Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007-06-11 CPC Packetr THE BIRTHPLACE OF MINNESOTA CITY OF STILLWATER PLANNING COMMISSION NOTICE OF MEETING The City of Stillwater's Planning commission will meet on Monday, June 11, 2007 at 6 15 pm in the Council Chambers of Stillwater City Hall, 216 N 4th Street to discuss the 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update Presentation and discussion of the draft Background Report The City of Stillwater Planning Commission will meet on Monday, June 11, 2007, at 7 p m in the Council Chambers of Stillwater City Hall, 216 North Fourth Street AGENDA 1 CALL TO ORDER 2 APPROVAL OF MAY 14, 2007 MINUTES 3 PUBLIC HEARINGS 3 01 Case No 07-24 A variance request to the maximum allowed impervious surface and to the minimum sideyard setback for the construction of a 34' x 40' two story addition located on the southeast corner of an existing building and a 14'8" x 24" one story addition to the west wall of an existing building located at 1826 Northwestern Avenue in the BD-O, Business Park Office District River Valley Place LLC, Summer Kuehn, applicant 3 02 Case No 07-25 An amendment to a special use permit at Stone's Restaurant for the construction of a permanent outside bar located at 324 South Main Street in the CBD, Central Business District Eric Hawkins, applicant 3 03 Case No 07-26 A variance request to the rear yard setback for the construction of a deck located at 1439 Lydia Circle in the RA, Single Farn!oy nes,dont,al Disti 1ct Dan Gruba, applicant 3 04 Case No 07-27 A variance request to the maximum allowed impervious surface coverage for the construction of a 24' x 35' garage located at 212 Maple Street West in the RB, Two Family Residential District Don and Cheryl Scoff, applicants 3 05 Case No 07-28 A special use permit for an accessory dwelling unit and a variance to the required rear yard setback for an accessory dwelling unit located at 218 West Maple Street in the in the RB, Two Family Residential District Matthew Lehmann, applicant 3 06 Case No 07-29 A variance request to the required lot size regulations and to the impervious surface regulations for properties in the St Croix Riverway Overlay District located at 105 Lakeside Drive in the RB, Two Family Residential District Mark S Balay Architects representing Mark Smith, applicant 3 07 Case No 07-30 Final plat and Final PUD approval for 44 townhomes, Millbrook 2nd Addition, located at 12427 Dellwood Road in the TH, Townhouse District US Home Corporation, Jay Liberacki, applicant 3 08 Case No 07-31 Preliminary Plat, Preliminary PUD, Zoning Map and Text Amendment and Special Use Permit for the construction of a new K-12 education facility for St Croix Preparatory Academy located at 8911 and 8753 Neal Avenue North in the AP, Agricultural Preservation District Ken Stone, Kodet Architecutural Group, applicant 3 09 Case No 07-33 A variance request to the minimum lot size requirements for the construction of an addition and garage located at 907 6th Avenue South in the RA, Single Family Residential District River VfwilEst9learkA r S e y Hig MERgoOi qMplicant PHONE 651 430 8800 WEBSITE www ci stillwater mn us r i City of Stillwater Planning Commission May 14, 2007 Present Dave Middleton Chairperson Gregg Carlsen Mike Dahlquist Dan Kalmon Wally Milbrandt David Peroceschi and Charles Wolden Staff present Community Development Director Turnblad and Planner Pogge Absent Suzanne Block and Brad Meinke Mr Middleton called the meeting to order at 7 p m Approval of minutes Mr Dahlquist moved approval of the minutes of April 9 2007 Mr Wolden seconded the motion motion passed unanimously PUBLIC HEARINGS Case No 07-20 A special use permit request for a rental car office (Avis Budget Car Rental) at 1674 Market Dr in the BP C Business Park Commercial District Steve Erban representing Avis applicant Steve Erban and Todd Wittinger representative of the Avis group were present Mr Pogge reviewed the request and staff findings that the request meets the three requirements for the issuance of a special use permit and that the use is in harmony with other uses in the area Mr Wittinger briefly spoke to the business the use will generate he noted that vehicles are not serviced on site Mr Kalmon asked about the total number of cars that will be on site Mr Erban explained that there are spaces for nine rental cars outside and three inside along with two customer parking spaces and three employee parking spaces Mr Dahlquist asked about long-term customer parking Mr Wittinger said Avis pickup -and delivery service negates the need for long-term parking During discussion it was noted there will be no additional outside lighting and no exterior intercom or music Mr Middleton opened the public hearing No comments were received and the hearing was closed Mr Milbrandt seconded by Mr Carlsen moved approval as conditioned Mr Kalmon asked if members were at all concerned about long term parking Mr Milbrandt suggested there is no need to address long term parking unless it becomes an issue Motion to approve as conditioned passed 7-0 It was noted this Case will be heard by the City Council on June 5 as it involves a determination of permitted use 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 at 13210 75th St and 13129 and 13199 Boutwell Road Teresa Hegland and Greg Schlink applicants Community Development Director Turnblad briefly reviewed the site which is located in the Phase 4 annexation area and proposal He said the proposal appears to be acceptable regarding zoning and land use The key question for the Commission he said is the timeliness of the request for annexation Mr Turnblad noted that the Council s previous position is that annexation is premature until the Comprehensive Plan update is completed i e City of Stillwater Planning Commission May 14, 2007 Greg Schlink and Paul Schroeder consulting planner for Bruggeman Properties addressed the Commission Mr Schlink pointed out the applicant has been working on this proposal for eight years has complied with every request and meets all the requirements for early annexation He also stated other Phase 4 properties have been annexed He pointed out the proposal complies in all respects with the South Boutwell Area plan and he noted that improvements to Boutwell Road have been completed and the infrastructure is in place to accommodate this development Mr Schlink said further delay of the request for annexation accomplishes nothing and should the Commission deny the request he asked that reasons for doing so be provided Mr Schroeder reviewed the timetable of the proposal beginning with the 1997 AUAR and South Boutwell plan He also pointed out the request meets all the requirements for early annexation — the site is contiguous to the City the infrastructure is in place the Joint Board has approved the request and the number of permits will not exceed the annual permit cap in the orderly annexation area Mr Schroeder also noted that the transportation requirements of the Boutwell Area plan — improvements to Boutwell Road signal at Manning/Myrtle and traffic calming measures on Deer Path — have been completed He briefly reviewed a preliminary site plan which he said is flexible enough to accommodate whatever decision is ultimately made regarding the possible extension of Neal Avenue Mr Middleton opened the public hearing Kitty Johnson 190 Northland Ave expressed concerns about the additional traffic the development would generate She spoke of the possibility of having four intersections on Myrtle Street within a mile section should Neal Avenue be extended Brian Luke 195 Northland Ave also spoke of traffic concerns and asked if the developer would be accountable for the wear and tear on streets Tom Garley 13295 Boutwell Road who owns property to the east of the Bruggeman site asked about plans for existing trees on the east property line No other comments were received and the hearing was closed Mr Schlink and Mr Schroeder responded to the comments They indicated a willingness to discuss an appropriate buffer on the east property line It was noted they are not proposing the extension of Neal Avenue but their plan is flexible enough to accommodate the extension should that be the City s decision It also was noted that developers do pay a City fee for road improvements Discussion was returned to the table Mr Peroceschi said it appears the applicant has met all the requirements and he noted that other Phase 4 properties have been granted annexation Mr Dahlquist noted that other Phase 4 properties that have been annexed have been minor parcels except for the development necessary to make the trunk utility connections to the Millbrook property Mr Dahlquist also pointed out that allowing early annexation is at the City s pleasure Mr Dahlquist said his biggest concern is that there is a lot of adjacent housing located on 2 5-5 acres near the Bruggeman site and said he anticipates that a new zoning for transition areas such as this will be developed in the Comprehensive Planning process Mr Dahlquist said 2 City of Stillwater Planning Commission May 14, 2007 another concern is with the diversity of housing stock and he suggested that what is built in 2015 may be a lot different than what is being built now Mr Kalmon said he thought it would be premature to allow annexation until having discussions with residents about land use during the Comprehensive Plan process Mr Carlsen also spoke in favor of waiting to proceed until the Comprehensive Plan is in place Mr Middleton noted that last year the Planning Commission/Council denied a development request due to concerns about traffic flow and that concern hasn t been addressed yet — the pieces of the puzzle haven t been framed Mr Wolden spoke in favor of considering the annexation request noting the developer had jumped through all the hoops and the land use proposal is not that much different than the existing Comprehensive Plan Mr Milbrandt spoke in favor of giving time for more sets of eyes the Comprehensive Plan committees to look at the issues Mr Dahlquist moved to deny the requested annexation zoning map amendment and comprehensive plan amendment noting there is no compelling reason to approve the request Mr Kalmon seconded the motion Motion passed 7-0 Mr Turnblad noted the Council would hear this request on June 5 Case No 07-22 A variance to the front yard setback for removal of a porch and replacing it with a 12 x 27 addition at 1333 S Fourth St in the RB Two Family Residential District Traci Brown applicant Ms Brown was present Mr Pogge reviewed the request and findings that the request meets the three requirements for the granting of a variance It was noted that the requested addition does not require a variance the variance is required because of an existing garage and the property is a non forming lot in terms of size Ms Brown explained that she wishes to tear down an existing framed in porch and replace it with living space Mr Middleton opened the public hearing No comments were received and the hearing was closed Mr Kalmon moved approval of the requested variance Mr Wolden seconded the motion motion passed 7-0 OTHER BUSINESS Request from Sheila E Martin for an extension of an approved variance (Case No V/05-19) — Mr Turnblad explained that Ms Martin is requesting a one-year extension of a variance granted in 2005 to allow construction of a garage Mr Turnblad noted that the proposed garage meets code requirements the lot size is non conforming He also noted that the same conditions apply as when the variance was granted in 2005 Ms Martin explained that she is in the process of removing a lot of existing concrete and replacing it with a permeable surface so she might be able to meet the new standards regarding lot coverage and impervious surface coverage 3 City of Stillwater Planning Commission May 14, 2007 Mr Middleton opened the public hearing No comments were received and the hearing was closed Mr Dahlquist seconded by Mr Carlsen moved approval of the one-year extension of the variance Motion passed unanimously Mr Dahlquist seconded by Mr Peroceschi moved to adjourn at 8 15 p m Motion passed unanimously Respectfully submitted Sharon Baker Recording Secretary 4 e Planning Commission DATE June 7, 2007 CASE NO 07-24 APPLICANT Summei Kuehn REQUEST Variances to the maximum impervious cover standard, side yard setback, and a vai lance to the parking standards LOCATION 1826 Noi thwestei n Ave COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DISTRICT BPO - Business Park Office ZONING BP-0 - Business Park - Office District PC DATE June 11, 2007 REVIEWERS Community Dev Director PREPARED BY Michel Pogge, City Plannei DISCUSSION The applicant is requesting a variance to the maximum allowed impervious cover, the requited side yard setback, and to the off-street parking requirements to allow for an addition to the River Valley Athletic Club Specifically the property owner is requesting a valiance to the maximum impervious coverage of 60% [31-1-20(5)d], a variance to the required number of off-street parking space of 291 spaces with 151 space provided [31-1-25(2)], and a 2 foot encroachment into the required 20 foot side yard setback [31-1-20(5)d] Impervious Cover Cuirently the site contains approximately 62 8% impervious surfaces With the additions and changes to the site the total proposed impervious surfaces will increase to 63 4% The applicant has proposed to mitigate the effects of the additional run-off thiough the use of a green roof (sod roof) on addition "B' If the green roof is not counted toward the impervious surfaces the total impervious surfaces on the property would only increase to 63 0% of the site Additional mitigation should be required on the site This could either be accomplished thiough the introduction of a rain garden, pervious surfaces, or additional green roofs 1$26 Northwestern Ave Page 2 Off -Street Parking Staff has classified this building as a "Health Club" for purposes of determining the required number of parking spaces Staff calculated the total floor area in the building as 29,102 square feet Health Clubs required 1 space per 100 square feet of floor area, thus, this site requires 291 parking spaces Currently there are 74 parking spaces on the site With this addition a total of 2 spaces will be lost on the property leaving 72 spaces Additionally, through an agreement with St Croix Clinics to the west the club has exclusive use of 20 parking spaces on the clinic's site and an additional 59 spaces during evening hours After the addition is completed there will be a total of 94 parking spaces available at all times with an additional 59 during evening hours for a total of 151 spaces During day time hours and during non -peak times of the year parking is not generally an issue on the site During evening and weekend time and especially during the winter months (January -March) parking around the site can become critical The use of the space in the additions includes expanded offices, storage, and pool side sitting areas These uses will increases the parking demand, however, they are not of particular concern One of the areas includes area for expanded salon services Staff is concerned that this could increase demand at the site and future exaggerate the situation Staff would suggest that the Commission table action on the request to allow the applicant time to prepare and submit a detailed parking analysis of the site EVALUATION OF REQUEST A variance may be granted only when all of the following conditions are found 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 A hardship is a constraint of the property (slope, irregular shape lot, etc) that prevents the reasonable use of a property The southern side yard property line angles on this lot Due to this it is impossible to build an addition that squares off the southeast corner of the building and meet the required side yard setback It would seem that this would be a reasonable hardship request Related to the portion of the request for variances to the maximum impervious coverage and off-street parking requirements there appears to be noting related to the physical conditions of the property that precludes reasonable use, therefore there appears to be no hardship It would appear that the request is simply for expansions that do not fit on the site There is no relevant hardship particular to this property ► 4 1826 Northwestern Ave Page 3 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 The property is zoned Business Park - Office District Even without these variances the property owner can continue to use the property as a health club, which is a reasonable use of the property Additionally, if the variances are granted as proposed this would create conditions that are not allowed on similarly sized lots elsewhere in the BP-0 district Therefore the request is not necessary for preservation of property right and would constitute a special privilege not enjoyed by other property owners in the area 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 Impervious cover such as buildings, driveways, and roads prevents water from entering the ground leading to increased flooding downstream and an increase in contamination and sediment in downstream water bodies Increases in impervious surfaces are the main causes of water quality degradation This degradation can be seen in many of the City's water bodies including the St Croix River These are just a few of the reasons the City have implemented maximum impervious coverage standards Staff has discussed with the property concern with the amount of building coverage on this site The property owner has proposed some rrutigation, however, the mitigation falls short of addressing all of the additional run-off from the site Additional areas of green roofs or the introduction of deep -root plantings, an on -site holding facility, replacing the drive with a pervious surface, or other alternative methods could be considered Without additional mitigation this will increase downstream water and impact the greater public interest FINDINGS 1 That the hardship is not peculiar to the property and is created by acts of the owner 2 That a variance is not 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 constitute a special privilege of the recipient not enjoyed by his neighbors T826 Northwestern Ave Page 4 3 That the authorizing of the variance will be of substantial detriment to adjacent property and will materially impair the purpose and intent of this title It would not necessary adversely affect the Comprehensive Plan ACTION BY THE HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION The Heritage Preservation Commission (HPC) reviewed a design review application for the proposed additions on June 4, 2007 They approved the design review with conditions ALTERNATIVES The Planrung Commission has the following options 1 Continue the public hearing until the July 9, 2007 Planning Commission meeting to allow the applicant time to propose additional storm water mitigation for exceeding the allowable maximum impervious coverage standard and to submit a proof of parking for the site The 60 day decision deadline for the request is July 17, 2007 2 Deny the requested variance to the maximum impervious coverage of 60% (63 4% proposed) [31-1-20(5)d], a 2 foot encroachment into the required 20 foot side yard setback [31-1-20(5)d], and a variance to the required number of off-street parking space of 291 (151 space proposed to be provided) since an affirmative finding on the required conditions for a variance could not be made by staff 3 Approve the requested variance to the maximum impervious coverage of 60% (63 4% proposed) [31-1-20(5)d], a 2 foot encroachment into the required 20 foot side yard setback [31-1-20(5)d], and a variance to the required number of off-street parking space of 291 (151 space proposed to be provided) If the Commission chooses to grant the variances the commission needs to make an affirmative finding on the required conditions for a variance Additionally, if the commission chooses to approve the variances staff would suggest that the Commission approve it with the conditions for approval listed below RECOMMENDATION Table action on the application to allow the applicant time to propose additional storm water mitigation for exceeding the allowable maximum impervious coverage standard and to submit a proof of parking for the site CONDITIONS FOR APPROVAL 1 The project construction shall be in compliance with the plan set dated May 11, 2007, which is on file in the Community Development Department 2 All minor modifications to the Design Review Permit shall be approved in advance by the Community Development Director All major modifications shall D 4 1826 Northwestern Ave Page 5 be approved in advance by the HPC Determination of the distinction between 'major" and "minor" shall rest with the City Administrator 3 The material for the new wall surfaces for addition 'A' and 'C' shall match the materials used on the adjacent existing wall surfaces 4 The banding on the south elevation should be continues along the south elevation of addition 'A' 5 If the applicant constructs an outside garbage storage enclosures it shall match the building materials The location and screening of the equipment shall be reviewed and found acceptable by the Community Development Director prior to issuance of a building permit 6 Any exterior mechanical units shall meet the design standards found in the West Stillwater Business Park Plan The location and screening of the equipment shall be reviewed and found acceptable by the Community Development Director prior to issuance of a building permit 7 An exterior lighting plan for the addition shall been submitted The location and planting materials shall be reviewed and found acceptable by the Community Development Director prior to issuance of a building permit 8 All landscaping shall be installed prior to final project inspection 9 No roof equipment, including roof vents, shall be visible to the general public Any exterior mechanical units shall be fully screened The location and screening of the equipment shall be reviewed and found acceptable by the Community Development Director prior to issuance of a building pernut 10 All trees are required to remain on site, as indicated on the plans, and shall be protected by fencing or other necessary measures shall be taken to prevent damage during construction activity 11 Continuous concrete curbing shall be installed to separate parking areas from landscape areas 12 Handicapped parking spaces and signage, in compliance with State requirements, shall be shown on building permit plans and installed before final inspection of the project 13 The street address of the building shall be displayed in a location conspicuous from the public street 14 All gutters, downspouts, flashings, etc shall be painted to match the color of the adjacent surface 15 Construction projects shall conform to the City's Noise ordinance Construction during the dry season shall mitigate excess dust problems 16 The applicant is not required to install berming along Northwestern Ave due to the existing landscaping that would be impacted 17 The existing metal building is to be removed with the construction of addition ' C" 18 The applicant shall propose additional storm water control to mitigate all of the the increase in impervious cover The storm water control shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of a building permit Attachments Applicant's Form, letter, and Site Plan May 15, 2007 Dear Stillwater Planning Commission, We are requesting a commercial building variance for the construction of additions to the existing River Valley Athletic Club structure, located at 1826 Northwestern Ave The requested additions are referenced as addition "A", addition "B", and Addition "C" on the accompanying drawings The variance requested is for an exception to the overall impervious coverage ratio, and to the minimum setback required The first and pnmary portion of the addition, referenced as Addition "A", will square off the S E corner of our existing building Addition "A" will displace an existing paved parkmg area (contammg 4 parking spots), as well as the cement sidewalks that run between the existing building and those 4 parking spaces Addition ' A" will add 1,470 SF to our building footprint (including sidewalk and fire exit door stoops) Addition A" will be built to match the existing structure in height and visual outward appearance Addition "A" will allow us to relocate our book keeping offices to our main business floor, and allow us to add an onsite records room Both of these changes will allow us to improve our administrative efficiency Addition "A" will also allow us to expand and reconfigure our salon area to better accommodate our salon clients The specific variance requested in conjunction to Addition "A" is a 2 ft exception to the 20 ft required setback from the adjacent property line The adjacent property in question is the city owned lot containing the Stillwater water tower The angle of our southern lot line makes a variance necessary in order to make Addition "A" square with our existing structure The second portion of the addition, referenced as Addition `B", will add a single story structure to the west side of our existing building In order to minimize run off, Addition "B" will had a green roof (a living sod roof) Addition "B" will add 352 SF to our existing building footpnnt Once addition "B' has been completed we will be tearing down the tin shed currently used to house our outdoor pool pump equipment The concrete tip up wall barrier located behind the tin shed will also be removed The space freed of these structures will be seeded with grass Addition `B" will provide a new and more secure location for our outdoor pool pump house It will also provide us with a location to store aquatics equipment when not in use for swimming lessons This will allow us to clear the storage bins from our indoor pool deck The third and final portion of this variance request, referenced as Addition "C", will allow us to replace the detenorating glass wall on the south side of our indoor pool room We will be replacing the current straight glass wall with a semi -circular glass wall, which will extend out on to the existing paved outdoor pool patio The new glass wall will provide improved thermal performance as well as improving the functionality of the seating area in our indoor pool area Addition "C" will add 208 SF to our building footpnnt We humbly request that you grant our variance request so that we may improve the fit, form, and function of the River Valley Athletic Club to meet the needs of our community Thank you for our Consideration, Su mer uehn d C .• and Swner River •alley Athletic Club t SfTff Cxtikv1tyV loo SITE INFORMATION -lot #7 She Area Impetuous Coverage Allowable 60% of 87 128SF Existi g Bldg Parlung/Drrreways Concrete walks Patio @ Pool Proposed Addn A Addn B Addn C 87 128 SF 52 277 SF 19 012 SF 27 760 2 646 5,280 (excludes pool) 54 698 SF (62 8%) 1 470 (includes so walk/stoops) 352 (includes sod roof system) 208 2030 SF less displaced park ng walks patio and equ p bldg Park g Totals Existing o lot #6 <1,486 SF> 544 SF 55 242 SF (63 4%) lle% impetuous surface crease 79 park ng stans shared with Cfroc ext door 20 parking stalls reserved for RV Athletic Club Proposed on lot #7 72 parking stalls after loosing 4 and ga n ng2 and 3 ADA stalls -- 7f:1707- $vw t1te RiverValley Ad,,?iLETLC CLUB M1 ;ca786/STO[{ies4 /�pC. 1-1lw4435O82 Ft- — �-S 34Hie.H. kat se�arerme nor s1�0er mmnesota 55062 a $ �v-21-7 f651)4991208 dax(651)439DB40 11b` -- it Rf9riaL+ Bxrrer _Ito 11- Aix, wwT ids A5. eigsTs. EpsKErryW, coN• 64r0 w/G��'90-cam. GAS ��5s'so �I.m ��1"IA1m�h17� River Valley ATHLETIC CLUB 1826 Northwestern Ave. Stillwater MN 55082 F gary Bressler Architect 9800 primrose avenue north s9llwaler mmnesola 55082 Vtc1.11iect 1H (651) 439 1208 f (6511439 0840 • - t2 APBM11.44, MET PEtcW 41-r }1-y` eW"1M1 -1 — — rero�rarlrx J [to] -�,raFasF-aw, t3F7Pw' t CJ 10-0 ts-} 4� t4 \ / / \ / IVR,< \-�,� [�� e9s{1,1 / yyyyyy \ / v / \ DI FPG DI L ' Stto• s — 1ki 1 L1 F tw — -P Dl?! -ias F�So-2s — -H River Valley ATHLETIC CLUB 1826 Northwestern Ave Stillwater MN 55082 439 7611 a Bressler Architect 3 9800 pnmrose avenue north st 0waler non esota 55082 aC�lai�eCi lel 16511439 1208 fa 16511439 084D bf - `1i'1' _- - - it ill' — 10 Si74W11. Ii • kimr lI■;' ! ral1ciFsmcgm•rniml 1111111"li.lati"171*7111 ^�iII!iIi!!!III1IIII I�I�Ii �I�I�jijf■�I�I_._I. E1 �''I l�i�l ililiI _ - _ CZ ■I.I. SEMI 11I -P►ZfosfA PC() MEM h■t ■ICI■!■I 7 ���jj�--(p�� ! 1��I!IL4 �ind I�'1v_�r�i� �IIII��IIII j.�„„,:ZlmAli!%=it1l''III �. it . m�ii II I. ;1I l • �; ; 11' 1I lin i I I,/. iltluit � I,>f �r!11711�!�lili f ' r� g1 J�V1iNr -1--- -a;a Al -HI -Ell( CLUB - 1826 Northwestern Ave Stillwater MN 55082 419-761 i H miler_ - _ _ Xl Architecsy 913110_pnmm5e_k{fll]dia�9t.Olm SU�VVareL mrnesota J5un2_ VttP { 1et 051) 499170 1 (651) 499 0840� 4 I E SIR H A OF MIAINE 0 1 A Planning Commission DATE June 7, 2007 CASE NO 07-25 APPLICANT Eric Hawking, Stone's Restaurant LLC REQUESTS An amendment to a special use permit for Outside Seating for Stone's Restaurant LOCATION 324 Main St S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DISTRICT CC - Community Commercial ZONING CBD - Central Business District CPC DATE June 11, 2007 REVIEWERS Community Development Director PREPARED BY Michel Pogge, City Planner m Of DISCUSSION Eric Hawking of Stone's Restaurant LLC is seeking approval of an amendment to their special use permit for outdoor seating Their current permit allows for up to 200 outdoor seats with a temporary bar that is required to be removed in the winter With this request they are asking for the ability to construct a permanent bar structure on the patio that will be left in place year around The bar and patio would continue to be used only seasonally EVALUATION OF REQUEST A special use permit may be granted only when all of the following conditions are found 1 The proposed structure or use conforms to the requirements and the intent of this chapter, and of the comprehensive plan, relevant area plans and other lawful regulations The property is zoned as Central Business District, which allows outdoor eating establishments by Special Use Permit The location of the patio area does not effect pedestrian or vehicular movement in the downtown area The use is 4 324 Main St S Page 2 comparable with the surrounding area and conforms to the intent of the zoning code and all other legal controls 2 Any additional conditions necessary for the public interest have been imposed In order to protect the public interest, staff recommends that if the Commission approves the request that they include the conditions listed below 3 The use or structure will not constitute a nuisance or be detrimental to the public welfare of the community The proposed change will cause no change to the number of downtown parking spaces during the peak summer months when parking is at a premium During the winter months this change will only result in the loss of two parking spaces Since this change will only impact downtown parking during the winter off-peak season staff finds that this will have a minimal impact and will not be a detriment to the public FINDINGS The proposed permanent outdoor bar structure 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 ACTION BY THE HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION The Heritage Preservation Commission (HPC) reviewed a design review application for this accessory dwelling unit on May 7, 2007 The HPC approved the application with the conditions listed below and with the condition that the applicant receive a variance to allow the accessory dwelling unit to be located in front of the midpoint of the primary dwelling unit RECOMMENDATION Approve the Special Use Permit as conditioned CONDITIONS FOR APPROVAL 1 There shall be no signs atop the outdoor bar 2 No lights shall be atop and directed upward on the outdoor bar 3 Lighting on the bar shall be recessed downcast lights The maximum wattage for each light shall be 75 watts 4 No additional signage 5 Only soft landscaping lighting (lot voltage) shall be permitted 6 A change in use shall require a new Special Use Permit 7 This Special Use Permit shall be reviewed before the Planning Commission and City Council for revocation if complaints regarding parking are received by the Community Development Director related to this site and use 324 Main St S Page 3 8 Evening outdoor music is allowed prior to 10 00 P M and is subject to review and revocation or adjustment upon complaint No outdoor music shall occur on the site between the hours of 10 00 P M and 8 00 A M 9 Expansion shall adhere to supplied drawings and changes are subject to review and approval by the Community Development Director as needed 10 All revisions to the design of the structure shall be reviewed and approved by the Heritage Preservation Commission Attachments Applicant's Form, Applicant's Letter, and Site Plan and Elevation of Proposed Building 1 Redrew/ma & Zeuve May 29, 2007 Planning Commission City of Stillwater Dear Sirs, Stone's Restaurant has applied for an amendment to our Special Use Permit concerning our outside bar Currently we have permission to build and operate a temporary bar in our patio area directly West of the restaurant building The permit states we can operate the bar during the summer months but it must be removed for winter Our amendment request seeks permission to build a permanent structure and leave it in place year around We feel a permanent structure is needed for the following reasons 1 A better product The bar will closely match the building architecture and will further enhance the outside area of the restaurant and Stillwater A temporary structure presents many limitations to achieving a quality structure and consistent look 2 Stone's will have a hard time serving our customers without a full service bar outside A permanent structure will allow us the opportunity to use the outside bar to its full potential during the busy summer months Our current Special Use Permit states that the patio/parking area is to be used for parking in the winter/off-season While parking is at a premium in the summer months, parking in winter is plentiful around the restaurant including a public lot immediately west of Stone's We will still have a full turnaround for customer drop-off as well as 5-6 parking spaces in the lot The bar will take up less than two potential parking spots We have been granted permission for construction of the bar design by The Stillwater Heritage Preservation Committee and a building permit by the City of Stillwater Health Department design approval is pending Thank you for your consideration, Eric Hawkins Stone's Restaurant Grand Garage Building 324 S Main Street Stillwater MN 55082 651 439 1900 www stonesstillwater com &IAA, C. 60451 I � R & ..deueofe eel 1-4A rrG C P"rr (066T ����1 11 Grand Garage Building 324 S Main Street Stillwater MN 55082 651 439 1900 www stonesstillwater com 118 NIGHT TIME OVERVIEV4 NOT TO SCALE Stone s Restuarant & Lounge 324 5 Main 5t Stillwater MN OUTDOOR COCKTAIL BAR REV 1 4/18/07 Design 8 Drafting Services by Wardell Consulting Inc 651 483 4974 Page # 1 of 8 Planning Commission DATE June 5, 2006 CASE NO V\07-26 APPLICANT Dan and Katie Gruba REQUEST A variance to allow up to a three (3) foot, two (2) inch encroachment into the required 25 foot rear yard setback LOCATION 1439 Lydia Circle COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DISTRICT SFLL - Single Family Large Lot ZONING RA - One Family Residential PC DATE July 9, 2007 REVIEWERS Community Dev Director, City Planner PREPARED BY Nicole Ormand, Community Development Intern DISCUSSION The applicant is requesting a variance to Chapter 31-1 11(4)a 6 of the Stillwater City Code to allow for a deck to encroach up to 3 feet 2 inches into the required 25 foot rear yard setback The applicant is making this request in order to install a 12 foot 2 inch by 14 foot deck in their rear yard EVALUATION OF REQUEST A variance may be granted only when all of the following conditions are found 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 property at 1439 Lydia Circle is an irregularly shaped single-family lot on a cul-de-sac The lot has two property lines that are perpendicular while the third is angled diagonally The property is located in the Highlands, 3iid addition to Stillwater The zoning in this development is RA and allows for lots as small as 10,000 square feet The subject property is 8,684 square feet conforming to an approved PUD Other lots within Lydia Circle range in size between 8,935 square feet and 12,240 square feet making 1439 Lydia Circle the smallest lot by r 1439 Lydia Circle Page 2 251 square feet The rear house wall and real property line are not parallel and is problematic for the development of a deck This hardship is particular to this property 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 This property is zoned for a single-family home and is currently being used as a single-family home Without this variance the property owner will be able to continue to use the property as a single-family home Staff does not believe that approval of this variance is necessary to preserve a substantial property right which has been denied The deck can have other dimensions than 12 foot 2 inch by 14 foot that meet setback requirements and result in the same square area footage 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 rear yard of this property is adjacent to other single-family housing properties The adjacent properties are meeting and exceeding the required setbacks 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 FINDINGS 1 That the hardship is peculiar to the property and that it is not created by any act of the owner In this context, personal financial difficulties, loss of prospective profits and neighboring violations are not factors involved in justifying a variance 2 That a variance is not 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 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 ALTERNATIVES The Planning Commission has the following options 4439 Lydia Circle Page 3 1 Deny the requested variance to allow a 3 feet 2 inches encroachment into the required 25 foot rear yard setback foi all structures in the RA district [31- 1 11(4)a 6] since an affirmative finding on the requited conditions for a variance could not be made by staff 2 Approve the requested variance to allow a 3 feet 2 inches encroachment into the required 25 foot rear yard setback for all structures in the RA district [31- 1 11(4)a 6] If the Commission chooses to grant the variance the commission needs to make an affirmative finding on the required conditions for a variance Additionally, staff would suggest that the following conditions foi approval a All revisions to the approved plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director b The deck be located no closer than 21 feet 10 inches to the sear property line 3 Continue the public hearing until the July 9, 2007 Planning Commission meeting The 60 day decision deadline for the request is July 17, 2007 RECOMMENDATION Since an affirmative finding could not be made for the three valiance review criteria, staff recommends denial of the requested variance Attachments Applicant s Form and Site Plan Dan and Katie Gruba 1439 Lydia Cir Stillwater, MN 55082 Community Development Department City of Stillwater 216 North Fourth Street Stillwater, MN 55082 May 17, 2007 Dear Planning Commission, This is a request for a vanance for a backyard deck at 1439 Lydia Circle in Stillwater My hope is to create a functional outdoor space for my family The backyard deck setback in our zoning area is 25 feet from the property line A compliant deck is only 9 feet 4 inches from the ledger board (8 feet 10 inch floor) This would not allow for a 3 foot sitting space on both sides of a 4 foot table having 2 feet for traffic My hope for this application is to gain usable floor space The location of the home on the property and the fact the backyard property line is not parallel to the home are affecting factors A 12 foot 2 inch deck (11 foot 8 inch floor) would be in compliance at one end of the ledger board but encroaches on the other side of the ledger board by 2 feet 10 inches The encroachment gets worse the further you move along the home I am requesting a vanance of 4 inches on one side of the deck and the maximum encroachment of 3 feet 2 inches on the other side to allow for a standard 12' 6" deck (12 foot deck floor) with 90 degree corners Please refer to the enclosed drawings showing the encroachment area in the shape of a thin wedge In theory the new setback would then become 21 feet 8 inches from the backyard property line We are planning on attending the hearing on June 11th to further discuss our request Thankyou for your help, Dan and Katie Gruba 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 fo 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►ngmafer►al (► e , photos, sketches, etc) submitted with application becomes the propertyof the Cityof Stillwater Sixteen (16) copies of supporting material is required If application is submitted to the City Council twelve (12) copies of supporting material is required A site plan showing drainage and setbacks is required with applications Any incomplete application or supporting material will delay the application process After Planning Commission approvals there is a 10 day appeal period Once the 10-day appeal penod 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 i1 (� / PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION Address of Project I'f I N zI/4 C1t LE Assessors Parcel No 32-03O2-O / 3c0 80 siNG/ 2 �u< YR-12 (GEO Code) Zoning District >✓Am►�yDescnptlon of Project `U I-1I6p LANOs or SrX 1,9ergi2, 32 Lo7 - o0z - 0p3 I hereby state the foregoing statements and all data information and evidence submitted herewith in all respects, fo the best of my knowledge and belief to be true and correct I further certify 1 will comply with the permit if it is grantedrD and used Property Owner (AN/E. L. L. GPO 3 ? Representative Mailing Address I 439 L11C! ! 0, G,r City State Zip J h I1t�p T �56 $ 2 Telephone No Signature LDSI -Zo(—) c I Lf F G (Signature is required) Lot Size (dimensions) ecik, Sp' Land Area k,6e¢59P1 D Z AererC Height of Buildings Stories Principal Accessory Mailing Address City State Zip Telephone No Signature (Signature is required) SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION at the 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 \mrnamara\shpila\PI ANAPP FRM June 9 2006 Case 07-26 1439 Lydia Circle Dan Gruba N A EI J- u 1 1 I Feet 0 50 100 200 300 400 1 inch equals 200 feet City of Stillwater MN Community Development Department 216 North Fourth Street Stillwater MN 55082 651 430 8820 — 651 430 8810 fax Planning Commission DATE June 7, 2007 APPLICANT Mariay Snuth PROPERTY OWNER Don and Cheryl Schoff CASE NO 07-27 REQUEST Variances to the maximum lot coverage, mnumum lot size and the minimum setback of an accessory structure from a principal dwelling unit LOCATION 212 Maple St W COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DISTRICT SFLL - Single Family Small Lot ZONING RB - Two-family District PC DATE June 11 2007 REVIEWERS Community Dev Director PREPARED BY Michel Pogge City Planner fM% DISCUSSION The applicant is requesting a variance to the maximum lot coverage, m,rumum lot size and the minimum setback from a principal dwelling unit for a proposed garage This property is zoned RB and currently has an existing single-family home Currently there is an existing 20x24 garage on the property The applicant desires to demolish the existing garage and build a 24x34 accessory structure The new accessory structure is proposed to contain a 24x24 garage area and a 10x24 shop area Currently the site exceeds the maximum lot coverage of 25% by 0 28% or 17 75 square feet The proposed new garage will add an additional 336 square feet of impervious cover on the site and increasing the site's overall buildmg coverage to 30 62% The driveway is proposed to cover 23 55% of the site bringing the total site coverage to 54 17% 212 Maple St W Page 2 EVALUATION OF REQUEST A variance may be granted only when all of the following conditions are found 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 property owner has not provided information showing a hardship that is peculiar to this property A hardship is a constraint of the property (slope, irregular shape lot, etc ) that prevents the reasonable use of a property In this case the property owner claims that the lot is an irregular shaped parcel of land due to the angle of Maple Street But even if the lot were rectangular, the shape is not causing the difficulty The lot size causes the difficulty There is no relevant hardship particular to this property 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 This property is zoned as two-family residential which allows single farruly and two- family uses Even without these variances the property owner will be able to continue to use the property as a single-family home, which is a reasonable use of the property Moreover the property owner could demolish the old garage and build a similarly sized new garage Additionally, if the variances are granted as proposed this would create conditions that are not allowed on similarly sized lots elsewhere in the RB district Therefore the request is not necessary for preservation of property right and would constitute a special privilege not enjoyed by other property owners in the area 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 Impervious cover such as houses, driveways, and roads prevents water from entering the ground leading to increased flooding downstream and an mcrease in contamination and sediment in downstream water bodies Increases in impervious surfaces are the main causes of water quality degradation This degradation can be seen in many of the City's water bodies including the St Croix River These are just a few of the reasons the City have implemented maximum impervious coverage standards Staff has discussed with the apphcant's representative concern with the amount of building coverage on this site One alternative staff suggested with the representative is possible rrutigation of the storm water run-off from the site There are a number of methods that could be used including the introduction of deep -root plantings, on -site holding facility, replacing the drive with a pervious surface, or other alternative methods Without mitigation this will increase downstream water and impact the greater public interest 212 Maple St W Page 3 The proposal as submitted will be a detriment to property owners m the community and will impair the purpose and intent of the zoning code FINDINGS 1 That the hardship is not peculiar to the property and zs created by acts of the owner 2 That a variance is not 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 constitute a special privilege of the recipient not enjoyed by his neighbors 3 That the authorizing of the variance wzll be of substantial detriment to adjacent property and wzll materially impair the purpose and intent of this title It would not necessary adversely affect the Comprehensive Plan ALTERNATIVES The Plannmg Commission has the following options 1 Deny the requested variances to the maximum lot coverage requirement, nunimum lot size, and the mmunum setback since an affirmative finding on the required conditions for a variance could not be made by staff 2 Approve the requested variances to the maximum lot coverage requirement muumum lot size and the minimum setback If the Commission chooses to grant the variances the Comrrussion needs to make an affirmative finding on the required conditions for a variance Addihonally, staff would suggest that the followmg conditions for approval a All revisions to the approved plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director b The garage shall be hunted to a 24 by 34 structure c The applicant shall propose some type of storm water control to mitigate the increase in impervious cover The storm water control shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engmeer prior to the issuance of a building pernut 3 Continue the public hearing until the July 9 2007 Planning Commission meeting The 60 day decision deadline for the request is July 17, 2007 RECOMMENDATION Since an affirmative finding could not be made for the three variance review criteria, staff recommends denial of the requested variance Attachments Apphcant s Form, Site Plan, elevations letter, and letters from adjouung property owners Ruri_S eel Ccr br June 2, 2007 Community Development Department City of Stillwater 216 N Fourth St Stillwater, MN 55082 To whom it may concern The existing garage on our property at 212 W Maple St was constructed in 1974, 16 years before we purchased the property in 1990 At that time, we knew this garage was not a well-built structure Now, at 33 years old, the garage's basic structural problems are glaring The building is in an advanced stage of detenoration The largest of its problems is the concert slab, which has numerous large cracks, some as wide as 4 inches Several experts have told us it cannot be repaired And if the slab cannot be repaired, the structure above the slab — the garage — cannot be repaired Replacing the garage was always part of our long-term plans It has been obvious for quite a while that we need to replace it with a standard 24-foot-wide structure The current garage is only 20 feet wide and can't accommodate two cars, much less other typical garage items like a lawn mower and a snow blower and a bike or two We intend to replace the existing ugly garage, which in no way resembles our 1880s house, with a new structure that would mimic the house's roof pitch and detail, thus fitting in — instead of fighting with — the lovely tone of this old neighborhood Our initial plan was to build a two-story structure with a garage below and a workshop above However, there were problems with this approach • We would need vanances for the setback on the east side of the garage This setback of 10 feet would make the garage difficult to use and unappealing to look at • We would need a vanance for the ceiling height • And we were womed about proportion The second story would be a lot of building very close to our neighbors to the east And since our house is not large, and we did not want it to be overwhelmed by the garage Our scaled -down plan is for a 24-by-34-foot one-story structure a standard 24-by- 24-foot two -car garage with a 10-foot shop behind June 2, 2007 Dear neighbors The existing garage on our property at 212 W Maple St was constructed in 1974, 16 years before we purchased the property in 1990 Unfortunately, this garage was never a well-built structure Now, at 33 years old, its basic structural problems are glaring The garage is in an advanced stage of deterioration We are asking the city to let us replace the garage with a standard 24-foot-wide structure (4 feet wider than the current garage) This would make the garage a true two -car garage We are also asking that we be allowed to have a 10-foot shop in the back of the garage This would make the structure 24-by-34 feet The city code states that all buildings on a lot cannot exceed 25 percent of the lot size Because we have such a small lot this proposed building will increase the footprint to 31 percent Therefore, a variance is required for the building permit Our new garage will benefit the neighborhood in four ways 1 The existing ugly garage will be removed 2 The new structure would mimic the house's roof pitch and detail, thus fitting in -- instead of fighting with — the lovely tone of this old neighborhood 3 It will allow us to put our cars in a garage for the first time therefore getting them off the driveway 4 The new garage will resolve any potential problem of rainwater run off from the roof by routing the water underground along the driveway straight south to the front of the lot and to the street We will be meeting with the city planning committee on June 11 to review our request We are asking our neighbors to sign this letter so we can show the committee that our neighbors favor of this variance Thank you for your onsideration Signature Name Address G (/ f /1/ ,4, d' 1 �1\1Q,;� L-YA)''!n id LCe c-{`441 ;l iv June 2 2007 Dear neighbors The existing garage on our property at 212 W Maple St was constructed in 1974, 16 years before we purchased the property in 1990 Unfortunately, this garage was never a well-built structure Now, at 33 years old, its basic structural problems are glaring The garage is in an advanced stage of deterioration We are asking the city to let us replace the garage with a standard 24-foot-wide structure (4 feet wider than the current garage) This would make the garage a true two -car garage We are also asking that we be allowed to have a 10-foot shop in the back of the garage This would make the structure 24-by-34 feet The city code states that all buildings on a lot cannot exceed 25 percent of the lot size Because we have such a small lot, this proposed building will increase the footprint to 31 percent Therefore, a variance is required for the building permit Our new garage will benefit the neighborhood in four ways 1 The existing ugly garage will be removed 2 The new structure would mimic the house's roof pitch and detail, thus fitting in -- instead of fighting with — the lovely tone of this old neighborhood 3 It will allow us to put our cars in a garage for the first time, therefore getting them off the driveway 4 The new garage will resolve any potential problem of rainwater run off from the roof by routing the water underground along the driveway straight south to the front of the lot and to the street We will be meeting with the city planning committee on June 11 to review our request We are asking our neighbors to sign this letter so we can show the committee that our neighbors favor of this variance Thank you for your consideration T t Signature 6/(b u-✓ -6,,,, ',\ y1l Name •JNn r'�Jr) 0 rr}N7l Address ,',4) �� L 7� r June 2, 2007 Dear neighbors The existing garage on our property at 212 W Maple St was constructed in 1974, 16 years before we purchased the property in 1990 Unfortunately, this garage was never a well-built structure Now, at 33 years old its basic structural problems are glaring The garage is in an advanced stage of deterioration We are asking the city to let us replace the garage with a standard 24-foot-wide structure (4 feet wider than the current garage) This would make the garage a true two -car garage We are also asking that we be allowed to have a 10-foot shop in the back of the garage This would make the structure 24-by-34 feet The city code states that all buildings on a lot cannot exceed 25 percent of the lot size Because we have such a small lot, this proposed building will increase the footpnnt to 31 percent Therefore, a variance is required for the building permit Our new garage will benefit the neighborhood in four ways 1 The existing ugly garage will be removed 2 The new structure would mimic the house s roof pitch and detail, thus fitting in -- instead of fighting with — the lovely tone of this old neighborhood 3 It will allow us to put our cars in a garage for the first time, therefore getting them off the driveway 4 The new garage will resolve any potential problem of rainwater run off from the roof by routing the water underground along the driveway straight south to the front of the lot and to the street We will be meeting with the city planning committee on June 11 to review our request We are asking our neighbors to sign this letter so we can show the committee that our neighbors favor of this variance Thank you for your consideration Signature *- Name Name 'c.Lt c C�i n i Address T C 2 N., 1 In [ `i 3c, - ' ' 7/ 1 if tt l,) i) lL`+ 1, VA_ c 4,0 t 1 1 Yt1 �FL Vl, 1{ A f 1.�,i,i �,\d J c >C `Lb 11 'Case 07-27 212 Maple St W Don and Cheryl Schoff N A 1-1J-LJ 1Feet 0 25 50 100 150 200 1 inch equals 100 feet City of Stillwater MN Community Development Department 216 North Fourth Street Stillwater MN 55082 651 430-8820 — 651 430 8810 fax ..ANNING 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 t 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 anyapplication. All supporting material (i e., photos, sketches, etc.) submitted with application becomesthe propertyof the Cityof Stillwater. Sixteen (16) copies of supporting material is required. !f application is submitted to the City Council, twelve (12) copies of supporting material is required. A site plan showing drainage and setbacks is required with applications. Any incomplete application or supporting material will delay the application process. After Planning Commission approvals, there is a 10-day appeal period. Once the 10-day appeal period has ended, the applicant will receive a zoning use permit which must be signed and submitted to the City to obtain the required building permits. PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION Address of Project 2 ( Z L,1 , in fl pie. - r . Assessor's Parcel No. ''\ (GEO Cope) Zoning District R13 Description of Project Ij1`' jr I. h C XI S i I,4 C7CvrInti e P 1 1 n 1I1-71 RA t 161 0 n e i (1 n CO cl (-- "1 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. 1 further certify I will comply with the permit if it is granted and used." Property Owner Mailing Address 2 i Z. (A% m -- op 1r 5 Mailing Address 12 1 ( 3 ` _�) S City - State - Zip Si 1 i V� }1 L r Mr) 5 --City - State - Zip 51� �' i7 t r ' 455Oc; _ l,,r I LI (7 fj3`-(k=c1 2 gnat(ire is required Representative ( (Z-+ �' �` r t 4h Telephone No. i 30 I L Telephone No. j,. Signature ( "IutC/L Signature( (Signatur is required) Lot Size (dimensions) 1 x r ? 3 Land Area t Lf,5 5 r Height of Buildings: Stories Principal Z.- Accessory SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTIO Feet; ii Total Building floor area square feet Existing I It, 65 square feet Proposed J square feet Paved Impervious + Area 19Z3 square feet No. of off-street parking spaces Z- Vi 2 H• mreamara :heila PI ANAPP FRP1 June 9. 2006 June 2, 2007 Community Development Department City of Stillwater 216 N. Fourth St. Stillwater, MN 55082 To whom it may concern: The existing garage on our property at 212 W. Maple St. was constructed in 1974, 16 years before we purchased the property in 1990. At that time, we knew this garage was not a well-built structure. Now, at 33 years old, the garage's basic structural problems are glaring. The building is in an advanced stage of deterioration. The largest of its problems is the concert slab, which has numerous large cracks, some as wide as 4 inches. Several experts have told us it cannot be repaired. And if the slab cannot be repaired, the structure above the slab — the garage — cannot be repaired. Replacing the garage was always part of our long-term plans. It has been obvious for quite a while that we need to replace it with a standard 24-foot-wide structure. The current garage is only 20 feet wide and can't accommodate two cars, much less other typical garage items like a lawn mower and a snow blower and a bike or two. We intend to replace the existing ugly garage, which in no way resembles our 1880s house, with a new structure that would mimic the house's roof pitch and detail, thus tilting in — instead of fighting with — the lovely tone of this old neighborhood. Our initial plan was to build a two-story structure with a garage below and a workshop above. However, there were problems with this approach: • We would need variances for the setback on the east side of the garage. This setback of 10 feet would make the garage difficult to use and unappealing to look at. • We would need a variance for the ceiling height. • And we were worried about proportion. The second story would be a lot of building very close to our neighbors to the east. And since our house is not large, and we did not want it to be overwhelmed by the garage. Our scaled -down plan is for a 24-by-34-foot one-story structure: a standard 24-by- 24-foot two -car garage with a 10-foot shop behind. We need a structure that is 34 feet deep, which would be large enough for a garage, storage and a workshop. With no usable attic or basement space in our house, we need additional room in the garage. The modest workshop in the back would house equipment for both leatherworking and metalworking — both quiet and clean pursuits. This revised garage plan solves many problems: • It would eliminate the ill -matched eyesore that currently masquerades as the garage. • The new structure would mimic the house's roof pitch and detail, visually tying it to the house and the neighborhood. • It would allow us to put our cars in a garage for the first time, therefore getting them off the driveway and out of sight. • The new garage would resolve any potential problem of rainwater runoff from the roof by rerouting the water. Please note that we have enclosed signed statements from six of our closest neighbors showing their support for our proposed project. We understand that this project increases the footprint on our property. Right now, house and garage cover 25 percent of the lot: House (1,109 square feet) plus garage (480 square feet) equals 25 percent of lot (6,285 square feet). Our handicap is not only that our lot is the smallest in the neighborhood but also it is an irregular shape. The angling of Maple Street robs us of critical space: Our lot is 15 feet shorter on the east than on the west. So, here's the rub: If we had a true rectangle (130.4 by 52.20 feet), our proposed larger garage (24 by 34 feet) when added to the house would cover only 28 percent of the total lot, closer to that magic number of 25 percent. Therefore, because this is a well -conceived project that will be well received by our neighbors, we request a variance for an increase in the maximum lot coverage for buildings and structures from 25 percent to 31 percent. This would enable us to build the garage we require with the workshop we need and, in the process, rid the neighborhood of a major eyesore. Tlrik yc u for your co} sideration. Do rSchoff Cheryl Burch-Sdhoff 212 W. Maple St. Stillwater, MN 55082 June 2, 2007 Dear neighbors: The existing garage on our property at 212 W. Maple St. was constructed in 1974, 16 years before we purchased the property in 1990. Unfortunately, this garage was never a well-built structure. Now, at 33 years old, its basic structural problems are glaring. The garage is in an advanced stage of deterioration. We are asking the city to let us replace the garage with a standard 24-foot-wide structure (4 feet wider than the current garage). This would make the garage a true two -car garage. We are also asking that we be allowed to have a 10-foot shop in the back of the garage. This would make the structure 24-by-34 feet. The city code states that all buildings on a lot cannot exceed 25 percent of the lot size. Because we have such a small lot, this proposed building will increase the footprint to 31 percent. Therefore, a variance is required for the building permit. Our new garage will benefit the neighborhood in four ways: 1. The existing ugly garage will be removed. 2. The new structure would mimic the house's roof pitch and detail, thus fitting in -- instead of fighting with — the lovely tone of this old neighborhood. 3. It will allow us to put our cars in a garage for the first time, therefore getting them off the driveway. 4. The new garage will resolve any potential problem of rainwater run off from the roof by routing the water underground along the driveway straight south to the front of the lot and to the street. We will be meeting with the city planning committee on June 11 to review our request. We are asking our neighbors to sign this letter so we can show the committee that our neighbors favor of this variance. Thank you forpur co sideration. Signature /�%/t� Name Address June 2, 2007 Dear neighbors: The existing garage on our property at 212 W. Maple St. was constructed in 1974, 16 years before we purchased the property in 1990. Unfortunately, this garage was never a well-built structure. Now, at 33 years old, its basic structural problems are glaring. The garage is in an advanced stage of deterioration. We are asking the city to let us replace the garage with a standard 24-foot-wide structure (4 feet wider than the current garage). This would make the garage a true two -car garage. We are also asking that we be allowed to have a 10-foot shop in the back of the garage. This would make the structure 24-by-34 feet. The city code states that all buildings on a lot cannot exceed 25 percent of the lot size. Because we have such a small lot, this proposed building will increase the footprint to 31 percent. Therefore, a variance is required for the building permit. Our new garage will benefit the neighborhood in four ways: 1. The existing ugly garage will be removed. 2. The new structure would mimic the house's roof pitch and detail, thus fitting in -- instead of fighting with — the lovely tone of this old neighborhood. 3. It will allow us to put our cars in a garage for the first time, therefore getting them off the driveway. 4. The new garage will resolve any potential problem of rainwater run off from the roof by routing the water underground along the driveway straight south to the front of the lot and to the street. We will be meeting with the city planning committee on June 11 to review our request. We are asking our neighbors to sign this letter so we can show the committee that our neighbors favor of this variance. Thank you for youjonsideration. Signature Name 1%C /1 l Address b F"' 5'A f%L C.-� fJCr'r, June 2, 2007 Dear neighbors: The existing garage on our property at 212 W. Maple St. was constructed in 1974, 16 years before we purchased the property in 1990. Unfortunately, this garage was never a well-built structure. Now, at 33 years old, its basic structural problems are glaring. The garage is in an advanced stage of deterioration. We are asking the city to let us replace the garage with a standard 24-foot-wide structure (4 feet wider than the current garage). This would make the garage a true two -car garage. We are also asking that we be allowed to have a 10-foot shop in the back of the garage. This would make the structure 24-by-34 feet. The city code states that all buildings on a lot cannot exceed 25 percent of the lot size. Because we have such a small lot, this proposed building will increase the footprint to 31 percent. Therefore, a variance is required for the building permit. Our new garage will benefit the neighborhood in four ways: 1. The existing ugly garage will be removed. 2. The new structure would mimic the house's roof pitch and detail, thus fitting in -- instead of fighting with — the lovely tone of this old neighborhood. 3. It will allow us to put our cars in a garage for the first time, therefore getting them off the driveway. 4. The new garage will resolve any potential problem of rainwater run off from the roof by routing the water underground along the driveway straight south to the front of the lot and to the street. We will be meeting with the city planning committee on June 11 to review our request. We are asking our neighbors to sign this letter so we can show the committee that our neighbors favor of this variance. Thank you for your consideration. Signature Name ( '✓\„,/ L ti, Address ,6/ June 2, 2007 Dear neighbors: The existing garage on our property at 212 W. Maple St. was constructed in 1974, 16 years before we purchased the property in 1990. Unfortunately, this garage was never a well-built structure. Now, at 33 years old, its basic structural problems are glaring. The garage is in an advanced stage of deterioration. We are asking the city to let us replace the garage with a standard 24-foot-wide structure (4 feet wider than the current garage). This would make the garage a true two -car garage. We are also asking that we be allowed to have a 10-foot shop in the back of the garage. This would make the structure 24-by-34 feet. The city code states that all buildings on a lot cannot exceed 25 percent of the lot size. Because we have such a small lot, this proposed building will increase the footprint to 31 percent. Therefore, a variance is required for the building permit. Our new garage will benefit the neighborhood in four ways: 1. The existing ugly garage will be removed. 2. The new structure would mimic the house's roof pitch and detail, thus fitting in -- instead of fighting with — the lovely tone of this old neighborhood. 3. It will allow us to put our cars in a garage for the first time, therefore getting them off the driveway. 4. The new garage will resolve any potential problem of rainwater run off from the roof by routing the water underground along the driveway straight south to the front of the lot and to the street. We will be meeting with the city planning committee on June 11 to review our request. We are asking our neighbors to sign this letter so we can show the committee that our neighbors favor of this variance. Thank you for your consideration. Signature �I Name `'r r � �^ :.� n , (17 Address 7 , June 2, 2007 Dear neighbors: The existing garage on our property at 212 W. Maple St. was constructed in 1974, 16 years before we purchased the property in 1990. Unfortunately, this garage was never a well-built structure. Now, at 33 years old, its basic structural problems are glaring. The garage is in an advanced stage of deterioration. We are asking the city to let us replace the garage with a standard 24-foot-wide structure (4 feet wider than the current garage). This would make the garage a true two -car garage. We are also asking that we be allowed to have a 10-foot shop in the back of the garage. This would make the structure 24-by-34 feet. The city code states that all buildings on a lot cannot exceed 25 percent of the lot size. Because we have such a small lot, this proposed building will increase the footprint to 31 percent. Therefore, a variance is required for the building permit. Our new garage will benefit the neighborhood in four ways: 1. The existing ugly garage will be removed. 2. The new structure would mimic the house's roof pitch and detail, thus fitting in -- instead of fighting with — the lovely tone of this old neighborhood. 3. It will allow us to put our cars in a garage for the first time, therefore getting them off the driveway. 4. The new garage will resolve any potential problem of rainwater run off from the roof by routing the water underground along the driveway straight south to the front of the lot and to the street. We will be meeting with the city planning committee on June 11 to review our request. We are asking our neighbors to sign this letter so we can show the committee that our neighbors favor of this variance. Thank you for your consideration. Signature -'7;'` l�>%�.y'�' Name 'i'Jl7X.t4c_, r> Address - /= '��,�� ` �_ 7. June 2, 2007 Dear neighbors: The existing garage on our property at 212 W. Maple St. was constructed in 1974, 16 years before we purchased the property in 1990. Unfortunately, this garage was never a well-built structure. Now, at 33 years old, its basic structural problems are glaring. The garage is in an advanced stage of deterioration. We are asking the city to let us replace the garage with a standard 24-foot-wide structure (4 feet wider than the current garage). This would make the garage a true two -car garage. We are also asking that we be allowed to have a 10-foot shop in the back of the garage. This would make the structure 24-by-34 feet. The city code states that all buildings on a lot cannot exceed 25 percent of the lot size. Because we have such a small lot, this proposed building will increase the footprint to 31 percent. Therefore, a variance is required for the building permit. Our new garage will benefit the neighborhood in four ways: 1. The existing ugly garage will be removed. 2. The new structure would mimic the house's roof pitch and detail, thus fitting in -- instead of fighting with — the lovely tone of this old neighborhood. 3. It will allow us to put our cars in a garage for the first time, therefore getting them off the driveway. 4. The new garage will resolve any potential problem of rainwater run off from the roof by routing the water underground along the driveway straight south to the front of the lot and to the street. We will be meeting with the city planning committee on June 11 to review our request. We are asking our neighbors to sign this letter so we can show the committee that our neighbors favor of this variance. Thank you for your consideration. Signature Name rA.l=SCvr‘tr �' t sf .n t Address 7 G z U c., r - "S 1� �L t‘ C F )1A-@; L Q 1L`C- t N . E 1. Cl: ► 1 iA -LQ( IAJV� %1CL 'Z s->c_• . `j...)• {�6v4 Landscape plan showing number of plants, location, varieties and container sizes (landscape plan). Check list for Planning Applications Incomplete or unclear applications/plans will be returned to the applicant and may result in delay of application processing.. Check and attach to application. The application form completed and signed by the property owner or owners authorized representative. ❑ Building planscleariy dimensioned and scaled (16 copies). 0 T£ The site plan showing exterior property lines, easements, lot width and depth and lot area building(s) location. (See attached site plan example, a parcel boundary survey may be required). ./ C] All adjacent streets or right of ways labeled. / Location, elevation, size, height of building or addition, dimensions, materials and/,,roposed use of all buildings and structures (including walls, fences, signs, lighting and hooding devices) exrstT g and proposed f r the site (if the site is in a Historic District, additional design detail maybe required). Distances between all structures and between all property lines or easements and structures. Show Adjacent buildingsto this application site and dimension from property line. All major existing trees on the site (4 inch caliber or greater), giving type, location, size and other site overage conditions. © Show existing significant natural features such as rock outcroppings or water courses (existing and ,proposed marked accordingly). Locate all off-street parking spaces, driveways, loading docks and maneuvering areas with dimensionsfor riveway widths and parking space sizes. Pedestrian, vehicular and service points of ingress and egress; distances between driveways and street corners. 1-Z Existing and proposed grading plan showing direction and grade of drainage through and off the site; indicate any proposed drainage channels or containment facilities. ipequired and existing street dedications and improvements such as sidewalks, curbing and pavement (may /not be required). tetter to the Planning Commission describing the proposed use in detail and indicating how this use will effect and compatibility with adjacent uses or areas. Applications for new structures on slopes of 12 percent or greater must include an accurate topographic map. The map must contain contours of two -foot intervals for slopes of 12 percent or greater. Slopes over 24 percent shall be clearly marked. i/ Other such data as may be required to permit the planning commission to make the required findings for approval of the specific typof application. 5-1/ //: 2 Applic3nt,rowner signature Date ,`..' $_ , LIW R31W RIIW r rI\ r rN r9N r-� R_ W R_ I W RJ W Vicinity Map 0 42 Scale in Feet owaseasi Ian" noas• Cowl did rasa• nA wvgKoCam" o ••tigion amp O CO FLI R R w 150 63 76 i MI , N If rn■IIIII DIN I O -LC, k d012) _ - - O • r N rti i' 111� rr O r rXN C 'I rry rry - - -- r 130 L 3 R_ .F., R_I V R_Ow 50 63 63 \ I 4 o -J Vicinity Map (0131)- 100 50 -0 2:18 50 6 r 7 c 20 — 2) oo�!Cf1 \\ ) co 1 \ �, �� � _ . . . ,, . . . ��- 52 o 42 5 2 20 0 Q� � `` Scale in Feet 522 PL M P \,[ Location Map 5'3 , / �� """" 5 Lo4 - 6za5 s.F 'Ex S -1--1 n G1 1559Jr Dr! (Jeu,. .►.A — 73 X111= 12.441 SF rcd La) O Part, La Cr re r t" ► nS Ors E , 5 � �n`le er- kcca p Zo' (Ai D 61i11") n 5a1 • C 'VS ncr_ CI rbJe,„ --Dot cinerii\ I" 7- 3 Ct 2.2 , 0 );) 2 k.t. j r ;4 19 r. • *, (: • • - - - .;.:4-L-ri • - z , 4 (7.1r, 30 kz- q rt- ra f) :Le 617,, 1'7" • fo RCA r 0 D- • . Lot- rnri I 1411 ("' 03 (c; 1 ' r : • I. 6 i iOr) Y" ArIS IZ 15/3z ©s eoc.. Nit '- .cr11 3 Ouee. IS -1,10 1211 de p p b 1 1(10 per- 1-1 r � -- In..) 2_ ` [ (? cord) r) b Ski° r1f " lkb wj 6/6 r-i- r k '14 ,4 3 • LA" ) G'a: �a 'lid t Y f}•'. pier . hP to {. 111 ',) I hu. p,oeA �,1 �� ; 1-() 'is 21(,H 1(0"0 i 2-1 ?. I s .1.. 4. Ily„ (0 4, 1 wr • ;. C.-3re ri 2.12 U , APE `� YF �f✓ ' rt&secS 4n 6-101,p (r - Z)4 L'c,nsi-Ne 1 Ho OG , ) nSvc a\-tci ct viwdai 14,1 1 3- tp e � pi S11wts..r IF KIR H A 0 M NNI 0 1 4 DATE APPLICANT Matt and Megan Lehmann June 7, 2007 CASE NO 07-28 REQUESTS 1 Special Use Permit to allow an Accessory Dwelling Unit 2 Variance to the rear and side yard setback for an Accessory Dwelling Unit LOCATION 218 Maple St W COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DISTRICT SFSL - Single Family Small Lot ZONING RB - Two Family PC DATE June 11, 2007 REVIEWERS Community Dev Director PREPARED BY Michel Pogge, City Planner fri,11 DISCUSSION The applicant is requesting a special use permit for an accessory dwelling unit that includes a two -car garage and an accessory dwelling unit on the second floor The applicant is also requesting a variance to allow the accessory dwelling unit to be located in the required rear and side yard setbacks The proposed accessory dwelling unit will be connected to municipal sewer and water services The lot size is 14,590 sq ft , and 10,000 sq ft is the minimum lot size perrrutted by the ordinance for an accessory dwelling unit The existing garage contains many of the same architectural elements including roof style (hipped roof), with dormers, and similar horizontal siding EVALUATION OF REQUEST Special Use Permit All accessory dwelling units in the RB (two-family district) zoning district permitted special uses in the RB district subject to the following conditions 218 Maple St W Page 2 a Lot size must be at least 10,000 square feet The subject lot is 14,590 square feet b The accessory dwelling unit may be located on second floor above the garage The proposed accessory dwelling unit is located on the second floor above the garage c The accessory dwelling unit must abide by the primary structure setbacks for side and rear setbacks The current structure is 6'11" from the rear property line and fails to meet the required 25' rear yard setback requirement The current structure is 20' from the side yard property hne with North Fifth Street and fails to meet the required 30' side yard setback requirement The applicant has made application for a variance to these requirements, which will be discussed later in this report d The accessory dwelling unit must be located in the rear yard of the primary residence or be set back from the front of the lot beyond the midpoint of the primary residence The current garage structure is behind the primary residence in the rear yard of the lot as defined by the zoning code The current garage meets this requirement e Off-street parking requirements for an apartment and single-family residence (four spaces) must be provided The proposed accessory dwelling unit will provide the required four off-street parking spaces with two spaces in the garage and a minimum of two in the driveway f Maximum size of the accessory dwelling unit is 800 square feet The proposed living space in the accessory dwelling unit is just less than 800 square feet g The application requires design review for consistency with the primary unit in design, detailing and materials The garage structure contains several elements from the primary residence including roof style (hipped roof) and similar horizontal siding The garage doors are single car doors, which provides visual relief between the doors and make the mass of the garage doors visually appear smaller Staff believes that the garage structure is consistent with the primary unit in design The HPC approved the design review for the structure at their June 4th meeting h The height may not exceed that of the primary residence The existing primary residence is a two story home and stands taller than the current garage structure ,218 Maple St W Page 3 i Both the primary and accessory dwelling unit must be connected to municipal sewer and water services and be located on an improved public street Today, the primary dwelling unit is connected to municipal sewer and water services The property owner has indicated that the accessory dwelling unit will be connected to municipal sewer and water services Since this is not clearly noted on the plans staff recommends that this be made a condition of the approval 1 Maximum size of garage is 800 square feet The proposed usable area of the garage in the accessory dwelling unit is Just less than 800 square feet Staff would also note that this property is NOT located within the City's historic downtown commercial district Variance The applicant is requesting consideration of a variance to Chapter 31-1-12(4)d of the Stillwater City Code to allow the accessory dwelling unit to be located in required side and rear setbacks A variance may be granted only when all of the following conditions are found 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 current owner purchased the property and building in their current condition This situation was not created by them However, the garage could have been easily built to meet the required accessory dwelling unit setbacks Nothing physically inherent in the property would have prevented it 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 Without the approval of a variance the applicant could continue to use the garage as a garage with 2nd story storage as originally permitted Therefore, denial of the variance would not preclude reasonable use of the property '218 Maple St W Page 4 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 purpose of the setbacks in this case is to provide privacy to the adjacent property In this case the second floor of the garage does not have any windows facing the adjacent property, therefore, the conversion of this space to an accessory dwelling unit will not cause the adjacent property owner to lose privacy and should not adversely impact them 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 ACTION BY THE HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION The Heritage Preservation Commission (HPC) reviewed a design review application for this accessory dwelling unit on June 4, 2007 The HPC approved the application with the conditions the condition that the applicant receive a variance to allow the accessory dwelling unit to encroach into the required setbacks and that it be connected to public water and sanitary sewer systems FINDINGS Special Use Permit 1 The request falls to meet all of the requirements of the zoning ordinance The request generally meets the intent of the comprehensive plan 2 The proposed accessory dwelling unit will not be injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare Variance 1 That the hardship is not 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 not 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 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 218 Maple St W Page 5 ALTERNATIVES The Planning Commission has the following options 1 Deny the requested variance to allow an 18'1" foot encroachment into the required 25 foot rear yard setback and a 10' foot encroachment into the required 30 foot side yard setback for all accessory dwelling units since an affirmative finding on the required conditions for a variance could not be made by staff Deny the requested Special Use Permit since all of the conditions for an accessory dwelling unit were not meet 2 Approve the requested variance to allow an 18'1 foot encroachment into the required 25 foot rear yard setback and a 10' foot encroachment into the required 30 foot side yard setback for all accessory dwelling units If the Commission chooses to grant the variance the commission needs to make an affirmative finding on the required conditions for a variance Approve the requested Special Use Permit since a variance was granted allowing the applicant to meet all of the conditions for an accessory dwelling unit Additionally, staff would suggest that the following conditions for approval a All revisions to the approved plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Heritage Preservation Commission b The accessory dwelling unit shall connect to public sanitary sewer and water service 3 Continue the public hearing until the July 9, 2007 Planning Commission meeting The 60 day decision deadline for the request is July 17, 2007 RECOMMENDATION Since an affirmative finding could not be made for the three variance review criteria, staff recommends denial of the requested variance Attachments Applicant's Form, Elevation Drawing, Site Plan, and Photos Case 07-28 218 Maple St W Matt and Amy Lehmann N A 0 30 60 120 180 1 inch equals 100 feet City of Stillwater MN I I I Feet Community Development Department 240 216 North Fourth Street Stillwater MN 55082 651 430 8820 — 651-430 8810 fax 218 Maple St W Stillwater MN May 14, 2007 Dear Planning Commission Members In October 2005 we purchased the property at 218 Maple St W The previous owner built a 1'/2 story, detached garage The structure was built to the enclosed drawings in 2003 The mtenor of the upstairs was never finished We would like to finish the upstairs making it an accessory dwelling unit A Special Use Permit has not previously been applied for and so, we are applying for one now The existing structure does not meet the set -back requirements for an accessory dwelling unit thus, we are also applying for a vanance The existing structure has a rear set -back of 7 ft, code requires 25 ft The side set -back is 20 ft while code requires 30 ft All other physical requirements for the permit are met in the original construction We feel that a vanance is justifiable for our situation, since it is not possible to locate a reasonably sized accessory dwelling unit on the lot and meet all of the set -back requirements The intended use of the finished space will be to create guest quarters for family Neither of our parents lives within the state and would appreciate a little more space while visiting their grandchildren We would greatly appreciate your approval of this request A Design Review Application has been filed in conjunction with this request Thank you for your time and consideration Sincerely, 1 `` r. 6(A,, Matt & Megan Lehmann J 0 i z 0 CI) NNV1d 311S 3I1V113HOS 0 SCHEMATIC SITE PLAN S001 6 DATG OVM Gn tc / at PROMO x0. St II 1 M I �` A BEAUTIFUL NEW GARAGE FOR THE R A N D A LL RESIDENCE 218 MAPLE STREET WESTa STILLWATER MINNESOTA `"'WE ' a" i a DATA PPM Err CSS DEM IF use i MARX DATE INIT DESGRIPTIDN B ALA Y Nark S flaky AM No a rpw aP. 1 REV DMA ARDYIICIS Stlihnter ��°3 WIZ PO I'd MI) I) P. IC a p 1 id ■gall= III11 III II -1/ oo co EAST ELEVATIO\ (BLDG HT FOR ZONING COMPLIANCE) A212J AL 121'-11N" TOP OF STRUCTURE 118'-3%" Ay 2ND FLOOR CLG diak 109'-3" GARAGE CLG Au 100 -0 GARAGE FLOOR @ WEST ELEV i 2 \OTH ELEVATION r A212 Tom/ SOUTH ELEVATION ASPHALT ROOFING 5 GUTTER K SECTION 5/4 CEDAR TRIM 4 LAP CEDAR SIDING \21J ROCK FACED BLOCK A BEAUTIFUL NEW GARAGE FOR LjJ H- U V) LUJ LJ 1 LLJ LJJ Lai CC Et - VD Q w LIJ c j N MINNESOTA STILLWATER .1 ge- e a� k2 >— OD g a t m W w B. *& I n t mm EAST NORTH & SOUTH ELEVATION A212 >f1VM 3c is lH1111111111111 H i- L ....11111luii IHI11IIJI, Illll1illllilll t 6 r UI' 1►1 WEST ELEVATION A211 6DWD 696 w 9/ An 9"CI 11P•O. 5 1 t I t " I t A BEAUTIFUL NEW GARAGE FOR THE RANDALL RESIDENCE 218 MAPLE STREET WEST STILLWATER MINNESOTA MO liAl NA WPM . ems` "°'m „`.`z ar ao i eoa o a eon DATA SwF ��„°o�Es� i MMau ARK Rrr rnv,oN G A L A i mark S Balq, Au »N "°`"` i REV DATA 4 NNYIEG�S !>UD. OOOBY rd. AO 1]- b Iml) 9>mmm a I a A I I 6 i11water II E EIP A OF MINAIISOIA Planning Commission DATE June 7, 2007 CASE NO 07-29 APPLICANT Mark Balay PROPERTY OWNER Mark Smith REQUEST Variances to the Bluffland Shoreland Regulations for a 587 square foot addition to an existing single-family residence LOCATION 105 Lakeside Dr COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DISTRICT SFLL - Single Family Large Lot ZONING RB - Two-family District OVERLAY ZONING Bluffland/Shoreland Overlay District PC DATE June 11, 2007 REVIEWERS Community Dev Director PREPARED BY Michel Pogge, City Planner frk DISCUSSION The applicant is requesting a variance to the bluffland/ shoreland overlay regulations to allow for a 587 square foot addition to an existing single-family residence Specifically the property owner is requesting a variance to the minimum lot size requirements of 1 acre, (31-1-23(7)b 1 a), minimum lot width of 150 feet (31-1-23(7)b 1 b) and the maximum impervious coverage of 20% (31-1-23(7)b 1 i) The subject property is a 12,240 square foot (0 28 acre) parcel of land that is 90 feet wide at the building setback line It should be noted that if the property would be connected to public sanitary sewer, which today uses a private septic system, the minimum lot size only would be 20,000 square feet with a rrunimum lot width of 100 feet I 105 Lakeside Dr Page 2 The applicant has proposed to mitigate the effects of the additionally run-off by controlling approximately 50% of the roof run-off and directing it to an on -site holding facility that will be constructed as part of this project EVALUATION OF REQUEST When considering a variance in the bluffland/shoreland overlay district the Commission must consider the following items in making your decision 1 Preserving the scenic and recreational resources of the St Croix Riverway, especially in regard to the view from and use of the river The proposed addition is being constructed on the non -river side of the home and should have no impact on the scenic value of the St Croix Riverway 2 The maintenance of safe and healthful conditions The home is currently connected to public water The home currently has a private septic system with the lateral field located in the northeast corner of the property A public sanitary sewer main was installed by the City along the front of the property in Lakeside Drive This property could connect to this sanitary sewer main The home is accessed from public roads The addition will be built in accordance with Minnesota building standards 3 The prevention and control of water pollution, including sedimentation The applicant is proposing to rrutigate the effects of the additional run-off by controlling approximately 50% of the roof run-off and directing it to an on -site holding facility that will be constructed as part of this project City staff has concerns that a holding structure may not be possible on this property due to subsurface conditions During the construction of the sanitary sewer and water mains in 2004/ 2005 the City encountered extensive bedrock and concrete from the old foundry foundation that existed at one time in this area These conditions could make the construction of an underground holding structure difficult, if not impossible 4 The location of the site with respect to floodways, slopes and blufflines The home is outside the Floodway as identified by FEMA The property slopes approximately 6% across the property and meets the slope requirements of the district There are no blufflines on the property or within 100 feet of the subject site's property lines 5 The erosion potential of the site based on degree and direction of slope, soil type and vegetative cover When compared to other lots in the area and within the City there are minimal slopes on the property Vegetation on the property is well developed In order to protect from erosion during constriction the property owner shall submit an r 105 Lakeside Dr Page 3 erosion control plan to the City Engineer for review and action prior to the issuance of a building permit The City has no information on the soil type in this area The City does know that the subsurface of the area contains bedrock and concrete from an old foundry foundation 6 Potential impact on game and fish habitat The proposed mitigation could actually lower the amount of over land flowage that will reach the St Croix River from this site Conditions for game and fish habitat in the St Croix River could be improved with the proposed mitigation 7 Location of the site with respect to existing or future access roads The home has access on a paved public street (Lakeside Drive) No changes are proposed with this addition 8 The amount of wastes to be generated and the adequacy of the proposed disposal system The home is currently connected to public sanitary sewer and there is adequate capacity in that system to support this addition 9 The anticipated demand for police, fire, medical and school services and facilities The home is currently a single-family home and no change of use is proposed with the addition Adequate public support services are available to support this property 10 The compatibility of the proposed development with uses on adjacent land The home at 105 Lakeside Dr is a single-family home in a single-family neighborhood The use is compatible and comparable to the developed land use pattern of the area A variance may be granted only when all of the following conditions are found 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 105 Lakeside Dr was constructed in 1970, according to the Washington County Tax Services department The City's bluffland/shoreland overlay regulations were developed in May of 1974 The conditions on the lot existed prior to the adoption of the ordinance and was not a condition created by the current home owner 105 Lakeside Dr Page 4 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 Without the approval of a variance the applicant would be denied the opportunity to add an addition to the existing residence The property meets all of the conditions of the RB zoning district and would be allowed to construct the addition without a variance if it were not in the bluffland/shoreland overlay district The mitigation proposed by the property owner will direct approximately 900 square feet of roof area to an underground holding structure were it will percolate in to the ground or evaporate The overall amount of storm water leaving after this improvement is in place should be reduced from the current amount of water leaving the property 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 use will continue to be a single-family home and will meet the minimum required setbacks for health and fire safety 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 FINDINGS 1 That the hardship is peculiar to the property and that it is not created by any act of the owner In this context, personal financial difficulties, loss of prospective profits and neighboring violations are not factors entering into the justification of 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 RECOMMENDATION Approval as conditioned 105 Lakeside Dr Page 5 CONDITIONS FOR APPROVAL 1 All revisions to the approved plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director 2 The proposed addition to the home shall be limited to 587 square feet 3 The structure shall use earth or summer vegetation colors 4 The holding structure shall be approved by the City Engineer and the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources 5 Test shall be conducted on the property to insure that the proposed holding structure can be constructed on the site and property work prior to the issuance of a building permit by the City 6 The existing septic system shall be inspected for compliance prior to the issuance of a building permit If the system is noncompliant than the property owner shall connect to the public sanitary sewer system 7 The applicant shall submit a grading and erosion for review and action by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of a building permit by the City 8 The variance shall not become effective until after review and certification by the Minnesota Commissioner of Natural Resources Attachments Applicant's Form and Site Plan Case 07-29 105 Lakeside Dr Mark Smith N A I I I Feet 0 25 50 100 150 200 1 inch equals 100 feet City of Stillwater MN Community Development Department 216 North Fourth Street Stillwater MN 55082 651 430 8820 — 651 430 8810 fax • Mark S Balay AIA S till w a ter Minn 110 East Myrtle Street Suite 100 Stillwater Minnesota 55082 (651) 430 3312 5/18/07 City of Stillwater Attn Michel Pogue 216 N Fourth St Stillwater, MN 55082 Dear Mr Pogue es o t a BATLAl_- o- _ ACHRBlSr- 1 n d i Michael E Balay, AIA a n a poll sin (liana 6801 Lake Plaza Drive Suite C 305 Imhanapolts Indiana 46220 (317) 845 9402 Attached are all materials requested to apply for a variance to the Impervious Surface Requirement of the Overlay Zoning District at 105 Lakeside Dr The enlarged Site Plan drawing descnbes the calculations which have been made to determine that the proposed impervious surface is 481 sf above allowable The calculated impervious surface is well below requirements for the base zoning distnct which is RB We have coordinated with Molly Shodeen of the Minnesota DNR in regards to required mitigation to allow this variance and receive their approval as well A gutter system has been negotiated which will control approximately 50% of the roof run-off and direct it to a holding structure, to be approved by the city engineer, so that it will percolate into the ground or evaporate The holding structure is located in the rear yard so that it does not impact the operation of the septic drain field which is located in the front yard as shown We are requesting that a vanance of 500sf of impervious surface be granted due to the hardship caused by the establishment of the overlay distnct on a previous city approved development of the residential RB subdivision which would deny the owner of reasonable use of his property as onginally approved, without this vanance We are taking into consideration the intent of the overlay distnct with regards to controlling storm water run-off to the nver with proposed mitigation which exceeds the Impervious Surface performance standard for the overlay distract after the control of roof water Please do not hesitate calling if you require additional information or have questions Sincerel ark S Balay Mark S Balay Architects,'(nc Gutter and Holding structure for approx. 50% of Roof to mitigate Imp. surface overage per DNR FRONT YARD SETBACK Wood Deck I Conc. Driveway Conc. Walk Notes RIVER Area Calculations Allowable 20X (2,448sf) Lot 12,240sf ExB. House 1,398 Addltlon 587 Driveway 739 Valk 87 Deck 118 Total Ir.p. (2,929sf) InpAreaControlled 900sf Net Dv. Area (2,029sf) GENERAL SYSTDA LOCATION heretv ccrtily that this plan, specification, er rrn(.tt rreoared by me or under my direct 4 ' J1 , 411 and that I am a duly Registered rcti tcct under t ' of the State of Min- 10 Da . *station No • 4D 0 Co sdaq.s _uapooM Ef SC( stft, J dD CD NDIIVAA/1 �CIK n x w 5 CD 3 0 3 3 CD CN O IsIxa UD4DN 6uijooJ 6u ,Cn — () Cr'Czi 0 a O c'I co —. a Cr ,� 7 C9 /213 CCD CD N U1` O CAD ETC C7 CD cCD O - :. C) o a o DX WEN 5 Ia/ .MCC, HS S t 1 Y I A REMODEL & ADDITION FOR THE RESIDENCE 105 LAKSEIDE DRIVE STILLWATER MINNESOTA �.on 1 DATA wawa 0.— °QCQDCr"M s A L Y 101. g B.,s AuSMITH `"""�'" 1uRK D E N MCP PTq)N DATA AA5 SYD. ter MN xi= Tat (OS /LOD]E Paz . Roll as® o 7 e 0 I 0 0 2 0 0 C N 3 4 c0CL 3 0 3 10 N + 3 a 0 .- S 3 `•<�n 0.<'1 hNT 3 3 V V Q1 0 Q 3 4 -81 X ✓0 0 C 3 N 0 0 0 3 „K) CO 1 / 1 Q Q o ▪ N (0 (� 3 'S C < A A N N E 0 0 •0 3 .+ < 0 .+ N .+3P+r 3 N f '0 p fl N 3 } 1. Q C tot 0 o c0 n N .+ • 0 N P 3 0 3 Q• _ 61-7" r1 00 / n z 0 6 0 Tf LI 0 0 0 0 0 O _1L II'-4' N C 9 (‘) L 22"- 28" (-c;) o DWG Ss.o.n. 5 1 01 - M. No 9 I I Y A REMODEL & ADDITION FOR THE SMITH RESIDENCEpa 105 LAKSEIDE DRIVEto STILLWATER MINNESOTA Man= n� 'wL�.yms� 0. m MNOW %.oy E DA1A DUNN ar N.. CHI m 6r YAW WE ND DEsca P1pN B ALA Y YarkS Bill AU REV NIA Mp01CC15 °^� Ff. Mil 00-Oac6 P 0 DOOR AND WINDOW SCHEDULE MARK TYPE AMUEN'1 RER THK MODELIS DESCRIPI ON ENSH EAT/INT DYE 01E5 ODR 7 0 0 Y 0 ANDERSE SERIES 00 3/ '4 072 81 S/6w6113181 R/111712 6 5 C TR w/SDCUGHTS mM/OAK EST E EMBUR S 5T0 PRAIRIE GR LLES / SP "ER O.MD DERSC SCR E5 00 CW35 R PLE ULLED CSMT NH 1E/PINE EST E 5 N OARO ROERSER SEINES 00 AN351 1414NG 00IE/PINE EST TE 5 OWH0 A DERSE 5CR1E5 100 SEE 0K SKINS ELEMPR ME C 5T01 MOE/PINE EST TE SN. O'ARD ANDERSE SERES 00 SEE DIME SIGNS PLE}IER ME CUST01 1.1w1E/PTNE EST 10 51i WNWW1)ANDERSEN SERIES 00 08351 AMINO *LITE/PINE EST TE g% WW0 NDCRSEN SERIES 00 CY45 CASEMENT YM1E/PINE EST 15 S ^ In1 .0HOCRSE SEIDES 00 NJS MN MG 15010 /PINE ESTATE SN 3S CJ PRO ANDERSEN SERIES 00 CW235 OBL 14 LLCD CSYT YH TE/ANE EST 10 5 H ® DR 2 0 X 6 a TCH EK5T0IG HOUSE 1 3/ CL0%1 91 G D00R MATCH EIR51 NO MA1CH C%G 1111) DR 5 0 6 a ASTERCRAET I 3/ ' P 1/P 1 UTl TY 081. SWING 0R 4 TCH E1051 NG LOCKS(T IP WHO A DERSE SER ES 00 C 35 C SEMEN1 NH TE/PI C ESTATE 5 N 0 WO ANDERSEN SER ES 00 R25 MN NG NH1E/PINE EST TE 5N 14 DR 0 6 8 M TCH EMST k HOUSE 3/ ' CLOSET 8YP 55 DOOR ICH E111511NG M TCH FAG PROJECT NOTE JOHN BOHMER NOTE #1 22428 TIPTON ST NW ASSIGNED TILE SUBCONTRACTOR ELK RIVER MN 55330 612-232-2121 rELL NOTE #2 EXISTING EXTERIOR FINISHES TO MATCH PAINT TO BE SHEPWIN WILLIAM SUPERPAINT 25 YEAR WARRANTY LEISURE BLUE #6515 FLAT LATEX ROOFING TO BE OWENS CORNING SUPREME 25 YEAR WARRANTY COLOR SHAPEL GREY NOTE #3 FIREPLACE TO BE HEAT N GLO EXCLAIM-36 W/ METAL TERMINATION CAP NOTE #4 ALL VAULT AND FIREPLACE WOODWORK TO BE AMERICAN WALNUT STAINED WITH APPROVED PENETRATING OIL STAIN AND SEALED WITH TWO COATS OF CLEAR SEALER PLAN WE5f/ REAP ELEVATION 5OL I 0 i hereby certify that this plan, specification, or rt,port was prepared by me or under my direct suNcrvislon and that I am a duly Registered Architect under the Y 1 of the State of Min- nesota Date Registration No't,s°7,e2 12 Galvanized Egress Well Assembly Rqd Styrofoam and Concrete Form Wall New 5'-0' \Double Dr Alternate#3 Basement De -watering System (including e <Isting) YaIE /2 1 0' RBD&SHELF New Closet (14) Sump Pump Standard Galvanized window well FLAN 0 1i o_ H 0 0 A REMODE MINNESOTA STILLWATER � � w a � A2 r CO 9 G a A3 u Planning Report DATE June 8, 2007 CASE NO 07-30 TO Planning Commission REQUEST 1) Final Plat approval for MILLBROOK 2nd ADDITION, a 44 unit townhome plat 2) Final PUD Permit approval for MILLBROOK 2na ADDITION APPLICANT J Liberacki, US Horne Corpoiation LAND OWNER US Horne Corporation LOCATION 12427 Dellwood Road MEETING DATE June 11, 2007 REVIEWERS Public Works Director, City Attoi ney, Public Safety, Fire Chief, City Planner PREPARED BY Bill Turnblad, Community Development Directoi BACKGROUND The City Council approved the. Pieliminaiy Plat and Concept Planned Unit Development (PUD) Pei nut foi MILLBROOK on August 15 2006 The 170 acre piehminaiy plat includes 172 single fanuly homes and 98 townhomes Development of the piopeity is planned to occur in three phases The application at hand is foi the second plat in Phase 1 Phase I is composed of two plats The fast plat was MILLBROOK (1st Addition) which consisted of 30 single family lots in the CR Cottage Residential Zoning District and 33 single family lots in the TR Traditional Residential Zoning District This is the second plat in Phase I and is known as MILLBROOK 2ND ADDITION This second addition is a 44 unit townhome plat Phase I impiovcments a►e to include local streets utilities giading landscaping etc for both the 63 single family lots and 44 townhome units But this phase would also include mass grading of the whole site extia Min lanes on TH 96 and giading and tinf establishment lot the two active cit<7 packs Millbrook 2°`i Addition — Emil Pht June 8 2007 Page 2 REQUEST AND ANALYSIS The specific request before the City is to approve the Final Plat and the Final PUD Pernut for MILLBROOK 2nd ADDITION The City Council adopted a Icsolution appioving the preliminary plat and concept PUD permit foi MILLBROOK on August 15 2006 On April 17 2007 the Council adopted a resolution approving an amendment to the pi eliminary plat and concept PUD permit as they apply to the townhome neighborhood in MILLBROOK Therefore the final plat and final PUD perrrut for Millbiook 2nd Addition are subject to the pertinent conditions of both resolutions of approval They are detailed below A August 15 2006 Resolution Conditions 1 The Final Plat and Final Planned Unit Development application shall be substantially sinulai to the following plans prepared by Sathre-Bergquist Inc and on file in the Community Development Dept tment except as modified herein Site Plan dated 7/21/06 Phasing Phn dated 7/24/06 Buffer Averaging Plan (including trails) - 8 sheets dated 6/26/06 Pielinunaiy Site Map* (Sheets SM2 - SM6) dated 1/17/06 Pielinunaty Plat (Sheets PP1-7) dated 3/30/06 Final Grading Plan (Sheets GP2 3 4 4A 5 6) dated 4/12/06 Final Utility Plan (Sheets 2-5) dated 4/12/06 Prelrmrnaty Landscape Plan (Sheets 1-4) dated 2/1/06 *Except h ails to be as shown in Site Plan dated 7/21/06 The final plan submittals for MILLBROOK 2`° ADDITION are substantially similar to the approved preliminary plans A minor difference is that there are fewer toznhome units proposed in this plat than were approved for this phase The approved phasing plan showed consti action of 62 tozvnlroine units, whereas only 44 are proposed The other 8 units will be developed in a later phase 2 The developer shall complete a Lakeshore PUD woiksheet and subrrut it to the Minnesota Department of Natuial Resource s (DNR) Ai ea Hydiologist prior to submitting an application foi a final plat foi Phase One If the DNR review results in substantial changes to the PielinunaiN, Plat of Concept PUD plans then the developer shall resubnut the Concept PUD and Pi elinunat y Plat foi ieview by the City and Joint Planning Boar d Tliis condition has been satisfied 3 The hail and sidewalk system shall be constructed substantially the same as represented in the following plan sets on file with the Community Development Department a Carnelian Mat ine Trails - Revised (Sheets CM-1 2 3) dated 6-21-06 b Blown s Cieek Ti ail - Revision 3 (Sheet BC 2b-1) dated 6-26-06 c Blown s Cr eek Tr ail - Revision 2 (Sheet BC 2-2 + 2-3) dated 6-22-06 d Revised Sidewalk Plan (Sheets SP-1 23) dated 6-21-06 Park and trail plans foi MILLBROOK 2`DADDITION are consistent with the appioved pielunina► y plans 4 All trails shall be paved FIILicale no trails inAlm ►iLOOK2`DADDITION TJure ate only sidewalks 1 Millbrook 2"I Addition - Final Plat June 8 2007 Plge 3 5 Ptioi to release of the final plat foi Phase One a blanket easement shall be provided over the open space outlot on the south side of South Twin Lake for tiail purposes Should the Carnelian Marine Watershed Dishict rules ever change and allow a trail closer to the lake the easement will give the City the light to construct that trail This will occur prior to release of the plat for MILLBROOK 15i ADDITION 6 Prior to release of the final plat foi Phase One the developer shall provide a 20 foot wide general easement allowing for future use foi trails and utilities on the property along the south side of State Highway 96 right of way The easement shall be reviewed by the City Engineer and City Attorney and found satisfactory to them in both form and content This will occur prior to release of the plat for MILLBROOK 1st ADDITION 7 The trail connection to State Highway 96 along Outlot F shall be allowed as shown only if the wetland in the ditch is determined by a State licensed delineator to be an incidental wetland If it is not an incidental wetland then the trail shall be realigned westward along the rear of Lots 17 through 19 Documentation from the delineator shall be submitted together with final plat application materials for the Phase One final plat This portion of the trail is in Phase II, so the delineation will be submitted together with Phase II application materials Therefore, this condition will not appear in the approval resolutions for Phase I 8 Lots 129 and 149 adjacent to the trail access off of the roundabout will be restricted by covenant to have open rail fencing and non -continuous shrubbery not exceeding four feet in height along then side and rear lot lines abutting the trail corridor This is to provide foi a mole inviting entrance to the trail system This will occur prior to release of the. plat for MILLBROOK 15t ADDITION 9 The Developer shall provide water service stubs at each park with three stubs to be included at the large active palk A sanitary sewer stub will be provided at the large active park at a place yet to be determined by the City of Stillwater These stubs will be provided 10 The two active pal ks will be graded by the developer as pal t of the first phase of development and the developer shall establish turf to the satisfaction of the city prior to the City s assuming maintenance of same This shall at a minimum include mowing fertilizing lock picking leveling trimming weed management and over seeding as necessary Target date foi the first transfer of paik land will be fall of 2007 Both active parks arc being graded with this phase However, since the project was not begun in 2006 as originally Hoped by US Home Corporation, the 2007 transfer date is no longer valid It would now be the fall of 2008 11 The Blown s Creek trail link on the Millbiook property that connects to the Carlson property to the south shall be installed by the developer at the same time that the Carlson property tiail is constructed if prior to construction of the final phase in Millbiook OK 12 An as built easement map showing 30 foot easements where possible (nunimum of 15 foot) foi trails shall be completed and recorded as each section of trail is completed OK 13 Final civil engineering plans shall be found satisfactory to the Stillwater Public Works Director or they shall either be a) revised to his satisfaction or b) reviewed by the City Council and approved Tlie civil engineering plans have been reviewed by the Public Woiks Director and were found satisfactory 14 Pi ioi to commencement of any giadi ng on the subject property the developer shall entei into a Development L\grcement that is appio\ ed b\ the Cit\ Council Millbrook 2nd Addition — Final Plat June 8 2007 Page 4 An addendum to the master development agreement for MILLBROOK will have to be signed prior release of the plat for MILLBROOK 2`'D ADDITION B April 17 2007 Resolution Conditions 1 The Final Plat and Final Planned Unit Development Permit applications for the townhomes shall be substantially similar to the following plans on file in the Community Development Depai tment except as modified herein Prehrmnary Plat Amendment (Sheet PP) dated 1/8/07 Preliminary Grading Plan (Sheet GP1) dated 1/12/07 Preliminary Utility Plan (Sheet UPI) dated 1/12/07 Prelinunary Landscape Plan (Sheet LP1) dated 1/12/07 Colonial Foundation Planting Plan (Sheet L1) dated 6/8/061 Architectural elevations submitted with materials for 4/17/07 Council Meeting This condition is satisfied 2 Any conditions applicable to the townhome development that are found in Resolution No 2006-179 (Resolution Approving Preliminary Plat and Concept PUD Permit) shall continue to be applicable This condition is satisfied 3 Evergreen trees shall be added to screen the driveways from the public streets and shall be added along the north side of White Pine Way between the street and the townhome pond The landscape plan needs to be revised to include these plantings This should bu done prior to City Council consideration of the final plat 4 Three to four architectuial elevations shall be developed for the ends of the units that face the public street and the pond Staff and City Council seein to be satisfied zvitli the variety of elevations prepared for the end units The Heritage Preservation Commission has yet to review them This will occur at their July 2, 2007 meeting 5 In order to reduce the mass of the units a variety of materials and colors shall be introduced into each building with variations amongst the buildings Staff and City Council seem to be satisfied with the variety of colors and materials for the units The Heritage Preservation Commission has yet to review them This will occur at their July 2, 2007 meeting 6 Depending on the oiientation of the building sidewalks shall be extended from the ends of the units to either the sidewalk along the public street or to the sidewalk surrounding the pond This has not been included in the plans, as both staff and the developer are uncertain how this could be accomplished with back to back units A sidewalk could be built along each side of the private driveways servicing the buildings But the amount of impervious surface this would add in comparison to the inuiuital walkability gained for the project makes the sidewalks questionable However, some sort of walkway could be extended off the end of each driveway to connect to the pond trail 7 Matei nil samples shall be subntted with the Final Plat and Final PUD Permit applications to be reviewed by the Het itage Pieservation Commission Augmented by tounclation planunL pl ul subnutted togethei mates cats to! 4/17/07 Cit\ Council meeting 1 Millbrook 2'd Addition — Final Plat June 8 2007 Pige 5 This must be done prior to the July 2, 2007 Heritage Preservation Commission meeting 8 All mmoi modifications to the Design Review Permit shall be approved in advance by the Community Development Director All major modifications shall be approved in advance by the HPC Detei nunation of the distinction between major and minor shall rest with the City Adnunrstiator ALTERNATIVES A Approval If the Planning Commission finds that the final plat and the final PUD Permit for MILLBROOK 2n' ADDITION are acceptable then the conmussion could recommend approval of the requests to the City Council with the follovvi ng conditions 1 Development of MILLBROOK 2nd ADDITION shall be substantially similar to the following plans on file in the Community Development Department except as modified herein Site Plan dated 7/21/06 Phasing Plan dated 7/24/06 Buffer Averaging Plan (including trails) - 8 sheets dated 6/26/06 Preliminary Site Map* (Sheets SM2 - SM6) dated 1/17/06 Preliminary Plat (Sheets PP1-7) dated 3/30/06 Final Grading Plan (Sheets GP2 3 4 4A 5 6) dated 4/12/06 Final Utility Plan (Sheets 2-5) dated 4/12/06 Prelmunary Landscape Plan (Sheets 1-4) dated 2/1/06 Millbiook Colonial AVIanoi Prelim Plat Amendment dated 1/12/07 Millbrook Pichminaiv Plat Amendment dated 1/8/06 Pielim Grading Plan Millbrook Pielim Plat Amend dated 1/12/07 Pielim Utility Plan Millbrook Prelim Plat Amend dated 1/12/07 Supplemental Landscape Plan Prelim Plat Amend dated 1/12/07 Colonial Foundation Planting Plan dated 6/8/06 Legacy Park Colonial Manor Elevations and Plans undated *Except trails to be as shown in Site Plain dated 7/21/06 2 The trail and sidewalk system shall be constructed substantially the same as represented in the following plan sets on file with the Community Development Depai tment Carnelian Mai Inc Trails - Revised (Sheets CM-1 2 3) dated 6-21-06 Brovan s Caeek Tiarl - Revision 3 (Sheet BC 2b-1) dated 6-26-06 Brown s Creek Trail - Revision 2 (Sheet BC 2-2 + 2-3) dated 6-22-06 Revised Sidewalk Plan (Sheets SP-1 2 3) dated 6-21-06 3 The Developer shall provide water service stubs at each park with three stubs to be included at the large active paik A sanitary sewer stub will be provided at the large active paik at a place yet to be determined by the City of Stillwater 4 The two active parks shall ix. graded by the developer as part of the first phase of development and the dcveloper shall establish turf to the satisfaction of the city prior to the City s assuming maintenance of same This shall at a minimum include moving fei taming i ock picking levcling trimming weed management and over sceding as ncccssaiv Tar get date for the fiist ti ansfu of park land will be fall of 2008 Millbrook 2" Addition — Emil Plat June 8 2007 Page 6 5 The Brown s Creek trail link on the Millbrook property that connects to the Carlson property to the south shall be installed by the developer at the same time that the Carlson piopeity trail is constructed if prior to construction of the final phase in Millbrook 6 Final civil engineering plans shall be found satisfactory to the Stillwater Public Works Director or they shall either be a) revised to his satisfaction or b) ieviewed by the City Council and approved 7 Prior to commencement of any grading on the subject property the developer shall execute and addendum to Development Agreement for MILLBROOK 8 Evergreen trees shall be added to screen the driveways from the public streets and shall be added along the north side of White Pine Way between the street and the townhome pond The landscape plan shall be amended to include this revision prior to City Council consideration of the final plat 9 Three to four architectural elevahons shall be developed for the ends of the units that face the public street and the pond 10 In order to seduce the mass of the units a variety of materials and colors shall be inhoduced into each building with variahons amongst the buildings 11 Pedestrian connections shall be extended from the ends of private driveways to the trail surrounding the pond 12 Material samples shall be submitted prior to review of the townhomes by the Heritage Pieservation Commission 13 All nunor modifications to the Design Review Permit shall be approved in advance by the Community Development Director All major modifications shall be approved in advance by the HPC Determination of the distinction between major and minor shall rest with the City Administrator B Table If the Planning Comnussion believes that the final plat and PUD application is not complete enough to make a decision it could continue the hearing for additional information C Denial If the Planning Conmussion finds that the final plat/PUD application is unsahsfactoiy the Planning Commission could recommend denial of it the City Council RECOMMENDATION Both the final plat and final PUD pernut for MILLBROOK 2nd Addition are in substantial compliance with the approved preliminary plat and concept PUD Pei nut as they were amended Therefore staff recommends approval of them with the conditions included above in Alternative A Attachments Finil Plat Revised Preliminary Site Plan Title Sheet to Civil Plans - Dated 5/14/07 cc Ji} Libeiacki 1 MILLBROOK 2ND ADDITION KNOW ALL BY THESE PRESENTS KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS That U S Home Corporation, a Delaware corporation, fee owners of the following descnbed property situated in the County of Washington, State of Minnesota to wit Outlot B MILLBROOK, Wasnington County Minnesota according to the recorded plat thereof', Has caused the same to be surveyed and platted as MILLBROOK 2ND ADDITION and does hereby donate and dedicate to the public for public use forever the drainage and utility easements as shown on this plat. STILLWATER, MINNESOTA C R DOC NO R T DOC NO This plat of MILLBROOK 2ND ADDITION was approved by the City Council of the City of Stillwater Minnesota this day of 200 and hereby certifies compliance with all requirements as set forth in Minnesota Statutes Section 505 03 Subd 2 CITY OF STILLWATER Mayor City Admhmstrator In witness whereof said U S Home Corporation a Delaware corporation has caused these presents to be signed by its proper officer this day of 200 COUNTY SURVEYOR Washington County Minnesota Signed U S Home Corporation John 1 Liberacki Division Vice President Pursuant to Chapter 820 Laws of Minnesota, 1971 this plat has been approved this By By Washington County Surveyor STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF COUNTY AUDITOR) REASURER Washington County Minnesota The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 200 by John J Liberacki Division Vice President of U S Home Corporation a Delaware corporation on behalf of the corporation Notary Public County Minnesota My Commission Expires I hereby certify that I have surveyed and platted the property descnbed on this plat as MILLBROOK 2ND ADDI77ON that this is a correct representation of the survey that all distances are correctly shown on the plat in feet and hundredths of a foot; that all monuments have been correctly placed m the ground as shown, or will be placed as required by the local government unit, that the outside boundary lines are correctly designated on the plat, and that there are no wet lands as defined in Minnesota Statues Section 505 02 Subdivision 1 or public highways to be designated other than as shown. David B Pemberton Licensed Land Surveyor Minnesota License No 40344 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF The foregoing surveyors certificate was acknowledged before me this Surveyor Minnesota License No 40344 Notary Public County Minnesota My Commission Expires SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC day of 200 , by David B Pemberton, Licensed Land day of 200 There are no delinquent taxes The current taxes due and payable for the year 200 have been paid, and transfer has been entered this day of 200 By By. Washington County Auditor/Treasurer Deputy COUNTY RECORDER Washington County Minnesota Document No 1 hereby certify that this instrument was filed m this office of the County Recorder for record on this o clock M and was duly recorded m Washington County Records County Recorder Washington County Minnesota By Deputy PRELIMINARY 05/01/07 day of , 200_, at SHEET 1 OF 2 SHEETS NW COR OF THE NW1/4 OF SEC 19 TWP 30 RGE 20 WASHINGTON COUNTY MONUMENT N89 46 55 E W a n to to • a yt N 0 N UNE OF THE NW1/4 OF SEC 19 TWP 30 RGE 20 N)So3,50450 w CO O 0 0 w7 • 40 F °1r SATHRE—BERGQUIST INC WP 2 • \- Ypo YO N75o/5 127 447 w 0 ry p O N 68 52 R 436 50 A_8 5941 NORTH 4.=27°53 12 176 92 R=363 50 MA UR EEN 212 45 R=436 50 A=2705312 143 93 A=18°53 32 /• S89 s 0 0 0 n N 0 46 06 W 04400 o p a U 0 0 44 00 0 75 0 44 00 06 0 0 44 00 25 a 0 44 00 MILLBROOK 2ND ADDITION ,,Pc' 60 30 0 30 60 120 \ j\\ 88 00 0 4 �0 0 0 4 o n / *4400 a0 020 844 000 n3 044 000 • 40 a44 00a 88 00 N89e46 06 E 6, 0 a N 0 Z OUTLOT C :?g 1 3 . N SCALE IN FEET The bans for th burg system ,s th south Imo fth Oatl t A, Leketown 1 t Add non, wht h us assumed to bear 589'01'32"W �I\vvl` A All I L ( \ IVIIL L 0=216 90 C 6=S89°04 52 W 218 56 R=512 00 A=24°27 28 0 05 w a LANE 18739 R=43900 A=24 272 S89°46 06 W 88 00 0 44000 0 8 0 44 00 44 00 -0 0f 0 in .44 00 O 020 • n On" 0 0 0 44 00 74 0 6 n 044 000 n3 no O 44 00 on N89 44 00 0 044 000 O A O .44 `44'00a 88 00 N89 46 06 E 20 47 W W N 8 m o4400 o 7 O N • in 044 00 5 �6 �, n co a W 0 � 8 • 2 474 93 R=586 50 6=46°236.3 7 S89 46 06 W 88 00 368 21 S89 46 06 W 88 00 04f4 00 044.000 0 4/4 00 o o n/ 0 ° n n � 10 0a4400 .4400a0 0 f'1 0 200 0 0 0 a ct 0 n a7 n n 0 0 N 2 N 0 N NO N en ee° 00 44 00 0 z 044 000 0 3n o4-4 00o an n Ca 44 00 o N aD o44 00 0 Nn 8 a n o4 00 0aay 0 Cr N 44 00 117 55 • 8 800 N89 46 06 E e5 N89 40 0 6 E 0 U T L O T AN1°22G, 44 00 O 0 1� a44 00 a0 n n N 044 0000 m 0 C ] 10 N/ N t' n a 044 000 n 4,4 n "bo 0 4 000 ,co. 1• h AC , 4n t )C 041r62- 06 5816 S89W 84 00 r ~ 0 no t WnN a 0na 044 00 84400 44 00 o0 d 0 � n71 n 0 4400 ( 0N 0n .4400a 0 n 2 044 000 n3n 0 0 44 00 5a 44 00 0 0044 00 a 'Dr, 4 7 � 44 00 0 0 88 0 N89 46 06 E a � 0 0 naz DRAINAGE SOJ SJ • & $ n 5 n a , c'n6 b 44 00 Oa44 00 0 a -.__a,___ 88 00 7 unuTy JS9 6S 247 OUTLOT B /64 93 R=10` 4=90000 00 0 66 LT DRAINAGE & UTILITY EASEMENT OVER ALL F, OF OUTLOT 9 FOR PONDING '1,7 a I �56p}6 Al- 00 y\ 1.0 19 G� C' q.'l\6 R� D55 • • O \} 60 000 eT DRAINAGE & UTILITY EASEMENT OVER ALL OF OUTLOT A aTh 8 a /,n m 0 12916 p=25 31 07 • 4 co CO co m J 00 • A=10 5201 1g1118249CBo 88 39598 °GWNATEPr8EWAY0o 4369 R=23000 0 08 29 C=280 48 934 W • • A All ;)vvj`\ IVIIL L L • 0� 830 • N. O i10 0 29 7 2- 0 I N73 26 D � , 4i14/1 I12 Iv o C 0 O 11 63 00 N13 6o 011 00, O 0 o 0� 68 /r- /� VL, ( I PRELIMINARY 05/01/07 C R DOC NO R T DOC NO O Den tes 1/2 mch by 14 ,ach iron ptpe set m the grwmd and marked by License N 24764 • Den tes Found Iron Monument 0 Denotes Found Cast Imo Monument \ v \\' DRAINAGE AND UTTLrTY EASEMENTS ARE SHOWN THUS oL 6 6 21 NOT TO Sre1 F Being 6 feet m Pndth and adj mtng 1 t Imes, unless otherwise mdtuted, and 10 foot m wtdth and adjotnmg nght of way Imes, unless otheronse mdtcated, as shown on the plat 9 tin o- k • iQ LA ROM no scale SECTIONS 18 & 19 TOWNSHIP 30 RANGE 20 WASHINGTON COUNTY MINNESOTA VICINITY MAP SHEET 2 OF 2 SHEETS 6 IVI I I I EASEMENTT F PON POND/ - s 1 1 1 1 i 1 A 0 f 0 M S75015 4p E 7?7 47 / s MILLBROOK COLONIAL MANOII USE P UD (Planned Unit Dardoprwr.9 BUILDING 1EIO14T 3 Blare end 33 Feel DARAOE IEKIM WA All AK.cM6 Wraps LOT AREA PER UNIT 8300 Sq. R Ps UNI Drew 4,830 eq R Per Udl Orris 6ETBACK8 FRONT YARD 15 Fed BIDE YARD TO ENRAGE WA SIDE YARD TO HOE WA 063E YARD TO STREET 21 Feel REAR YARD- WA 176 92 R=363 50 0=27`53 1 2 7 218 00 24°27 28 MAUREEN l e7 39 Rr439 00 AA39 20'471M 13750 44 7 • 4444) SBBe4B'0B%I moo 164 93 RHO' =90°DO 00 PONDit3C NWL9100 HWL 914 0 co 415 82 R�1 3 50 6, 6g°5934 W DEYELOPCR Ll S HOMES CORPORATION Address 935 ImTRSTEffi BI d, 9, •Salt4 11 Contact y Lbere ti T Iapbone 952 249 3022 Fax 952-173 74041 '23 40 R=15 00 L.=89°23 23 C=21 10 1 \C B=N10°13 07 E N54°54 48 Ei, 49 38 43.00 34.00 3+00 43.00 it 1 2 3 4 1 18 71 6 5 I _43D0 3.00 3�.00 4},00 N60046b E 1S0.00 PRIV DR.3 MBI°61aey, 18DRv. 42 56 _ 'R=45 00 A=54°1102 )i'`� 19 33 \ \� 0 3 N7o5�•\ \ T - R=90 00 `�R4ic78 =12°118 32 1 :° 1 a..Ss000 1 I 1 ENGINEER/LAND SURVEYOR SATHRE BEROQUISf INC. Address 150 Broadway Ave S Wayzata, 3tn Contact. Cm Eaggrm Dan I Schmrdt Lad S rveyor Devrd Pemberton T lepbote 952-476-6000 Pax 952-476-0104 NORTH 50 25 0 25 50 100 SCALE IN FEET PARCEL AREA INFORMATION BLOCK 1 Lot i 14916q. Fl La2 1406Sq FL La 3 1400Sq. FL La14 1,6926q Lot5 1002 SqR Lel6 1400Sq. F4 la 7 1 406 541- R iota 1691Sq R Told 131086q R BLOCK 2 1a 1 1 091 Sq. Ft Lott 1406 Sq.R Lot 3 1 408 Sq. FL Lot4 1022 Sq. R Lott 1.092 Sq.Ft Lel 6 140E Sq. FL Lot 7 14966q R 1e16 1.80164 R Teti 13 19654 R BLOCK 3 lc1 1191SeR Lc 140854 R Lot 1408Sq R Lai 1 11392Sq. R Lot 5 1202eq. FL La 6 1400Sq. R Lot 7 1 400 Sq. ft }ale manse R Tots, 13 1964 R BLOCK 4 Lott 1.001 Se FL Lai 2 1 408 Sq. R Lot 3 1405 6q. R Lao 1A005q R La5 1A92011- R Lot 6 11102 Sq. R La 7 1400 54. Ft Lot 6 1400 6q R I09 1 403 Sq_Ft }al 10 1.091 So FL Tad 16014 Sq. R BLOCK 6 Lott ,081 So. R Lag Lot3 Lao Las Lai0 la7 Lab Lao 1.10 Told 1 400 04 Ft 408 Sq. R 1392 SgR. .0926gR 408 Sq. R 403 6q R .400 Sq R .e91 So 014 Sq R BLOCK 6 Lail 1101Sq. R Lao 2 1,406 Sq. R Lot3 1 408 SqR Lot 4 1,092 6q R Lots 1,0026q R Lot 0 1 408 Sq. Ft La17 1,400 6q R }a61891SoR Total 13,10054 R 0.043 Aces 0432 Acres 0 032 Aces 0 043 Aces 0043 Aces 0.032 Aces 0032 Acres 0 043 Acres 0303 Aces 0.043 Aces 0 032 Aces 0.032 Acres 0 043 Aces 0.043 Acres 0 032 Acres 0202 Aces 0443 Aces 0303 Aces 0 043 Aces 0 032 Acres 0 032 Aces 0043 Aces 0.043 Acres OAI2 Acres 0 032 Acres 0043 Acres 0303 Aces 0043 Acres 0 032 Acres 0432 Aces 0032 Aces 0043 Aces 0 043 Aces 0032 Aor 0.032 Aces 0432 Aces 41 043 Aar. 0368 Acres 0 043 Aces 0 032 Acres 0 032 Aces 0.032 Aces 0.043 Acres 0043 Aces 0 032 Acres 0 032 Ares 0 002 Acres 17043 Aces 0368 Aces 0.043 Acres 0 CO2 Acres 0 CO2 Aces 0043 Aces 0043 Acres 0 032 Aar 0.032 Acres p 043 Agee 0303 Acres BIDCK 7 Lott 1091 SqR La 2 1,400 Sq R Lai 1 408 Se La 4 1,&926q Ft Lel 5 1092 Sq. FL Loll I,4086q. FL Lot 7 1,408 Sq. R 1.10 1.8910a R Told 19108Sq R BLOCK 6 lot11.892SgFt Ld 2 1,407 54 R Lot3 1001Sq. R Lot4 1091Sq. R Lot 6 1,407 6q. R 1a16 1002 So R Told 10.390 5q. R BLOCK 9 1.1 1 1,881 Sq FL Lott 1 408 Sq R Lot3 1406S%R Let 1,0926q R Lot 5 1.0926q. R La46 1,406 Sq. R Lot 7 1A09 Sq. R Lab 1.091Sq R 'Tod 1319e54 R BLOCK 10 la1 149154 R 1a 2 1,4086q. R La 3 1,4003q. R. Lot4 1,6612Sq. R Lot 5 1,082 Sq. R Lott 1408 Sq.R Lao 7 1400Sq. R 1440 1119160R Total 13 10634. R BLOCK 11 Lel1 10916q. R Lot 2 1 406 Se R Id 3 1,400 Sq. R Lao 199254 R Lot 5 4e825q. R Lot 0 1,400Sq. Ft Lot 7 1 403 Sq R }d 6 1.0991 Sq. R Told 13 196Sq. BLOCK 12 Lot 1091S4R- t. 2 1 408 SqR Lot 3 1 4065q R Lol4 1,092Sq. FL lot 5 1 092 Sq. R Lai 8 1 400 Sq. R Lao 7 1,4006q R 016 1.091 So R Tots 13,1986q R 0 0° Adel 0 032 Aces 0 032 Acres 0 043 Aces 003 Aces 0432 Acres 0002 Ace. 0 043 Aces 0303 Aces 0043 Ace 0202 Aces 0.043 Acres 0043 Acres 0.032 Aar 0043 Aces 0230 Acres 0443 Aces 0032 Aar 0 032 Ace. 0.043 Aces 0043 Acres 01332 Aces 0 032 Aar 0 0° Aces 0304 Agee 00° Acres 0E12 Acres 0.032 Aar 0 043 Acres 0.043 Acres 0.032 Axles 0092 Acta 0443 Awes 030! Acres 0.043 Acne 0032 Aar 0 CO2 Aces 0 043 Aces 000 Aces 0202 Aces 0 032 Aces 0 043 Acre. 0303 Aces 0043 bee 0 032 Aces 0 032 Aces 0 043 Aar 0443 Aces 0 CO2 Aces 0 032 Aar. 0 043 Aces 0301 Aces TOTAL BLOCK AREA 161 190 5q R 3 700 Aces RIOIR OF WAY 164 366 Sq R 3 773 Acres OUROF A 318 037 Sq. F1 7270 Aar OVERALL AREA 642.213 Sq.R 14 743 Acres I hereby certify that Oils plan or specification was prepared by me or rider my direct supervision nd that am duly licensed tend surveyor under the laws of Ole State of Minnesota Dated Ogle 11th day of January 2007 SATHRE-BEROOUIST INC David B Pemberton MI sacra License No 40344 l REVISIONS BY 150 SOUTH BROADWAY WAYZATA MN J DRAWN DBP CHECKED ORO DATE 01/0BNB SCALE AS SHOWN JOB NO 5455-076 PREPLAT COLONIAL FILE PRELIMINARY PLAT DWG SHEET PP MILLBROOK 2ND ADDITION DEVELOPER LENNAR CORPORATION 935 WAYZATA BLVD WAYZATA MINNESOTA 55391 PHONE (763) 249 3022 CONTACT JOHN LIBERACKI ENGINEER SURVEYOR LAND PLANNER SATHRE BERGQUIST INC 150 S BROADWAY WAYZATA MINNESOTA 55391 PHONE (952) 476-6000 CONTACT DANIEL SCHMIDT PE R L S SYMBOL LEGEND DESCRIPTION PROPOSED EXISTING FUTURE LOT LINE WATERMAIN WN 03 - - CAM- - - BNLDING SETBACK BOUNDARY - - - - - - - - - - - - _ _ PARCEL BOUNDARY UNE DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS - - - - - - - CURB AND GUTTER RIGHT-0F WAY DRAINTILEW/CLEANOUTS BACKYARD CATCH BASIN - ---0-0--0-- - = t - CATCH BASIN ---- --11,- -0- -}-e-}- _ _t - STORM SEWER MANHOLE a 0 D -P 0 » - � $- - - FLARED END SECTION WIRIPFAP -0-4 ---,1,---41 - - --43 STORM STUCTURE LABEL M is SANITARY STUCTURE LABEL O O SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE --.--yam .--..-410-- -..-0- HYDRANT %gm IF WM - M W'A1- YAL ..4, GATE VALVE IIIIM w NMI—N,— -WL- -L —me— EMERGENCY OVERFLOW SWALE BARRICADE SPOT ELEVATION Tr MO T OR ® IMS. Ti OR p TBC SPOT ELEVATION ... e. Dessert% Rd IBA 751t. SE 19 CL CL WHITE PINE WAY UY3548 END 8136 ENDCOG 15'q�� ST 9.65 =^416 aiDa- Nix22.�, 122 C � Ddsaad RAIN e EXISTING UTILITIES SHOWN ARE SHOWN IN AN APPROXIMATE WAY ONLY THE CONTRACTOR SHALL DETERMINE THE EXACT LOCATION OF ANY AND ALL EXISTING UTILITIES BEFORE COMMENCING WORK HE AGREES TO BE FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY AND ALL DAMAGES ARISING OUT OF HIS FAILURE TO EXACTLY LOCATE AND PRESERVE ANY AND ALL EXISTING UTILITIES INDEX 1 TITLE 2-4 STREET SHEETS 5 6 SEWER & WATER SHEETS 7 9 STORM SEWER SHEETS 1012 DETAILS Ma SEW 50 25 0 25 50 100 SCALE IN FEET _ "`L.."4,9246, DATE MAY 14, 2007 1 II 1 / I �' / II/Ij I I 1 11 II II NORTH REG NO T— 4 (Lt 7 REVISIONS BY MILLBROOK 2ND ADDITION STILLWATER MINNESOTA LENNAR CORPORATION INC DRAWN VTN CHECKED DLS DATE 05-14-07 SCALE AS SHOWN JOB NO 5455-078 FILE W 15455-0781DWG\BASE MILL DWG SHEET 1 OF 12 SHEETS H 4 1 H P I h [ 0 h N N F 0 G DATE APPLICANT Friends of St Croix Preparatory Academy June 7, 2007 CASE NO 07-31 REQUEST 1) Annexation Petition 2) Shoreland Overlay District Amendment to conditionally permit schools 3) Rezoning to RA, Single Family Residential 4) Conditional Use Permit for school in RA and Shoreland District 5) Preliminary Plat approval for a one lot subdivision 6) Building height variance LOCATION 8753 Neal Avenue ZONING A-P, Agricultural Preservation (upon annexation) TZ, Transitional Zone (current Stillwater Township zoning) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN SFLL, Single Family Large Lot PLANNING COMMISSION DATE June 11, 2007 REVIEWERS Public Works Director, Police Chief, Fire Chief, City Planner, City Administrator, City Attorney PREPARED BY Bill Turnblad, Community Development Director BACKGROUND The St Croix Preparatory Academy proposes to construct a school on the 25 9 acres1 located at 8753 Neal Avenue North in Stillwater Township The new K-12 charter school facility is hoped to be open m the fall of 2008 with 620 students Within several acaderruc years the school is expected to reach its maximum enrollment of 975 students Development of the facility is planned to occur m three phases The request at hand is for approval of the first and second of these three phases 1 The first phase includes the 129,800 square foot school building with 39 classrooms2 an 83 vehicle parking lot and a small playground The school hopes the first phase 1 Excluding Neal Avenue and the delineated wetlands (including Heifort Pond) the net acreage is 19 1 2 Three classrooms for each of the 13 grade levels St Croix Preparatory Academy June 7 2007 Page 2 construction will be completed by August 15 2008 At a minimum the desire is to have classroom space available for grades 6-10 on the site by that time Grades K-5 could stay at the current facility for either all or part of the 2008-09 acaderruc year 2 The second phase would include construction of the athletic fields on the north side of the property and a trail connecting the fields to the school No hghts are planned at this time for the athletic fields It is thought that the second phase would occur in about 2010 3 Future phases would be for construction of additional parking as enrollment increases to capacity and for a free standing performing arts theater The school plans to offer community access to the outside amenities and open spaces, as well as some of the inside facilities The theater would be one such facility Other possible areas may include the gymnasium lunchroom and performance area Smaller spaces such as computer labs may be considered for public access as well Infrastructure improvements to be completed by the school would include extension of city sewer and water improvements to Neal Avenue and the extension of the Neal Avenue trail SPECIFIC REQUEST In order to develop the property as proposed the St Croix Preparatory Academy has requested the following 1 Approval of then petition to be annexed into the City of Stillwater 2 Approval of a zoning ordinance amendment that would allow by special use permit a school within the Shoreland Management Overlay District 3 Rezoning of the proper ty from A-P Agricultural Preservation to RA Single Family Residential 4 Approval of a Special Use Permit for a school in the RA, Single Faintly Residential zoning district as well as within the Shoreland Management Overlay District 5 Approval of a one lot preliminary plat and 6 Approval of a height variance to allow a 37 5 foot tall buildmg, whereas 35 is the maximum height permitted EVALUATION OF REQUEST I ANNEXATION PETITION 1 Orderly Annexation Agreement (OAA) • The subject property is located in the Phase IV annexation area This area is not scheduled for development until2015 • The refill provision of the OAA (Section 4 09) would allow the City Council to approve the request, since each of its criteria are satisfied o 100% of the subject landowners have signed an annexation petitioned, o The property is adjacent to the City o The level of growth in the entire area regulated by the OAA has not exceeded 120 permits per year St Croix Prepaiatory Academy June 7 2007 Page 3 • Section 4 08 of the OAA does not obligate the City or Township to approve an annexation request even though it may satisfy all of the provisions of the OAA 2 Orderly Development • Development of the property represents a logical pattern of contiguous urban growth extending westward from Oak Glen • Sewer and water will be available for the school to extend from Oak Glen Trail (water) and Millbrook (sewer and water) • Street network o Wenck Associates completed a traffic impact study that analyzed the effect of school traffic on the existing street network in the neighborhood For the purposes of the annexation discussion the report concluded that the existing road infrastructure is satisfactory to handle the school s traffic even at maximum enrollment However it does suggest improvements to existing streets that could be made to ensure good levels of service at all neighborhood intersections The study will be discussed in more detail later in this report Would require improvement of Neal by school o The lack of a north/south collector corridor through the western portion of the City has stalled out residential development in the annexation area One of the main reasons a north/south collector is needed it to provide a more direct and route from western residential neighborhoods to shopping and services provided along the Highway 36 corridor That convenient route to Highway 36 is not a need shared by school traffic II ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT The property hes within the Shoreland Management Overlay District of South Twin Lake Consequently any development of the site is guided by regulations of both the Shoreland Ordinance and the RA Zoning District In the RA district schools are allowed with a special use permit However in the shoreland overlay district schools are not listed as permitted uses The only uses listed as permitted in Stillwater s shoreland districts are single-farruly homes, parks (and historic sites) and agricultural cropland and pasture 3 However, in other cities schools are permitted within shoreland districts Consequently the DNR area hydrologist was asked whether it would be acceptable to the DNR if the City were to add schools as a specially permitted use in the shoreland overlay districts The hydrologist and her DNR colleagues did not find the idea to be out of the ordinary and indicated that they would hkely find such an ordinance amendment acceptable III REZONING If the City approves the annexation request, the Municipal Board will automatically zone the property A-P, Agricultural Preservation The A-P zoning classification serves as a holding classification until the City rezones the annexed land The school is requesting that the zorung of the property become RA Single Farruly Residential 3 City Code Ch 31 1 Subd 33 (4)(b) ct Croix Preparatory Academy June 7 2007 Page 4 One of the principle issues to be considered for a rezoning is whether the proposed change would be compatible with existing and planned uses within the surrounding neighborhood As seen in the attached zoning map, all of the land to the south and east of the site is already zoned RA, so the requested zoning classification would be consistent with these existing neighborhoods The property immediately west of the school property is in Stillwater Township and is zoned TZ, Transitional Zone The City s current Comprehensive Plan has not identified a guided use for that property yet However the property to the southwest across Neal Avenue has been annexed into the City already and development plans have been already been approved for all of this land A portion of it is being developed by US Home Corporation and the remainder is being developed by C3 Land Development All of this land is zoned TR, Traditional Residential The TR district allows single fanuly homes with an average lot size of 10,000 square feet (which is the same home density as the RA district on the east side of Neal Avenue ) Therefore the proposed RA zoning would be consistent with the zoned and guided land use of the surrounding neighborhoods IV SPECIAL USE PERM' r The City zoning ordinance refers to principal uses as either perrrutted in a zoning district or not permitted in that district Howevei some principal uses may be compatible with the permitted uses in a given district if the impact of their use can be mitigated or controlled The zoning ordmance refers to this class of uses as allowed by conditional or special use permit In the RA zoning district as well as in the shoreland overlay district (if the applicant s request is approved), schools are allowed with a special use permit City Code Ch 31-1 Subd 10 (1)(d) establishes guidelines for reviewing requests for special use permits They are In approving a special use permit or conditional use permit it must be determined by the plannmg commission that (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 Comprehensive Plan and zoning ordinances both find schools located within residential neighborhoods to be acceptable Traditionally schools have been located within residential neighborhoods, which allows convenient non -vehicular access and helps foster a stronger sense of neighborhood and community Moreover, the fringe locations chosen by today s very large schools such as the Stillwater Area High School are not hypicall y the result of an incompatibility between schools students and their home neighborhoods The decision for these large schools to locate out on the edge is more likely to be driven by the need for very large properties, which are not usually available in established urban/suburban neighborhoods (2) Any additional conditions necessary for the public interest have been imposed The conditions of approval found at the end of this report are intended to satisfiy this review criterion St Croix Preparatory Academy June 7 2007 Page 5 (3) The use or structure will not constitute a nuisance or be detrimental to the public welfare of the community The two main issues that have arisen with the proposal to date are parking and traffic Parking - A) Is there enough parking for the school's needs? B) The parking lot is located immediately behind a row of homes How can the impact of that location be eliminated or mitigated? A) The Zoning Ordinance requires 3 parking spaces per classroom (39 classrooms Y 3 spaces each = 117 parking spaces] It also requires one space for every 4 students in high school The school policy is that 10th graders are not allowed to drive to school Therefore at maximum enrollment there will be 6 upper classnien high school rooms and a total enrollment of 150 students (25 students/room @ 6 rooms = 150 students] At a rate of 1 parking space for every 4 juniors and seniors an additional 38 parking spaces will be needed Therefore, the total number of required packing spaces at maximum enrollment will be 155 [117 for classrooms + 38 for Juniors and seniors = 155] The total number of parking spaces shown on the site plan is 132 Tlie plan is slioi t 23 spaces The school believes that the 132 spaces are sufficient for their projected needs Therefore proof of parking for the additional 23 spaces should be shown on the site plan Incidentally since only 10th graders would be using Hu school during the fir st academic year the 38 spaces for the 11thi and 12th graders would not be built during the first please Tliat will be built as enrollment in the 11th and 12th grades fills out Another parking challenge will present itself when the ball fields are built Spectators will want to park closer to the fields than in the school parking lot The proposed solution to both the proof of parking and ball field parking is a future parking lot north of the central wetland on the property It may be appropriate for this to be a sod parking lot rather than a paved lot Tlus could also serve as the overflow parking when there are large gatherings for school events Since the actual parking needs of the school will not be know until it is open and functioning for a while staff recommends that either the future parking area east of the main parking lot be developed during this first phase as a sod overflow lot Or, the future parking lot nearer the athletic fields should be developed now as a sod parking lot B) Neighbors immediately south of the proposed parking lot are very concerned about the noise, light, and views of cars This is certainly a legitimate concern since the lot is proposed to be 30 feet from their rear lot lines In order to make the school use more compatible with the existing residential neighborhood staff suggested two alternatives One would be to relocate the parking north of the building This would require a complete redesign of the school and its layout So the school s consultants have pursued the second alternative, which was to create a buffer yard with screening The 30 foot wide buffer yard can be seen in St Croix Preparatory Academy June 7 2007 Page 6 the two attached cross section views (One is an enlargement of the screening) The screening proposed for the buffer area includes a wall to retain a bean along the entire parking lot On the berm would be coniferous and deciduous over story plantings along with shrubbery In addition a 6 foot tall wooden fence is shown as optional On the west end of the lot the retaining wall would be 6 feet tall though this would be gradually less tall as the land rises to the east Traffic - Wenck Associates completed an analysis of the impact that the school would have at maximum enrollment upon the streets in the neighborhood The conclusion of the study was that all streets and intersections would be able to accommodate the additional traffic But • Paving Neal Avenue all the way to Highway 96 is the best solution If the toad were to remain gravel and it were to develop a wash board condition traffic would avoid it and disperse to other nearby paved roads instead • A westbound bypass lane on Highway 96 at Ncal Avenue should be further investigated • Tlie level of service for the northbound Neal Avenue approach to Highway 96 would be unproved by widening and paving the Neal Avenue approach to allow for separate left and right turn lanes • In order to better accommodate the exiting traffic after school, the access driveway from the parking lot could be reconfigured to have two exiting lanes and one entering lane This will allow for separate left and right turn lanes V PRELIMINARY PLAT The prehminary plat will be reviewed in this section of the report A Minimum Dimensional Standards Lot size and width The entire 25 9 acre parcel is to be platted as a single lot The resulting very large lot exceeds all minimum lot dimension standards in the RA district or the Shoreland Management Overlay District Building Height The maximum building height permitted in the RA and shoreland districts is 35 feet The peak of the school s main roof is 35 feet However, there are several vertical articulation elements that break up the buildmgs facades These elements have tilted roofs with a height of 37 5 feet (measured at the halfway point of the highest end of the accent roof) If these elements are lowered 2 5 feet they loose their visual appeal Therefore 2 5 foot height variances would be needed for each of these elements St Croix Preparatory Academy June 7 2007 Page 7 The extra 2 5 feet of height represents only a 7% variance And given the massing of the building the extra 2 5 feet is fairly msigruficant But it is enough to give the building visual variety The Planning Comrrussion should consider whether the variance is 1) unique enough not to set a negative precedent, 2) that it will not have a negative impact upon surrounding properties or City development standards and that 3) granting the variance would not be granting special privileges to this property If these criteria are satisfied, the comrrussion should approve the variance request Setbacks The minimum setbacks for structures in the RA district are 30 feet from front yard 10 feet from side yard and 25 feet from rear yard All proposed improvements meet or exceed these muumum standards The buffer area required by the Browns Creek Watershed District is 75 for Heifort Pond and 50 feet for the other two delineated wetlands All structures ball fields and trails stay out of the buffer area for Heifort Pond but not from the wetland lust north of the proposed school The future theater building the trail connecting the school to the ball fields and the future parking lot are all located partially within the 50 foot buffer of this wetland The watershed district will have to determine whether this is allowable Impervious surface The maximum percentage of impervious surface allowed m the RA district is 30% in a shoreland district it is 25% The proposed impervious coverage, including the future improvements is 18 5% of the net land area4 and 13 7% of the gross land area B Civil Engineering The City Engineer has reviewed the plans and his memo is attached Since the property has frontage on 96 MnDOT will need to review the plans It is possible that the state highway department will want a bypass lane or turn lane constructed by the school as part of this project D Tree Preservation The school is allowed to remove 35% of the trees on the site If more are to be removed than that, replacement would be required The tree removal plan and inventory that were submitted showed the removal of 12 9% of the trees on the property Half of these are scheduled to be relocated elsewhere on the property Consequently, no replacement would be required 4 Net is gross minus Neal Avenue and the delineated wetlands (including Heifort Pond) St Croix Preparatory Academy June 7 2007 Page 8 However staff believes that the tree removal and inventory that were submitted may reflect only those trees impacted by the first phase of development If that belief is correct, the tree plan should be updated by the school's consultants to reflect removal for each phase of construction That will make it possible to determine if tree replacement will be necessary at any point m the site development E Park and Trail Dedication The school would like the athletic fields and playground improvements to be credited toward the public park dedication requirement since these school improvements become de facto neighborhood park facilities The Palk & Recreation Board will consider this request at their June 25th meetmg The City s comprehensive trail plan shows a future trail along Neal Avenue between Browns Creek Park and Highway 96 A portion of that trail will be built by C3 Land Development and US Home Corporation as the develop property on the west side of Neal Avenue The school should therefore build a trail along the west side of Neal Avenue from their southern property line to a point opposite the school where it could cross over to the east side of the street The city would then continue the trail up the east side of Neal Avenue to Highway 96 at some undetermined time in the future The Park & Recreation Board will consider this at their June 25th meeting as well F Miscellaneous Fire Safety The trail/sidewalk on the north side of the school should be a minimum of 10 feet wide to provide public safety access Building design review The Heritage Preservation Comrrussion has commented on the materials and design of the building Though staff feels that the service area (loading dock) needs more attention It is located on the west side of the proposed school and will be clearly visible from Neal Avenue Staff recommends that the school draw up a screening detail that would soften the view from the street Future theater building The freestanding theater building is not part of this review, since it would not be completed until phase three None the less, it should be noted that the location will probably not be acceptable to the Brown s Creek Watershed District While it meets the 75 foot buffer/setback from Heifort Pond, it may not meet the 50 foot buffer requirement for the other wetland Since some buffer/setback averaging is allowed by the BCWD, the school should research whether the proposed location will be acceptable St Croix Preparatory Academy June 7 2007 Page 9 ALTERNATIVES The Planning Commission has several alternatives A Approval If the proposed school and its associated requests are found to be acceptable to the Planning Commission, it should approve the height variance and recommend that the City Council approve the remainder of the requests with the following conditions 1 The site shall be developed in substantial conformance with the following plans on file with the Planning Department except as may be modified by the conditions herem • Site Plan AO 1 dated May 29, 2007 • Preliminary Gradmg Plan C3 0 dated May 18 2007 • Preliminary Gradmg Plan C3 1 dated May 30 2007 • Preliminary Erosion Control Plan C4 0 dated May 18 2007 • Preliminary Utility Plan C5 0 dated May 18 2007 • Landscape Plan LO 1 dated May 29 2007 • Landscape Plan LO 2 dated June 5 2007 • Landscape Plan LO 2a dated June 5 2007 • Site Section AO 0 dated May 31, 2007 • Exterior Elevation South dated May 18 2007 • Exterior Elevation East dated June 5 2007 2 The comments noted m the memo from the Public Works Director dated June 8 2007 shall be addressed to his satisfaction in the final plat application materials 3 The rezoning and Special Use Pernut for a school u1 the RA zoning district shall not become effective until the applicants receive Final Plat approval from the City Council 4 The Special Use Permit for a school in the Shoreland Management District and second reading of the Shoreland Management District ordinance amendment shall not be approved by the City until the DNR approves the Shoreland Management District amendment 5 The annexation approval will not be filed with the Minnesota Municipal Board until after the applicants receive Final Plat approval from the City Council 6 Any prehmmary plan review comments from the City Engineer shall be forwarded to the City Council And final engineering plans shall mcorporate those comments 7 Unless the school builds parking facilities large enough to accommodate loth grade drivers, the school policy shall continue to be that 10th graders are not allowed to drive to school 8 Proof of parking shall be provided for 23 parkmg spaces 9 When the athletic fields are constructed, the parking facility shown on the May 29, 2007 site plan as future parking shall also be constructed 10 In addition to the berrrung, landscaping and retaining wall shown in Site Section AO 0 dated May 31, 2007, the school shall also install the 6 foot tall wooden privacy fence that is labeled as option on said Site Section 11 The following suggestions included in the Wenck Traffic Impact Study dated June 6, 2007 shall be included in the final plat application materials St Croix Preparatory Academy June 7 2007 Page 10 • Paving of Neal Avenue all the way to Highway 96 • A westbound bypass lane on Highway 96 at Neal Avenue shall be further investigated with the Minnesota Department of Transportation • Widening the northbound Neal Avenue approach to Highway 96 shall be further investigated with the Minnesota Department of Transportation and the City Pubhc Works Department • In order to better accommodate the exiting traffic after school the access driveway from the parking lot should be reconfigured to have two exiting lanes and one entering lane This will allow for separate left and right turn lanes 12 The Parks & Recreation Board shall review and make a recommendation to the City Council on the park and trail dedication concerns prior to City Council consideration of the preliminary plat proposal 13 The school should verify with its consultants whether the tree removal information included all three phases of development If it did not then the final plat application materials shall include revised tree removal information that takes into account all phases of development 14 The trail/sidewalk on the north side of the school shall be constructed to a width of at least 10 feet to accommodate public safety access to the rear of the building 15 Screening details shall be provided for the service area (loading dock) prior to City Council consideration of the prehmmary plat proposal B Table If the Planning Commission believes that additional information is necessary to formulate a recommendation on the requests it could table the application until July 9 2007 C Denial If the Planning Commission finds that the proposal is not advisable it could deny the variance request and recommend that the City Council deny the rest of the requests With a denial, the basis of the action should be given RECOMMENDATION A recommendation from City staff will be available at the public hearing on June 11 2007 attachments Memo from Shawn Sanders Neighborhood Map Zoning Map Site Plans Grading plans Building elevations Traffic report MEMORANDUM To Bill Turnblad, Community Development Director From Shawn Sanders, Public Works Director Date June 8, 2007 Re St Croix Prep Academy- Preliminary Plat Review Comments Comments for the St Croix Prep Academy Preliminary Plat are as follows 1 A 60 foot nght of way along the west property line should be dedicated for the southerly 900 feet of the property and additional nght or way dedicated as shown on the attached map for property north of the 900 feet 2 Storm sewer calculations should be submitted to the city for review and approval 3 Alternative storm water design should be incorporated into the plans, ideas include ram gardens, infiltrations basins, porous pavement, grass pave parking, etc 4 All wetlands on the property should be platted as drainage and utility easements 5 Neal Avenue shall be constructed to urban design( 26 wide with B618 curb and gutter, storm sewer and 8' trail) for the south 1000 feet The remaining section shall be overlaid with 3' of bituminous to Highway 96 6 Watermam should be installed to the end of the curbed street ( see note 5) 7 Browns Creek Watershed District will need to review and approve the plan 8 Dnveway slopes entenng onto Neal Avenue shall be no more than 2% 9 The City Engineer will need to approve the final street utility plans and erosion control plans before construction 10 Storm sewer pipe under the road shall be concrete pipe 11 Overhead utility lines are not within the proposed dedicated easement, They should be relocated or an easement should be dedicated } - - -- ,_ - \ \ _ 4033 2456 - ILIW HAM, RI TA _ I— N 0 N T \■I r\ I Z 2444 nIN II 5, C� < T3U\ rr ■' T 0\ %� 2384 0) p 1111112 /� JF 0 N n9N T9\ Oilk / 8911 cc l 2310 2330 \2370 P8s !�' T a\ z _ w z1S 20 i Q / 1 n — o \ CI 2300 235041/1_O o N cv C— O FcT 2351 --- 2250 2241 �o N 0 .� N 2230 22`L 1 T Nii FL M. R_I\ Tn f IZON z t 2200� oPG�G�� 21 ____,,A / Vicinity Map y . 1-- - L „ ,, in ,,,,, -, , ,, _ NORTH - \\ 9 8753 o ^ _ ( .- 2171 o O_ 2180-- `L^O 7 2151 ` O - 1 ti� m 2131 210 0 f 2101 1 _ 207U -2065 2050 2045 ~ _ _ 2030 2O2"5 _� -,,— r ` -- ' 2010 0 2005 0 300 A Scale in Feet / o ®0 1990 / ®rn op I— 1995- z_ o , ' O m O O� cr , O I> 7=� ,- _ a' rn in jRA1L Q�- v a - ' - - GU 1985 _ — r 1965 1975 ' w 18 cc 1861 r ,1945 1955 GLE Z �— 0 - - — 1935 1890 188( 11v 1841 - 1:: 0 1$21 1825 i __ lj �� i I I 8- I--- 1 Outlot L Iw 1801 I _ _ — --- — 17 \ 1785 1765 1788 r g I °4 \ 1 ,� �, GOV 1740 1'T45 1 fi94 — — — OPO R end przeunon wv �. e w �a„d " "� Location Map MCKUSICK - - COUNTY ROAD 64 — --1745 a 172' — _ — — — ProneI� I Cowry Sun sp., O, 0.10-661 City.of 44tei St. Croix Prep Academy Neighborhood Map Community Development Department ^ ;II r - \ g< 41441 parking and parent drop off future parking bus drop off City of ter Community Development Department St. Croix Prep Academy Current Zoning �00000�o� IN N, ' 1 : \, : A4s* k\. \NN.N7e7A \NI, is e\ Nk ‘ irms rg°'. ►``. 14 =Elmo MIP le irawvoinsw 1 17j Ill i\ 1fq •sk 801 o• ye- I parking and parent drop off future parking bus drop off Lake Shoreland Management District Road centerlines Road right-of-ways Zoning District Classifications A-P, Agricultural Preservation RA - Single Family Residential RB - Two Family TR, Traditional Residential LR, Lakeshore Residential CR, Cottage Residential ▪ CTR, Cove Traditional Residential CCR, Cove Cottage Residential CTHR, Cove Townhouse Residential TH, Townhouse RCM - Medium Density Residential RCH - High Density Residential VC, Village Commercial ME CA - General Commercial CBD - Central Business District BP-C, Business Park - Commercial ▪ BP-O, Business Park - Office BP -I, Business Park - Industrial ▪ 18 - Heavy Industrial CRD - Campus Research Development - PA - Public Administration I= 1111 - Proposed school 1 1 I l J Public Works Facility IN Railroad MI WATER NE Stillwater Township I 1 1 4 OEofffi f Lfl- T RE BASEBALL FIELD FUTURE SOCCER FIELD E IS 1 GBULD GS{1 AJD CCESS — — NEAL SITE PLAN FUTURE PARKING I \ I FUTURE T E TER 952-0 - —, F STI G WETLA DS POND G -0 PROPERTY I INF 0-0 PAR I G SETBACK 0 0 BUILDI G SE B CO WATER LI E WET DE EA 0 SEE SUR EY 5 3-0 SER� SS — — GRAVEL TREES OT S ON FOR C ARM.' SEE LA DSC PE SAIR CROIX PREPARATORY C DEMY — B U I OUS NEAL-AVENUE NORTH BUI DI G D IRS' FLOOR SECOND FLOOR TOTAL 3005F 55,500 S F 299005F UTURE T EA RE 22 300 S F A ED 1PERVIOUS AREA 52 688 S OFF STREET AR G 83 SPACES FUT REP RK G 375 ACES TOT L 205 CES EXISTING PROPERTY LI E ROAD RIGHT OF WA 23 0 126 2 F TE PARKINGUB0 Ji J 30 60 20 600 5Y aratory Academy 4) a X_ O 0 8911 Neal Ave e Stillwate MI esota 55082 5 2 2 cc 5 8 E 8 ) Y tkt A B C c 0 E D o co 0 CO 0 76041 C3 dwg 0 0 0 Z 0 0 v4 ♦ ; • TOfr iy,Se .rYyti ►� "ow_ u, J'�±�.Jr NEAL AVENUE N ELINEA1lON ON MAY 7 2007 PRELIMINARY m NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION 0 20 40 eo May18 2007 Ch k day MAM D w By JDM Stillwater Minnesota 55082 cc , C3 ,O q0ad%gSlan A 0 c �19 /9I li �1( 00/ 0/0 9 Cn 00 PRELIMINARY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION J 90 7 30 0 a p 3 aratory Academy St Croix Pre E M nesota 55082 3 9 r / 0 0 O 7 c- J , \ 0 N 01 Q <2 30 U. 00 0 wa D0 1 / II l Yt / 11 zi�, r ,..,: `--- -, ., - / / � c D Z 01��1 0 RIP -RAP <0 0 0 U OJ w< / 0 / o % 1 11• \\\\\\O r y J\\ tl o / r I i I `l0 5 J \ �' s �9 Y A tt \ ' — — _ f Lk "I \ Yid, ,p, 4� J -t'" y� o % 'o . o. o� --J s --' sLTFENCE� VI AL AVENUE f\i 1 / r _ 0 0 N 0 — ICV �,7 Z , F < 0 ) F F a 30 w Z O0 w O 0 0 0 Z W < 1 1 . ` / \ 1 \< . /' 1 , // I1 _� .-1' �` SILT FENCE i^ -Lk Allik rail 1'g`,{{r� goo i0Q / / AIM rty 1 PROVIDE INIFT PROTECTION 1 t r AT ALL CATCH BASINS t SAT FENCE / 0� 40 1 EROSION CONTROL NOTES 1 Ow d C t 1 hall bt MPCA NPOES pe m 1 2 I lilt mp ry cot I m s ( I l p to 1 It 1 d rock co truth tra ) p o 10 b g g y b ord m It w rk tih I 3 E t I m how th ro co 1 I p1 th bsol t m m m Th co tract h II tall 1 mporary dh 0 k ed m flap ba dd b I s Rat 1 g and/ d kthe Ip II It th cot rs deem d cessary to I rth co t I 4 All co t t Re 1 h II be s rf ed with crushed k cr s the t width f th 1 ce d I m th t ce 1 po t 50 t th co tru t 5 Th t Ith h1 h IIb le hed m m m f 6 Th U h b kf11 h II b mp I d wdh 6 I ry plat comp a 6 Allg dg prat hllb codad m t m m th p l t If t o Sed m l cont ol p b m ib lblhd Ildwgd t p mlrsbl y pg d tl dd Irbng cb t beg 7 All p d I m t h imp ry p t t cove cod g I Ih 1 II w g Typ I SI p Tm (M m m t m ca ma p wh th t t b gwrkd) SI p t p Ih 31 wth 7d y 51 p btw 101 d 3 1 wlh 14dy SI p nd th 101 wth 21 dy ly Th cld tru t d t m w t m gm t p d d I p d yy po 4 I wth p t I p t I ro t co y y t m h b dg II ylm t m ew Iltmpo ry p m t d g d tch th t ral m md y t m th l d h g t d wat wh co t 4ed g w th ( ha w I d f 1 f Inn Ihb d 1k )th onto t If aft h Ilbeb k dby 1 biz t I t p tectlh f 11 ft mth t t d11w 9 All I m ew catch b 1 eded I I d g d gc t t h lib dl p tru N1 m 1 gth Irmsw y m Clhb ec ry I st d g d gco 1 I h lib d dby It f d bl g 1 l k d h y b I back dby owl Th 1 b I h II t II d d m t 4 d II.th b l l th I b t ry 10 All l m w d h rg g t w ll d w l bod h II 11 1 1 b l w th rm l w t I vet l th p t w tl 44 w l body t I t wh th dow I m l p 1 pe t 11 1! Th rrn I w 1 I I sh II b th h I b 1 th outl I I th w ll d w 1 body 11 Pp d t m be pro ded with gyd p t wth 24 h l eo t t d ce w t 12 All prap h II bed g 4 d t II d wth It m t I d m t lh M t D p rtmenl 1 Tra port 1 pear cat 1 prap d fIt mat I 13 I pest th co tru t 1 ery se d ys d ng ary tru Iro dwth 24h rs ft I II tg 1 th 05 oh 24h rs 14 All 111 e m t be p d pl ced o ppl m t d wh th y b tom 1 t o I th ad m 1 ch 1/3 11h h ght 1 th f ce Th repa s m s1 b m d wth 24h rs Id co ry oo sf Id co dh II w cc ss 15 II d m I p th co by b I N to m I I ( edm Im tb m ed m d t f q y I6a r t m mrz N I mp cl 16 All I tra k d t p m th II be rem ed d ly 17 Allp m 1 edm t I ba m tbere f edt th d g d t mm d t ly f II wi g t b Ilzal of th t 16 Up complet 11h p I a dstab l ato f 0 g aded II 1 mpo ry rost co trot Mal b s (s n le s h y b 1 t) h II b mmo ed from t PRELIMINARY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION 0 20 40 Bo EE 01 pjb1 May18 2007 0 0 € 4 Y E 9 2 0 0 0 2 Stillwater Minnesota 55082 \C4. Q Ero'sIpY3 Contrgl Plan A B C y E D 0 0 N CO 0 76041 C5 dwg ¢Q 30 O 0 wa 0 0 0 O LJ 44 LF 12 HOPE 2 27X per— ES 5 INY 98 00 FES 4 INV 9700\ / n N CD a Ct 0 30 00 0 o Q INV 98.00 0 /' z 0 %, `�j wear'i STMH-2 RIM 10300 INV 9807 21 LF 24 HDPE 0 0 33Z mM 1100 NEAL AVENUE N INV 10410 INV 10400 16 1 2 RIM 10300 INV 98 34 0 0 n 0 N O J cc z / 0< F a / 3 O W / // / 4p � 0 / / W spy F 0 0 / (7 Cal 0 r2 I / g,o // F 0]O J / r< / i PROPOSED BUILDING FFE = 116 00 DPE441512 0 0 550 C8 7 RIM 113.76 INV 109 76 m NEW HYDRANT M11H GATE VALVE & BOX SSMH-1 RIM 113.90 INV 10590 421E Il - HDPE 0 1 210 - LF, 24 HOP€ 0 0 in CB-2 RIM 10273 INV 98 73 / / FES-1 /- INV 11000 Ac:75.-C13-& RIM 115.00 INV 110 60 INV 110 27 300 LF 8 PVc. 0 0 4% 8 DIP WAIERMAIN 25 IF 12 HDPE 01 6% CB 5 S711.1H-1 RIM 115 00 RIM 116 83 INV 111 00 INV 104 07 1901E 15-HDPE 1 0% l7 1-4 M41690-- V11250J. V.112 491 77 lr 15`HDPE 0 1 0% 25 IF 112 HDPE 0 1 6% - - CB 3 RIM 11690 INV 112.90 CB-2 �1727 — - /317 300 LF 8 PVC 0 0 4% 25 LF 12 HOPE 0 L60 RIM 11767 INV113 67 PRELIMINARY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION ♦ 20 80 May 18 2007 0 EN 8911 Neal A Draw By JDM E Stillwater Minnesota 55082 WW- 05.V Utgity Pio -MST 6 PROPERTY L E h4— 1 I \ C B 1 c'lAi;` X7' T�� —cam, t �\ � r 1 � 1 � l�a� `� \ ��✓'` �� LANDSCAPE PLAN Plant Schedule Legend 5 BOL BOTANICAL NAME A FRAYI8 US PENT SSLV CA MARSH LL \ B CEA GLAUC BLACK HILLS C AS SPIREA X BU AULDA ANTHO Y W TERER IBRU UM RILOBUM LFREDO D AXUS X MEDI D RK GREE COMMO E ARSH LL GREE A5 B CK ILLS SPRUCE NTRON WA ERER SPIRIRA FREDO COMPAC ERIC ❑ RK GREE EW S ZE 21 CHES CALIPER 3 2FEET HGH 8 INCHES HIGH 18 INCHES H GH G LI O E 15TI G REES TO E 1 NEW TREES TO BE P A TED .�" 1 i, Vi ,� �'Y'l FtiFJ 'b."l i \\ f l T�5 1 1 ft, ^ 1 , i ! / p e Li t j1_'': A l ./ --'1, ' �, �Y�r_ As\+\ ,y_/Kr, l i it i\ r L. _\I \1 it ,,, 1 fir\ 3g��'',-J`i� T\I i f /\��� e v�V y.. *I(.is „-1 t o `t 555T GR /E SAINT GROIX PREPARATORY ACADEMY BUS DROP OFF = ESPIPAnrou—s — General Notes 1 60 0 1 { EAST G 51TU51 OU5 EXSTING ROPERTY L C F 0 EL to z sh p M esota 55082 St Itwater Tow 5 0' 9a a 6 SP REA X BU LDA T ONY TERE V BRUNUM TRILOBUM LFREDO IAXUS X EDIA DARK GREEN T 0 ATERER SPIRIRA ALFREDO COMPACT AMERICA D RK GREEN YEW 8 1 arena° MI PM Me 758 75- 9 779 781 756 7T8 i790 762 5 760 777 761 g7775 78$6 76 Z f76_3 647 774 8887 ▪ 766 767 '773 790 79 4 771 E a~ 66 r6�a7 770 1 645 .662 661 0 658 r 6 ; 647-14, 6`§� Vf{6 1ac4 656 36406 ?3254 \651`653 a26 �624 565 637 6GG34r,2g 622 5 6 34 626 627 6 623 567 566 St Croix Preparatory Academy 8911 Neal Avenue 243 253 208 210 21: 219 242 238 252 2(17 209'217,2yS- 214 239 a 251 206 '? 215247 245,1, 236 -02 203 }2113 Q 744- 237 24 22 226 �30234 201 22h �31 222 228 233 227 225 232 r 339 336338 337 33435 263 263/ 4 i 2 l 68 3 0� K -1761 3&Q -365 ;36 }36 36968 ,370 37-4 1 7T i 3r 378 �3 r 0 VAJVH7 1; 0 6 j i � o z N y St Croix Preparatory Academy 8911 N IA ShIlwat MI esota 55082 NI) Kodet Architectural Group Ltd I. 2] 'awn By rmea God.a By ra — HS 1 850 SF PREP 125 5F HS SCIENCE 1055 5F PERFORMANCE SEATING 2202 5F // H5 2 850 SF 1111111111111111111 STAGE 1132 SF MS 1 851 5F PREP 12'15F / M5 SCIENCE 1119 SF // 4/ K 6 MEDIA 2918 SF MS 2 850 SF mn WR / OFF 351 SF BOYS 63 5F GIRLS 163 5 K 6 MUSIC 1088 5F STOR 99 5F KIVA ij581 261 SF /653 5F SG 2 299 SF T ?5 5FL KIT 100 5F 16 SF STOR DISCOVERY HARBOR 1162 5F K 6COMP 966 5F z o 7 1 1I 2 934 SF BOYS 1166 SF GIRLS 159 5F JAN C.L. 164 5F ed MULTI MEDIA / 335 SF BOYS LOCKER A/V STOR / 666 5F 324 5F F LL ��� �I— '6SFdl N ry IIIII 1 MS 3 868 SF -1'TJLr MS 4 861 SF 300 SEATING E [ BOYS /A 163 5Fr GIRLS L 163 5F LL LL tti ^� FN t N 4- HS 3 HS4 851 SF 852 SF SERVICE 1631 5F 1 6.4 LOAD DOCK 321 SF KIT 828 SF LUNCH ROOM 2815 5F a_ ad, wm LOBBY 4341 5F BOYS 194 5F C GIRLS 211 5F GIRLS LOCKER 6155F GOON GOON SEN 6u5 OFF OFF ADV ADMIN 150 51.150 SF OFF OFF — / 150 SF�225 SF r OFF 111 5F 2 925 5F GYM_ 8964 SF 1 MEAD 95 1055F g7 II T 6�5 1100 SF OFF I OFF OFF OFF 15051.1505F1505F1505 REGEP SEC 829 5F WORK ASSIST ROOM ADMIN 950 SF 200 SF ADMIN OFF 225 SF IL( 11 VEST 150 5F p Il WAITING 32�/ 7 GONF ROOM 262 SF I 0 FIRST FLOOR PLAN 1/16 1 0 K K 1201 SF 1201 5F r 545 5T 55 2 STOR/ 921 5F LAUND 314 SF -- — — Ell 45 aa K 1202 SF 54 5E L / T T 5 5 4u5 1 1 928 5F 922 SF UP 54 St 1 812 5F 5 10 25 50 IBM // Architectural Group Ltd Q z in z r 0 3 u St Ilw to MN 55082 ■� % 2 HS 5 861 SF SG 3 262 SF FRET 4 5 H5 SCIENCE 1111 5F IIII NIORK ROOM �—� 405 SF STAFF �I LOUNGE 699 SF ST 45 ART ROOM 1149 SF mN tthr dl 1 12 MEDIA 1981 SF 52 0 OPEN TO ,BELOW ART STOR 254 SF 5G 2 261 5 MS 5 832 SF [DN J1 Y T 15 SPECIAL ED GR 691 SF 01' NV PEE 449 SF MS 6 850 SF _Li STOR 285 SF OY 63 5 GIRLS 163 5 M5 1 M5 8 843 SF 845 SF 7- /� OPEN TO BELOW I-i HS 6 850 SF HS 1 851 SF BOYS d i 63 SFP GIRLSL 163 5F �11- 688 SF RAG 30 SF OFF 10 SF H5 8 852 SF HS 9 884 SF STOR 326 5F BAND/ ORCH 1185 5F OPEN TO BELOW OPEN TO BELOW STOR 386 SF 1 12 COMP 842 SF ST F 56 5 0" SM 3 128 5F( ELF SECOND FLOOR PLAN 1/16 1 0 KIVA 683 SF / 4 865 SF I 1 1 TT T r,nm L . BOYS 166 5F 2 GIRLS 89 5F STORAGE 4 865 SF L 3 850 5F STOR 169 SF STOR 219 5F PRAG 112 SF CHOIR 1115 SF PRAG 91 5F OFF 152 SF 3 850 SF 4 872 SF 6 812 SF \ / OPEN TO BELOW OPEN TO' BELOW ART 1090 SF NLORK ROOM 400 5F STAFF LOUNGE 500 5F CONF 25 5F 3 850 5F pa 5 850 SF 1 6 8l2 5F 1 1 I T- 11 � 5 850 SF 6 911 SF 5M 5 II 2515 -J` 5 10 25 50 5 812 5F Architectural Group Ltd T E a) -o Croix Preparatory Ac 0 4 } G z Ct m y e a d 1 II II 1! I , ,I 7 St Croix Preparatory Academy 8911 Neal Avenue St Ilwater MN 55082 Architectural Group Ltd ISC o el AT tJ An i MN S 4011 e Ell h k rit / b1 to k d r 1 1 4I (I? 737 1 c I bl 3 1 1 m.«.-.<•..y WU x+n anneintri ve..fA m A .a yore PA Se0 vu-Ync O 05/18/07 P I N 72307 • w By hi / ks Oh 1 d By ks ck Um Ct ea —t <c(g s.41 cce { t°LC tv e r � rl, r t, C� fir q <Chb a ` I -1 i G1 1i St Croix Preparatory Academy 8911N IA S IIw t M I 55082 Kodet Architectural Group Ltd O 1 f 7 If 1,0 I(•det Architectural Group Ltd 15 G oval nd T rrace Min e p 11 MN 55403 I 1 54 E Mall a chekodet com WebSIte www kod t corn Telephone 612 377 2737 Facs mile 612 377 1331 I p r lIl ♦ 11 — if-- ---Li ♦ \ \\. • ,\ L _ O.r. 05/18/07 P.W02Na 72307 Om n Rr NI((/ k3 Cnectw BY ks ReNabN 4fJ / 40 f o Va. 6... 1 Wenck File #1916-01 Prepared for St Croix Preparatory Academy and Kodet Architectural Group, Ltd Prepared by WENCK ASSOCIATES, INC 1800 Pioneer Creek Center P O Box 249 Maple Plain, Minnesota 55359-0249 (763) 479-4200 Traffic Impact Study for St Croix Preparatory Academy Stillwater, MN June 6, 2007 -' Wenck Table of Contents 10 PURPOSE AND BACKGROUND 1-1 2 0 EXISTING CONDITIONS 2-1 3 0 OTHER NEARBY DEVELOPMENT 3-1 4 0 TRAFFIC FORECASTS 4-1 5 0 TRAFFIC ANALYSES 5-1 6 0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 6-1 FIGURES 1 PROJECT LOCATION 2 SITE PLAN 3 WEEKDAY A M PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES 4 WEEKDAY P M PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES 5 WEEKDAY A M PEAK HOUR LEVEL OF SERVICE RESULTS 6 WEEKDAY P M PEAK HOUR LEVEL OF SERVICE RESULTS 1 1.0 Purpose and Background The purpose of this study is to evaluate the traffic impacts of the proposed St Croix Preparatory Academy facility The project site is located in the southeast quadrant of the TH 96/Neal Avenue intersection as shown in Figure 1 This traffic study examined the impacts of the proposed school on the following intersections • TH 96/Neal Avenue • Neal Avenue/school parking lot access (future) • Neal Avenue/Oak Glen Trail • CR 64/Neal Avenue The proposed project consists of a new 129,800 square foot school facility The school is expected to open in the fall of 2008 with 620 students By the fall of 2010, it is expected the school will reach its full enrollment of 975 students All access for the school will be from Neal Avenue north of Oak Glen Trail See Figure 2 for the current site plan 1-1 _______\ /I \ PROJECT =" LOCATION n TSTn IT M. 17 �-r� Wenck ICrn Sr n 9 — c Mgt" f ST STILLWATER TCWNSHIF 20v0 PJP 2 53 Ie )0N WO. T)O. QUI I Ic ZO DAI HILL CT N. L DLLLACER CT All CSON PL Pl. LI eNLM050e b e CT 941 93rd ST Kfr S rfiIA VOLUM 3 TRAFFIC STUDY FOR ST CROIX PREPARATORY ACADEMY IN STILLWATER, MN TEP _WE 9L z g 5r ST 102 d 91111 ST N. Aa� FALLS m00 ST CT IDSS i - STILLW 2000 POF ..auras 3 ya9r � tz. Saerazear POPLAR loans t APPROXIMATE SCALE 0 2600 FIGURE 1 PROJECT LOCATION 1-2 1h11111Ot�A1 L lllI!I!!llI 11111111 Wenck L 0 z v 1111111 1IIItIII _ 1111 i �! !IILI TRAFFIC STUDY FOR ST CROIX PREPARATORY ACADEMY IN STILLWATER MN a —I N APPROXIMATE SCALE FIGURE 2 SITE PLAN 1-3 2.0 Existing Conditions The proposed site presently is pnmanly agncultural land The project site is bounded by Neal Avenue on the west, TH 96 on the north, and residential areas on the south and east Both TH 96 and Neal Avenue are two lane undivided roadways Neal Avenue north of Oak Glen Trail is presently a gravel surface roadway Oak Glen Trail is a two lane, urban section residential roadway that intersects Neal Avenue north of CR 64 and TH 96 east of Neal Avenue CR 64 is a two lane roadway with nght turn lanes at Neal Avenue The existing subject intersections provide the following geometncs and control • TH 96/Neal Avenue One shared lane on each of the northbound, eastbound, and westbound approaches The southbound approach, which is slightly offset from the northbound approach is a small pnvate driveway The northbound Neal Avenue approach is controlled with a stop sign • Neal Avenue/Oak Glen Trail One shared lane on each of the northbound, southbound, and westbound approaches The westbound Oak Glen Trail approach is controlled with a stop sign • CR 64/Neal Avenue One shared lane on each of the northbound and southbound approaches One shared left turn/through lane and one nght turn lane on the eastbound and westbound CR 64 approaches The Neal Avenue approaches are controlled with stop signs To better understand existing traffic conditions at the subject intersections, traffic counts were completed at the subject intersections from 7 to 9 a m and 2 to 4 p m on May 8, 2007 21 3.0 Other Nearby Development A new housing development known as Millbrook is proposed for the area west of South Twin Lake on TH 96 The proposed residential development, which will be constructed in phases, will initially have all access to TH 96 When the third phase is constructed, which is currently expected to occur sometime after 2011, access will also be constructed to Neal Avenue at Oak Glen Trail For purpose of this study, we have accounted for the number of dwelling units that are expected to occur by 2008 and by 2010 Detailed information on the traffic volumes generated by this development is described in the traffic forecast section of this report A second small residential development is proposed for the northwest quadrant of the CR 64/Neal Avenue intersection This development, known as Browns Creek Reserve, will consist of 15 single family dwelling units All access will be to/from Neal Avenue For purpose of this study, all 15 dwelling units will be occupied by 2008 Detailed information on the traffic volumes generated by this development is described in the traffic forecast section of this report 3-1 4.0 Traffic Forecasts Forecasting Scenarios To effectively analyze traffic impacts for this development, traffic forecasts were developed for the years 2008 and 2010 Weekday a m and p m peak hour traffic volumes were developed for the subject intersections Analysis for the subject intersections included the following scenanos • 2007 Existing • 2008 No -Build • 2008 Build • 2010 No -Build • 2010 Build The following methodology was used to develop traffic volumes for the above scenanos • 2007 Existing Weekday a m and p m peak hour traffic volumes for this scenano were established based on peak penod traffic counts • 2008 No Build To account for natural background traffic growth, existing volumes at the subject intersection were increased at a rate of three percent per year This growth factor was established based on review of histonc traffic volume information on the surrounding roadways Trips added by the proposed Millbrook and Browns Creek residential developments were also added to the roadway system under the 2008 No - Build scenano • 2008 Build Volumes due to the proposed school were added to the 2008 No -Build volumes to establish 2008 Build volumes • 2010 No -Build To account for natural background traffic growth, existing volumes at the subject intersection were increased at a rate of three percent per year This growth factor was established based on review of histonc traffic volume information on the surrounding roadways Additional taps added by the proposed Millbrook residential development were also added to the roadway system under the 2010 No -Build scenario • 2010 Build Volumes due to the proposed school were added to the 2010 No -Build volumes to establish 2010 Build volumes School staff indicated that the typical school day will start during the 8 00 to 9 00 a m hour Staff will typically amve dunng the 7 00 to 8 00 a m and students will arrive dunng the 8 00 to 9 00 a m hour The p m peak hour for both staff and students is 3 00 to 4 00 since school 4-1 dismisses during this hour This is earlier in the day than the typical 4 00 to 5 00 peak hour of adjacent street traffic Therefore, traffic forecasts were developed for the weekday 7 00 to 8 00 a m 8 00 to 9 00 a m and 3 00 to 4 00 p m peak hours of school traffic generation Dunng the 4 00 to 5 00 p m peak hour of adjacent street traffic the school will have little impact due to the small number of trips generated dunng that time period Tnp Generation The school trip generation estimates were based on anticipated attendance and staff figures provided by St Croix Preparatory Academy The school is expected to accommodate 620 students and 55 staff upon initial opening The resulting taps are shown in Table 1 Table 1 Proposed School Tnp Generation for 620 Students Trip type A M Peak Hour Staff (7-8 am) A M Peak Hour Students (8 -9 am) School P M Peak Hour (3-4 pm) Daily In Out In Out In Out In Out Student drivers 0 0 60 0 0 60 60 60 Student drop-offs 0 0 109 109 109 109 218 218 Buses 0 0 10 10 10 10 20 20 Staff 55 0 55 0 0 55 55 55 Totals 55 0 179 119 119 234 353 353 The school is expected to accommodate 975 students and 55 staff in 2010 Using the same basis as descnbed above, the estimated trip generation for this full build -out condition is shown in Table 2 Table 2 Proposed School Tnp Generation for 975 Students Trip type A M Peak Hour Staff (7-8 am) A M Peak Hour Students (8 -9 am) School P M Peak Hour (3-4 pm) Daily In Out In Out In Out In Out Student dnvers 0 0 225 0 0 225 225 225 Student drop-offs 0 0 131 131 131 131 262 262 Buses 0 0 12 12 12 12 24 24 Staff 55 0 0 0 0 55 55 55 Totals 55 0 368 143 143 423 566 566 Tnp generation for the nearby residential development descnbed earlier in this report was estimated using data presented in the Institute of Transportation Engineers' Trip Generation, 4-2 Seventh Edition Table 3 shows the tnp generation for a m and p m peak hours on a typical weekday Table 3 Residential Weekday Tria Generation Use Size Units7 8 A M 8 9 A M 3 4 P M Daily In Out Total In Out Total In Out Total Millbrook 2008 Single family 62 DU 12 35 47 9 26 35 30 17 47 593 Townhouses 56 DU 4 21 25 3 15 18 15 7 22 328 Browns Creek 2008 Single family 15 DU 3 8 11 2 6 8 7 4 11 144 Millbrook 2010 Single family 54 DU 10 31 41 8 23 30 26 15 41 517 Townhouses 21 DU 2 7 9 1 6 7 5 3 8 123 Tnp Distnbution Percentages Tnp distribution percentages for the school tnps were established based on the expected distribution of students and staff as determined by St Croix Preparatory Academy staff, the nearby roadway network, and existing and expected future traffic patterns The tnp distnbution percentages used for the development area are as follows • 20 percent to/from the west on TH 96 • 35 percent to/from the east on TH 96 • 5 percent to/from the east on Oak Glen Trail • 5 percent to/from the west on CR 64 • 20 percent to/from the south on Neal Avenue • 15 percent to/from the east on CR 64 Traffic Volumes Tnp generation estimates for the proposed school were then assigned to the surrounding road network based on the above tnp distnbution types and percentages Traffic volumes for the subject intersections are shown in Figure 3 (a m peak hours) and Figure 4 (p m peak hour) 4-3 7-8 AM 0/0/0/0/0 3//347/372/372 4/4/23/4/23 144I1853/ B62�� 4JWL DELLWOOD RD/TH 98 'L_ / /oNo c- -//0//0 Tf N SCHOOL ACCESS t_ 1/1/4/1/4 r 48/47/47/50/50 Tr OAK GLEN TRAIL es--2/20 //ate shsrma 60/ __� 9/9/9/10/10 CR64 --( Wenck N NOT TO SCALE 8-9 AM Z 0 a00 .114 F�� �173/186/186 r 6/6/68/7/136 mono _ot 120/136/136/152/152 - 3/11/47/17/91 -� 2007 L70S11NG 2008 NO-BU 2008 NUILD ILD 2010 NO-SUILD Fri-7- 2010 BUILD )3(0M/0/M/M 51-4 DELLWOOD RD/TH 96 t. -/ /65/ /79 - - -/ /54/ /84 SCHOOL ACCESS t 2/2/11/2/20 16/16/18/17/17 Tr OAK GLEN TRAIL t_. 7/8/35/10/65 39/40/40/43/43 11/11/11/12/12 1/2/11/2/20 _± 4/4/4/4/4 TRAFFIC STUDY FOR ST CROIX PREPARATORY ACADEMY IN STILLWATER, MN 4ftf se,(, CR 64 FIGURE 3 A.M PEAK HOUR TURNING MOVEMENT VOLUMES 4-4 3-4 PM 000 a� 00 0oa .114 w t__ 0/0/0/0/0 ,(-_ 129/147/147/164/164 r- 616/47/7/57 2/212/212 217/231/231/249/249 _ 4/9/33/13/42 W tt 4 .114 DELLWOOD RD/TH 96 '_ /-/129/-/233 /4105/-/190 Tr 5 SCHOOL ACCESS 0/0/8/017 f— 19/20/20/21/21 OAK GLEN TRAIL t__ 13/19/37/23/44 /35/35 18/19/1 9/20/20 6/9/15/10/17 ___t 39/40/40/43/43 —, 9/9/9/10/10 —y r-riAlWenck 1 CR 64 TRAFFIC STUDY FOR ST CROIX PREPARATORY ACADEMY IN STILLWATER, MN N t NOTTO SCALE 2007 EXISTING 2008 NO -BUILD 20 1BUILD FFF- 2010 BUILD FIGURE 4 P M PEAK HOUR TURNING MOVEMENT VOLUMES 4-5 5.0 Traffic Analyses Level of Service Weekday a m and p m peak hour capacity analyses were completed for the 2007 Existing, 2008 No -Build, 2008 Build 2010 No -Build and 2010 Build scenanos The initial analyses assumed existing intersection control and geometncs Capacity analysis results are presented in terms of level of service (LOS), which ranges from A to F LOS A represents the best intersection operation, with very little delay for each vehicle using the intersection LOS F represents the worst intersection operation with excessive delay Results of the capacity analyses are presented in Figure 5 and Figure 6 Dunng the weekday 7-8 am hour, all movements at all intersections operate at LOS C or better under existing, 2008, and 2010 conditions Therefore, all movements will operate at acceptable levels of service both without and with the proposed school in place Dunng the weekday 8-9 am hour, all movements at all intersections operate at LOS C or better under existing 2008, and 2010 conditions Therefore, all movements will operate at acceptable levels of service both without and with the proposed school in place Dunng the weekday 3-4 pm hour, all movements at all intersections operate at LOS D or better under existing 2008 and 2010 conditions Therefore, all movements will operate at acceptable levels of service both without and with the proposed school in place Overall, all of the analysis intersections have adequate capacity to accommodate the traffic generated by the proposed school facility Impacts to Oak Glen Trail As shown in the volume figures, we anticipate a small amount of school traffic will use Oak Glen Trail to travel between TH 96 and Neal Avenue This route is much more indirect than using Neal Avenue directly The amount of traffic assigned to Oak Glen Trail equates to approximately 35 vehicles per day in 2008 and 57 vehicles per day in 2010 This amount of increase will not have significant impacts on the operations of Oak Glen Trail Therefore, we do not anticipate any significant issues related to school traffic on Oak Glen Trail Potential Need to Improve Neal Avenue North of the School Access As shown in the site plan, Neal Avenue will continue to be a gravel surfaced roadway north of the proposed school access point If the roadway is properly maintained on a regular basis, the 5-1 gravel surface will not be a significant issue If the surface is allowed to detenorate, students and staff traveling to the school from TH 96 may seek out alternative routes to avoid the roadway Other possible routes include CR 64 from the west and Oak Glen Trail from the north and east Encouraging additional school trips on Oak Glen Trail is not desirable and not the intended use of that roadway Therefore, proper maintenance of the gravel surface is very important From a traffic operations standpoint, replacing the gavel surface with bituminous would be the best solution Operations at the TH 96/Neal Avenue Intersection As shown in the volume figures, the westbound left turn volume onto Neal Avenue from TH 96 will increase significantly as the school traffic increases While the overall level of service for this movement remains acceptable with existing geometncs, the safety of this movement would be improved with the construction of a westbound bypass lane on TH 96 We recommend that the feasibility of constructing a westbound bypass lane be further investigated as part of this project As shown in the level of service figures, the northbound approach operates at LOS D dunng the 2010 Build p m peak hour scenario While still an acceptable result, this change is due to the increase in volume dunng the exiting penod after school releases The level of service for the northbound approach would be improved by widening and paving the Neal Avenue approach to allow for separate left and nght turn lanes We recommend that this option be considered if operations issues anse at this intersection in the future Geometries on the School Parking Lot Access Dnveway In order to better accommodate the exiting traffic after school releases, we recommend that the access driveway from the parking lot consist of two exiting lanes and one entenng lane This will allow for separate left and nght turn lanes 5-2 7-8AM &9AM Z FNNNNA 4— NNNNA NNNNA r NNNNA —* NNNNA - m II Jy4 DELLWOOD RD/TH 98 t_ -1 IN /A c- I -IN /A Tr as SCHOOL ACCESS t— NNNNA NNNNA OAK GLEN TRAIL NNNNA A A/A/A/A NNNNA _t NNNNA _- NNNNA —� CR04 Wenck N NOT TO SCALE NNNNA NNNNANNNNA 2007 OUSTING � NNO-BBUILD BU 2010 NO -BUILD 2010 BUILD NNNNA NN aA -4 41Tr aaa DELLWOOD RD/TH 98 -/ /SI-/B 1/B1/B tr as SCHOOL ACCESS NNNA/B NNNA/B OAK GLEN TRAIL t_ NNNNA 4— NNNNA NNNNA NNNNA NNNNA . NNNNA TRAFFIC STUDY FOR ST CROIX PREPARATORY ACADEMY IN STILLWATER, MN CR84 FIGURE 5 A.M PEAK HOUR LEVELS OF SERVICE 5-3 3-4 PM 1 N //A AA A/A/A/A/A Wenck A/A/A/A/A _' NNA/A/A __ NNAINA b 11, ZZ as as 4.4 ill +1yy ltr IN age °ELLWOOD RD/TH 96 '- -/ /B/ac 4— / /B/-/C SCHOOL ACCESS 'C— NNA/AB 4— A/A/A/AB t_ A/A/NA/A A/A/A/A/A ,c— A/A/A/A/A OAK GLEN TRAIL NNNNA ___± NA/AA/n A 4 cR64 TRAFFIC STUDY FOR ST CROIX PREPARATORY ACADEMY IN STILLWATER, MN Ali N t NOT TO SCALE 2007IDIELMNG 2008 NO -BUILD 7- 2008 BUILD 201 o NO -BUILD zolo BUILD FIGURE 6 P M PEAK HOUR LEVELS OF SERVICE 5-4 6.0 Conclusions and Recommendations Based on the information presented in this report, we have established the following conclusions • We estimate that the proposed school will generate 55 trips during the 7-8 a m hour, 298 tnps dunng the 8-9 a m hour, and 353 trips dunng the 3-4 p m hour in 2008 We estimate that the proposed school will generate 55 trips during the 7-8 a m hour, 511 taps during the 8-9 a m hour, and 566 traps during the 3-4 p m hour in 2010 • The traffic forecasts developed for this study include trips generated by nearby proposed residential developments • All analysis intersections operate at acceptable levels of service with existing geometrics and control under both the 2008 and 2010 scenanos • The amount of traffic assigned to Oak Glen Trail equates to approximately 35 vehicles per day in 2008 and 57 vehicles per day in 2010 This amount of increase will not have significant impacts on the operations of Oak Glen Trail Therefore, we do not anticipate any significant issues related to school traffic on Oak Glen Trail • Proper maintenance of the gravel portion of Neal Avenue is very important in order to avoid dispersing school traffic to other nearby paved roadways From a traffic operations standpoint, replacing the gavel surface with bituminous would be the best solution • We recommend that the feasibility of constructing a westbound bypass lane on TH 96 at Neal Avenue be further investigated as part of this project • The level of service for the northbound Neal Avenue approach at TH 96 would be improved by widening and paving the Neal Avenue approach to allow for separate left and nght turn lanes We recommend that this option be considered if operations issues arse at this intersection in the future 6-1 r E IIRTHP A 0 M I N 1 E 0 A Planning Commission DATE June 7, 2007 APPLICANT River Valley Restoration PROPERTY OWNERS Amy and Sean McDonough REQUEST CASE NO 07-33 A variance to the minimum lot size requirement to allow for an addition to existing single-family dwelling and new two car garage LOCATION 907 6th Ave S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DISTRICT SFSL - Single Family Small Lot ZONING RB - Two -Family District PC DATE June 11, 2007 REVIEWERS Community Dev Director PREPARED BY Michel Pogge, City Planner AA 3-P DISCUSSION The applicant is requesting a variance to Chapter 31-1 12(5)a 2 of the Stillwater City Code to allow for an addition to existing single-family dwelling and new two car garage on a legal non -conforming lot that fails to meet the minimum lot size requirement of 7,500 square feet The existing lot is only 6,732 square feet EVALUATION OF REQUEST A variance may be granted only when all of the following conditions are found 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 property at 907 6th Ave S was platted with Hersey Staples lot Addition in July of 1871 The lot has not been modified since it was originally platted The current owner purchased the property and building in their current condition The nonconforming lot size was not created by the property owner In the case the size of the lot has created a hardship 406 South Fifth Street Page 2 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 This property is zoned as two-family residential which allows single farruly and two- family uses Without the variance the property owner would be denied the right to add an addition to the property The proposed addition meets all other zoning code requirements including impervious coverage requirements The granting of the variance would not convey a special privilege that the property owner does not already enjoy 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 addition and garage will meet all proposed setback and the maximum impervious coverage requirement of the RB zoning district Therefore, 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 FINDINGS 1 That the hardship is peculiar to the property and that it is not created by any act of the owner In this context, personal financial difficulties, loss of prospective profits and neighboring violations are not factors entering into the justification of 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 406 South Fifth Street Page 3 ALTERNATIVES The Planning Commission has the following options 1 Approve the requested variance to the minimum lot requirement for all lots in the RB district [31-1 12(5)a 2] since an affirmative finding on the required conditions for a variance was made by staff Additionally, staff would suggest that the following conditions for approval a All revisions to the approved plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director b The garage shall be hmited to 22 x 22 in order to remain under the maximum permitted building coverage on the lot 2 Deny the requested variance to the minimum lot requirement for all lots in the RB district [31-1 12(5)a 2] If the Commission chooses to deny the variance the commission needs to make an appropriate finding 3 Continue the public hearing until the July 9, 2007 Planning Comrrussion meeting The 60 day decision deadline for the request is July 17, 2007 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approved the requested variance Attachments Applicant's Form, Letter, and Site Plan May 17, 2007 City of Stillwater Planning Commission 216 Fourth Street N Stillwater, MN 55082 Dear Members of the Planning Commission Please accept this application for a vanance to construct a two -car garage and a master suite addition at 907 6th Avenue South, Stillwater The second -story addition of 544 feet will add a bedroom, bathroom, laundry and closet space to our home It will also add a porch to the back of the house The small two -car garage with loft will be built five feet from all property lines Thank you for your consideration Sinc rely 4 i /74-- Arhy and Sean McDonough 907 6th Avenue S Stillwater, MN 55082 Case 07-33 907 6th Ave S Amy and Sean McDonough N A 0 30 60 120 180 1 inch equals 100 feet City of Stillwater MN 1 I 1 Feet Community Development Department 240 216 North Fourth Street Stillwater MN 55082 651 430 8820 — 651 430 8810 fax KfVEr< �E-AN Th A _ALLy W w N f`c DO k[ O LI K E� TO F AT ION ci A v, S. m IP" 4111 M 9 ij I gi- n r 0 1 0 r -4 -11 0 0 c 11 3 v 0 —'G)n 4- 101�j111 0// l -I' O' Siam 0 7 -0 r 2 ti-c‘ / Le 0-1-8-4,9v Uno a r 14 jr' LTG Wf�LL N A\ 1_O O r< 1._ MO MORT 0U 110.1 MAOE TO E61ER TIME RUC Ma *EMLTE UO COIRLTC WAIVER. TIE WERE RP, RED 100 REMO O 41ET31ERSOO 000 ARP MO IS TEIERI 4g0TECTR OR 1001NO MO WUAU1TIO 4R EAPREssof a MIED. TIEv MP[ NTONEO A3 GLIDE 101 RLCC6 MO ARE E*0R3 mms*0 E MOUT 031EI11LK1 a R CT IT C DO 111100115115.111 V TTR F*D9. MEN OR USER Or TWO RUC T *ERF( ALL ONCC4C, GETY.! OEV 00 4 coo o4 veer TJToe uD TRIICTU41 000Olw3 MONO M UNKs RN APO NR ULA IOW 0E ows10 IUTEWUI DRUTNO S DOWL 4*1. VOILES M0 TURRRT 10 MMT ERIgn. 011400, .IOO E CM410Es OR NROEEII COCTRUCTOM MTN= ALL WORK 00 026 N CRRWICE w0M 01‘101.1E 3 EON LOGIC CODE] •IN O1OMU1[E0 NSW op Po Pc N (No PAIL OrL 5 1NCL t( it *6 /wp.,Appp IN �' of 8 53)N1NO10 NV 7300) 010 OV 11 315VNLN 10NV 13O3 N 000 1 VW TV 5001171 101.11011O01 430W1•B W „nO we 'C.. VO 'Wmn un No u4 n 01 8341517 'TN 10 f30 3 701.4301 70010.1Y 31703 F 10 VTN100 0H1 /0110f afl iLL ON0IE041 411Q0.03 1761177115 OIN 'QO1 VOW315 'WO 000011S WM A3O'81V11b 00,0314 11 MGM OWN 0 umn 0000 O0O13011301“11.0035L i11 O 11 13N MI N0 TW 00) MOO' 313V30031.001 34V OWE 010701 BOA amp 40 Oi01311i iM Ai11 1171 4 40 005510i WV mimeo ON OM 1101711712 01 413111O30 03tl315 0311 10N an 01.1 51OO13321MO 5 531034 NM 030V6 4 343N 3Nl 13A3NON 7 714101 QO i1VM0n i1V SN N 04341 31.1O3 1 ia1N 1M3 51N is a M13A3 A a iT�'`Yv 7i Asit L9cl 8c auo , L11 Catrut d Gi NI S Cs � Ghti4 . 40 NIG1 -1 a 1`c,4-t �1S0ozA 0.,o1?13L+1A 37( l9 N (H S _1:1\4 i,) ,/ . 01 • 63O11MG0D 0M 13000 1000 0A 31 19 31000WI M101 30110110.00 N 24e0 30 01 1024Tv '90 4134 ,101L100/110013 010.0161 00 91,1000 3 9 001 9101000'90W9 WV 01 11124102104 9211011 '3 ? WWIQ 9 MUM) TIRp11N Watt* F 101011I 11.1 0M 10 WIWI all Morin Wl0W100 TM11310111 O1I 1001013930'90 10W 3111 5'01 A39 LI1130 910N6110 Tt &ASA 01 0O11 i1041 p IWI 00191ND tW11V iLL O A1IV119011011 pll p 11 MUM, 10061 3110100310O01 In 011M 009130 02 30100 91 031094 3011311 0!1M d0 0501113 30I 10114100 M On pI240110 0LN1WCl19' I1011i030 1241 021 O/M p90111O1110 110101 mil O MEM MIA 1241 10A11011 7131310O9111111001 as• 0011 3011 WWI 01 3011.1 ON 11O101151/3 -/ITI\)r4l q0 L 181 r- v\ v\ 0cA �Qe N-�oLLIL Cn WE/7T E i--GVAT I ON m ToP PLT Sc4_T 1 SID1N&� TR I INA -r-o I �✓�TC 1 I-}OuSE ADDITION till -tH-ILK CONC. SLAT 9" Tk ICK ERI W O\I N >2-a13 >- Ho" 0C Lop AFr N A SAC-, Lo i>L N j�lORTi f 1=LE'//'T ON IzA>P-.. /1\-p1.1gLT S H'rIULE 15 � b FF1-T 1Gtr+ 4-rL_lt I-1-ARple LAP tilol/4, Nbu6E WMY D 12 to C A R,4 C-, E o1--t 1_ I_ 1 1 GA IAA �i R oo F- PL-A.N FL-{ 1Z4FTER (Wept - I N TRU55 Per GF g