Avenue would not necessarily spread traffic among the residential streets to the south since few of them offer a direct route anywhere- it would likely perpetuate the already contentious cut -through traffic on Deer Path Section IV Recommendations for the Boutwell South Planning Area B Roadways, Recommendation 4 The Boutwell-County Road 12 intersection should be modified to improve safety Traffic Analysis- The comments on traffic signals at the CSAH 12/15 intersection and at the CSAH 15/13outwell intersection should be clarified it is highly likely that the reconstruction plans for CSAH 15 will include a traffic signal at CSAH 12, but nothing specific has yet been proposed It is certainly an option and very likely, but at this time, there are no plans A signal at CSAH 15/Boutwell intersection is a possibility, but it would be treated as all other County road intersections are- it would be subject to the standards of the County's Traffic Signal Ranking System and our cost participation policies Section IV Recommendations for the Boutwell South Planning Area B Roadways, Recommendation 4 The Boutwell-County Road 12 intersection should be modified to improve safety Traffic Analysis- We disagree somewhat with the wording of the section that states that, "The proposed alignment for the Neal Avenue connection to County 12 at a point midway between residential streets to the south, to encourage the use of County 15 and disperse traffic among other streets rather than creating a direct connection and higher Page three Letter to Shem Buss — Boutwell August 23, 2002 traffic volumes on residential streets to the south " This sentence is grammatically unclear and suggests that drivers will continue south through any street that lines up with Neal Avenue whether it is a direct route to any destination or not Very few drivers will cut through residential areas unless they find that it is a quicker route to their destination Neither Northland nor Maryknoll is an efficient route to anywhere but the residential areas that surround them Section IV Recommendations for the Boutwell South Planning Area B Roadways, Recommendation 4 The Boutwell-County Road 12 intersection should be modified to improve safety Traffic Analysis- The final bullet in this section contains a typo and we also disagree with its content We feel that development of the Boutwell South area will have minimal traffic impact on Maryknoll Avenue and Northland Avenue but will perpetuate the pattern of drivers using Deer Path as a cut -through route We appreciate your efforts to include our comments in the report I hope that these comments clarify the County's positions Please call meat 651-430-4312 if you have any questions or comments Sincerely 1sep ��h Lux Senior Transportation Planner c Steve Russell, Stillwater Community Development Director Klayton Eckles, Stillwater City Engineer Don Theisen, County Engineer/Transportation Division Director Wally Abrahamson Washington County Commissioner District 3 Jim Schug Washington County Administrator M.IUSERSWWUFLUMORDWtat Rmew-StiltwateABoutwett South August 2002 Drakdoc HIGHWAY 36 STILLWATER, MN NORTH 62ND PLANNING AREA CONCEPT PLANS ('V InBonestroo Rosene ® Anderlik & " Associates E gln s A Arch t cis Attachment C jk _ t e �...� e -. i f ' • 4 ; ' ; +,+�� `. ` T ! a DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY %_. x , -'� , y� fit/ P <p • `. , �., a` i ,k i. < a • ai , , 1 , E '' f ` [ i `• , f y . 9 Project Area = 18 +/ ac. E. t16 i'Sk,�. • r +4` i t ! •' ��, '-4� .1, t. Annexation =Request into Stillwater r' . of « • f t `', �• �,.. `-.... t ',•t V t, < f. ; S ;aft i:.; ' 1 4 [ 1• ,' R' �l% • 1 :.,`• . .3 <} j E t ' ` Proposed Zoning Est = -k• ( C'< •i f ,L `� i „ N CCR - Cove Cottage Residential Lot Width Minimum = 60' • \ i =.- ;� / •- ` r_ i Lot Size Minimum = 7,000 sf f �� % • f t, ` ` `c 4 Project Minimum = 7,000 sf ` Er ` - = ' . : t ' 4 ! • �' 9 Lot Average = 10,000 sf .. .,1 J�• Project Average � 14,000 sf `( C s. 4 s' ROW = 60' { _ - r-..i �"R'�, �. . 4i. - • . ei 1 1 ' y`1 ,� _s. Cul-de-sac - 120' dia.(100 min.) ! , „ �L.l r > � r m - . / # ti • • _ r' •' Access = Bout -well Road ( + �' } g► z j ! 1 .; E �� .' `� - Future Extension onto CSAH 12 v•"fi a ` ,• _ . t - ` i l . . } i ` ,. . • � -, '' ` i ; -•, Project Density = 18+/- acres 2 "3 a ` �, i Y• \ 1. • j Single Family Lots = 45 t ` i ! as 5 6 9\' `' ; Park Dedication = 11% +. i;�. , — r- 4•%, ', Park/Open Space Provided10 = — __ a , ° • Land(9%) and Cash #r { ►Ilk' 1 l 42 11 I \ s t ' r • ,�,.' Future Expansion P ■�, # • I - �, PARK 12, • : k, y- <JorExrlaL /` , \ \� ' • m ' 1 T ' 'f t_ d PARK / POND ; ��ExsnNc� It 13 ' .\ r i 4�°c ! Wetland t O ' EXI571NG EXPANSION _ ( 14 E• r, _ . • ' I , _ wen.AW ; N \ F Delineation and Mitigation ETLI• l ( it ' lE `41� \ is ♦ < t • �� G rfth 4 <.i , IS I \ \ ` , �0 Storm Water Ponding 35 ' R 1 I 1 1 1' ` 39 �: ' r 'yf Per Watershed fit. 4.'. t f 4 •;�• ( I -- 32 361$ t f.= . s (� . t i f �. � .•� _ _� t ,• � ; Soil Correction la 31 1g 1 f�QSTING , t `. •_ Minor to Moderate q ./ . - r#}, •y f F f •. n�Qq� ` 1 30 37 Z�` r.yVE714N0 i �\ . `- C v1'S.S`o +\) , - , \ `+y. . �. > .t City Water and Sewer 252 ` c ,s r ? _ Boutwell Road 29 28 127,26E ' 1 [ :5TREE7 24,i r< a fr a < _ �1 t, P < - . r• -"'�-- N Ry PONE i + '� �••�' �1!• — r C,SgI� 12 W MYR"ES' �` ' !. [ `\ ♦ • r.-. , 1 -�.-82 � i _1�-� ` Y ` q f It 40, di t It It BOUTWELL RESIDENTIAL CONCEPT PLAN Bruageman --- 1 RO )I EX I I LS STILLWATER, MINNESOTA NORTH 200' iI July 21, 2006 Schoell Madson Planning Engineering Surveying 0 IDJvQ�40 it -- 7% 7 ! 2 i 3 W 4 45 1 9 \ 5 • 43 10 I I I I r 7 42 7 I 11 PARK 12� - POTENTIAL 13 i PARK /POND EXISTIN� � EXPANSION I ,EXISTING I I WETLAND , � I -- I I � WETLAND/ : POND , ` 1q ✓ ' 41 ' 15 40 16 r34 7 , 39 y 33 \ �f / 35 17 y 32 38 18 36 19 — 37 30 2 20 � �21 7 T 25 1 29 28 27 126 I / ` I r 1 I I r 24 7 23 �22 \ ! I D I /J `- - - IV 75th ST DAR y CSA/. POND _ _ ! M 72 / yy MYRTLE ST z I I =Z I I ¢ w I I za 0 x g� a BOUTWELL RESIDENTIAL CONCEPT SITE PLAN Br «g p STILLWATER, MINNESOTA DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY Project Area = 18 +/- ac. Annexation = Request into Stillwater Proposed Zoning = CCR - Cove Cottage Residential Lot Width Minimum = 60' Lot Size Minimum = 7,000 sf Project Minimum = 7,000 sf Lot Average = 10,000 sf Project Average = 14,000 sf ROW = 60' Cul-de-sac - 120' dia.(100' min.) Access = Boutwell Road Future Extension onto CSAH 12 Project Density = 18+/- acres Single Family Lots = 45 Park Dedication = 11% Park/Open Space Provided = Land(9%+/-) and Cash Future Expansion Wetland Delineation and Mitigation Storm Water Ponding Per Watershed Soil Correction Minor to Moderate City Water and Sewer Boutwell Road NORTH 150' July 21, 2006 Schoell Madson Diammng Engineering Surveying Ij Dellwood Road / Highway 916 ru MCKusick / CR 64 . .. �' � r "`"n � +.. al.f ~1 -.der �.. � °'�•' �' �• ° '% �` U. 'c a�'.4 r� ► i� Boutwel�I Road mcm '' Area f ' 1 W Myrle S _ t * �w d 12 St N I CSAH 71 �+ p ' r by � �• •#v��`. �*� �. a-� . s a .. :;'Y# � � 3.. ,R•..Mr •. , ,vra •-.t:# , r ,. .ter ., .. - Yf l- ."Kj BO U-TWELL RESIDENTIAL REGIQNAL PLAN STILLWATER, MINNESOTA Bru 99111"I'll (, _- -- I IMI I ,IZ• I I I•,ti NORTH NOT TO SCALE JULY 21, 2006 Schoell Madson Planning Engineering Surveying M l 1 11� 16112 n PHASE III 2002 _ ,r PHASE IV' ter. 2015 N. w F1�9} PHASEII 1999 Twin � Lake car — a Z CREEK w Sim O° Q Cax� L C / II z 1 77TH ST N ASE IV' 2015 1 (-1 cf, i - PHASE IV' 2015 OAK le cy DR. B T. N. U JZ OAK HILL -E w CT. O < oEL'Np00 RD. Browns ,Greek 5 V AMUNqSQN \ Cf. \2 � p' WA \ C/a� S v POND � _.Y O Rr u ( R L O INTERLAC EN 70o E PP r W w k ,4' DR. n O A O OQ,/ , S Tt �oZA w ® p ST O`N p To, FAI RM � m v� w o $� � J sio Q4ROIxW n 'il I_ cr it o 5 ���❑ O� Qt �WILLARD ongS WIEW °w �" 13b ui ` ° ake sw� GREEN Li WIL CT o p IVING w ° c ,� RY L a j��—�l O E aaN z� CROIX[AVE rnS I❑ ❑ ❑ L) o ® 6.1 ^Inn [w] F E ST 4R ��❑® z ^* R w m �� �► ❑ � L—ICI!'! Yd.L ❑I �7C ❑ S1. ` C 12 ❑ALl 6. 2 E � � ❑ ST. W-OAK❑ N O W. 11��K 1-9 E.'�UwIL5��4 I y ON ke N W DER ON ST. ❑❑ a TROTTER y S� C R N OO (/i Vj vi (- i L�9ffiW4NBLEANS 9Q.�'I'❑ CT. _... / � LEANS \ W. om.EmIs ❑ rn La c CRESTWER -DR z I 09- VICTORIA Z 66 w OREN CT 0 UPPER Cit) of •hAlq ter Engineering Department Zoning Map O AGRICULTURE • BUSINESS PARK COMMERCIAL r) BUSINESS PARK INDUSTRIAL ow BUSINESS PARK OFFICE O GENERAL COMMERCIAL 40 CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT O CRD O GENERAL HEAVY INDUSTRY O PUBLIC ADMINSTRATIVE OFFICES O ONE FAMILY O TWO FAMILY O HIGH DENSITY FAMILY O MEDIUM DENSITY FAMILY O COTTAGE RESIDENTIAL O TRADITIONAL RESIDENTIAL ® LAKESHORE RESIDENTIAL VILLAGE COMMERCIAL ® TOWN HOUSE O PUBLIC WORKS FACILITY ® COVE TOWNHOUSE RESIDENTIAL COVE COTTAGE RESIDENTIAL COVE TRADITIONAL RESIDENTIAL I BtutFs / Shoreland Area City Limits Streams CD Pareela Outside City Expansion Areas Railroad Prepared By. iiaWt. r. `F Stillwater :S; Community Dcvclopment W • �- E and Planning sources: . 0+ Washington Cormty Survey Deparnnent City ot• Stillwater - Planning Department S 800 0 800 1600 Feet IIS yl<< 0 .N. T. N. ti ST. �I Q z O rm z DATE REQUEST APPLICANT LOCATION MEETING DATE REVIEWED BY PREPARED BY SSIjilawter 1 1 E 8 R i M P I A [ O I M1 N N F 0 1 4 Planning Commission May 9, 2007 CASE NO 07-22 Variances to Construct House Addition Traci Brown 1333 Fourth Street South April 23, 2007 Building Official, Community Development Director Michel Pogge, City Planner jk S e BACKGROUND Traci Brown has made application for variances to allow her to complete the addition on the southeast corner of her home at 1333 Fourth Street South The home is currently a non -conforming property and thus a variance is required in order to do any type of addition' The proposed addition is 27 foot by 12 foot and includes a bedroom and expanded kitchen REQUESTS Expanding Non -Conforming Property The Brown property is zoned RB, Two -Family Residential Therefore, the required minimum lot area is 7,500 square feet for a single-family home In this case the lot contains 6,690 square feet of area making the lot non -conforming Additionally the required front yard setback is 20 feet and the side yard setback is a minimum of 5 feet on one side with a minimum of 15 feet when you add the two side yard setbacks together In this case the attached garage on the north side is setback approximately 17 feet from the front (west) property line and 1 foot from the side (north) property line making the existing structure non -conforming As a note the proposed setback for the new addition is 10 feet from the south property, therefore, the proposed addition will conform with the required side yard setback No other variances are required for this request City Code §31 1 9 Grown Variances Page 2 SPECIFIC REQUESTS In order for Ms Brown to proceed with her project she needs approval of lot size and front and side yard setback variances for the existing property City Code Ch 31-1, Subd 9 states that non-conformng properties can not be expanded Since the existing home does not meet minimum front and side yard setback requirements, nor does the lot meet minimum size requirements, variances are being requested from each of these standards to remove the non -conforming status of the property This would then allow the home to be expanded with additions EVALUATION OF REQUEST The Planning Commission may grant a variance when all of the following conditions are foundz 1 A hardship peculiar to the property, not created by any act of the owner, exists Personal, family or financial difficulties, loss of prospective profits and neighboring violations are not hardships justifying a variance The home at 1224 North 2nd Street was constructed in the 19th Century, which was long before the current 20 foot front setback and 5 foot side yard setback requirements were adopted Moreover, it was constructed in this location long before Ms Brown purchased the property Therefore, staff finds this criterion to be satisfied 2 A variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights, and, if granted, would not constitute a special privilege not enjoyed by neighbors In terms of the setback variances, the proposed addition does not increase the non -conformity of the structure and if it was not for the current non - conformities the proposed addition would be permitted without a variance Moreover, the size of the lot at 6,690 square feet is not so much smaller than the minimum required lot size as to create unusual land use difficulties and even with the addition the lot will meet the maximum lot coverage require setout in the code Therefore, staff believes the front and side setback requests and lot size variance are acceptable 2 City Code Ch 31 1 Subd 30 (2) d IN Brown Variances Page 3 3 The authorizing of the variance will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property and will not materially impair the purpose and intent of this section or the public interest nor adversely affect the comprehensive plan The proposed additions will have no negative impacts on any of the surrounding properties They will be no closer to either street than the existing house And, as seen in the exhibits the setback distances from abutting lots are satisfactory Therefore, staff finds this criterion to be satisfied for the setback variance requests ALTERNATIVES The Planning Commission has the following options 1 Deny the requested variances 2 Approve the requested variances in whole or in part 3 Continue the public hearing for more information The 60 day decision deadline for the request is June 22, 2007 and the next Planning Commission meeting is scheduled for June 11, 2007 RECOMMENDATION Staff finds the variance review criteria to be met for the setback variances attachments Location Map Applicant s Letter Applicant s Plot Plan cc Traci Brown PLANNING ADMINISTRATION APPLICATION FORM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY OF STILLWATER 216 NORTH FOURTH STREET STILLWATER MN 55082 Case No Date Filed Fee Paid Receipt No ACTION REQUESTED Special/Conditional Use Permit 1/ 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 support►ngmater►al (► e , photos, sketches etc ) submittedwith application becomes the propertyof the C►tyof Stillwater Sixteen (16) copies of supporting material is required If appl►cat►on 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__ Yn" 5T- Assessors Parcel No 33o-2,nzv14oi0 n (GEO Code) Zoning District Description of Protect KE"VAL OF 56DE P61004 h 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 / l oc, -BookW Mailing Address 1393 4w 5 City State Zip �)Tk �%�'�n 177N 5�2 Telephone No(&51J Signature, %%b Representative_ Mailing Address_ City State Zip Telephone No _ Signature (Signature is required) (Signature is required) SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION Lot Size (dimensions) - —x — - - Total -Building -floor -area square feet Land Area Existing square feet Height of Buildings Stories F t Proposed square feet Principal Paved Impervious Area square feet Accessory No of off street parking spaces_ H \mrnamara\shPih\PI ANAPP FIRM June 9 2006 April 22, 2007 Traci Brown 1333 S 4" St Stillwater, MN To Whom It May Concern Re Variance to set back, lot size, and lot coverage I would like to appeal to you for the noted variances on my home on the south hill of town I own a small and older home in this area which I have been trying to improve over time My plan is to remove an existing framed porch with two rooms, one to be a bedroom, and the other an extension of my kitchen for a dining area Because the house is small, one of the bedrooms is only big enough for a dresser and twin bed with no room for closet space The new room would be slightly bigger enough for a closet I have a teenage son living with me and as he gets older, we seem to need more space The new dining area would allow me to have more then two family members over at one time Right now I can only accommodate two besides my son and me The variance for the garage is pre existing I did not build it and it was built long before I bought the property As for the new addition, it would only extend two more feet towards the property line still leaving ten feet I believe this project will not only benefit my son and me, but the whole neighborhood The existing porch is quite rotted and has been an eye sore for years It will also improve the value of this older home and bring it closer to like value of the neighboring homes Thank you for your consideration in this matter Traci A Brown ( It) of C ommumt,, De loonn.nt Dwartment N 1 C�s� # 2007-22 1333 S 4th St Cr 04 ® hl a ro ti. r a ti I Subject Propert W � � o v r1 0 s �CoqJ r 1 l n) I I - _ 7i, i � V I t33.� �ii� �s •-��k�� � -Z? S'T 1 LL YJ A -r )Q K a �l jw� t e r 1 B F i M P I A f U N F U 1 4 DATE TO REQUEST APPLICANT LOCATION MEETING DATE PREPARED BY BACKGROUND PLANNING REPORT May 8, 2007 Planning Commission Garage Variance Extension Sheila Martin 509 W Laurel St May 14, 2007 CASE NO 05-19 Bill Turnblad, Community Development Director TV , On May 9 2005 the Planning Commission approved a variance for Sheila Martin s property at 509 W Laurel St The variance was to allow the construction of a garage on a non -conforming lot Since the use of a non -conforming lot can not be expanded a variance was granted for the lot size With the variance the lot was no longer considered non -conforming and the garage could be built The garage is planned to be constructed this summer but the variance expires on May 9 2007 Therefore a one year extension to the variance is being requested REQUESTS Extend the variance by one year to May 9, 2008 EVALUATION OF REQUEST The zoning ordinance states that a variance can be extended for an additional year by the Planning Commission Subsequent to approval of the Martin variance in 2005 the City amended the impervious cover standards for the RB, Two-Farruly Residential zoning district The Martin property is located Martin Variance Extension y May 8, 2007 Page 2 In 2005 the maximum impervious surface coverage allowed was 30% The existing home and the proposed garage together have a total footprint size of 1 546 square feet This represents 29 4% of the lot area The driveway is gravel and evidently staff at the time considered a gravel driveway to be a pervious surface Consequently the proposed impervious coverage was deemed in 2005 to be within the 30% limit In 2006 the ordinance was amended to allow 25% impervious cover and an additional 25% building coverage If the gravel driveway is considered to be an impervious surface, then the total impervious surface on the lot (without buildings) would be 23 9% This complies with the new regulations However, the total footprint area of the home and garage together would be 29 4%, which exceeds the 25% maximum allowance There are at least two ways to address the 4 4% additional building coverage 1 Approve the variance request even though the building cover is 4 4% greater than would be permitted today Since the building cover regulations were amended subsequent to the 2005 variance approval, the Planning Comrrussion is allowed to consider the garage project grandfathered into the 2005 standards 2 Deny the variance extension request This would leave the Martins with two courses of action A) file a new application for the non -conforming lot variance and the building coverage variance, or B) reduce the size of the garage from 606 square feet to 375 square feet to meet the 25% building coverage lirrut ALTERNATIVES The Planning Commission has the following options 1 Deny the requested variance extension 2 Approve the requested variance extension 3 Contmue the discussion to the next meeting for more information The statutory 60 day decision deadline for this case is June 19 2007 The next Planning Commission meeting is scheduled for June 11, 2007 RECOMMENDATION Staff would prefer to consider this project to be grandfathered into the 2005 coverage regulations Therefore, we recommend approval of the variance extension for one year The conditions that applied to the 2005 variance would continue to apply to the extension attachments Planning Comrrussion Minutes 2005 Planning Report i City of Stillwater Planning Commission May 9, 2005 Mr Dahlquist moved to deny Case No SUB/V/05-17 Mr Tuniquist seconded the motion, motion passed unanimously Case No V/05-18 A variance to the front yard setback (30 feet required, 12 feet requested) for construction of a poach at 1224 Third Ave S in the RB, Two Family Residential Distnct Jarme Soudt, applicant The applicant was present He said they are trying to recreate what the original house looked like and construct a porch similar to one that was in place in the 1950s A new paver sidewalk also will be installed, he said The porch will not extend past the front of the house There were no comments from the public Mr Junker, seconded by Mr Peroceschi, moved approval as conditioned Motion passed unanimously Case No V/05-19 A variance to the lot size regulations (7,500 square teet required) for construction of a one -car garage on a 5,250 square foot lot at 509 W Laurel in the RB, Two Family Residential Distnct Sheila Martin, applicant Ms Martin explained that she has owned the house for a year and is planning on doing a restoration She said she wants to be histoncally accurate in building the garage and plans on doing research to determine the proper style of siding, color, windows, etc An existing concrete slab on the property will be removed The garage, as proposed, meets all setback requirements Mr Dahlquist asked if there was an existing shed on the property Ms Martin said an existing steel shed will be i emoved Mr Middleton suggested the hardship in this instance is that there is currently no garage for the residence Mr Teske, seconded by Mr Carlsen, moved approval as conditioned Motion passed unanimously Case No V/05-20 A variance to the parking regulations for a restaurant located at 1501 Stillwater Blvd in the BP-C, Business Park Commercial Distnct Juha Thao, applicant Ms Thao said she plans to open a Tai restaurant The restaurant will be pnmanly take-out business, with some seating, six to eight tables, for dine -in customers The restaurant will be located in the fonner Papa John's location and will be open from 11 a m to 10 or 1 l p m Mr Turnquist said he did not think parking at the location was out of control, and Mr. Junker said lie did 'lot tfiinlce use was drastically different from the former use Mr Dahlquist did express a concern about parking, and Mr Middleton said when he had driven by the area earlier 4 r PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW FORM CASE NO V/05-19 Planning Commission Date May 9, 2005 Project Location 509 West Laurel Street Comprehensive Plan District Two Family Residential Zoning District RB Applicants Name Sheila Martin Type of Application Variance Project Description A variance to construct a garage and on a non -conforming lot (7,500 square feet required, 5,250 square feet requested) (Revised 5/3/05) Discussion The applicant is requesting consideration of a variance to construct garage addition on a non -conforming lot There are no other sheds or garages on the property The applicant can meet the required 5 foot setback from the side and rear property lines The applicant is demolishing a concrete slab that is behind her house and replacing it with grass The driveway will be gravel Making these alterations will keep the applicant within the 30 impervious lot coverage that is permitted Recommendation Approval with conditions Conditions of Approval 1 The garage shall match the house in style, material and color Findings 1 That a hardship peculiar to the property, not created by any act of the owner, exists In this context, personnel financial difficulties, loss of prospective profits and neighboring violations are not hardships justifying a variance 2 That a variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights possessed by other properties in the same district and in the same vicinity, and that a variance, if granted, would not constitute a special privilege of the recipient not enjoyed by his neighbors 3 That the authorizing of the variance will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property and not materially impair the purpose and intent of this title or the public interest nor adversely affect the Comprehensive Plan Attachments Application form, letter from applicant, site plan and elevation Drawings CPC Action on 5/9/05 +8-0 approval LAUREL ST 4' SITE PLANto A •®IN-Ga ±20 s o s 1At) zk=I, s- 0 J7 A 7 Q0aB1 2 5 8 � 1 B 3 -f� 1 8 d 49 6 €faoe B 4 st°0W B 2 B 150 2 �1 C 313 6 150 1 �I � 5 7 go 1 SD 8 as 1 50 9 1 0 10 0' -1 50 11 dp I 50 12 pp osl so — 5 150 2 1 do I W I 3 4 K°I d, F- d. 14 W, X O Z 7 8 9 10 11 40 I y® I $P 1 0' Bl 4P I 60 60 1 50 1 50 1501 50 1 50 0 0 0 0T,14 0 0 0 0 0 1285 ApW 74 13 12 118 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 al flp I 0 dzvdp0° !gyp' 0. C10q W. !p0° o uu33 34 35 / 36i 40 41 42 44 4 46<'A0 0 00 p 0 15 25 40 2 BS 4285 7 dPO I 18 dp. I a' dl"° m"^" 6"' ° dpo N 13 14 Np I 12 Wow 10 ,It � p 4p x s �!+ 15 g 0 fFq — zp \\ 285 n A 13 d, 1 14 263 2 2es a 15 r ,� dpo9oge�l 16 18 17 dp°5 19 r 1 WAF 1 s'40 o � 1 � GO i - d � / zs t2 4 8 3N o I 11 p 3 9' d0a 1 B6 12 12 4 8 CHERRY ST 5 gIN 56 % 56 56 SE 1, 9 8 7 6 5 6 a v I66 166 gpae 1 goose, a s s 4 s s s I 1 5 s 7 � � m 0 -9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 10 g 11 12 13 Y1 8 w ~ d— 1 1 d- �Oa01 OM'€ 11 & 1 Bops 1 9 � 0 Q 20 1 415 5 5 5 15 ] 15 5 1 56 1 56 1 56 1 56 M I rT 115 425 415 5 5 5 4/5 205 415 25 25 425 425 425 Location Map rW '� ti 48v 7V 6 5 4 3 2 1 �12 11� 10 9 8 7 Vicinity Map I� 0 156 Scale In Feet ma�4m n mmW bn mm 1 aa1 � � mps w ID v z t J 0 N z 0 - m z � a a, a LLsZ s Yb F m3� 0 H'a iNaQ A 24-W 3 0 gvz Z � l s ett FZ�a3 j ��s�l;e9s NORTH ELEVATION EAST ELEVATION M, Scale 1/4 = 1-0 Scale. 1/4 =1-0' n , > Y N NI o m Ul e o Ypp ba C1 � � --� � _ ZU) NM izz2. I.-m9NN g�av�Y3 cti�mfi ���J 9 i j c psa gyy� DRAWN S`� GN- SobF"P"'h' gcw a �a �Zc�o � ZVy Pg 3-0' 9 0 15 0 3@ 24-0 34 r ZZ' Y� v�v� a> �Zi�C zz-far WEST ELEVATION A 3 SOUTH ELEVATION ma y� 6LEVRllONS Scale 1/4 - 1-0 Scab 1/4 - 1-0' cFt1�Z uy SHSEf NIMISF.12 SGF A-1 gq 9 jj i3lil) jm NwAT'm 0 920 III � II