Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007-08-13 CPC Packeti THE BIRTHPLACE OF MINNESOTA CITY OF STILLWATER PLANNING COMMISSION NOTICE OF MEETING The City of Stillwater Planning Commission will meet on Monday, August 13, 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 July 9, 2007 MINUTES 3 PUBLIC HEARINGS 3 01 Case No 07-37 A preliminary plat that subdivides one lot into four lots, a rezoning from AP, Agricultural Preservation, to LR, Lakeshore Residential, and a variance to the lot width requirements located at 1133 Nightengale Blvd Damon Francis, applicant Continued from July 9, 2007 Meeting 3 02 Case No 07-27 A variance request to the maximum allowed impervious surface coverage and lot size regulations for the construction of a 24' x 24' garage located at 212 Maple Street West in the RB, Two Family Residential District Don and Cheryl Scoff, applicants 3 03 Case No 07-39 A variance request to the side yard setback for the construction of a storage garage located at 1220 1st St No in the RB, Two Family Residential District Lee Erickson, applicant 3 04 Case No 07-40 An amendment to a PUD for the construction of a 12' x 56' temporary building for use by sentence to serve located at 14949 62"d St N in the PA, Public Administration District Don Theisen, Washington County Government Center, applicant 3 03 Case No 07-41 A special use permit for an accessory dwelling unit and a variance to the lot size regulations and to the rear and side yard setbacks located at 601 South Fourth Street in the RB, Two Family Residential District Mark S Balay Architects, representing Tim and Amy McKee, applicant 3 05 Case No 07-42 A variance request to the side and rear yard setbacks and maximum lot coverage for the construction of a garage located at 309 West Churchill Street in the RB, Two Family Residential District Mark S Balay Architects, representing Phyllis Hicks and Dave Schleh, applicant 3 06 Case No 07-43 A special use permit application for transfer of ownership for William Sauntry Mansion located at 626 N 4th Street in the RB, Two Family Residential District Tom and Sandy Lynom, applicants 4 OTHER BUSINESS 4 01 Zoning Ordinance reorganization review and comment CITY HALL 216 NORTH FOURTH STREET • STILLWATER MINNESOTA 55082 PHONE 651 430 8800 • WEBSITE www ci stillwater mn us City of Stillwater Planning Commission July 9, 2007 Present Dave Middleton Chairperson Suzanne Block Gregg Carlsen Mike Dahlquist Dan Kalmon Wally Milbrandt David Peroceschi and Charles Wolden Mr Middleton called the meeting to order at 7 05 p m Approval of minutes Ms Block seconded by Mr Peroceschi moved approval of the minutes of June 11 2007 as submitted Motion passed unanimously PUBLIC HEARINGS Case No 07-24 A variance request to the maximum allowed impervious surface and to the minimum side yard setback for construction of a 34 x 40 two-story addition 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 at 1826 Northwestern Ave in the BP-0 Business Park Office District River Valley Place LLC Summer Kuehn applicant Gary Bressler architect was present representing the applicant Mr Pogge reviewed the staff report and findings He stated the applicant plans to mitigate storm water runoff by utilizing a green roof system and he said calculations indicate that if the system works properly there will be less runoff leaving the site that currently does Regarding parking Mr Pogge said the applicant has an agreement with St Croix Orthopaedics that provides for 20 spaces at all times and an additional 81 spaces during evening hours The applicant also has an agreement with ReMax for use of 34 spaces during the evening hours for a total of 95 spaces at all times and an additional 115 spaces during evening hours for a total of 210 spaces He stated the applicant has submitted parking calculations indicating parking demand is 206 spaces and he said staff is generally in agreement with those calculations Mr Pogge noted that shared parking is allowed with a special use permit and he said if the use changes the City has a right to review and revoke the permit Mr Kalmon asked if the applicant was meeting the intent of the ordinance by mitigating the volume of runoff or whether contaminants such as phosphorus were still an issue Mr Pogge noted that the original intent of limiting impervious surface was one of aesthetics but over time runoff and water quality have become issues Mr Pogge stated the proposed green roof system does decrease runoff volume and should provide some filtration of contaminants Mr Pogge stated Brown s Creek Watershed District has reviewed the plan and provided positive comment Mr Milbrandt pointed out that most of the site in question is already impervious surface and the addition will result in minimal increase Mr Bressler provided samples of the green roof vegetation and stated the applicant had worked with Rusty Schmidt of the Washington Conservation District in determining runoff calculations Mr Dahlquist said he was more concerned with the side yard variance than the small increase in the impervious surface Mr Bressler stated they are requesting the side yard variance in order to square off the building Mr Kalmon said he appreciated the applicant working with the Watershed and Conservation District to find ways to mitigate runoff and improve water quality Mr Middleton opened the public hearing No comments were received and the hearing was closed Mr Carlsen stated he had driven by the business at 10 a m and could not find a place to park and questioned how peak parking demand would be handled during the day It was City of Stillwater Planning Commission July 9, 2007 noted swimming lessons are going on at this time and 10 a m probably was the peak demand time currently Mr Dahlquist noted that availability of parking is self-limiting and since staff agreed with the applicants calculations regarding parking, he did not think that was an issue However Mr Dahlquist reiterated his concern with the lack of hardship in the request for the side yard variance Mr Wolden stated the angle of the property is the hardship and he pointed out the area of the variance is adjacent to a property where nothing can be constructed in the future Mr Wolden moved approval as conditioned Mr Carlsen seconded the motion Mr Peroceschi said he was concerned about the green roof garden Mr Kalmon agreed there can be issues with the systems and noted the systems need ongoing maintenance and a watering plan Mr Bressler demonstrated the irrigation system for the green roof Motion to approve as conditioned passed 7-1 with Mr Peroceschi voting no Case No 07-27 A variance request to the maximum allowed impervious surface coverage for construction of a 24 x 35 garage at 212 Maple St W in the RB Two Family Residential District Don and Cheryl Schoff applicants Mr Schoff and contractor Manay Smith appeared before the Commission Mr Pogge reviewed the request and staff findings Mr Pogge noted the applicant could rebuild a garage but can t increase the square footage of a structure as this is a non -conforming lot Mr Schoff explained that the garage was present when they purchased the property He stated there are large cracks in the cement and the slab needs to be replaced Mr Schoff noted the existing garage is not a true two -car garage and they would like to reconfigure the structure so it looks like the rest of the neighborhood He pointed out that neighboring property owners have indicated support of the plans Mr Smith pointed out the plans are for a 24 x 24 garage with shop area The applicant does metal work as a hobby and needs the space for all his equipment Mr Smith stated Mr Milbrandt asked if the applicant had considered going to a second story rather than add the shop area to the garage level Mr Pogge pointed out a second story would require a lot of 10 000 square feet as it would be considered an accessory dwelling unit Mr Middleton opened the public hearing No comments were received and the hearing was closed Mr Dahlquist said he was concerned with the size of the requested structure and the need for a significant variance Mr Dahlquist suggested he would not be opposed to constructing a usable garage but the addition of the shop created the problem in his view Mr Milbrandt agreed that he would have no problem allowing construction of a garage Mr Kalmon said he could not support the additional massing on an infill property Mr Dahlquist seconded by Mr Milbrandt moved to deny Case No 07-27 without prejudice Mr Milbrandt explained that denying without prejudice would allow the applicant to submit new plans without the normal one-year waiting period Motion to deny without prejudice passed unanimously Case No 07-36 A variance to the required front yard setback (20 required 16 requested) to the interior side yard setback (20 required 6 '/4 requested) and variance to allow up to two accessory buildings larger than 120 square feet at 502 W Churchill St in the RB Two Family Residential District Mark Balay Architects representing Brent and Chris Peterson applicants City of Stillwater Planning Commission July 9, 2007 Mark Balay and Brent and Chris Peterson were present Community Development Department Intern Nicole Ormand reviewed the staff report and findings and recommendation that all three requested variances be granted Mr Milbrandt asked about the front yard setback it was noted that variance is required because this is a non -conforming lot Mr Dahlquist asked about the historical significance of the existing garage and whether the Heritage Preservation Commission would have to review plans Mr Pogge explained that any structure over 50 years ago is considered to be potentially historically significant the HPC would have to review plans only if the applicants desired to remove the structure Mr Peroceschi asked if the roof on the new structure would be the same as the existing building Mr Balay stated that is a budget issue — the roofs will be of the same material but the material may not be steel It was explained that the Peterson plan to construct a 22x24 attached garage with living space above Mr Balay noted that the existing garage is a one- horse carriage house that doesn t accommodate modern vehicles It also was noted that the third accessory structure on the lot is a playhouse Mr Middleton opened the public hearing No comments were received and the hearing was closed Mr Wolden seconded by Mr Carlsen moved approval as conditioned Mr Dahlquist expressed a concern about the number of accessory structures on the lot Mr Pogge explained that an attached garage is considered an accessory structure in the RB District Mr Peroceschi asked if the proposed attached garage would be considered an accessory dwelling unit Mr Pogge responded in the negative Mr Milbrandt said he would like a determination from the HPC that the existing garage is historically significant Mr Peterson pointed out the carriage house/garage matches the main house and belongs there Motion to approve as conditioned passed 7-1 with Mr Dahlquist voting no Case No 07-37 A preliminary plat that subdivides one lot into four lots a rezoning from AP Agricultural Preservation to LR Lakeshore Residential and a variance to the lot width requirements located at 1133 Nightingale Blvd Damon Francis applicant Mr Middleton announced that this case had been continued to the August 13 Planning Commission meeting Mr Middleton opened and closed the public hearing Mr Wolden seconded by Mr Peroceschi moved to continue the hearing until Aug 13 Motion passed unanimously OTHER BUSINESS St Croix Preparatory Academy — extension of a special use permit for a temporary module at 216 W Myrtle St Case No SUP/04-87 Mr Pogge explained that the Academy is requesting a one-year extension of the special use permit for an existing temporary module at their location on Myrtle Street Mr Peroceschi seconded by Mr Dahlquist moved approval of the requested one-year extension Motion passed unanimously Zoning Ordinance reorganization review and comment — Mr Pogge explained that the ordinance had been reorganized to make the document more readable He stated while obvious inconsistencies were corrected no substantive changes had been made He stated any City of Stillwater Planning Commission July 9, 2007 substantive changes would be made once the Comprehensive Plan has been completed Mr Pogge asked members to review the document and bring comments to the August meeting so a public hearing could be scheduled for September • Mr Kalmon stated he had an additional comment to make regarding the Comprehensive Plan update presented to the Commission at its June 11 meeting Mr Kalmon stated his comment involved the process itself Specifically he said he would like to see some accounting of all the comments submitted during the visioning sessions rather than just a listing of broad categories of comments Mr Pogge noted that it would be difficult to do comment by comment analysis as 300 comments have been submitted at some sessions However Mr Pogge stated there will be both summary and more in depth analysis of comments in the consultants next report to the Council and Commissions • Mr Kalmon brought up the issue of the public s perception of the need for an unbiased third party analysis of certain data as evidenced by comments made during discussion of St Croix Preparatory Academy s traffic analysis Mr Milbrandt and Mr Pogge pointed out that it is staffs role to provide unbiased analysis and expertise Mr Kalmon suggested that there needs to be an educational piece to let the public know that staff has reviewed and found analysis to be correct Mr Dahlquist seconded by Mr Carlsen moved to adjourn the meeting at 8 45 p m Motion passed unanimously Respectfully submitted Sharon Baker Recording Secretary 1 jwa ter 1 BIRTF 4 M N IJ F 0 1 A DATE August 8, 2007 CASE NO 07-37 APPLICANT Damon Francis, Advent Builders REQUESTS Preliminary Plan, Zoning Map Amendment, and Variance LOCATION 1133 Nightengale Estates COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DISTRICT SFSL - Single Family Small Lot CURRENT ZONING AP - Agricultural Preserve PROPOSED ZONING LR - Lakeshore Residential PC DATE August 13, 2007 REVIEWERS Community Dev Director PREPARED BY Michel Pogge, City Planner Pil 11 DISCUSSION The applicant is requesting review and approval of a preliminary plan, zoning map amendment and a variance to the lot width requirements Once the application was received by the City public hearing notices were published and mailed as required by law After the notices were completed, it was deterrruned that the application was incomplete and staff rejected the application Since the public hearing notices were mailed and published before it was rejected the Commission is required to open the public hearing At that point the Commission can close the hearing without the need to take any future action RECOMMENDATION Open the public hearing as required and close it without taking any action E BIR 11 A LO M N I E OIA Planning Commission DATE August 8, 2007 CASE NO 07-27 APPLICANT Marlay Smith PROPERTY OWNER Don and Cheryl Schoff REQUEST Variances to the maximum lot coverage and minimum lot size LOCATION 212 Maple St W COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DISTRICT SFSL - Single Family Small Lot ZONING RB - Two-family District PC DATE August 13, 2007 REVIEWERS Community Dev Director PREPARED BY Michel Pogge, City Planner DISCUSSION The applicant is requesting a variance from the maximum lot coverage and minimum lot size standards in order to construct a new 24' x 24 garage The property is zoned RB and currently has an existing single-family home The lot is 6,184 square feet in size Currently there is an existing 20x24 garage on the property The apphcant desires to demohsh the existing garage and build a 24x24 accessory structure for a total of 576 square feet Garages in the RB district are allowed to be no larger than 1,000 square feet or 10% of the lot size which ever is smaller In this case the maximum allowed garage size on the property is 618 square feet Currently the site exceeds the maximum lot coverage of 25% by 0 28% or 17 75 square feet The proposed new garage will add 96 square feet of impervious cover on the site and mcreasethe site s overall building coverage to 26 8% The driveway is proposed to cover 23 55% of the site bringing the total site coverage to 50 35% The applicant has submitted storm water calculations to the City The apphcant has proposed to reshape the rear of the lot in order to keep as much of the storm water on the property and absorbed into the land The City Engmeer has reviewed the calculations and found that if the system is installed by the applicant correctly and if the area provides for the same absorption rate as shown in the tests then the amount of storm water run off will be less than what currently occurs 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 is a 6,187 square foot lot If the lot met the minimum lot size of 7,500 square feet the addition of a 24 x 24 garage would not cause the lot to exceed the maximum impervious coverage The property owner purchased the lot as is and this is not a condition that they created Staff finds this to be a hardship pecuhar to the property and not created by the property owner 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 A garage size of 24 x 24 is considered a standard sized for today s hvmg and as noted previously if this lot conformed to the lot area requirement of 7 500 square feet no vanance would be required Therefore staff finds that the variances are necessary to allow the property owner to construct a garage that meets the needs of current modern vehicles along with the preservation and enjoyment rights possessed by other properties in the same district and m the same vicinity 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 m 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 has implemented maximum impervious coverage standards The applicant has proposed a storm water system on their property that will reduce the amount of storm water run off leaving the site even with the increase in impervious surface area The proposal as submitted will not be a detriment to property owners in the community and will not impair the purpose and intent of the zoning code 212 Maple St W Page 3 FINDINGS 1 That the hardship is peculiar to the property and is not created by acts of the owner 2 That a variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights possessed by other properties m the same district and m 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 will not materially impair the purpose and intent of this title It would not necessary adversely affect the Comprehensive Plan ALTERNATIVES The Planning Commission has the following options 1 Approve the requested variances to the maximum lot coverage requirement, minimum lot size, and the minimum setback If the Commission chooses to grant the variances the Comnssion needs to make an affirmative finding on the required conditions for a variance 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 hm ted to a 24' by 24 structure c The installation of the storm water control shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineering Department prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the garage 2 Deny the requested variances A denial needs to be accompanied by substantive findings of fact 3 Continue the public hearing until the September 10, 2007 Planning Commission meeting The 60 day decision deadline for the request is September 14, 2007 RECOMMENDATION Select alternative number 1 and approve the request as conditioned Attachments Apphcant s Form, Site Plan elevations, letter, and letters from adjoining property owners PLANNING ADMINISTRATION APPLICATION FORM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY OF STILLWATER 216 NORTH FOURTH STREET STILLWATER MN 55082 Case No Date Filed Fee Paid Receipt No ACTION REQUESTED Special/Conditional Use Permit Variance Resubdivision Subdivision' Comprehensive Plan Amendment* Zoning Amendment* Planning Unit Development Certificate of Compliance *An escrow fee is also required to offset the costs of attorney and engineering fees The fees for requested action are attached to this application The applicant is responsible for the completeness and accuracy of all forms and supporting material submitted in connection with anyapplication All support►ngmater►al (► e photos, sketches, etc) submitted with application becomes the propertyof the Cityof Stillwater Sixteen (16) copies of supporting material is required If application ►s 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. IA.t if) S Assessor s Parcel No 1 / (GEO Coe) ` _ Zoning District Description of Project I err-1 U 1 i S h c XI sh rl(.L clttilf�`i e 10u+-• I t 1 1 Vf 7 13I,t L Id la net.. CI n r 1l(i td, 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 00)n'I.( I,rrli t S.L1i- `'1 Mailing Address 21 Z 1,,‘: In op 1C S City State Zip S (1. , ► R v. p fz M r I f In e5`>e}E ZCity Telephone No Signature L• i 3 0 7 (Signature/is required) Representative 1 1 I I iZ- (A 9 A J ) 1 i Mailing Address -7 Z 1 l\I, 3 `ter) S ( 5ff IIt,k,nl-z-r, trnn '356i2_ Telephone No (,r- f LI 30 34 kri State - Zip Signature " SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTIO i Lot Size (dimensions) I x ) ,2 3 Land Area L LE,S S r Height of Buildings Stories Feet Principal Z. Accessory __I_ ___i__Le nat re is required) Total Building floor area square feet Existing ((pb 5 square feet Proposed square feet Paved Impervious Area j'jlS square feet No of off street parking spaces 2- _0615 H n T r,- I Pi .-riaPP cR I 7.. Q 0 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 authonzed representative ❑ Building plansclearty dimensioned and scaled (16 copies) / p The site plan showing extenor 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) lit All adjacent streets or nght of ways labeled i / -- '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) exisfng and proposed f r the site (if the site is in a Histonc Distnct additional design detail maybe required) Distances between all structures and betNeen all property lines or easements and structures ©/ DiShow Adjacent buildings to this application site and dimension from property line 12/All major existing trees on the site (4 inch caliber or greater) giving type location size and other site coverage conditions. Locate all off street parking spaces dnveNays loading docks and maneuvenng areas with dimensions for nveway widths and parking space sizes Pedestnan vehicular and service points of ingress and egress distances betNeen dnveways and street corners Landscape plan showing number of plants location varieties and container sizes (landscape plan) Existing and proposed grading plan showing direction and grade of drainage through and off the site indicate any proposed drainage channels or containment facilities I►J 'not and existing street dedications and improvements such as sidewalks curbing and pavement (may /not be required) iApplications 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 Show existing significant natural features such as rock outcroppings or water courses (existing and roposed marked accordingly) Letter to the Planning Commission describing the proposed use in detail and indicating hoN this use will /effect and compatibility with adjacent uses or areas Other such data as may be required to permit the planning commission to make the required findings for approval of the specific typof application j� 1 �lr ,` r Applic.intro vner s;66nature 51/4,./(.: 2 Date 5cihrnr1461C--C 7/14 /6 7 July 16, 2007 Community Development Department City of Stillwater 216 N Fourth St Stillwater, MN 55082 Planning commission members We are resubmitting our application for vanances (Case No 07-27) that was reviewed and denied without prejudice by the planning commission July 9 As you may recall, we seek to replace our existing 24-by-20-foot garage at 212 W Maple Street Following up on phone conversations with City Planner Michel Pogge July 12 and July 13, we have modified our garage plan and eliminated two of the four variances we seek 1 Maximum allowed size for an accessory building We have reduced the size of the requested garage to a standard 24-by-24-foot (576-square-foot) structure City Planner Pogge tells us this size is under the maximum allowed size, and therefore no vanance is required 2 Maximum lot coverage City Planner Pogge tells us this vanance speaks directly to impervious surface/water runoff concerns The revised garage size reduces the roof surface and the rainwater runoff we used in our storm water control plan calculations (attached) Those numbers for the larger garage (24-by-34-foot) showed we would actually be captunng more runoff than we are today with a 24- by-20-foot garage So, with the revised garage (24-by-24-foot), we would have even less runoff and even more room for a ram garden (The previous storm water control plan was reviewed by the City Engineer, who "found that if the system is installed by the applicant correctly and if the area provides for the same absorption rate as shown in the tests then the amount of storm water runoff will be less than what currently occurs ") We request this vanance and believe we have met the impervious surface/water runoff concerns of the city planner and city engineer 3 Minimum setback of an accessory structure from a pnnctpal dwelling unit City Planner Pogge verifies that the minimum setback for a garage is 6 feet from the house foundation to garage foundation Our bluepnnt (attached) has been modified, moving the proposed garage back to 7 feet from the house Therefore, no vanance is required 4 Minimum lot size City Planner Pogge tells us that the minimum lot size is 7 500 square feet Our lot is 6,184 square feet Therefore, we request this vanance Commission members, we have reduced the size of our garage, eliminated two of the four vanances previously sought and satisfied the City Engineer and City Planner's water runoff concerns We also collected signed statements of support from six of our closest neighbors who would be most directly affected by our building project Also, dunng the last planning commission meeting, you collectively left us with the strong impression that reducing the size of the garage to 24 by 24 would be acceptable you Therefore, we are hopeful you will grant the two variances we seek and allow our garage project to more forward Respectfully, 0: a&Ce tcdel Don Schoff Cheryl Burch-Schoff 212 W Maple St Stillwater, MN 55082 651-430-2764 LI V RJ W RI M' PIS rnl PIN R_ W R_IW RJW Vicinity Map 0 42 Scale in Feet MITOO•ramn woe mar= Mir cMumma _ SE July 16, 2007 Storm Water Control Plan (Case No 07-27) Don Schoff and Cheryl Burch, 212 W Maple St , Stillwater, MN (Please note These calculations were based on our initial request for a 34-by-24-foot garage This plan met the approval of the City Engineer Since we reduced the size of the garage to 24 by 24 feet, the storm water control plan should be even more acceptable ) This plan will address the city's concerns over the amount of impervious surfaces on our lot The goal of this plan is to keep as much water runoff as possible on our lot and absorbed by the ground within our lot This will prevent the run off from degrading the cities bodies of water At the present time, the house and garage on our lot have 1,589 square feet of roof area The new garage/shop would add 336 square feet for a new total of 1,925 square feet By using the back yard (grass) as a collection system, we can capture and absorb the ram run off from 1,371 square feet of our roofs or 71 % of the ram runoff from our house and garage/shop This would be the entire run off from the proposed garage/shop and the west side of our house Currently we do not capture any rain run off Therefore, even with the larger garage/shop, our ram run off would be 86 % lower than now The water collection system would work by shaping the back yard into a basin to hold the rainwater We would do this by routing the gutters from both sides of the garage/shop roof directly into the basin The house on the other hand has a steel roof Gutters would not survive the first winter on the house However, for the past 15 years, we have been collecting water from the west side of the house roof (on the ground) and piping that water under our patio onto the grass Currently this water is channeled through the center of the lot and out the northeast corner All we need to do is convert this channel to a basin that holds the water Below, I have listed the rainfall at the Minneapolis/ St Paul airport during the last year I have excluded the winter months 2006 June 2006 July 2006 August 2006 September 2006 November 2007 Apnl 2007 May Total 2 81 inches 1 29 inches 6 90 inches 2 44 inches 92 inches 1 11 inches 1 99 inches 17 46 inches or an average of 2 49 inches per month To test how this collection system would absorb water in our back yard, I have run a number of full-scale tests Below I have shown how I have calculated the amount of water that would come off of the west half of the roof of our house and the new garage/shop Roof area 1,371 square feet (1/2 of the house roof and the complete garage/shop roof) * 144 (square inches in a square foot) = 197,424 square inches of roof area If it rained 1 inch we would collect 197,424 cubic inches of water 1 gal = 231 cubic inches of water 197,424 / 231 = 855 gals of water 855 gals of water / 2 = 428 gals or'/z inch of ram Currently the way the back yard is sloped, our collection area is about 3 x 16 feet or 48 square feet After changing the contour of the yard, we can increase the settling area to 341 square feet To test the amount of water the yard will absorb, I put 428 gals of water on this 3 x 16 foot settling area This will simulate a rainfall of inch on our 1,371 square feet of roof area Thursday 6/21 - 428 gals of water (it took 79 minutes to put on this amount of water) (water was completely absorbed within 30 minutes) Fnday 6/22 - 428 gals of water (it took 79 minutes to put on this amount of water) (water was completely absorbed within 40 minutes) Saturday 6/23 - 428 gals of water (it took 79 minutes to put on this amount of water) (water was completely absorbed within 30 minutes) As you can see, if we expand our settling area by 7 times from 48 square feet to 341 square feet, we will be able to handle 7 times the'/z ram fall in the test This would be a 3 5-inch rainfall in one storm or well over a month's average rainfall Should we get a very heavy rainfall that the basin will not it An overflow will carry the excess water out the northeast comer of the lot This is the same way all of the water has flowed off or lot for the past 15 years This has never cause any problems for the neighbors or us Attached is a drawing of the backyard detailing the water basin and a picture taken at the end of the last test This picture shows how much water remained in the settling area once the flow of water was stopped All three tests were completed within 36 hours - r/itkti i Ai.)i t4--» i i 1,3.AAn7 r1) L,,o,c )v,S,iC) a lrsf�N-r %/%'/V / L 61 / - _��_ s = _" •1 -r, o i li -6 )1 .- C> SA% (_ 0 ",--7 7 ,v ,_7 1 b a 0 ,JC, S / a/ t'1 S op N� �S! x 0 i� /f 1d , avL/./o?'.ice —_ M tQ Cvi 1L1 1-y oc1,-)4", !Al o-� 'C i h2 p't 1 hrill 7N171 ka t.z aIad--3t? ukp -Pad 09 0 d -Ad m -Do' S 1 1- )71 Try ' r v0 V`d -, 5 as� °%SS1 L1 X 1L m ill ►-tC °ra V,z -15 tS' I LA) O :.-) 5 * 1-S, ---a_Ave) O ct7t-"'14) oty� J� S bQ 1 1 O+ 5 - J ns 5 .n.)'1Tcr4sodeva. -au (I 'doad 1daj cy- --).batP29 p a; od o.Jt c) ,-).eo_A A 5C3z, �zI5 +<71 �bro� to b p a5ociiJ ' `4"24j , L S ' vy+ ky o2 -413 g 46'1 lr73aa49 di( (-z) 5 XM hz s 10c x sZZ (7 -4-ru.sS 6960P5c y r — I zy 6pkrr eae.,, _ 2> 4 CLnSb'r, -bcr �16" oc . 2- ► 2 uo , plc SA-, 41- R.)sec.1 Gefuo P1P114.411 �h '-fu oa ;,Arm 05/3z os 6 eooF ciNexPVeitl �-5 utehn 3 lio-b ova- ,`� ov- is -U, Fe11- b t Err 2. ru.rs 1t.e, i l.0 s w oaf I JG e, 24410 h{,r4 cA e fL £n+Yi Lei/ Th c. ere ConLre b 1 2 " akec-p b9 i(ou w @ per- rrnci-e/ tioI 2a - .Li Pe -ban Cc n4- ) rvitp ±P-per) l' 'lib wl 6)<Go Vibe frek w, A J , > > h Pve. 'h)1 , L „ C-eedIG t I P-p a�0inl� GG}` Qv, � 7`-b►41X tL' Fr sVad 9vcniP44 Elec-�-r� c. v.ti 1 \ Ine. 't `r r r nc-% hout _�S r�col vve-6 Ski r Q ncj G 4 -1, ss p hed +-o wa-1 l w hu.r r,�A.roz.. Wall Fr ►z 2)4 H /1 W, 7 I 1 io: a s f 3 242_ (nrf - 1%yH _ 1 :Sti l lwater B I 11 a L l ! N L 0 A Planning Commission DATE APPLICANT REQUEST LOCATION COMPREHENSIVE ZONING PC DATE REVIEWERS PREPARED BY July 31, 2007 Lee Erickson CASE NO V/07-39 1) Variance to the side yard setback for the construction of a garage 2) Variance to allow a second accessory structure to be larger than 120 square feet 3) Variance to allow accessory building lot coverage to exceed 1,000 square feet 1220 1st Street North PLAN DISTRICT SFSL - Single Family Small Lot RB - Two -Family District August 13, 2007 Community Development Director, City Planner Nicole Ormand, Community Development Intern q DISCUSSION The applicant is requesting three variances to allow the construction of a garage on the cornea lot of 1220 1st Street North A variance is being requested to Chapter 31-1- 12(5)a 81 of the Stillwater City Code for the setback of the new garage The garage plan pioposes a setback of 18 feet from the back of the curb on St Croix Avenue East, however, public safety and engineering staff has requested that the garage be setback a minimum of 20 feet from the back of curb in order to allow a car to be parked in front of the garage without encroaching onto St Croix Avenue East Gai age Fi ont yard A minimum of 30 feet and set back at least 10 feet from the front set back line of the principal dwelling r 1220 1st Street Noith Page 2 Since the existing chicken coop has an area of 306 25 square feet, a variance is being requested to Chapter 31-1-12(3)c2 of City Code to allow a second accessory structure to be larger than 120 square feet on the property Furthermore, a variance is being requested to Chapter 31-1-12(3)a3 of City Code to allow the accessory building lot coverage to exceed 1,000 square feet The proposed garage at 720 square feet, combined with the area of the chicken coop at 306 25 square feet, totals to 1,026 25 square feet exceeding the 1,000 square feet maximum in the RB zoning district EVALUATION OF REQUEST A variance may be granted only when all of the following conditions are found4 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 and garage were constructed during the 19th Century, which was before the current 30 feet minimum setback requirement for garages in the RB zoning district and before Mr Erickson purchased the property Additionally, by code, the chicken coop is potentially historically significant thus restricting the garage to meet the minimum setback requirement of 30 feet Staff finds these to be hardships peculiar to the property and not created by the property owner 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 old garage was stated as substandard for modern vehicles and approved for demolition by the HPC The variances are necessary to allow the property owner to construct a garage that meets the needs of current modern vehicles along with the pi esei vation and enjoyment of rights possessed by other properties in the same district and in the same vicinity 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 setback for the new garage is 18 feet, matching the setback of the old demolished garage Although, requiring a minimum setback of 20 feet from the back of the curb on St Croix Ave East, the situation on the property will be improved Moving the garage back 2 more feet than proposed will still allow 2 No mole than two accessory buildings one private garage and one other accessory building 120 square feet maximum shall be located on a residential premise ' The maximum lot coverage of all accessory buildings including attached and detached private garages and other accessoiy buildings shall be 1 000 square feet or ten percent of the lot area whichever is less 4 City Code Ch 31 1 Subd 30 (2) d 12201st Street Noith Page 3 over 8 feet of clearance between the proposed garage and the chicken coop The garage will be 17 feet 7 inches in height, which complies with the 20 foot height maximum of garages in the RB zoning district With over 1,000 square feet in accessory buildings, the lot and impervious coverage will remain under the 25 percent requirements The authoiizing of the variances is consistent with other similar cases in the area and will have negligible impact to adjacent properties ACTION BY THE HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION Since the old garage structure was over 50 years old the applicant was required to make application for a demolition permit to the Heritage Preservation Commission (HPC) The HPC reviewed and appioved the demolition permit on June 4th, 2007 RECOMMENDATION Approve as conditioned CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1 All revisions to the approved plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director 2 The garage shall be located no closer than 20 feet to the back of curb of St Croix Avenue East Attachments Applicant's Form Letter Site Plan PLANNING ADMINISTRATION APPLICATION FORM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY OF STILLWATER 216 NORTH FOURTH STREET STILLWATER MN 55082 Case No Date Filed Fee Paid Receipt No ACTION REQUESTED Special/Conditional Use Permit Variance Resubdivision Subdivision* Comprehensive Plan Amendment Zoning Amendment Planning Unit Development * Certificate of Compliance *An escrow fee is also required to offset the costs of attorney and engineering fees The fees for requested action are attached to this application The applicant is responsible for the completeness and accuracy of all forms and supporting material submitted in connection with anyappl►cation All support►ngmater►al (i e , photos sketches etc) submitted with appl►cat►on 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 apphcation 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 / 6 IdS No SiziltOthLi Assessor s Parcel No 1 1-1 c `3) yl L '1-j Cat,, iq fL6 ) / `,�'qDescription of Project `etL V1( /L_ 9tqEo,Cyf, 2*1 J /Z?o ()04(7ge4010) dai am)/ 1L19 f 4,/2/dee (i/%IC i2/Zi ( I hereby state the foregoing statements and all data information and evidence submitted he with Zoning District 1 Representative all Mailing Address ''�—�� I7t JP►gL— Ai 71 Mailing Address City State Zip •..y 1 LLi4)ATE%2. fl1& '4— City State Zip Telephone No 11151 % iC%5 Telephone No Signature Signature (Signatureos required) (Signature is required) SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION i() L Lot Size (dimensions) /Lk x 11-Z Land Area Height of Buildings Stories Principal 3- Accessory / Feet / 12-J N / ! 0" Total Building floor area Existing -37P) Proposed 7i Paved Impervious Area No of off street parking square feet / 1/2- 3t ?,4 square feet -41 square feet L> j&square feet spaces H \mrnamara\shaila\PI ANAPP FRM June 9 2006 Dear Sirs. I'm applying for a vanance to build a storage garage on my property at 1220 North First Street. Included with apphcation is the site plan showing the previously existing garage position on the property. The existing large trees and the property elevation slopes, prevent the proposed garage from being built on any other areas of the property. The current driveway was 18' 6" by 21'. I have successfully parked 2 vehicles on the driveway without restnctmg the traffic flow. Although the proposed garage is larger (24'x30') the depth of the driveway would remain the same. Moving the proposed garage south towards the chicken coop more than the 6.5' already proposed would encroach upon the chicken coop which has been determined by the Histonc Preservation Committee to be historically significant and cannot be moved. To address the side yard extenor setback vanance, I am wilting to increase the proposed 9' 4" to 12' between the proposed storage garage and the property line. I hope this meets with your satisfaction. Thank for your consideration. Lee Erickson Supporting Criteria for new garage @ 1220 North First Street 1 ) West to East Slope 10 feet, per Ryan Smith, with approximately 12% grade 4/10/07 2 ) J 8-foot space between existing wall of Chicken -Coop and proposed garage wall 3 ) Existing fence height is 4 Feet 4) Proposed dnveway is 30 feet wide corresponding to proposed garage width 5 ) South facing roof, planned for solar shingles, Acceptmg Bids 6 ) Garage loft use will be shop space, not apartment 7 ) Will run electrical Ines under ground from house 8) Plan for frost footings, due to height of garage _Lgt9 `3Av X !Q ' .'LS • • • • 4-1 • .• • 0 3N17 • \ ht,yr 110.1 N \3� •\\ Jb1 fil4014-1L01m ..L� I azz 1 ® ® • • • A • • • • • • ®®g o c 9 4 Q • :110-1fs7'. j\I • • • , QJ ti1ivair 44 1 44 li A 0 N N N 1 0 4 Planning Commission DATE August 9, 2007 APPLICANT Washington County CASE NO 07-40 REQUESTS PUD Amendment to allow a temporary trailer and parking area for sentence to serve crews at the Washington County Government Center LOCATION 14949 62nd Street North COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DISTRICT A/O - Administrative Office ZONING PA - Public Administrative Offices CPC DATE August 13, 2007 REVIEWERS Public Works Director, Community Development Director, Fire Chief, Interim Police Chief PREPARED BY Michel Pogge, City Planner ,t\A5c DISCUSSION Washington County is seeking approval of an amendment to their existing PUD in order to allow for a temporary trailer and parking area for sentence to serve crews at the Washington County Government Center during the campus expansion project The site is zoned PA, Public Administrative Offices District and government administrative offices are a permitted use This request is to allow a 12' x 56' trailer and a 16 space parking lot in the southwest corner of the government center site Additionally, two port -a -pots will be on the site for use by the sentence to service work groups It is anticipated that there will be 10 to 35 people on the site with an average of 20 people per day Crews arrive every morning (excluding holidays) starting at 8 00 and leave for the job site by 9 00 every morning The crews return to the site between 4 00 to 4 30 14949 62nd Street North Page 2 There is an existing residence to the east of this site The July 12, 2007 letter from Washington County indicated that staff has discussed the proposed use with the adjacent neighbor and the neighbor is agreeable To help screen the use the county has proposed to construct a wood privacy fence between the site and the resident to the east SPECIFIC REQUEST In order to allow this use Washington County is requesting an amendment to their current Planned Unit Development permit EVALUATION OF REQUEST Neighborhood Land Use Existing and planned land uses in the neighborhood are as follows North County facility South State Highway 36 East Single Family (City of Oak Park Heights) West Staging area for the construction project Land Use Compattbzlzty One of the principle issues to be considered for a PUD request is whether the proposal is compatible with existing and planned uses within the surrounding neighborhood The county owns property to the north and west of the site and highway 36 is located to the south To the east there is one single-family home Normally the city would have a concern with the placement of this type of use next to a single-family home The County has indicated that they have discussed this use with the home owner who had no objection to the use Additionally, to help screen the use the county is proposed to construct a wood privacy fence between the site and the resident to the east Since the affected home owner does not have an objection staff is inclined to make a finding that the proposed amendment is compatible with the area Parking - After raising concerns with a gravel lot on this site for a period of 3 to 4 years the county has agreed, as noted in the letter dated August 2, 2007, to pave the parking lot After completion of the government center construction project in 2010 the STS program will move back to the LEC or at another site within the government center At that time, the trailer, fence, parking lot, and other equipment will be removed and the lot will be reseeded and maintained as part of the government center campus grounds FINDINGS The proposed PUD amendment, as conditioned, will not be injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the pubhc welfare and will be in harmony with the general purpose of the zoning ordinance 14949 62nd Street North Page 3 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the PUD amendment as conditioned CONDITIONS FOR APPROVAL 1 The sentence to serve (STS) use shall be in compliance with the plans dated July 12, 2007 and modified with by the plans dated August 2, 2007, on file in the Community Development Department 2 All minor modifications to the plans shall be approved in advance by the Community Development Director All major modifications shall be approved in advance by the Planning Commission Determination of the distinction between "major" and "minor" shall rest with the City Administrator 3 Any trash receptacles on the site shall be screened from public view The location and screening of the trash enclosures shall be reviewed and found acceptable by the Community Development Director prior to issuance of a building permit 4 The STS use shall be discontinued on the site and the trailer, fence, parking lot, and other equipment will be removed and the lot shall be reseed and maintained as part of the government center campus grounds by no later than July 1, 2011 5 All other PUD and amendments to the PUD shall remain in effect and are not affected by this amendment This specifically includes, but is not limited to, Planning Case 2007-10 Attachments Applicant's Form, Applicant's Narrative, and Site Plan PLANNING ADMINISTRATION APPLICATION FORM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY OF STILLWATER 216 NORTH FOURTH STREET STILLWATER MN 55082 Case No Date Filed Fee Paid Receipt No ACTION REQUESTED Special/Conditional Use Permit Variance Resubdivision Subdivision* Comprehensive Plan Amendment* Zoning Amendment* Planning Unit Development * Certificate of Compliance xxx *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 matenal submitted in connection with anyapphcation All supportingmatenal e , photos, sketches, etc) submitted with application becomes the propertyof the Cityof Stillwater Sixteen (16) copies of supporting matenal is required If appl►cation 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 matenal 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 14949 62nd St N Assessors Parcel No 33-030-20-44-0010-0016 (GEO Code) Temporary Trailer and Parking for Sentence -to -Service Zoning District PA Description of Project Crews during Campus Expansion 'I hereby state the foregoing statements and all data, information and evidence submitted herewith in all respects, to the best of my knowledge and belief, to be true and correct / further certify / will comply with the permit if it is granted and used ' Property Owner Washington County Government Representative Don Theisen Mailing Address 14949 62nd Street Mailing Address 14949 62nd Street City - State - Zip Stillwater MN 55082 City - State - Zip Telephone No Signature 651-430-4304 Lot Size (dirr\epgaris'g05 x 165 Land Area 25 Tare Height of Buildings Principal Accessory Stories Feet Telephone No Signature ign . ure is required) - ignat re is required) SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION Total Building floor area 672 square feet Existing 0 square feet Proposed 672 square feet Paved Impervious Area 0 square feet No of off-street parking spaces 16 Stillwater MN 55082 651-430-4304 H \mrnamara\cheula\PI ANAPP FRM June 9 2006 1 Washington County Stillwater Planning Commission/City Council 216 4`h St North Stillwater MN 55082 Public Works Department Donald J Theisen P E Director/County Engineer Keith T Potter Facilities Manager July 12 2007 Amendment to the Planned Unit Develop Permit Request Sentence -to -Serve (STS) Trailer during the Campus 2025 Project Background As part of the sentencing process individuals can be ordered to provide community service in a program known as Sentence -to -Serve (STS) Currently the men and women in this program meet every morning (excluding holidays) at 8 00 a m in the lobby of the Law Enforcement Center (LEC) The work groups led by a Crew Leader (county employee) leave in vans by 9 00 a m to sites and activities throughout Washington County There is typically 10-35 individuals with an average of 20 persons Those in the STS program may be coming from home or the County Jail At the end of the work day the crews return to the LEC and return home or return to the jail for the evening During the Campus 2025 project the space within the LEC lobby will not be available for the STS program to assemble participants A temporary location is needed Request We are requesting that a 12' x 56 construction trailer be permitted on the lot immediately to the south of the LEC for the duration of the Campus 2025 Project (see attached maps) This is expected to be no later than December 2010 Specific issues related to this request and comments include • Parking — There will be room for 16 vehicles at this location This is adequate based on history The lot and parking areas will be covered with class 5 gravel • Traffic — participants in the STS program will access the site via the alley located to the south of the main Government Center complex The traffic will occur between 8 00 a m -8 45a m and 4 00 p m - 4 30 p m This is not an increase or change over current traffic levels • Adjacent Residence — A privacy fence constructed per city code will be erected along the lot -line between the proposed site and the residence to the east County Staff have met with the adjacent neighbor who is agreeable to this trailer being placed on this site • Restroom facilities — Portable facilities will be kept on site adjacent to the trailer The privacy fence will be extended so that the fence is on 3-sides of the portable restrooms and the trailer shields the fourth side At the completion of the project in 2010 the STS program will be moved back into the LEC or at another site within our new facilities At that time the building trailer fence and other equipment related to this request will be removed and the lot will be reseeded and maintained as part of the Government Center Campus grounds 11660 Myeron Road North Stillwater Minnesota 55082 9573 Phone 651 430-4300 Fax 651 430 4350 TTY 651 430 6246 www co washington mn us Equal Employment Opportunity / Affirmative Action S 1 inch = 30 feet Aerial photography taken April 21, 2005. Port Pots No Parking prepared by. Washington County Public Works Department Survey and Land Management Division t 1 `i�nc i-= 100 feet —.Aerial photography taken April 21, 9 aq 1 FM4.1.1' rrtil .- i g iv* Aid is 11n ;taa A9fr 1 1, AffiVIIIR Ale r ' -{C•YaiPo—aciFt�Mj r - ill •11.'�A _aa • STATE HWa' 36— Y .r-_-- .I. w • I tras tngton Countyp_ubli s Departme Marta erxa WashingtonC;-:41.--,o August 2 2007 Stillwater Planning Commission 216 4`h St North Stillwater MN 55082 Public Works Department Donald J Theisen P E Director/County Engineer Keith T Potter Facilities Manager Additional Information - Amendment to the Planned Unit Development Permit Dear Planning Commission Provided below is additional information for the application to place and use a temporary trailer on the Washington County Government Center Campus for the Campus 2025 project - Tree removal plan - The attached lay -out of the site indicates the five (5) Arborvitae trees that need to be removed Future permanent parking lot improvements will provide landscaping in greater quality and quantity These improvements will be reviewed and approved by the City of Stillwater - Parking Spaces — The attached lay -out shows the size of the parking spaces at City Code dimensions of 9 feet by 18 feet This provides a total of seventeen parking spaces Paving — The parking area will be paved Privacy Fence — A wood slat privacy fence will be installed for the neighbor to the east and will be six (6) feet high as per City Code - Trailer & Skirting — The trailer color will be white Vinyl privacy skirting will be provided and installed by the company providing the trailer in a color coordinated with the trailer color - Permit with Middle St Croix Watershed Management Organization (WMO) — Washington County has a permit with the WMO for all phases of the Campus 2025 project WMO staff are aware of our plans for this trailer Storm water run-off — The analysis provided with our WMO permit application addressed run-off rates The site was formerly covered by a home garage and asphalt driveway The existing driveway will be re -used and the new paved area will cover roughly the same area as the home and garage There will not be in an increase in storm water run-off 11660 Myeron Road North Stillwater Minnesota 55082 9573 Phone 651-430-4300 Fax 651 430 4350 TTY 651 430 6246 www co washington mn us Equal Employment Opportunity / Affirmative Action NOTE: All Parking Spaces Shown Are 9' x 18', (Typical). W S 1 inch = 30 feet Aerial photography taken April 21, 2005. No Parking (6 Spaces) - Denotes Existing Arbor Vitae (To Be Removed) prepared by: Washington County Public Works Department Survey and Land Management Division 1 3 8 0 WEST FRONTAGE ROAD HIGHWAY 36 STILLWATER MINNESTOA 55082 Phone 651 275 1 1 3 6 x 2 2 fax 651 275 1 2 5 4 WWW m s c w m o o r g April 16, 2007 Larry D Hansen, Administrator City of Stillwater 216 North 4`s Street Stillwater, MN 55082 RE Washington County Government Center — MSCWMO Project Review Submittal Dear Mr Hansen The Middle St Croix Watershed Management Organization (MSCWMO) received submittal items for the proposed Washington County Government Center project, located within MSCWMO boundaries and in the city of Stillwater, Minnesota According to the MSCWMO 2006 Watershed Management Plan (WMP), any project undertaking grading, filling, or other land alteration activities which involve movement of earth or removal of vegetation on greater than 10,000 square feet of land will be referred to the MSCWMO for full review (2006 WMP Section 6 2 1) Because the proposed project qualifies for full review under the 2006 WMP, the following WMP Policies and Performance Standards apply WMP Section(s) 5 1 4 Policy Item t 5 1 4 Policy Item 2 5 1 4 Policy Item 3 5 1 4 Policy Item 4 Policy or Performance Standard Direct discharge of stormwater to wetlands and all other water bodies without water quality treatment is prohibited Sources of water pollution shall be identified through the MSCWMO data collection program and corrected through the application of BMPs All hydrologic studies shall analyze the 2 10 and 100 year rainfall event with the critical duration defined as that event causing either the highest water surface elevation or the largest peak discharge in an area or both Any study must use consistent methodology for the pre development and post development land use conditions The methodology must be approved by MSCWMO Newly developed or redeveloped areas will be limited to the predevelopment or existing rate of runoff or to a rate within the capacity of downstream conveyance systems whichever is less and no increase in the volume or rate of runoff from newly developed areas will occur in areas where natural outlets do not exist In sub areas of a landlocked watershed development shall not increase the predevelopment volume or rate of discharge from the sub area for the 10 year return period event Comments Project as submitted is compliant with this policy Project as submitted is compliant with this policy Sources of water pollution for this site include erosion/sedimentation issues during construction and increased impervious areas after construction is complete BMPs will be applied based on other policies and performance standards of the MSCWMO Narrative plans and drainage summary indicate compliance with this policy However runoff calculations were submitted in a format that cannot be reviewed by MSCWMO Accordingly compliance with this policy cannot be fully determined However compliance with this policy is probable based on best professional judgment Project as submitted is compliant with this policy Stormwater drainage summary contains required information on flow and volume rates Middle St Croix Watershed Management Organization Member Communities Afton Bayport Baytown Lakeland Lakeland Shores Lake St Croix Beach Oak Park Heights St Mary s Point Stillwater & West Lakeland J April 16 2007 Page 2 of 4 WMP Sections) Policy or Performance Standard Comments 5 1 4 Policy Item 5 Runoff will be minimized through on site infiltration or prevented through reduction in impervious surfaces to the largest extent Project as submitted is compliant with this policy On site bioretention practices meet design standards 5 1 4 Policy Item 6 Site design practices that may have only a minor negative impact on peak flow and volume such as the use of buffer strips along receiving waters and drainage swales will be promoted to achieve compliance with the water quality Project as submitted is compliant with this policy Recommend using native vegetation to the extent possible Recommend working with the WCD to refine the landscape and planting plan to ensure plant establishment 5 1 4 Policy Item 7 Applicants must secure any flowage easements that would be required to accommodate the stormwater management facilities These easements will be granted up to the 100 yr flood Project as submitted is compliant with this policy on the condition that all required easements will be secured 5 1 4 Policy Item 8 Applicants will provide the MSCWMO with 100 year flood levels on the ponds lakes and Project as submitted is compliant with this policy 5 1 4 Policy Item 9 The MSCWMO has adopted the Washington Project as submitted is compliant with this policy 5 1 4 Performance Standard I 5 2 4 Performance Standard 1 See Appendix I for Design Standards for Structural Stormwater Management Measures Project as submitted is compliant with this policy On site bioretention practices meet design standards 5 1 4 Performance Standard 2 Enhanced volume runoff controls will be designed to retain the first'h inch of runoff for all impervious areas plus 'A inch of runoff for areas with compacted soils Project as submitted is compliant with this policy Runoff volume standard has been met On site bioretention practices meet design standards 5 1 4 Performance Standard 3 5 2 4 Performance Standard 2 No increase in rate of runoff leaving the site from pre development to post development conditions generated by the 2 10 and 100 year rainfall Narrative plans and drainage summary indicate compliance with this performance standard However runoff calculations were submitted in a format that cannot be reviewed by MSCWMO Accordingly compliance with this policy cannot be fully determined However compliance with this policy is probable based on best professional judgment 5 1 4 Performance Standard 4 5 2 4 Performance Standard 3 A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) that meets the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) requirements must be submitted to and approved by the MSCWMO for all projects undertaking grading filling or other land alteration activities which involve movement of earth or removal of vegetation on greater than 10 000 square feet of Project as submitted is compliant with this performance standard 5 1 4 Performance Standard 5 Direct discharge of stormwater to wetlands and all other water bodies without water quality treatment is prohibited Project as submitted is compliant with this performance standard Middle St Croix Watershed Management Organization MEMBER COMMUNITIES Afton Bayport Baytown Township Lakeland Lakeland Shores Lake St Croix Beach Oak Park Heights St Mary s Point Stillwater and West Lakeland Township iie April 16 2007 Page 3 of 4 WMP Section(s) Policy or Performance Standard Comments 5 1 4 Performance Standard 6 Predevelopment conditions shall assume good hydrologic conditions for appropriate land covers as identified in TR-55 or an equivalent methodology The meanings of hydrologic soil group and runoff curve number are as determined in TR-55 However when predevelopment land cover is cropland rather than using TR-55 values for cropland the following runoff curve numbers (RCN) shall be used These curve numbers represent midrange values for soils under a good hydrologic condition where conservation practices are used and are selected to be protective of the resource waters Hydrologic Soil Group RCN A 56 B 70 C 79 D 83 Not applicable 5 1 4 Performance Standard 7 Conversion of high permeability soils shall be avoided and these soils shall be targeted for infiltration Project as submitted is compliant with this performance standard 5 1 4 Performance Standard 8 Lowest floor elevations of structures built adjacent to stormwater ponds and other water bodies must be a minimum of two feet above the 100 year flood elevation and a minimum of two feet above the natural overflow of landlocked basins The landowner or developer is required to provide MSCWMO with the location of the 100 year flood elevation natural overflow elevation and lowest floor elevations Project as submitted is compliant with this performance standard 5 1 4 Performance Standard 9 Buffer zones of unmowed natural vegetation shall be maintained or created upslope of delineated wetland edges ordinary high water elevation or floodplain of all water bodies (wetlands streams lakes) in accordance with the Performance Standards relating to wetlands Section 5 3 4 Not applicable 5 1 4 Performance Standard 10 Detention facilities will be designed to attenuate peak flows and provide on site infiltration in high permeability soils natural depressions and swales Project as submitted is compliant with this policy On site bioretention practices meet design standards 5 2 4 Policy Item 1 The MSCWMO shall require proper erosion and sediment control throughout the watershed to prevent siltation and sedimentation of streams lakes wetlands and other areas of the watershed Project as submitted is compliant with this policy Compliance with other policies and performance standards relating to erosion and sediment control has been achieved (including 5 1 4 Performance Standard 1 5 2 4 Performance Standard 1 5 1 4 Performance Standard 2 5 1 4 Performance Standard 4 5 2 4 Performance Standard 3 5 2 4 Policy Item 2) Middle St Croix Watershed Management Organization MEMBER COMMUNITIES Afton Bayport Baytown Township Lakeland Lakeland Shores Lake St Croix Beach Oak Park Heights St Mary s Point Stillwater and West Lakeland Township e April 16 2007 Page 4 of 4 WMP Section(s) Policy or Performance Standard Comments 5 2 4 Policy Item 2 Both temporary (during construction) and permanent (long term) erosion control will be required on newly developed or redeveloped land in MSCWMO undertaking grading filling or other land alteration activities which involve movement of over 100 cubic yards of earth or removal of vegetation on greater than 10 000 square feet of land Project as submitted is compliant with this policy Compliance with other policies and performance standards relating to erosion control has been achieved (including 5 1 4 Performance Standard 1 5 2 4 Performance Standard 1 5 1 4 Performance Standard 2 5 1 4 Performance Standard 4 5 2 4 Performance Standard 3 5 2 4 Policy Item 1) The proposed project disturbs greater than 10 000 square feet of land 5 2 4 Policy Item 3 Existing agricultural activities will be exempt from the performance standards listed below MSCWMO will require buffers from waterbodies and support agricultural BMPs New agricultural activities must conform to the performance standards listed below Not applicable 5 2 4 Performance Standard 4 Construction is prohibited on slopes greater than 12 percent Project as submitted is compliant with this performance standard 5 2 4 Performance Standard 5 Buffer zones of unmowed natural vegetation shall be maintained or created upslope of delineated wetland edges ordinary high water elevation or floodplain of all water bodies (wetlands streams lakes) in accordance with the Performance Standards relating to wetlands Section 5 3 4 Not applicable This project, as submitted, meets all Policies and Performance Standards contained within Section 5 0 of the MSCWMO WMP The MSCWMO Board approved the project on April 12 2007 with the following comment Although the MSCWMO feels that the stormwater management features are correctly sized the MSCWMO was unable to review the drainage calculations Therefore, any future failure of the stormwater management facilities due to improper calculations is the responsibility of Washington County and not the MSCWMO Washington Conservation District staff is available for technical assistance to the landowner to ensure that the project design and construction meets all MSCWMO Policies and Performance Standards Feel free to contact this office at 651 275-1136 if you have any questions regarding these comments Sincerely Pete Young Engineering Specialist, Washington Conservation District CC Eric D Roerish, P E , SRF Consulting Group Inc , One Carlson Pkwy N #150 Minneapolis MN 55447 Don Theisen, Washington County, 11660 Myeron Road N Stillwater, MN 55082 Melissa Lewis, Administrator, Middle St Croix Watershed Management Organization Middle St Croix Watershed Management Organization MEMBER COMMUNITIES Afton Bayport Baytown Township Lakeland Lakeland Shores Lake St Croix Beach Oak Park Heights St Mary s Point Stillwater and West Lakeland Township SthtirLer RTHPI 4 CO FIJNI O I 4 DATE August 8, 2007 TO Planning Commission REQUEST 1) SUP for Accessory Dwelling 2) Lot Size Variance for Accessory Dwelling 3) Side and Rear Setback Variances for Accessory Dwelling APPLICANT Tim and Amy McKee LAND OWNER Tim and Amy McKee LOCATION 601 S 4th Street MEETING DATE August 13, 2007 REVIEWERS Public Works Director, Fire Chief, Police Chief, City Planner PREPARED BY Bill Turnblad, Community Development Director 71— CASE NO 07-41 BACKGROUND Tim and Amy McKee are proposing to make improvements to their existing detached accessory building The accessory building is a historic two-story structure that has a multiple -car garage on the ground level and a recreation room on the second floor The recreation room has both electricity and heating and still has its original hardwood floor, bead board interior, lighting fixtures, and a dumbwaiter This room was used historically as a ballroom/ speak-easy The stairway between the two stories is rather ornate with original woodwork The improvements are planned to include a full bathroom upstairs and various updates to insulation and building safety The exterior of the building and its footprint will not be changed With the addition of the full bathroom, the detached accessory building could now function as an accessory dwelling Accessory dwelling units are allowed in the RB zoning district within which the McKee property is located Therefore staff asked the owner's to submit an application requesting a Special Use Permit McKee SUP Page 2 REQUEST In addition to the Special Use Permit for the accessory dwelling, the project would require two variances from the performance standards for accessory dwellings in the RB zoning district Therefore, the specific requests are 1 Approval of a Special Use Permit for an accessory dwelling unit in the RB, Two -Family zoning district, and 2 Approval of a variance from the minimum lot size required for an accessory dwelling unit, since the McKee lot only has an area of 6,750 square feet and a minimum of 10,000 square feet is required, and 3 Approval of setback variances since an accessory dwelling unit on the subject property is required to have a setback of 5 feet from the south lot line (side lot line) and a 25 foot setback from the east lot line (rear lot line), whereas both existing setbacks are only 1 5 feet EVALUATION OF REQUEST A SPECIAL USE PERMIT The Zoning Ordinance establishes 10 performance standards" for accessory dwelling units in the RB district (1) Lot size must be at least 10,000 square feet The McKee lot has a size of 6,750 square feet As mentioned above, a variance from this standard has been requested The variance is discussed later in the report (2) The accessory dwelling unit may be located on second floor above the garage The ground floor of the accessory building is a garage The second floor is currently a family recreation room The bathroom is planned to be added to the second floor Consequently, this criterion is satisfied (3) The accessory dwelling unit must abide by the primary structure setbacks for side and rear setbacks The existing two story accessory building does not meet the primary structure setbacks As seen in the attached graphics the setback from both the side and rear lot line is 1 5 feet The primary structure setbacks are to be at least 5 feet and 25 feet respectively A variance has been requested from these setback standards and will be discussed later in the report (4) 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 This criterion is satisfied 1 City Code Ch 31-1 Subd 12(4) McKee SUP Page 3 (5) Off-street parking requirements for an apartment and single-family residence (four spaces) must be provided There are two parking spaces in the garage and two in the driveway Therefore, this criterion is satisfied (6) Maximum size of the accessory dwelling unit is 800 square feet The current second story has a size of about 680 square feet, which is well under the allowable 800 square foot maximum (7) The application requires design review for consistency with the primary unit in design detailing and materials The accessory structure includes original building details The front windows are double hung with what would appear to be the original woodwork and glazing bars The Heritage Preservation Commission reviewed the proposal to convert the accessory structure to an accessory dwelling and they found that the accessory structure is consistent with the primary dwelling unit (8) The height may not exceed that of the primary residence The existing primary residence is a two story home and stands slightly taller than the current accessory structure (9) 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 as well Since this is not clearly noted on the plans staff recommends that this be made a condition of approval (10) Maximum size of garage is 800 square feet The ground level of the accessory building, which includes the garage, is about 680 square feet in area B VARIANCES The Planning Commission may grant a variance when all of the following conditions are satisfied 1 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 configuration of the lot, home and accessory structure pre-existed the current owners by many generations Neither the physical configuration of the property, nor the location or layout of the existing home or accessory building are a result of any action by the current owner Therefore, staff finds this criterion to be satisfied 1 Zoning Ordinance Ch 31 1, Subd 30 (2) d McKee SUP 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 The accessory building has been used by the various owners of this property as living space for over a hundred years Allowing a bathroom to be constructed within the building would preserve the grandfathered right to use the building as living space It would not be granting special privileges to this property owner Staff finds this criterion to be satisfied 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 accessory structure has existed in its current location and configuration for over a hundred year Since its use and configuration will not change with the proposed bathroom improvement, it will not be detrimental to adjacent property owners Moreover, it is public policy in Stillwater to preserve historic buildings By updating the structure, the useful life of the building would be extended This is consistent with the city's comprehensive plan Therefore, staff finds this criterion to be satisfied ALTERNATIVES The Planning Commission has the following options 1 Approve the requested SUP and variances with the condition that the accessory dwelling unit shall be connected to municipal sewer and water prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the updated structure 2 Deny the requested SUP and variances 3 Continue the public hearing for more information The 60 day decision deadline for the request is September 18, 2007 RECOMMENDATION Staff finds that the proposal is consistent with the intent of the city's zoning ordinance and comprehensive plan and therefore recommends approval with the condition found in the first alternative above attachments Exhibit A, Location Map Exhibit B Neighborhood Map Applicant's Letter cc Tim and Amy McKee Mark Balay , Cu\ oI C on111111nIt\ DIA(,IOpnk,nt DLOtrtmuit Location Map McKee Case • cf 111111111110111 ar*45r37.1MMISi i NMI • Exhibit A 1 Mark S Balay RA 5 t i I 1 w a t e 1 M 1 n n e s 0 t a 110 East Myrtle Street Suite 100 Shliwater Minnesota 55082 (651) 430 3312 7/20/07 City of Stillwater Attn Michel Pogge 216 N Fourth St Stillwater, MN 55082 Dear Mr Pogge B c k l k A 'L'A i ARCHITECTS t Y' Mtchael E Balay RA India n a p o l i s I n d i a n a 13166 Hamiltcm Commons Blvd Fishers Indiana 46037 (317) 845 9402 Attached are all materials requested to apply for any required variances to support the renovation of the existing historical accessory structure at 6011/2 S Fourth St on the property of 601 S Fourth St and allow the installation of a full bath within the existing footprint as illustrated The enlarged Site Plan drawing describes the calculations which have been made utilize for variance requirement procedures We are not changing any of the existing square footages This structure was constructed in the first decade of the 20th century and is shown on the 1910 insurance map as a domicile 601 1/2 S Fourth St The upstairs has heating and electricity, and has been occupied by the various owners of the house since then It's current historical configuration which was probably done in the late twenties gave it a dual function as a family recreation hall It has a bead board interior with ornate stairway, period lighting and benches, including a dumbwaiter The physical condition of the ground floor of this building has deteriorated and now needs structural repair As a part of this investment the current owner would like to add a full bath to the upstairs level, and upgrade the insulation and code safety issues of the building These proposed improvements are shown conceptually on the attached documentation and a site plan of the property with area calculations has also been created for your information W request whatever variance or conditional use permits which you deem will be required to carry -out the proposed work We believe the project has a justifiable hardship based upon the new neighborhood conservation district Ordinance, with mtent and suggestion to preserve, restore and utilize existmg structures of histoncal significance In order to utilize this structure and mvest m it's restoration the owner requests a reasonably usable facility, which mcludes a full bath for family members and guests who occupy it Please do not hesitate calling if you require additional information or have questions Smcerely, Mark S Balay Mark S Balay Architects, Inc In di a n a p o 1 1 s i n d i a na B A L A Y S t i I I w a t o r M i n n e s o t a ARCHITECTS c 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 S Speaal/Conditional Use Permit ✓ Vanance 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 thls application The applicant is responsible for the completeness and accuracy of all forms and supporting material submitted in connection with anyappllcation Allsupportlngmaterlal (i e , photos, sketches, etc) submitted with application becomes the propertyof the Cltyof 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 mcomplete application or supporting matenal will delay the application process After Planning Commission approvals, there is a 10-day appeal penod 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 budding permits PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION Address of Project cd -E� )ll (( Assessor's Parcel No Zoning Distnct 1 Descnption of Project L—L- "I hereby state the foregoing statements and all data, Information and evidence submitted herewith in all respects, to the best of my knowledge and belief, to be true and correct 1 further certify 1 will comply with the permit if it is granted and used " Property Owner i'S1/4"1-1`( 11 Yk E Mailing Address U�) ( ( : L 1i I LI re, City - State - Zip �" '( _[ �?t'� \L) Representative Mailing Address I t er:LtS1, City - State - Zip STL LiwF-1 iN15 � Telephone No (OS `, - 7 Telephone No Lo k' Signature Signature s required) SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION Lot Size (dimensions) ' ) x / 3 C Land Area (p 7 SC s Height of Buildings Stories Feet Principal __a__ _? Accessory II/1 Total Building floor area) cD 3 square feet Existing square feet 1 C C_ t Proposed square feet + U LP4..J l Paved Impervious rea 1)4fl) square feet C ,y,^; No of off-street parking spaces �. H \mcnamara\shelia\PLANAPP FRM June 9 2006 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 authonzed representative Building plans clearly dimensioned and scaled (16 copies) The site plan showing extenor 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) 82" All adjacent streets or nght of ways labeled [Location elevation size height of building or addition dimensions, matenals and proposed use of all buildings and structures (including walls, fences, signs, lighting and hooding devices) existing and proposed for the site (if the site is in a Histonc Distnct additional desgn detail maybe required) kDistances between all structures and between all property lines or easements and structures Show Adjacent buildings to this application site and dimenaon from property line . r1411 major existing trees on the site (4 inch caliber or greater) giving type location size and other ate coverage conditions I 'how existing significant natural features such as rock outcroppings or water courses (existing and Lroposed marled accordingly) ocate all off-street parking spaces, dnveways, loading docks and maneuvenng areas with dimensions for dnveway widths and parking space sizes. Et/Pedestrian vehicular and service points of ingress and egress, distances between dnveways and street comers Nandscape plan showing number of plants, location vaneties and container sizes (landscape plan) xrsting and proposed grading plan showing direction and grade of drainage through and off the site indicate any proposed drainage channels or containment facilities t( Required and existing street dedications and improvements such asadewalle, curbing and pavement (may not be required) +� t2 Le tI to`the Pla^ni^d (Pfi kr n/ (descnbrng the proposed use in detail and indicating how this use will effect and compatibility with adjacent uses or areas `iJ�;ltSApplrcatronsfor 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 149k 24 percent shall be clearly marked ther such data as may be required to permit the planning commission to make the required findings for approval of the specific type of application / Applica wn ignature Da Lift • FCL 1 IrP-11:1-' 4 FE Z J 3 lii i604 6/Z 60711 f Pri 45 CO/ 607 05 601 FOUFf- 51, 50U1"- N AIJACFN1" WVO 511OI?Y HODS; N '4 WA, I -6" HOUS: CONCI?:1"� 15'-O"+ - PFCK 0 6115 HOU5F E3A.Lp00M I CONC C3II?CH 6" 00 CONCp�11 E2pIVMAY FWF HFbGF AIJAa N1' ONF 5TOPY GMAa 5vUCf I?� 8 50 Ft Ar W. wA.Nu151" CALCULA110N5 1.01' AV\ 6,750, 5F 13ULWIING COVFE 2,405 5F / 55,6% iMK GFOUN19 COVED 1,490 5F / 22% 6OU\2 ftOOF I'4"=1' 5CAL; 1,11919k1 =,OOp L4H' 5CAt w Sti1hvi!! 11 8 1 4 il A Or MINNF 0 1 A Planning Commission DATE August 8, 2007 CASE NO 07-42 APPLICANT Mark S Balay Architects PROPERTY OWNER Phyllis Hicks and Dave Schleh REQUEST Variances to the maximum lot coverage, minimum lot size, side yard setback and rear yard setback LOCATION 309 Churchill St W COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DISTRICT SFSL - Single Farmly Small Lot ZONING RB - Two-family District PC DATE August 13, 2007 REVIEWERS Community Dev Director PREPARED BY Michel Pogge City Planner"71 DISCUSSION The applicant is requesting a variance to the maximum lot coverage m,mmum lot size, side yard setback and rear yard setback for the construction of a new garage This property is zoned RB and currently has an existmg single-family home The lot is 5 404 square feet in size Currently there is an existing two -car garage that is shared by both the property owner and the neighbor (the Hanson s) to the east The applicant has received approval from the HPC to demolish their half of the garage The Hanson s intend to save their half of the garage and install a new roof system on it The proposed garage is a 20 x18 detached garage with a 4 x 10 storage area attached to the garage The total area of the garage is 400 square feet Garages in the RB district are allowed to be no larger than 1,000 square feet or 10% of the lot size, which ever is smaller In this case the maximum allowed garage size on the property is 540 square feet, which the proposed garage meets Currently the site exceeds the maximum lot coverage of 25% by 6 63% or 358 square feet The proposed new garage will add an additional 59 square feet of impervious cover on the site and increase the site's overall building coverage to 32 72% With the new garage the total site impervious surface is proposed to be 50 57% The applicant has shown were an underground holding structure could be installed to control storm water on this site The applicant has indicated that if the comrrussion requires storm water mitigation then they would work with the City Engineer to develop a system for the site .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 is a 5 404 square foot lot If the lot met the mrrumum lot size of 7 500 square feet, the addition of the proposed garage would not cause the lot to exceed the maximum impervious coverage The irregular shape of the property, the physical size of the lot, and the slope along the north side of the lot between the home and street hunts any potential location for the garage Due to all of the above mentioned constraints, a garage could not be built on this lot without some kind of variance As proposed it will be difficult at best to maneuver vehicles in and out of the garage The property owner purchased the lot as is and this is not a condition that they created Staff therefore finds the existing conditions to be hardships peculiar to the property and not created by the property owner 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 family and two- family uses Garages are generally considered an important element for residential uses by the Commission The garage has been kept to a muumal size and in fact as a 20' x 18 garage is considered to be substandard by today s standards As noted previously if this lot conformed to the lot area requirement of 7,500 square feet, a variance to the lot coverage requirement would not be needed Therefore staff finds that the variances are necessary to allow the property owner to construct a garage for the preservation and enjoyment rights possessed by other properties in the same district and in the same viciruty 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 leadmg to increased flooding downstream and an increase in contamination and sediment in downstream water bodies Increases in impervious surfaces are the mam 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 has implemented maximum impervious coverage standards The applicant has noted that if the commission requires storm water rrutigation then they would install a storm water holding structure If a storm water holding structure were to be installed, then it would likely reduce the amount of storm water run off leaving the site even with the increase in impervious surface area With the installation of a storm water holding structure proposal as subrrutted will not be a detriment to property owners in the community and will not impair the purpose and intent of the zorung code 212 Maple St W Page 3 FINDINGS 1 That the hardship is peculiar to the property and is not created by acts of the owner 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 vicuuty, and that a variance, if granted, would not constitute a special privilege of the recipient not enjoyed by his neighbors 3 As conditioned, the authorizmg of the variance will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property and will not materially impair the purpose and intent of this title It would not necessary adversely affect the Comprehensive Plan ALTERNATIVES The Planning Commission has the followmg options 1 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 Additionally staff would suggest the following conditions for approval a All tumor revisions to the approved plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director All major revisions shall be revised and approve by the Planning Commission Determination of the distinction between 'major" and minor' shall rest with the City Administrator b The garage shall be hmited to the size shown on the plans c The property owner shall install a storm water control device to control the additional storm water run off from the site The installation of the storm water control shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineering Department prior to the issuance of a building permit for the garage 2 Deny the requested variances A demal needs to be accompanied by substantive findings of fact 3 Continue the public hearing until the September 10, 2007 Planning Commmssion meeting The 60 day decision deadline for the request is September 18, 2007 RECOMMENDATION Select alternative number 1 and approve the request as conditioned Attachments Apphcant's Form, Site Plan, elevations letter, and letters from adjouung property owners a Mark S Balay RA S t i 1 1 w a t c r M i n sot 1 110 East Myrtle Strtet Suite 100 Stillwater Minnesota 55082 (651) 430 3312 7/20/07 City of Stillwater Attn Michel Pogue 216 N Fourth St Stillwater MN 55082 B A- L A ARCHITECTS Y I n i i 1 n Michael E Balay RA 9 p o 1 i s i n d i a n a 13166 Hanniton Commons Blvd Fishers Indiana 46037 (31') 845 9402 Dear Mr Pogue Attached are all materials requested to apply for a vanance to side and rear setbacks for construction of a replacement garage This application is in support of a separate application for demolition of an existing two plus car garage which is shared by two property owners The certified survey drawing describes the calculations which have been made utilize for variance requirement procedures The overall square footage for this property from old garage to new garage is increasing by only 63 sf and accomplishing a two car garage with reasonable storage which is not shared The other property owner will have a one car garage created from the existing shared garage entirely on their own property If a design review is required for this in fill garage then please include us in your next HPC agenda for this purpose The variance request is a change to 1 ft side and rear yard setbacks on the garage only This vanance is justified by the hardship imposed by previous approved development by the city which is now considered sub standard and having an impact on the expectable and beneficially use of the property by the owners If mitigation is required for this minimal increase in square footage A gutter system can been negotiated which will control up to 50% of the roof run-off on the main house 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 shown as located in the side yard so that it does not impact any other underground utilities Please do not hesitate calling if you require additional information or have questions Sincerely, -_ ��% /Mark S Balay / G/ Mark S Balay Architects, Inc 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 .-8peaal/Conditlonal Use Permit Variance Resubdivision Subdivision' Comprehensive Plan Amendment* Zoning Amendment* Planning Unit Development * Certificate of Compliance *An escrow fee is also required to offset the costs of attorney and engineering fees The fees for requested action are attached to this application The appbcant is responsible for the completeness and accuracy of all forms and supporting material submitted in connection with anyapplication Allsupportingmatenal (i e , photos, sketches, etc ) submitted with apphcation 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 appl►cant w►ll receive a zoning use permit which must be signed and submitted to the City to obtain the required budding permits Z \ / I I PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION Address of Project >0� W . 10 r'C �l� L`S7Assessor's Parcel No (GEO Code) Zoning Distnct .3 Descnption of Project"eoL! l ICU (^)� � ,-'t✓!—� "I hereby state the foregoing statements and all data, information and evidence submitted herewith in all respects, to the best of my knowledge and belief, to be true and correct 1 further certify / will comply with the permit if it Is granted and used " Property Owner L f.{S-}ik5 �fi-1 IL L, t t Mailing Address City - State - Zipfl L! 1 c �pT �1 tiD Z City - State - Zip S l / LL A7I � k? U Telephone No ,, � - 4- Telephone No C� � I - Cf�j.7 2Cyc4> Signature - fig : rdis re Mailing Address Signature nature is r Lot Size (dimensions) Land Area Height of Buildings ,Stories c Principal t 1a Accessory fired) SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIP11ON 'Fr i t- Representative Representative Feet -212 I (42 Total Building floor area (707 square fee Existing j 7t square feet Proposed ��%% square feet Paved Impervious Area !, square No of off-street parking sp ces f7r✓ 1 S/ALPE c) H \mcnamara\shella\PLANAPP FRM June 9 2006 Check list for Planning Applications Incomplete or unclear applications/plans will be returned to the applicant and may result in delay of application processing Ch ckand attach to application 'The application form completed and signed by the property owner or owners authonzed representative WBuilding plans clearly dimensioned and scaled (16 copies) '67J The site plan showing extenor property lines, easements, lot width and depth and lot area building(s) ocation (See attached site plan example a parcel boundary survey may be required) t(l All adjacent streets or nght of ways labeled Location elevation size height of building or addition dimensions, matenalsand proposed use of all buildings and structures (including walls fences, sgns, lighting and hooding devices) existing and proposed r the site (if the site is in a Histonc Distnct additional desgn detail maybe required) b/91stances between all structures and between all property lines or easements and structures Show Adjacent buildingsto this application site and dimension from property line -1,41N4ll major existing trees on the site (4 inch caliber or greater) giving type location size and other site coverage conditions hhow existing significant natural features such as rock outcroppings or water courses (existing and proposed marled accordingly) Locate all off-street parking spaces, dnveways, loading docks and maneuvering areaswith dimensions for / driveway widths and parking space sizes 1p Pedestnan vehicular and service points of ingress and egress distances between dnveways and street corners andscape plan showing number of plants location vaneties and container sizes (landscape plan) d- Exist! ng and proposed grading plan showing direction and grade of drainage through and off the site dicate any proposed drainage channels or containment facilities Required and existing street dedications and improvements such as sdewalle, curbing and pavement (may not be required) �--�� 4i LikFtolthe Plannl g Co'mm'I'sslln rs-- bYng"fh� 7oposed use in detail and indicating how this use will effect and compatibility with adjacent uses or areas \-.6h1/4pplications for new structureson 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 percent shall be clearly marled Other such data as may be required to permit the planning commission to make the required findings for approval of the specific type of application pplicant/oOne tgn - ure 7/2 D at 1, Notes CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY Notes o Ind #13774 iron set "M " Ind Meas value • Ind survey monument found or set, BARRETT M STACK "R " Ind record plat value as noted or shown hereon STILLWATER, MINN 55082 I, „ Deed Ind record Deed value Bearing system is an assumed datum MINNESOTAREGISTERED Offsets shown to existing structures Underground or overhead, public or LAND SURVEYOR are measured to the outside building private utilities, on or adjacent the Tel No 439-5630 wall line, unless shown or noted parcels, were not located in this survey otherwise hereon Note location of concrete drive providing access to the existing garages The majority of this existing driveway is not located within the limits of the esmnt description furnished Discuss this matter with any attorney for an opinion on this conflict SURVEY MADE EXCLUSIVELY FOR Dave Schleh & Phyllis Hicks, 309 W Churchill St , and Sonja Hanson, 908 Fifth St So , all in Stillwater, MN 55082 DISCRIPTION1 Schleh/Hicks Parcel Desc Supplied (see copy of Contract for Deed attached) Hanson Parcel Description Supplied (see copy of Doc No 3518378 attached) Description Notes The Hanson Description supplied has no reference therein to appurtenant and encumbering easements that are recited on the Schleh/Hicks description supplied Details of this access easement shown hereon are as recited in said Schleh/Hicks Description Refer this matter to an attorney for an opinion on the status of this access easement As shown hereon, a conflict exists between the described and occupied location of the existing concrete driveway providing access to the existing garages This driveway is also located on portions of the Yatchak/Johnson parcel which adjoins to the north of the Hanson Parcel Field measured values for Block 11, Churchill, Nelson and Slaughters Add , Wash Co , Minn , yield small excess and defeciencies in record vs measured values for lots in this block The record description lines in Lot 3 overlap 0 04 feet on the north line and 0 06 feet on the south line This small description overlap is not graphically shown hereon Survey monuments set are on the easterly line of the west 35 feet of lot 3, which is the Schleh-Hicks desc e'ly line Refer this matter to an attorney for an opinion on what steps, if any, that may be required to ascertain title in this area, prior to any new construction adjacent to this description overlap area Existing Schleh/Hicks Area Summaries Proposed Schleh/Hicks Area Summaries Hse & Exist Gar = 1709 sq ft = 31 63% Exist Hse & New Gar = 1768 sq ft = 32 72% Other Impery = 591 sq ft = 10 93% New Other Impery = 965 sq ft = 17 85% Exist Pervious = 3104 sq ft = 57 44% New Pervious Area = 2671 sq ft = 49 43% Airs r P<gT'eci_ a Lo r !se o.✓ // - - To/ of 7Z'/ 6 — 1 ' 41011.c-No7Se r V i - - SD 00 - - S.v,vo57a e/E Ler 4 k 44 era "=20' ` " _'-. M ra,r, w7 ; i /36A Frf; r r /I r So 00 Cyv,ec,v/« Sr. ,e /3S - - A!/87'D¢'j¢/'E / 1' /3SD/ - - --N /--- - BSO/ M - - BS o0 DEED �f%SE/cb309%I / e 4lswc 7,4 5) ti SEr%' v/,y O.eiLc Ha,E r,✓ TDy /ic/ye.c_ dZ. C GNE W So r Zor Overall Schleh/Hicks Parcel desc , as surveyed, contains 5404 sq ft 4,- `�\ He=Coe ' 1 BL // YArc ,' e/sa//v.-4v Gbc No iS08974 ,e /3S Il /►'89'04E /'7 /34e r8 ��+ OEEo BS /�r8¢98 Lorz DEED °� /i% 2S FEEr a Z aNN I 00' ir----- e..------' 7-00/VC `! I�- EX/si ..Schzew/v/c.Cs ES..7T i V \ / ,..r 84 9C OEro es !ar Z iSoa /ve9oo¢�z¢'E Cor 3- 1� - M /3¢ 9G - - - ,N'`.../, -- .lr o /od N/ 9976 — — O// NiI ON \ O-Eo = Eivs r /44 F 7 LaT 3 3 f/�/', / fc/8378 �� 1Z Note As directed, survey work on the k,Dew & 10 Ws5r r riri,,,,ser _L ,'POP e- 1. �T1I /✓a./ K 1 D,e/G oil :1210Lat S. I3G,vz hl1 Q1 Hanson Parcel was limited to survey work I in Lot 3, as shown and noted hereon tar 3 Lor 0 / _ — - 9? 94 /7 - - Daeo /oa - - - -'/ SE roe L a73� �\-- ——589'O¢ /8"A/ /7 /- 9¢-- -- - era ,e �3S 1 hereby certify that this survey, plan, or report was gAZ , /f /^'0 7147 / P prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that k 0 s . 0 65�� Z07 4' 1 am a duly Registered Land Surveyor under the laws of D 0'� �' the State of Minnesota V / 4/ • / L. / i 4 n , � s.7 , ,, / ,ice r .- ' /, � =.� _ /7 - L. / if 4-- i .�/ ,/� - — L- (— 1._ /� ? / ie, N [/,✓e So /S 1� — — — - .3soo - - /•••-- July 12, 2007 RegNo 13774 Aic /Vo 4//0¢9 Date 1.J 1L 11 A51r 1,VAflON o 501,1 �LvA110N f1,001 PLAN 100F PLAN I,VA1'ION GAp\AGCONCP1r 18' X2O' - 4' X1O' 51'O, Scale I/ 8" ----- I' -OH St 1 lwa t er B 9 H F C 0 n Planning Commission DATE APPLICANT REQUEST LOCATION COMPREHENSIVE ZONING CPC DATE REVIEWERS PREPARED BY August 1, 2007 Tom and Sandy Lynum CASE NO SUP/07-43 Transfer of a Bed and Breakfast Special Use Permit from Tom and Sandy Lynum to Marlene Buchner for the William Sauntry Mansion 626 4th Street North PLAN DISTRICT SFSL - Single Family Small Lot RB - Two Family District August 13, 2007 Community Development Director, City Planner Nicole Ormand, Community Development Intern( j DISCUSSION The applicant is requesting that the special use permit for the William Sauntry Mansion be ti ansfei i ed from the current owners Tom and Sandy Lynum to Marlene Buchner Mailene Buchner is proposing to purchase the property pending approval of the special use permit Furthermore, The William Sauntry Mansion Bed and Breakfast will continue to operate as a six -guest room bed and breakfast on 626 4th Street North EVALUATION OF REQUEST All bed and breakfasts require a special use perrrut A special use permit may only be gi anted after the applicant has demonstrated that they have met the 12 conditions for a bed and breakfast This site meets all of the conditions including the required number of off-stieet parking spaces, the site is located at least 900 feet from the nearest bed and breakfast, and the home was built over 100 years ago No changes to the exterior facade of the building are proposed with this application The City has not received any complaints regal ding this Bed and Breakfast in the preceding 12 months $ 626 4Ui Street North Page 2 RECOMMENDATION Appioval as conditioned CONDITIONS FOR APPROVAL 1 The owner of the residence shall live on -site and be the manager of the Bed and Breakfast 2 Befoie use as a Bed and Breakfast, the building and cooking facilities shall be approved by the County Health Officer, Fire Marshall, and City Building Official and a letter of occupancy received by the Community Development Director 3 One parking space for each guest room shall be set aside and marked "FOR GUESTS ONLY" Additional spaces are available for owners use as shown on the site plan 4 If pi ovided, dining facilities shall be available to registered guests only, (not available to the general public) 5 No liquor shall be sold on premises 6 One four square foot sign is allowed on -site consistent with the architectural character of the building 7 Adequate pedestrian scale lighting shall be provided between the Mansion and pal king area 8 No general external lighting of the site may impact the surrounding residential area is allowed 9 The special use permit is not transferable, new property owners or managers shall iequire a new special use permit 10 The bed and breakfast use permit shall be reviewed before the Planning Commission and City Council for revocation, if complaints regarding the bed and breakfast use are received by the Community Development Director CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR SPECIAL EVENTS 1 A maximum of six special events (large functions defined as business meetings, bus tours, bridal and wedding showers, anniversaries, weddings and wedding receptions, and church functions) over twenty persons allowed per month 2 All special event visitors shall park on site or at a controlled remote location 3 Limit of groups 40 capacity as approved unless special approval is obtained horn the City Council 4 Food must be served by a licensed caterer 5 All special events shall be over by 9 OOPM 6 No open bar on premises for special events Champagne is allowed on a two person/one bottle limit 7 No outside entertainment or lighting for special events is allowed 8 No persons to leave premises of the Mansion with alcohol 9 No live entertainment or loud reproduced music shall be allowed 10 This permit shall be reviewed one year from this approval (August, 2008) or upon complaint 626 4th Street North Page 3 11 Marlene Buchner, owner of the property, shall be on site and visible during all special events This special use permit is not transferable 12 All special use permit conditions from previous approvals shall apply FINDINGS The proposal, as conditioned, meets the intent of the City's zoning ordinance for Bed and Breakfasts Attachments Applicant's Form and Letter PLANNING ADMINISTRATION APPLICATION FORM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY OF STILLWATER 216 NORTH FOURTH STREET STILLWATER MN 55082 Case No Date Filed Fee Paid Receipt No ACTION REQUESTED Special/Conditional Use Permit Variance Resubdivision Subdivision* Comprehensive Plan Amendment* Zoning Amendment* Planning Unit Development Certificate of Compliance *An escrow fee is also required to offset the costs of attorney and engineering fees The fees for requested action are attached to this application The applicant is responsible for the completeness and accuracy of all forms and supporting material submitted in connection with anyappl►cat►on All support►ngmater►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 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 Address of Project Zoning District PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION 0,6 Description of Project Assessor s Parcel No goy /2) Ob7 (GEO Code) I hereby state the foregoing statements and all data information and evidence submitted herewith in all respects to the best of my knowledge and belief to be true and correct I further certify I will comply with the permit if it is granted and used ,,/ Property Owner TO 11, d— a rvt/G L J epresentative Mil /3,, Mailing Address �(/d•b q 61- A) Mailing Address City State Zip S So 0 1- City State Zip Telephone No lLJ 5 1 - 6 -� Signature (S ature is require Telephone No Signature (Signature is required) E AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION Lot Size (dimensions) x Land Area Height of Buildings Stories Feet Principal Accessory Total Building floor area square feet Existing square feet Proposed square feet Paved Impervious Area square feet No of off street parking spaces H \mrnamara\chwla\PI ANAPP FRM June 9 2006 -7/d7/7 )9/n)\/-1)-- (opI -i Jo1\��l°1 /7/ &L)04---e/ � �7 J01( L k 17 Aa- /0 --- 0 16 ,511 c-r C) 6 of .e) 0 0)- (c, jj-- for, ,)1, CO 14'4_ /id "" /-7 11/7.0rij 6t e p cy) /e 9 L., h -I c- 71-tt 740 7 (0 J/ic ‘j 71-\ / /4„ soridy Id 19- ,_5c3 ic4--*(,) fritano )1) ro;', 66 a 'tit-e-iLl; larol o '1 7- 27 -0 1 8 1 IHPI E 0 M I N N I S (I R DATE August 9, 2007 REQUEST Review and comment on draft of reorganized Zoning Ordinance PLANNING COMMISSION DATE August 13, 2007 REVIEWERS City Planner, City Attorney, City Administrator PREPARED BY Bill Turnblad, Community Development Directoreif [NOTE Please bring your copy of the reorganized zoning ordinance with you to the meeting on August 13 It was distributed to you with your agenda packet last month ] BACKGROUND The City s land use ordinances (collectively referred to as the "Zoning Ordinance") are a body of regulations that have been revised numerous times over the decades However, over those many years little attention has been given to the organization, flow, internal consistency and ease of use of the document as a whole The result is a zoning ordinance that is confusing and at times unintentionally misleading Consequently, city staff has completed a draft of a reorganized zoning ordinance The proposed changes are clerical and organizational in nature There are no changes of substance being proposed Staff believes that the City would benefit from a number of substantive changes to the zoning ordinance, but that will be left until after the 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update is completed Changes include • Reorganization of sections material is now grouped according to content • Addition of a "table of contents" • Reformatting o All sections are numbered according to the article of the ordinance that they are associated with For example, all sections in Article 1 are numbered in the 100s, in Article 2 they are numbered in the 200s, etc o All definitions (except the adult uses definitions, which I kept buried with the adult use regulations) have been placed together in a definition section o Consistent formatting for each zoning district Reorganized Zoning Ordinance August 9 2007 Page 2 o All allowed uses are contained in unified tables Previously they were found as text scattered throughout the ordinance in zoning district sections and elsewhere o Performance standards are now included in a separate section of the code rather than being scattered throughout the ordinance Notes • All cross references have been edited Though, they are not shown in legislative format in the shoreland overlay district, the St Croix River overlay district and the floodplain overlay district • Since the "Bluffland/Shoreland overlay district" of the current ordinance only applies to the St Croix River corridor, the name has been changed to the "St Croix River overlay district' This is less confusing, since there are other sections of the code that relate specifically to the Shoreland Management overlay district and to bluff protection SPECIFIC REQUEST Please review the draft of the reorganized zoning ordinance Staff would like to have a discussion on it at the August 13, 2007 Planning Commission meeting If the draft is in order, it would be forwarded to the City Council for codification in September