Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1994-06-13 CPC Packettllwat!r THE BIRTHPLACE OF MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF STILLWATER 216 NORTH FOURTH STREET NOTICE OF MEETING The Stillwater Planning Commission will meet on Monday, June 13, 1994, at 7 p.m. in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 216 North Fourth Street. Approval of Minutes of May 9, 1994 AGENDA 1. Case No. SUB/94-27. A minor subdivision of a 51,844 sq. ft. (1.2 acres) into three lots of 13,475 sq. ft, 16,469 sq. ft. and 21,900 sq. ft. The property is located on Gilbert Court in the RA, Single Family Residential District. Steve Fitterman, applicant. 2. Case No. V/94-28. A variance to the rearyard setback requirement (25 feet required, 17 feet requested) for the construction of a 13 x 12 deck. The property is located at 1348 Benson Blvd W in the RA, Single Family Residential District. James and Karen Neal, applicant. 3. Case No. SUB/94-29. A minor subdivision of Lots 1, 4 and 5, Staples and May Addition (22,500 sq. ft.) , into two lots of 11,250 sq. ft. The property is located at 814 N Everett Street in the RB, Two Family Residential District. William Conley, applicant. 4. Case No. V/94-30. A variance to the sideyard setback requirement for a corner lot (30 feet required, 18 feet proposed) for the construction of a garage addition. The property is located at 1251 W Orleans in the RA, Single Family Residential District. Richard Rodrigue, applicant. 5. Case No. V/94-31. A variance to the rearyard setback requirement (2 ft. proposed, 5 ft. required) for the construction of a garage at 416 S 4th in the RB, Two Family Residential District. James Huntsman, applicant. 6. Case No. V/94-32. A variance to the rearyard setback requirement (5 ft required, 0 ft. proposed) for the construction of a garage addition at 504 N 2nd Street in the RB, Two Family Residential District. Mike and Nance Anders, applicants. 7. Case No. V/94-33. A variance to the sideyard setback requirement (20 ft required, approximately 7 ft. proposed) for the construction of a storage garage at 1750 W Frontage CITY HALL: 216 NORTH FOURTH STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 55082 PHONE: 612-439-6121 Road in the BP-C, Business Park Commercial District, Tom Balstad, applicant. 8. Case No. V/94-34. A variance to the frontyard setback requirement (30 ft required, 16 ft proposed) for the construction of a garage addition at 722 S Martha Street in the RB, Two Family Residential District. Robert Clark, applicant. 9. Case No. SUP/94-35. A special use permit to conduct outside sales (food vending) on private property at 229 S Main Street (private vacant lot) in the CBD, Central Business District. Thomas Loome, applicant. 10. Other Business * Review and discuss Park Dedication Policy * Comprehensive Plan followup to June 6, 1994 meeting PRESENT: ABSENT: ALSO PRESENT: STILLWATER PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES May 9, 1994 Gerald Fontaine, Chairman Glenna Bealka, Duane Elliott, Dorothy Foster, Rob Hamlin, Kirk Roetman, Don Valsvik, Darwin Wald Jay Kimble Steve Russell, Community Development Director Ann Pung-Terwedo, Planner APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion by Glenna Bealka, seconded by Kirk Roetman to approve the minutes of April 11, 1994 as submitted. All in favor. PUBLIC HEARINGS Case No. SUB/94-18 - A preliminary plat approval for a subdivision of a 3.46 acre parcel of property into 3 lots of 42,322 sq. ft., 39,121 sq. ft. and 67,785 sq. ft. The property is located south and east of Green Twig Way in the RA, Single Family Residential District. Janet and Richard Kutz, applicants. Dave Harvieux, Realtor, and Barry Stack, Surveyor, presented the case with Janet Kutz. Mr. Harvieux reviewed the history of the request: On February 14, the Planning Commission approved the request with conditions. On February 28, the City Council denied the request. The request is now in full compliance and all conditions have been met. A 32-foot wide street is planned. No wetland will be filled, and the dump site is not an issue. The five recommended conditions will be met. Duane Elliott asked how lot 3 will be served by sewer. Mr. Harvieux stated that it could be served by gravity sewer or a private lift station. Mr. Elliott also asked about the proposed walking path. Barry Stack responded that the City owns outlot A, 60 feet wide, which will accommodate a 32 ft. wide road and the walking path. Tony Zanko, 540 Eagle Ridge Trail, asked how much fill would be brought in. Mr. Harvieux stated that the lots are buildable at this time, and fill would have to be brought in only for the roadbed. David Brekke, 645 Eagle Ridge Trail, adjacent to Green Twig Way, stated he is concerned about drainage because his lot is lower. Mr. Harvieux stated that a drainage plan is a condition of Stillwater Planning Commission Minutes May 9, 1994 approval, and there are culverts planned under driveways of Lots 1 and 2. Jon Pederson, 480 Eagle Ridge Trail, stated that he sees only one difference between this request and the request submitted in February, and that is the widening of the road. Todd King, 210 Wildwood Court, south of the proposed development, was at the City Council meeting when it was denied. The plan lacked detail; it had to be complete and substantially different. He objects to the City Council being used to engineer and design this plan. Jackie Pederson, 480 Eagle Ridge, stated that the homes will experience water problems. Motion by Kirk Roetman, seconded by Glenna Bealka to approve the Subdivision request. Rob Hamlin stated that he forsees problems, and request a 6th condition: that no fill be brought in. Steve Russell stated that the amount of fill is not regulated by the City, but the Commission could require no grading or fill on the building sites. Kirk Roetman moved to amend his motion by adding a sixth condition as discussed. Glenna Bealka seconded. Motion to approve the subdivision request failed: Ayes - 3; Nays - 5. Case No. V/94-24. A Variance to the sideyard and rearyard setback requirements (2 ft. 4 inches sideyard setback proposed, 5 ft. required, 1 ft.. 6 inches rearyard setback proposed, 5 ft. required). The property is located at 813 West Olive Street in the RB, Two Family Residential District. Bruce and Janet Kramer, owners, presented the request to add an addition to an existing single car garage which does not meet the required setbacks. There is one recommended condition of approval: that all drainage shall remain on site. The applicant questioned this condition, and was informed that gutters would be necessary. Duane Elliott asked what the maximum square footage is allowed for accessory structures. Steve Russell reported that 1,000 sq. ft. is allowed, and this structure would be 616 sq. ft. total. Motion by Darwin Wald to approve the Variance request with one condition. Seconded by Dorothy Foster. Carried 8-0. Case No. SUP/94-25. - A special use permit to conduct a trolley system on an existing railroad right of way (601 North Main Street to the loading area for the Andiamo Showboats). The property is located in the CBD Central Business District. Dave Paradeau, applicant. 2 Stillwater Planning Commission Minutes April 11, 1994 Jelle DeBoef presented the application for Dave Paradeau. He stated that they have talked to MN/Dot regarding the Chestnut Street crossing and are awaiting a response. There are six recommended conditions of approval. The Commission added two more conditions: No. 7 - Review of the Special Use Permit in one year. No. 8 - A copy of Burlington Northern approval on file with City. Motion by Rob Hamlin to approve the Special Use Permit with 8 conditions. Seconded by Darwin Wald. Carried 8-0. Submitted by: Shelly Schaubach Recording Secretary Comprehensive Plan, Phase II followup on land use plan from May 2 meeting. (Ann Pung-Terwedo took over as acting secretary at 8:00 p.m.) Steve Russell reviewed the Stillwater Planning Area (Township area) as received from the Planning Commission meeting of May 2, 1994. Rob Hamlin would like to see all the property south of 62nd Street as low density residential. He felt multi -family and light industrial was too intensive for this type of use on this land. Jerry Fontaine added that he would like to see multiple family housing north of 62nd Street. Duane Elliott felt that low income housing is important. Location is important as is commercial and light industrial. The high-tech, medical industry is important. Rob Hamlin is sympathetic to the property owners on 62nd Street. How big of a geographic area do we need for multiple family housing? Kirk Roetman questioned the options based on full expansion to no expansion. Steve Russell stated that these land uses will be modified based on the type of option. Mr. Russell reviewed the meeting dates with the Commission on the open public comments sessions. It was decided that the locations will be at Lily Lake Elementary, City Hall Open House, and Washington School. He mentioned to the Planning Commission that the Armory could be sought for the June 6th meeting. Motion by Kirk Roetman, seconded by Darwin Wald to adjourn at 9:00 p.m. Carried 8-0. Submitted by: Ann Pung-Terwedo, Acting Recording Secretary 3 PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW Case No. SUB/94-27 Planning Commission Date: June 13, 1994 Project Location: Off end of Gilbert Court Zoning District: RA/PUD Applicant's Name: Steve Fiterman Type of Application: Minor subdivision Project Description Resubdivision of 4 lots into 3 lots of 13,475 sq. feet, 16,469 sq. feet and 21,960 sq. feet. Discussion The request is to subdivide parts of 4 lots into 3 lots (see location map). One lot is located off of Pine Tree Trail (Maxine Benson). This lot is being divided into three pieces, one containing the existing house on Pine Tree Trail and two fronting on Gilbert Court. A triangular portion of a separate property is being combined with new Lot 1 (13,475 square feet). The lots have many pine trees growing on them and will need to be graded before construction of residences (no grading /drainage plan has been submitted but will be required as a condition of approval before final plat approval). The grading/drainage plan should show the location of existing trees and what trees will be removed. This resubdivision was contemplated as a part of the Highlands Development and utilities were stubbed in to the site to provide for development. As a condition of Highlands PUD approval a 20 - 30 foot pedestrian easement was required to provide pedestrian access from Gilbert Court to Lily Lake school. A review of the site indicates the pathway is not in and evidence of a 20 to 30 foot pedestrian easement has not been provided.. The new lots are of a size and dimension that meet the RA zoning requirements. Recommendation Approval Conditions of Approval 1. A grading/drainage tree removal plan shall be submitted for review and approval of the Public Works Director before council review of the preliminary plat. 2. A 20 foot pedestrian easement from Gilbert Court to Lily Lake School property shall be provided along the western side of Lot 1 and the pathway shall be improved before final plat approval. 3. No more the 50 percent of tree cover shall be removed from Lots 1 or 2 to prepare the sites for construction. Attachments Application Preliminary Plat Letter of support from James Lammers for Maxine Benson T Y C/'��v `2,1121 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY OF STILLWATER CITY OF STILLWATER 216 NORTH FOURTH STREET STILLWATER, MN 55082 APPLICAT N0. ,SC{,B '7 DATE: c 3/1 ACTION REQUESTED Appeal Certificate of Compliance Conditional or Special Use Permit Design Review Permit Planned Unit Development Variance Comprehensive Plan mendment Zonin A endment Other FEE *ADDITIONAL ENGINEERING COSTS MAY BE INCLUDED AS PART OF THIS APPLICATION .Engineering Review Fee TOTAL FEE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW EAW EIS No Special Environmental Assessment Required The applicant shall be responsible for the completeness and accuracy of all forms and supporting material submitted in connection with any application. PLEASE PRINT OR TYPE [n ADDRESS OF PROJECT \`tJstteOV\ c\WAVocteA ASSESSOR'S PARCEL N0. ZONING DISTRICT �:�. '� DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT VA- S \ — REPRESENTATIVE�-�4�.c MAILING AD, R SS j ,'. So. -`k9 - MAI\L�I,NGG ADDRESSs i V, Ac,!L Z I P \� N(V.1. ZIP _Ky \ (, TELEPHONE (G.-z. TELEPHONE (('c-_) SIGNATURE ` SIGNATURE ' jA1.,J - Y i��„—. - '' 's )08 g 1.11, > G+,e A " "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, true and correct. I further�ecertify I will comply with the permit if it is granted and used." PROPERTY OWNER `T `C"2,� Any decision made on this proposal can be appealed within ten (10) calendar days of the date of the action. APPLICATION DATA 2 LOT SIZE (Dimensions) TOTAL LAND AREA HEIGHT OF BUILDINGS: Stories (Principal) (Accessory) x TOTAL FLOOR AREA SQ. FT. sq. ft. PROPOSED FLOOR AREA SQ. FT. Feet BUILDING COVERAGE SQ. FT. PAVED IMPERVIOUS AREA SQ. FT. # OFF STREET PARKING SPACES NS\ 13,/ C./j CW 11 tic* * * PIONEER engineering *4c� Westerly ext. of North line 154.40 S.W. Cor of parcel described In entry 66, Book 253, Poge 137 LAW 9Fw,aa. PA 040.1315 2422 Enterprise Drive Mendota Heights, MN 55120 (612) 681-1914 FAX:681-9488 625 Highway 10 N.E. Bioine, UN 55434 (612) 783-1880FAX:783-1883 PRELIMINARY PLAT GILBERT' COURT ADDITION FOR GROUND DEVELOPMENT"' N.W. Cor of parcel described in entry 66 Book 253, Page 137 r-p i 1 )\/ L_ I sl 11\ 1 AREA 13,475 sq.ft. to� m m O Lvvi $ ,__ ITI r\r V V I L. V 1 g1.72 1 A = 79'40'52" R=60.00 GEF: r,nr ri.)-r \71L.i..L.I\T v'./VI61 N89'46'01 "W 294.60 216.00 v v AREA 16.469 sq.ft. 140.14 PAGE 137 O 4' O --- 64.82 ,A-) S89'46'01 "E el, h � 4 Ary co Scale: 11nch=50fee PROPERTY DESCRIPTION Outlot A, THE HIGHLANDS OF STILLWATER 3RD ADOITION, according to the recorded plat thereof, Washington County, Minnesota. and The West 216.00 feet of the Parcel described in Entry 66, Book 253,, Page 137, in Minnesota. the office of the County Recorder, Washington County, and That part of the Northeast Quarter of Section 32, Township 30: Range 20,'' Washington County, Minnesota, described as follows: Commencing at the southwest corner of Parcel as described in Entry 66, Book 253 of Deeds, Page 137, in the office of the County Recorder, Washington County, Minnesota; thence northerly along the west line of said Parcel 12.75 feet to the point of beginning of the land to be described; thence continuing northerly along said west line to the northwestcorner of said Parcel; thence westerly to a point of intersection with the westerly. extension of the north line of said Parcel with the northwesterly extension of the southwesterly line of Outlot A, THE HIGHLANDS OF STILLWATER 3RD ADDITION, according to the recorded plat thereof, Washington County, Minnesota; thence southeasterly along said northwesterly extension of said Outlot A, 110.45 feet to the most northerly line of said Outlot A; thence easterly along the most northerly line of said Outlot A, to the point of beginning. 1 hereby certify that this survey, plan or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am duly Registered Land Surveyor under the lows of the State of Minnesota. Doted this 21 sr day of ncf'obe/ , 19 9% Re ;sad +o Z2-93 Terrence E. Rothenbacher, L.S. Mn. Reg. No. 20595 /32_98 369 * PIONEER *engineering *it* * West line of parcel desc. Entry 66. Book 253, Page 137 1-0 17) O 00 0 Z uw v.nc.o" • OW. a,arm: '2422 Enterprise Drive M enooto Heights. MN 55120 (612) 681-1914 FAX:681-9488 ,.vv",vwn. ,.,wrcvr.uw"trn 625 Highway 10 N.E. Blaine, MN 55434 (612) 783-1880 FAX:783-1883 SKETCH & DESCRIPTION FOR GROUND DEVELOPMENT N.E CDR. Sea 32, TWP. 30 R. 20 S89'22'01"E 1694:70 Line parallel with west line of parcel Desc. entry 66, Book 253. Page 137 S89'46'01 "E 435.60 216.00 Parcel A AREA 21.599 sq.ft. 216.00 8 219.60 Parcel B AREA 21,960 snit. 219.60 Scale: finch=100f-gg 435.60 N89'46'01 "W N89'46'01 "W PROPOSED DESCRIPTION FOR PARCEL A The West 216.00 feet of the following described parcel: A11 that part of the Northeast Quarter 4NE-1/4) of Section Thirty-two (32). Township Thirty (30) North, Range Twenty (20) West. described as follows: Coesencing at the northeast corner of Section Thirty-two (32), Township Thirty (30) North, Range Twenty (20) West. Washington County, Minnesota; thence South 89 degrees 22 minutes. 01 second East along the north line of said Section Thirty-two (32) for 1494.70 feet; thence South 5 degrees 31 minutes 01 second East for 741.30 feet; thence South 0 degrees 41 minutes 59 seconds West for 101.40 feet; thence North 89 degrees 46 minutes 01 second West for 30.0 feet to the'point of beginhing of this description; thence continuing North 89 degrees 46 minutes 01 second West for 435.60 feet; thence North 0 degrees 41 einutes 59 seconds East for 100 feet; thence South 89 degrees 46 minutes 01 second West for 435.40 feet; thence South 0 degrees 41 minutes 59 seconds West for 100.00 feet to the point of beginning. PROPOSED DESCRIPTION FOR PARCEL 8 A11 that part of the Northeast Quarter of Section 32. Township 30, Range 20, described as follows: Commencing at the northeast corner of Section Thirty-two (32), Township Thirty (30) North. Range Twenty (20) West, Washington County, Minnesota; thence South 89 degrees 22 minutes 01 second East along the north line of said Section Thirty-two (32) for 1694.70 feet; thence South 5 degrees 31 minutes 01 second East for 741.30 feet; thence South 0 degrees 41 minutes 59 seconds West for 101.40 feet; thence North 89 degrees 46 minutes 01 second West for 30.0 feet to the point of beginning of this description; thence continuing North 89 degrees 46 minutes 01 second West for 435.60 feet; thence North 0 degrees 41 minutes 59 seconds East for 100 feet; thence South 89 degrees 46 minutes 01 second West for 435.60 feet; thence South 0 degrees 41 minutes 59 seconds West for 100.00 feet to the point of beginning, except the West 216.00 feet thereof. Together with an' easement for roadway purposes to provide access from the above described tract to the public road to the north described as follows: A 30.00 foot road easement over a part of the Northeast Quarter (NE-1/4) of Section Thirty-two (32). Township Thirty (30) North. Range Twenty (20) West, the east line of said easement being located and described as follows: Beginning at a point on the north line of Section Thirty-two (32). Township Thirty (30) North. Range Twenty (20) west, Washington County. Minnesota. 1494.70 feet West of the northeast corner of said Section Thirty-two (32). said point being on the east line of said 30.00 foot road easement; thence South 5 degrees 31 minutes 01 second East along said east line of 30.00 foot road easement for 741.30 feet; thence South 0 degrees 41 minutes 51 seconds West along said east line of 30.00 foot road easement for 101.40 feet to the end of the road easement, said road easement being 30,00 feet in width from the east to west and being adjacent to the east line of the above described one acre tract and commencing at the south line of said on acre tract and then running northerly to the said north line of Section Thirty-two (32), said roadway to be used in common by the parties hereto and others. 1 hereby certify that this survey, pion or report was prepared by me or under .my direct supervision and that / am duly Registered Land Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Doted this 21 SI' day of Oc-lobe/ , 19 93 E. R� Terrence E. Rothenbacher, L.S. Mn. Reg. No. 20595 3 69 /3Z LAW OFFICES OF ECKBERG, LAMMERS, BRIGGS, WOLFF a VIERLING 1835 NORTHWESTERN AVENUE STILLWATER. MINNESOTA 55082 LYLE J. ECKBERG JAMES F. LAMMERS ROBERT G. BRIGGS PAUL A. WOLFF MARK J. VIERLING GREGORY G. GALLER KEVIN K. SHOEBERG THOMAS J. WEIDNER SUSAN D. OLSON Mr. Steve Russell Community Development Director City of Stillwater 216 North Fourth Street Stillwater, MN 55082 June 2, 1994 (612) 439-2878 FAX (612) 439-2923 In Re: Maxine Benson Gilbert Court Addition Minor Subdivision Dear Steve: Regarding the above -entitled matter, I represent Maxine Benson, who is the owner of Parcels A and B as set forth in the attached Sketch and Description. As you are aware, Ground Development, Inc. has submitted an application for approval of a minor subdivision. The purpose of this request is to allow Mrs. Benson to convey to Ground Development, Inc. Parcel A, which is the west one-half (1/2) of her property. This conveyance was contemplated at the time that Gilbert Court Addition was platted. My client prefers not to attend either the Planning Commission Meeting or the City Council Meeting unless her attendance is required. It is my impression that this is a straight forward request, but should there be any problems or concerns which need to be addressed, or should the presence of Mrs. Benson or her representative be required, I would appreciate your contacting me. Thank you for your cooperation and consideration regarding the above. Ver truly yours, // es F. Lammers JFL:dmr Enclosure c: Maxine Benson * PIONEER engineering * West 15,. of pored desc. Entry 66, Book 253. Poge 137 9422 Enterprise Drive Nendola Heights. NN 55120 (612) 681-1914 FAX:681-9488 625 Highway 10 N.E. Wokw:. NN 55434 (612) 783-1880 FAX:783-1883 SKETCH & DESCRIPTION FOR GROUND DEVELOPMENT 216.00 Parcel A AREA 21,599 sq.ft. 216.00 Scale. 11nch_1 OO ee PR0P0SE0_D.ESCRIPTION FOR PARCEL A Line parallel with west One of parcel I Demo. entry 65, Book 253. Pogo 137 S89'46'01 "E 435.60 8 435.60 N 89'46'01 "W N.E COR. Sec. 32, IMP. 30 R. 20 S89'22'01"E 1694.70 I 219.60 Parcel B AREA 21.960 sq.ft. 219.60 30.00 4". N 89'46'01 "W The West 216.00 feet of the following described parcel: A11 that part of the Northeast Quarter (NE-1/4) of Section Thirty-two (32), Township Thirty (30) North, Range Twenty (20) Nest, described as follows: Commencing at the northeast corner of Section Thirty-two (32), Township Thirty (30) North, Range Twenty (20) West, Washington County, Minnesota; thence South 89 degrees 22 minutes 01 second East along the north line of said Section Thirty-two (32) for 1694.70 feet; thence South 5 degrees 31 minutes 01 second East for 741.30 feet; thence South 0 degrees 41 minutes 59 seconds West for 101.40 feet; thence North 89 degrees 46 minutes 01 second West for 30,0 feet to the'polnt of beginhing of this description; thence continuing North 89 degrees 46 minutes 01 second West for 435.60 feet; thence North 0 degrees 41 minutes S9 seconds East for 100 feet; thence South 89 degrees 46 minutes 01 second West for 435.60 feet; thence South 0 degrees 41 minutes 59 seconds West for 100.00 feet to the point of beginning. PROPOSED DESCRIPTION FOR PARCEL 8 A11 that part of the Northeast Ouarter of Section 32, Township 30, Range 20, described as follows: Commencing at the northeast corner of Section Thirty-two (32), Township Thirty (30) North, Range Twenty (20) West, Washington County, Minnesota; thence South 89 degrees 22 minutes 01 second East along the north line of said Section Thirty-two (32) for 1694.70 feet: thence South 5 degrees 31 minutes 01 second East for 741.30 feet; thence South 0 degrees 41 minutes 59 seconds West for 101.40 feet; thence North 89 degrees 46 minutes 01 second West for 30.0 feet to the point of beginning of this description; thence continuing North 89 degrees 46 minutes 01 second West for 435.60 feet; thence North 0 degrees 41 minutes 59 seconds East for 100 feet: thence South 89 degrees 46 minutes 01 second West for 435.60 feet; thence South 0 degrees 41 minutes 59 seconds West for 100.00 feet to the point of beginning, except the West 216.00 feet thereof. Together with an' easement for roadway purposes to provide access from the above described tract to the public road to the north described as follows: A 30.00 foot road easement over a part of the Northeast Quarter (NE-1/4) of Section Thirty-two (32). Township Thirty (30) North, Range Twenty (20) West, the east line of said easement being located and described as follows: Beginning at a point on the north line of Section Thirty-two (32). Township Thirty (30) North, Range Twenty (20) West. Washington County, Minnesota, 1694.70 feet West of the northeast corner of said Section Thirty-two (32), said point being on the east line of said 30.00 foot road easement; thence South 5 degrees 31 minutes 01 second East along said east line of 30.00 foot road easement for 741.30 feet; thence South 0 degrees 41 minutes 51 seconds West along said east line of 30.00 foot road easement for 101.40 feet to the end of the road easement, said road easement being 30.00 feet in width from the east to west and being adjacent to the east line of the above described one acre tract and commencing at the south line of said on acre tract and then running northerly to the said north line of Section Thirty-two (32), said roadway to be used in common by the parties hereto and others. 1 hereby certify that this survey, plan or report was prepared by me or under .my direct supervision and that I am duly Registered Land Surveyor under the lows of the State of Minnesota. Doted this 21 S7' day of Ocaober , 19 93 . i » E Terrence E. Rothenbocher, L.S. Mn. Reg. No. 20595 365 PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW Case No. V/94-28 Planning Commission Date: June 13, 1994 Project Location: 1348 Benson Blvd Zoning District: PUD/RA Applicant's Name: James and Karen Neal Type of Application: Variance Project Description Variance to construction a 12 x 13 foot deck with a 17 foot rear yard setback (25 feet required). Discussion The proposal is to construct a 13 x 12 foot deck 9 feet above ground off the back of a residence in the Highland neighborhood. The deck would be as close as 15 feet from the rear property line. A 25 foot rearyard setback is required. The site boarders land owned by the school district. The lot is irregularly shaped with a 42 inch retaining walling running parallel to the house. The proposed deck projects 8 feet into the rearyard setback. A different stepped design deck could be constructed that meets the setback requirements. Findings The proposal does not meet the setback requirement of the zoning ordinance and other designs could be constructed that are 25 feet from the rear property line. Recommendation Denial Attachments Application and plans PLANNING ADMINISTRATIVE FORM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY OF STILLWATER 216 NORTH FOURTH STREET STILLWATER, MN 55082 ACTION REQUESTED Appeal Certificate of Compliance Conditional or Special Use Permit Design Review Permit Planned Unit Development t/Variance Comprehensive Plan Amendment Zoning Amendment Other Engineering Review Fee Total Fee Case No. /N 73g Date: � % Fee Paid: ADDITIONAL ENGINEERING COSTS MAY BE INCLUDED AS PART OF THIS APPLICATION Environmental Review EAW EIS No Special Environmental Assessment Required FEE The applicant shall be responsible for the completeness and accuracy of all forms and supporting material submitted in connection with any application. Address of Project p3 i-s„� a/,/,i/e w?S%/1.�t )9T /;'jti Assessor's Parcel No. //.//—' Zoning District Description of Project Coa./57,".1cTia,+.' 7 r- b'77) E ',S7-iAtk= s7, "4417-,ee / "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, true and correct. I further certify I will comply with the permit if it is granted and used." Property Owner ,ir41L., Mailing Address /9fl Telephone No.'s — Signature g^ Any decision ma • e on this proposal can e appealed within ten calendar days of the date of the action. Representative Mailing Address Telephone No. Signature s Lot Size (dimensions) x sq. ft. Total Land Area Hight of Buildings: Principal Accessory Stories Date of Public Hearing is Feet �2G Total Floor Area Z.2 V sq. ft. Proposed floor area sq. ft. Building Coverage sq. ft. Paved Impervious Area sq. ft. Number of off street parking spaces APPEALS BUILDING MOVING PERMITS CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE CONDITIONAL OR SPECIAL USE PERMIT GENERAL BLUFFLAND/SHORELAND/FLOOPLAIN DESIGN PERMIT GRADING PERMIT i I PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT ON -SITE SEWER PERMIT r—' SITE ALTERATION PERMIT VARIANCE VEGETATIVE CUTTING PERMIT ZONING AMENDMENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT OTHER Record of Action on Application Decision Authority Date of Action Decision by Authority Appeals Period (date) Appeal Filed (date) Appeal Scheduled (date) Appeal Decision Authority Apeal Decision Approved Denied Date Decision Complete (date) 13 May 1994 Planning Commission Members City Council Members James D. Neal 1348 Benson Blvd. Stillwater, MN. 55082 439-0295 PROJECT DESCRIPTION/REASON FOR VARIANCE GRANT Proposed construction of wood (cedar) deck 13'X 12' attached to building and extending towards the North property line. A triangular section of the deck approximately 8' X� /Swould be within the required 25 foot structure limit of the North properfy line. Deck would be approximately 9 feet above ground level with a stairway descending on the West side. A 42 inch (height) retaining wall extends approximately 70 feet from the Northeast corner of lot to the Southwest. On the North side of wall and parallel is a water drainage easement. Water runs to a storm sewer drain about 200 feet to the West. North side of property line is school district property (Lily Lake Elementry). North side is slightly sloped with a wide and tall growth of pine trees. Request variance be granted to allow construction of deck attached to existing structure, which will allow use of patio door included in initial construction house. Addition of the deck will increase the value and enhance the use of the property. Contractor for this project is Dave Swager. Attachment: 1. Site Survey I • �* i PIONEER engineering Certificate `t.iwo SUR YORS 1 CIVIL INCZNEERS LAND PLANNERS . LANDSCAPE ARCw1tM S 2422 Enterprise Orive Mendota Heights, MN 55120 (612) 681--1914•Fox 681-9488 625 Highway 10 N4rtheast Blaine, MN - 55434' (612) 783--1880 •Fax 783-1883 of Survey for: CLASSIC HOME DESIGN I House Address: BENSON BLVD, WEST. S11LLWAER. MN Model Name: ISLE CARLEY 9 S 88'56'30" W _1A) 100.40 7 iq ?i` �Jr GT¢" ,titi0 o ‘V cp 11 25o.t / a •cbek 9Vt.8�! \ / PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW Case No. SUB/94-29 Planning Commission Date: June 13, 1994 Project Location: 814 N Everett Street Zoning District: RB Two Family Applicant's Name: Elvera Conley Type of Application: Minor Subdivision Project Description Request to subdivide 22,500 square foot parcel in two lots of 11,250 square feet each. Discussion The request is to subdivide one 22,500 square foot lot in two 11,250 square foot lots. The site meets the lot size requirements of the RB Duplex residential district. There are some trees located around the perimeter of the site and a section of driveway for the adjacent lot is on the new lot that is being created. To preserve the character of the lot and provide driveway access on each property, the following two conditions of approval are recommended. Recommendation Approval as conditioned Conditions of Approval 1. The existing driveway to 814 North Everett shall be removed from new lot and reconstructed so it is entirely on the old lot. 2. The pine tree, crab apple and four ash trees lining West Elm Street shall be protected and not removed with the development of the lot. Attachments Application and certificate of survey rLANNING ADMINISTRATIV1 FORM Telephone No. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY OF STILLWATER 216 NORTH FOURTH STREET STILLWATER, MN 55082 ACTION REQUESTED Appeal Certificate of Compliance Conditional or Special Use Permit Design Review Permit Planned Unit Development Variance Comprehensive Plan Amendment Zoning Amendment Other Engineering Review Fee Total Fee Case No. Date: Fee Paid: ADDITIONAL ENGINEERING COSTS MAY BE INCLUDED AS PART OF THIS APPLICATION Environmental Review EAW EIS No Special Environmental Assessment Required FEE The applicant shall be responsible for the completeness and accuracy of all forms and supporting material submitted in connection with any application. Address of Project Zoning District Description of Project Assessor's Parcel No. "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, true and correct. I further certify I will comply with the permit if it is granted and used." Property Owner aLV-ei(2—f'r C..OpJ1.,,y Mailing Address S 19- IS a G.VcfZe �Tt lj _ T`—c V2 / 114 ---S-y D 71/1i Signature ki..LIL x CLJ( I ( Pc k) Any decision made on this proposal can be Lot Size (dimensions) x Total Land Area sq. ft. Hight of Buildings: Stories Principal Accessory Date of Public Hearing is Representative v� `1 Mailin Address `4 ©S` So ''-C-ST I►akiaPC, , ,T,r�..r >>s3 Telephone o. 1 0 2.- Signature W,1 G G pealed within ten calendar days of the date of the action. Total Floor Area sq. ft. Proposed floor area sq. ft. Feet �/ `I Building Coverage sq. ft. ArVA(14- f Paved Impervious Area sq. ft. t vi C -re _ Number of off street parking spaces of SJ42U ey To whom it may concern: Regarding: A proposed subdivision I propose for your consideration the subdivision of Lots 1, 4 & 5 in Block 12 of the Staples and Mays Addition as depicted in the attached Certificate of Survey. The proposed subdivision would result in PARCEL 1 and PARCEL 2 shown in the Certificate of Survey. qi4) William L Conley Power of Attorney for the owner, Elvera Conley - 814 No. Everett St., Stillwater (Power of Attorney form attached) CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR:WILLIAM L. CONLEY AND DENNIS P. CONLEY N 0 30 60 90 SCALE IN FEET SCALE I INCH = 30 FEET Bearings are based on assumed datum o Denotes.1/2" 0 Iron Pipe Set • Denotes iron monument found 0 1.47 0.31 0 O WEST ELM STREET /V 89°46'28 `E /SO.00 PARCEL l /6 Z5D S. F BLOCK /2 3 !J A/ 89°46'R8 "L' /,, 0 • 690 iq ,;�• _ -_ a /gig" fyEb 0,3 0 ?/vwra y r - - 43/77 O VVEWAy O l y c the R ),Les s_o -• 0,10 o.44 /ARCEL 2 //,2. ' 5 1-li 0.10 9il tt 1` tt N w a, N nl /50.00 N 89°44' 8 E 354 tf EXISTING, N Nov54 n 30,0 EXISTING LEGAL DESCRIPTION Lots 1, 4, and 5, Block 12, STAPLES AND MAYS ADDITION, Washington County, Minnesota PROPOSED LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS 60 NORTH EVERETT STREET 60 Parcel 1 Lot 1 and the North Half of Lot 4, Block 12, STAPLES AND MAYS ADDITION, Washington County, Minnesota. Subject to easements, reservations and restrictions of record, if any. Parcel 2 Lot 5 and the South Half of Lot 4, Block 12, STAPLES AND MAYS ADDITION, Washington County, Minnesota. Subject to easements, reservations and restrictions of record, if any. MAERALA MIME & 8401 73rd Ave. No., Suite 63 Brooklyn Park, MN 55428 Telephone (612) 533-7595 Fax (612) 533.1937 ENGINEERING SURVEYING PLANNING We hereby certify that this is a true and correct representation of a survey of the boundaries of the above described land and of the location of all buildings• if any, thereon and all visible encroachmantR if any,y,from or on said land. As surveyed this /2 ay of /9'2 �19 rsuY,./ Land MinnR.g No 5. 7 Job No 9q--03 6 book - Pap PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW Case No. V/94-30 Planning Commission Date: June 13, 1994 Project Location: 1251 W Orleans Zoning District: RA Applicant's Name: Richard Rodrigue Type of Application: Variance Project Description A variance to the sideyard setback requirement on a corner lot. Discussion The request is to construct an attached garage to an older home which presently does not have a garage. The location of the structure will not impair traffic on West Orleans and Orleans Court. Findings The granting of the variance is necessary for the reasonable use of the land and buildings. Recommendation Approval Conditions of Approval 1. The garage shall be the same color as the home. Attachments Application, letter and site plan COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY OF STILLWATER CITY OF STILLWATER 216 NORTH FOURTH STREET STILLWATER, MN 55082 APPL ICATIONJV DATE: `-' ACTION REQUESTED Appeal Certificate of Compliance Conditional or Special Use Permit Design Review Permit Planned Unit Development Variance Comprehensive Plan Zoning Amendment Other 9 Amendment FEE r1C,.n0 *Additional Engineering fees may be required Engineering Review Fee as part of this application. TOTAL FEE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW E AW EIS No Special Environmental Assessment Required The applicant shall be responsible for the completeness and accuracy of all forms and supporting material submitted in connection with any application. PLEASE PRINT OR TYPE I 1 I ADDRESS OF PROJECT J) $ / 6f/ IC7' a y/ , kr ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 32 — L JJJ ZONING DISTRICT DESCRIPTION OF PFtOJECT ;1J�' f !a 7/ n 7 � �(�Y/1 �J N L'e!". sT74- /d¢ o 1✓ /-'(7(7r�- "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, true and correct. I further certify I will comply with the permit if it is granted and used. I realize that additional engineering fees will be my responsibility." PROPERTY OWNER k:L r i 49674U) MAILING ADDRESS l)- S/ 11/As 7` Qr. fzo TELEPHONE ) SIGNATURE Xek, )7)L/ ZIP SY-6W— REPRESENTATIVE MAILING ADDRESS TELEPHONE ( ) SIGNATURE ZIP Any decision made on this proposal can be appealed within ten (10) calendar days of the date of the action. APPLICATION DATA 21 LOT SIZE (Dimensions TOTAL LAND AREA HEIGHT OF BUILDING: S cries (Principal) (Accessory) sq. Feet " TOTAL FLOOR AREA SQ. FT. PROPOSED FLOOR AREA C74 SQ. FT. BUILDING COVERAGE SQ. FT. PAVED IMPERVIOUS AREA SQ. FT. # OFF STREET PARKING SPACES To the Stillwater Planning Commission, I own a house located at 1251 West Orleans Street. I am requesting a variance to build a 24 x 24 attached garage. There is currently no garage on the property. If granted, the garage would be: 47 feet north of West Orleans and 37 feet north of the utility easement that parallels West Orleans Street; and 28 feet east of Orleans Court and 18 feet east of the utility easement that parallels Orleans Court (See diagram). Due to the topography of the property, the proposed location is the only viable one. Moving the garage to the back of the house would mean the loss of a large Maple shade tree, a very old stone retaining wall as well as extra lawn area. r 4 4 /f/ k/41.5- C -4 f 6 ry%5 G'c `i/:, 4(o..t17,:// d �- /ji, S a /(-/_)2 iti Gt r d to f� /o a_ //o k9--- PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW Case No. V/94-31 Planning Commission Date: June 13, 1994 Project Location: 416 S Fourth Street Zoning District: RB Applicant's Name: James Huntsman Type of Application: Variance Proj ect Description A variance to the rearyard setback requirement (2 feet proposed, 5 feet required) for the construction of a two -car garage. Discussion The request is to construct a new garage on the foundation of an existing garage with an 8 foot expansion to the north. The existing Walnut Tree to the north will remain. A small 96 square foot addition will be added to the south for storage and a workspace. St. Mary's Catholic Church Campus is directly to the west of the site. A chain -link fence with heavy vines screens the Huntsman yard from the Church. A larger garage would not greatly impact this adjacent property because this is the rear of the site and the service area. By the description of the visual elements of the garage, it should be appropriate to the neighborhood. Findings The proposed variance will not be injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. Recommendation Approval as conditioned. Conditions of Approval 1. All run-off from the roof shall remain on -site. Attachments Application, letter and plans LANNING ADMINISTRATIVL iORM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY OF STILLWATER 216 NORTH FOURTH STREET STILLWATER, MN 55082 ACTION REQUESTED Appeal Certificate of Compliance Conditional or Special Use Permit Design Review Permit Planned Unit Development Variance Comprehensive Plan Amendment Zoning Amendment Other Engineering Review Fee Total Fee Case No. \)/c4-i-31 Date: .7.z. Yr Fee Paid: i7 4 (,0 ADDITIONAL ENGINEERING COSTS MAY BE INCLUDED AS PART OF THIS APPLICATIO Environmental Review EA W EIS No Special Environmental Assessment Required FEE 4 car, plAiD 1 i spaWAI R. (.�77 }• The applicant shall be responsible for the completeness and accuracy of all forms and supporting materia omitted in coun& •n =`6l1+.'3 with any application. Address of Project ' 4 S ; Li S 1 , Zoning District Description of Project Pe r 1_rrcr Assessor's Parcel No. /O!3 :: `/ 760 La,)tl 02—C-frt- Y41`q?.119:', "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, true and correct. I further certify I will comply with the permit if it is granted and used." Property Owner Mailing Address f/(C J ; y Le sr: S"T�/lwR-rtr- Mti g`3 c:t? Telephone No. tt Signature Any dec's)on made on this proposal can be appealed within ten calendar days of the date of the action. Representative Mailing Address Telephone No. Signature Lot Size (dimensions) „ 23S x /SO sq. ft. Total Land Area 3 S) 2 0 Hight of Buildings: Stories 4 Feet Principal of 3 b Accessory j ) 2- Date of Public Hearing is Total FIoor Area sq. ft. Proposed floor area sq. ft. Building Coverage to 7 sq. ft. Paved Impervious Area sq. ft. Number of off street parking spaces Jim & Annette Huntsman 416 S. 4th St. Stillwater, Minn. 55082 May 27, 1994 To the Planning Commission City of Stillwater, Minnesota 216 N. 4th St. Stillwater, Minn. 55082 Re: Variance to rebuild single garage as two -car garage on existing location We are requesting a 3' variance in the rear setback requirement to rebuild a detached, dilapidated garage. The existing one -car garage was built about 30 years ago after the house's original carriage house in the northwest corner of the property was torn down. The garage's roofing has deteriorated and needs replacing; the foundation is cracked and leaks; and some of the structure has rotted wood. It would be a waste of money to repair the structure. Storm run—off from St. Mary's adjacent paved lot has gone onto our property over many past years in the area of the old carriage house and has created some underground erosion, causing sink holes to occur in that area. That area would not be suitable to build any structure on. The present driveway is at an angle to the rear property line, creating a narrowing wedge, within which to build a garage. The only real possibility is to rebuild the garage on its present location, which is about 2' from the rear property line. In keeping with the realities of modern family life, a two -car garage (ca. 24' x 24', exterior dimensions) should be built instead of a single -car one. Our proposal is to widen the current foundation (16') 8' to the north because the existing driveway prevents widening to the south. However, a large walnut tree (10" diam.) to the north prevents widening more than about 8' to the north. With this constraint, additional storage and workspace cannot be created by the usual method of widening beyond the width to accommodate two cars. Instead, additional storage and workspace will be provided by a small, perpendicular extension area (ca. 8' w x 12' 1), the equivalent of a shed, to the south and integrated into the structure. That part of a 6' chain link fence behind the existing garage would likely be removed, and the remaining fence terminated at the new garage's rear corners. This would provide easier access to the rear of the structure for maintenance. A second reason for rebuilding the garage is that the current garage is architecturally incompatible with the house's historic style. Since the house is on the National Register, substantial effort will be made to be consistent with the house's style. The plan is to use ca. 2' of simulated sandstone foundation block and siding & corner boards similar to the house's. The roof should have at least a 5/12 pitch, possibly even a 6/12 pitch, and an eyebrow over the front to create a gable similar to the house's eyebrowed gables. A roof cupola is a possible decorative accent, depending on its cost and aesthetic compatibility. Sincerely, • // p Recreation Center St. Mary's School 0 0 a) CC Garage Kilty 4-plex 416 S. 4th St. Existing garage 71' RI a) > 0 235' Garage Crimmins' house Scale: 1" = 40' South 4th Street North—► rear lot line 2' l chain Zink fence 8' 12' house N new garage 24' walnut tree 6" sugar maple 63' Scale: 1" =10' N -- / 1 PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW Case No. V/94-32 Planning Commission Date: June 13, 1994 Project Location: 504 North Second Zoning District: RB Applicant's Name: Mike and Nance Anders Type of Application: Variance Project Description Discussion The proposal is to construct a garage on the site. The only reasonable location is the rear of the property as shown on the site plan. The home is on the National Register of Historical Places so the architectural features of the structure and its setting are important as viewed from Second Street. A driveway presently exists which will provide access to the garage. The retaining wall will also be replaced. Findings The proposed variance is reasonable for the reasonable use of the land and buildings and the minimum variance to accomplish the use of a garage. Recommendation Approval Conditions of Approval 1. All drainage from the roof shall remain onsite. Attachments Letter Application form PLANNING ADMINISTRATIVE FORM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY OF STILLWATER 216 NORTH FOURTH STREET STILLWATER, MN 55082 ACTION REQUESTED Appeal Certificate of Compliance Conditional or Special Use Permit Design Review Permit Planned Unit Development ✓ Variance Comprehensive Plan Amendment Zoning Amendment Other Engineering Review Fee Total Fee ADDITIONAL ENGINEERING COSTS MAY BE INCLUDED AS PART OF THIS APP Environmental Review EA W EIS f No Special Environmental Assessment Required The applicant shall be responsible for the completeness and accuracy of all forms and suppo with any application. Address of Project -5-e),/ /t-: S ,//e a Zoning District Description of Project C,z Assessor's Parcel No. Case No. � Ci Date: Fee Paid: `D 11.1,• V FEE � �4AT ON (8 ''."- Cn1 aterial submitsubmit2i, connection "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, true and correct. I further certify I will comply with the permit if it is granted and used." Property Owner /14 Mailing Address Telephone No. y3/- 5-72 5— Signature: Representative Mailing Address Telephone No. Signature Any decision made on this proposal can be appealed within ten calendar days of the date of the action. Lot Size (dimensions) '7 5 x /SD sq. ft. Total Land Area / // 2 S D s . Hight of Buildings: Stories t'f teet Principal - Accessory Date of Public Hearing is Total Floor Area 3 i 7 sq. ft. (e x, s+ ► '� } Proposed floor area *ISO sq. ft. C `i z ref { Building Coverage "fl3 0 sq. ft. (9 . a 9e ) Paved Impervious Area 7 ie sq. ft. (d ),r'veiva1> Number of off street parking spaces Ann Pung-Terwedo Steve Russell Community Development Department City of Stillwater 216 North Fourth Street Stillwater, MN 55082 RE: Zoning Variance Application 504 N. Second St. Stillwater, MN 55082 May 25, 1994 Please accept this letter as our application for a variance to the zoning code for the purpose of constructing a garage near our property line. Our proposed garage would be attached to the west side of our house, and extend to the west property line of our lot. We have been unable to locate our property stake, despite use of a rented metal detector and lots of shovel work. The previous owners confirmed that no stake had been located when they constructed a shed near this same property line. We have, however, determined the property line through measurements from our neighbor's property stake. In any case, we plan to build the new garage on the foundation of the old garage, which was torn down by a previous owner of our property. The west side of our house is the only logical location for a garage and driveway as our only other possible access would be onto North Second Street just south of Laurel Street. This would be a most unsafe location for a driveway, as traffic comes over the hill from "Battle Hollow" quite rapidly, and a high stone retaining wall separating our property from our neighbors to the north would block our view of this traffic. As it would also be located directly across from Pioneer Park, parked cars would also obstruct views and add to the hazards of this option. The remaining foundation of the old garage forms a retaining wall on our west property line, and is approximately 5 to 6 feet high on both the west and north sides of what used to be the garage. This area has provided us with off-street parking for the 10 years we have lived in this house, but this old garage foundation is becoming unsafe from years of water and exposure. We will need to remove and replace this even if we continue to use it solely as a retaining wall. We have consulted with our neighbors to the west, John and Anne Johnson, near whose property line our proposed garage would be. They have expressed no reservations about our intentions and encouraged us to pursue our building plans, including this variance application. Along with our application fee of $70, we have attached the following for your review: Planning Administrative Form legal description, 504 N. Second St. site plan garage floor plan layout photographs of site If you require further information or have any questions, please contact us at 439-5725. Thank you in advance for your efforts and consideration. ike and Nance Anders 1%.12.‘ ET. ‘1,1 era tsJ G At-4C 5 1T"8" T\J t-fr,cY ) DO 6 Ke.A/A/hZ PAO a .11gAGE RPRNI/ rc--k L 1,1 Sca/e. et: / 7 ' ge 6 — .et,uneir zs 1 r /10115E ro 5 02) 6f-s: Kr1,4, A t 'rOJ AN t, 5 0•14 .13 - -1.5 A ai ?/73H a.SV3 3W Qj 5-L / 1/ »e1o.Ls1ti 14o15- 5- A- N Q S VIA( -110073. ►s � S•hl bt a 7v21-V9 C-1Q _nouw4nc03 �` o7(y1rY1-t/u.(3A 9,.4r-i/ jL dad -15,9en 91 LEGAL DESCRIPTION All that part of Block Seven (7) of the Original Town (now city) of Stillwater, described as follows: Beginning at the Southeast corner of said Block and running thence northerly along the west line of Second Street, 150 feet; thence westerly and parallel to the north line of Cherry Street 75 feet; thence southerly on a line parallel to the west line of said Second Street 150 feet to the north line of Cherry Street, and thence easterly along the north line along said Cherry Street 75 feet to the place of beginning, according to the recorded plat thereof. PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW Case No. V/94-33 Planning Commission Date: June 13, 1994 Project Location: 1750 W Frontage Road Zoning District: BP-C Applicant's Name: Gunnar Balstad Type of Application: Variance Project Description Variance to sideyard setback for construction of storage shed. Discussion The request is to construct a 25 x 12 foot storage shed next to Stillwater Inn as shown on the attached plan. The shed would be setback 7 feet from the CUB property line. A trash receptacle would be stored in the shed. The applicant shows shrubs to help break up the facade of the structure and screen it from the adjacent CUB parking area. A drawing shows a simple shed roofed structure. The shed would be painted to match the motel. Findings Because of the location of the site next a drainage pond and parking lot, the structure as conditioned will not be detrimental to the character of the area. Recommendation Approval Conditions of Approval 1. Bush lilacs shall be planted along the south and west side if the shed. 2. The shed shall be reduced in size to 22 x 12 feet to accommodate a 10 foot setback. 3. The shed shall be painted to match the color of the motel. Attachments Application and plans. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY OF STILLWATER CITY OF STILLWATER 216 NORTH FOURTH STREET STILLWATER, MN 55082 APPLICATION NO. U DATE: 5 - - J _ ! ACTION REQUESTED Appeal Certificate of Compliance Conditional or Special Use Permit Design Review Permit Planned Unit Development Variance Comprehensive Plan Amendment Zoning Amendment Other FEE *ADDITIONAL ENGINEERING COSTS MAY BE INCLUDED AS PART OF THIS APPLICATION ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW EAW EIS No Special Environmental Assessment Required The applicant shall be responsible for the completeness and accuracy of all forms and supporting material submitted in connection with any application. Engineering Review Fee TOTAL FEE PLEASE PRINT OR TYPE Q ADDRESS OF PROJECT_0r0 vlf l2-OTi1e ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. ZONING DISTRICT DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT Lqp,�fillivintr S a (70 acr.41-c.E (9 A0 c "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, true and correct. I further certify I will comply with the permit if it is granted and used." PROPERTY OWNER 600052- &4t_5 pO MAILING ADDRESS l-MD 6 p t �- VTl� Ct/2 11A�J ZIP SSb _ TELEPHONE (&(D 4 - t 0 REPRESENTATIVE TM 1-24 -p-o MAILING ADDRESS -22_42,8 S`t 1 (L 44-71 2_/1/1 /`1 ZIP cs_0 7 TELEPHONE ((0(2-) /70 SIGNATURE - SIGNATURE Any decision made on this proposal can the date of the action. be appealed within ten (10) calendar days of APPLICATION DATA 2 LOT SIZE (Dimensions) TOTAL LAND AREA HEIGHT OF BUILDINGS: Stories (Principal) (Accessory) 'x TOTAL FLOOR AREA SQ. FT. sq. ft. PROPOSED FLOOR AREA SQ. FT. Feet BUILDING COVERAGE SQ. FT. PAVED IMPERVIOUS AREA SQ. FT. # OFF STREET PARKING SPACES 3 T1 1 -z '34 ," 9n315y ((1V 4 ZIxSz 010C iva N 531',11; hrn 17vd ' liM 9M o NS Ono 4o '1vvnowaa rw M L vcirA 0--oz.,tizAucet.JD Cilivv\810t-1 VALC, 11.57,5-r- 4, PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW Case No. V/94-32' ,2,./1 Planning Commission Date: June 13, 1994 Project Location: 504 North Second Street Zoning District: RB Applicant's Name: Robert Clark Type of Application: Variance Project Description A variance to the frontyard setback requirement (16 feet proposed, 30 feet required). Discussion The request is to add a garage to an existing home and modify the existing garage into living space. The sideyard setback for a habitable living space is ten feet. The applicant did not give the sideyard setback. The Building Official reviewed the proposal and does not recommend approval because of the modification of the garage into a living space. The new garage would also impact the front yard. The design of the home cannot accommodate a large garage. There presently is a garage on the site and the lot cannot accommodate additional structures. Findings The proposal is not necessary for the reasonable use of the land. An existing garage does exist on the property. The lot is too small to accommodate additional living space. Recommendation Denial Attachments Application, letter and plans. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY OF STILLWATER CITY OF STILLWATER 216 NORTH FOURTH STREET STILLWATER, MN 55082 APPLICATION DATE: �A(0. tt07/-3 , ACTION REQUESTED Appeal Certificate of Compliance Conditional or Special Use Permit Design Review Permit Planned Unit Development vv-Variance Comprehensive Plan Amendment Zoning Amendment Other FEE *Additional Engineering fees may be as part of this application. required Engineering Review Fee TOTAL FEE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW E AW EIS No Special Environmental Assessment Required The applicant shall be responsible for the completeness and accuracy of all forms and supporting material submitted in connection with any application. PLEASE PRINT OR TYPE 1 I ADDRESS OF PROJECT Vic, g- ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. l.�kgK 349cD ZONING DISTRICT DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT Fly,, ,,,J , � T at' 1-i-4 tip- 1/4NeC "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, true and correct. I further certify I will comply with the permit if it is granted and used. I realize that additional engineering fees will be my responsibility." PROPERTY OWNER I"di�c ?; � k?1�T,t eefrei6- REPRESENTATIVE MAILING ADDRESS 1,?- So A ialz-t'it, si--a,'&T MAILING ADDRESS ► ,1/Y ZIP 5-75;-cz ZIP TELEPHONE (4' Imo) 3 v SIGNATURE TELEPHONE ( ) SIGNATURE Any decision made on this proposal can be appealed within the date of the action. ten (10) calendar days of APPLICATION DATA LOT SIZE (Dimensions) TOTAL LAND AREA HEIGHT OF BUILDINGS: Stories (Principal ) (Accessory) 'x sq. ft. Feet TOTAL FLOOR AREA SQ. FT. PROPOSED FLOOR AREA S/z SQ. FT. BUILDING COVERAGE SQ. FT. PAVED IMPERVIOUS AREA SQ. FT. # OFF STREET PARKING SPACES May 25, 1994 City of Stillwater Planning Department Dear Planning Commission Member, Enclosed is the information on our request for a variance to setback requirements. This request for a vanance is a result of our need tor a two car garage. Various special circumstances include: 1.) Many neighbors have two car garages. In today's real estate market a two car garage is standard. 2.) The addition of this garage will allow the existing garage space to be finished into living space. Both of these changes will increase the property value of the neighborhood and subject property. 3.) Neighboring properties along Martha Street are closer than the current 30' setback requirement. This addition will include two changes: 1.) The existing garage changes to a family room. 2.) Adding a two car attached garage in front of the existing garage. This addition will enhance the look of this property. See the enclosed drawing with a front view. Consideration has been made to attempt to locate the new garage to the west side of the home. Two problems to this would be: 1) Two four to six foot in diameter sugar maple trees would need to be removed. These trees must be over 100 years old and are part of the character Stillwater has to offer. It is a terrible mistake to take trees like these down. 2.) To build the garage on the west side would also require a variance from current setback requirements. Please accept our request as we are very anxious to start this project. I will be happy to answer any questions regarding this matter. I can be reached at 439-1412 or 430-3039. Sincerely, Bob Clark 7?''' Sr -is -HA o\V_ `;) vi I 1-6 U*T01Af (/U416(t ,fvU k:;19,tql ((D June 8, 1994 City Hall 216 North fourth Stillwater, MN 55082 RE: A Variance - Case No. V/94-34 Dear Mayor Hooley and City Council Members: We the undersigned, residents of the neighborhood of South Martha Street are opposed to the request from Robert Clark for a variance to the frontyard setback requiremnt. We are proud of our beautiful neighborhood with established Maple trees and a garage in his front yard would not only devalue our property but would spoil the beauty of the neighborhood. PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW Case No. SUP/94-35 Planning Commission Date: June 13, 1994 Project Location: 229 South Main Street Zoning District: CBD Applicant's Name: Thomas Loome Type of Application: Special Use Permit Project Description A special use permit to conduct outside sales (food vending) on private property. Discussion The request is to conduct outside sales (food vending) on the vacant lot south of the Stillwater Book Center. The proposal calls for leasing the space to local food service establishments. The vending will not be on a full-time basis. The planters and landscaping will remain along Main Street so the vending will take place to the rear of the property as shown on the attached map. Findings The proposed use will not be injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare and will be in harmony with the general purpose of the Zoning Ordinance. Recommendation Approval as conditioned Conditions of Approval 1. The design of all exterior service areas shall be reviewed by city staff. 2. A food service license that is issued by Washington County shall be submitted to the city for each service vendor. 3. The applicant shall provide a trash receptacle for customer use and clean up the area each day. Attachments Application, letter and plan PLANNING ADMINISTRATIVE FORM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY OF STILLWATER 216 NORTH FOURTH STREET STILLWATER, MN 55082 ACTION REQUESTED Appeal Certificate of Compliance Conditional or Special Use Permit Design Review Permit Planned Unit Development Variance Comprehensive Plan Amendment Zoning Amendment Other Engineering Review Fee Total Fee CaseNo. SO,P Date: Fee Paid'. 0 0 FEE ti0 ADDITIONAL ENGINEERING COSTS MAY BE INCLUDED AS PART OF THIS APPLICATION Environmental Review EAW EIS No Special Environmental Assessment Required The applicant shall be responsible for the completeness and accuracy of all forms and supporting material submitted in connection with any application. Address of Project Zoning District Description of Project C C e l Assessor's Parcel No. "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 true and correct. I further certify I will comply with the permit if it is granted and used." Property Owner b`-�� I'--C,_:\) Lc (T) Mailing Address .?)at.) e. Telephone No. 4=50 — Representative Mailing Address Telephone No. Signature Any decision made on this proposal can be appealed within ten calendar days of the date of the action. Lot Size (dimensions) x sq. ft. Total Land Area Hight of Buildings: Stories Feet Principal Accessory Total Floor Area sq. ft. Proposed floor area sq. ft. Building Coverage sq. ft. Paved Impervious Area sq. ft. Number of off street parking spaces Date of Public Hearing is STILLWATER BOOK CENTER 229 SOUTH MAIN STREET • STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 55082 PHONE: 612-430-8183 FAX: 612-439-8504 OPEN: SUN NOON-9:00 MON-THURS I0:00-7:00 FRI-SAT 10:00-I0:00 26 May 1994 To whom it may concern: OWNERS: GARY R. GOODMAN THOMAS M. LOOME MANAGER: CHARLES PERRY On behalf of the owners of the new Stillwater Book Center, Gary Goodman and Thomas Loome, I wish to request permission for three or four vendors to sell food and drink (e.g., popcorn, soft drinks, coffee and tea, ice cream, hot dogs) on our property at the address above. These would be outside vendors, using the small park area to the South of the building, and our private parking areas, to the South and East of the building. There would be no vending on the sidewalks or on any other public property. It is out intention, if approval is given, to permit several vendors to sell on our property, weather permitting, on Weekends and Holidays. Thank you for a thoughtful consideration of our request. Si c'rely, / Thomas Loome 30 SPECIALIST BOOKSELLERS FROM THE UPPER MIDWEST USED, RARE, OUT -OF -PRINT AND ANTIQUARIAN BOOKS, MAPS AND PRINTS Th /VATER I STREET I 4' ¥oR OUThoc . \let\i•U NG MAIN STREET MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Ann Pung-Terwedo RE: Park Dedication Policy DATE: June 9, 1994 The Park and Recreation Board has reviewed and made changes to the Park Dedication Policy, which was adopted in 1989. Issues such as the amount of land to be dedicated and the in -lieu cash dedication was not sufficient based on the fair market value of property in the City of Stillwater. The attached policy is presented for your review, discussion, and possible recommendation for adoption to the City Council. I have also included a survey conducted on other park dedication policies in other cities. Municipal Offices 7701 County Road 110 West Minnetrista, MN 55364-9552 MEMORANDUM TO: Metro Area Planners FROM: R. Michael Leek, Minnetrista City Planner DATE: June 2, 1994 RE: Minnetrista Park Dedication Survey Dear Planning Official: Some months ago I contacted you to complete a survey regarding park dedication requirements for new subdivisions. We were fortunate to receive 24 responses, and are happy to share our summary of the survey results with you. We hope they may be of some interest and use to you. Thanks again to those who responded. OFFICE 612-446-1660 13" FAX 612-446-1311 CITY OF STILLWATER PARK DEDICATION POLICY POLICY ADOPTING STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES FOR DETERMINING THAT PORTION OF LAND BEING PLATTED, SUBDIVIDED OR DEVELOPED WHICH IS TO BE CONVEYED OR DEDICATED TO THE PUBLIC FOR PARK OR RECREATION PURPOSES OR WITH RESPECT TO WHICH CASH IS TO BE CONTRIBUTED TO THE CITY IN LIEU OF SUCH CONVEYANCE OF DEDICATION. 1. AUTHORITY: The state of Minnesota has enacted Minnesota Statutes 462.358, subdivision 2(b) which gives the authority to the Cities to require that a reasonable portion of any proposed subdivision be dedicated to the public, or preserved for public use as parks, playgrounds, trail or open space. The City of Stillwater has, by this dedication policy, chosen to exercise this authority in establishing minimum requirements for meeting this public need. 2. PURPOSE: The City Council recognizes that preservation of land for park, playground and public open space purposes as it relates to the use and development of land for residential, commercial/industrial purposes is essential to the maintaining of a healthful and desireable environment. The City must not only provide these necessary amenities for our citizens today, but also be insightful to the needs of the future as outlined in the Comprehensive Plan. It is recognized by the City Council that the demand for park, playground and public open space within a municipality is directly related to the density and intensity of development 1 permitted and allowed within any given area. Urban development means greater numbers of people and higher demands for park, playground and public open space. The City's Park Plan Standards, an element of the Comprehensive Plan, has established minimum community criteria for meeting the needs of the residents of Stillwater. In order to meet the community needs for parks and open space, ten (10) acres of park shall be required for each 1,000 residents of which seven (7) acres shall be designated as neighborhood parks. Neighborhood parks have a service area of one -quarter mile. Other parkland may include trails, open space areas and community parks. This shall be the standard upon which the City shall establish its parkland and parks cash dedication. It is the policy of Stillwater that the following guidelines for the dedication of land for park, playground and public open space purposes (or cash contributions in lieu of such dedication) in the subdividing and developing of land are appropriate. 3. RESIDENTIAL PARKLAND DEDICATION: The amount of land to be dedicated shall be based on the gross area of the proposed subdivision, proposed type of dwelling unit and density. The 1990 census data for households includes 2.8 persons per household. The formula for land dedication: The greater of 1) proposed units per acre or 2) zoned density. Dwelling Unit Density Land to be Dedicated 0 - 1.9 units per acre 7% 2.0 - 3.5 units per acre 8% 2 3.6 - 5.9 units per acre 6 - 10 units per acre 9% 10% 10+ units per acre Additional .5% for each unit over 10 4. GUIDELINES FOR ACCEPTING DEDICATION OF LAND FOR PUBLIC PARK PURPOSES: A. Land proposed to be dedicated for public purposes shall meet identified needs of the City as contained in the Stillwater Comprehensive Plan. B. Prior to dedication, the subdivider shall deliver to the City Attorney, an abstract of title or registered property abstract evidencing good and marketable title, free and clear of any mortgages, liens, encumbrances, assessments and taxes. The conveyance documents shall be in such form acceptable to the City. C. The required dedication and/or payment of fees -in -lieu of land dedication shall be made before final plat approval. D. The removal of trees, topsoil, storage of construction equipment, burying of construction debris or stockpiling of surplus soil on dedicated land is strictly forbidden without the prior written review by the Parks and Recreation Board and approval of the Community Development Director. E. Grading and utility plans, which may effect or impact the proposed park dedication, shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director and Parks and Recreation Board prior to dedication or at such time as is reasonably determined. F. To be eligible for park dedication credit, land dedication is to be located outside 3 of drainways, flood plains or ponding areas after the site has been developed. Grades exceeding 12 percent or are unsuitable for parks development may be considered for partial dedication. Where ponding has been determined to have a park function, credit will be given at a rate of 25 percent of the pond and adjoining land areas below the high water level; a minimum of 70 percent of land above the high water mark or 100 year flood plain where determined shall be dedicated before pond credit is granted. Other City dedication policies relating to wetland dedication must also be complied with. In those cases where subdividers and developers of land provide significant amenities such as, but not limited to swimming pools, tennis courts, ball fields, etc. within the development for the benefit of those residing or working therein, and where, in the judgement of the Parks and Recreation Board, such amenities significantly reduce the demands for public recreational facilities to serve the development, the Community Development Director may recommend to the Parks and Recreation Board that the amount of land to be dedicated for park, playground and public open space (or cash contribution in lieu of such dedication) be reduced by an amount not to exceed 50 percent of the amount calculated under paragraph 2 above. G. The City, upon review, may determine that the developer shall create and maintain some form of on -site recreation use by the site residents such as tot lots and open play space. This requirement may be in addition to the land or cash dedication 4 requirement. 5. CASH PAYMENT IN LIEU OF DEDICATION, RESIDENTIAL: If, at the option of the City upon review and recommendation of the Parks and Recreation Board, it is determined that a cash payment in lieu of land dedication shall be made, the cash shall be placed in a special fund for Parks and Recreation use and deposited by the developer with the City prior to final plat approval. The in lieu park fee shall be based on the percentage of land dedication. Cash dedication shall be based on the fair market value of the land no later than at the time of final approval. 6. INDUSTRIAL/COMMERCIAL DEDICATION REQUIREMENTS: Subdividers and developers of commercial/industrial land, including commercial/industrial portions of Planned Developments, shall be required at the time the site plan is approved and building permits are issued to dedicate to the City for park, playground and public open space purposes, 7.5 percent of the net land area within the development as determined by the City according to the guidelines set forth in Section 3 of this policy. 7. CASH PAYMENT IN LIEU OF DEDICATION, COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL: In those cases where the City does not require park or open space within a development, the City shall require payment of fees in lieu of such land dedication in an amount equal to $.10 per square foot of net land area, or such amount as determined by the City Council based on the value of the payments. Cash shall be contributed at the time of approval of each final plat or at the time of site plan or building permit approval as determined by the City. 5 A credit of up to 25 percent of the required dedication may be allowed by the City Council for on -site stormsewer, water, ponding and settling basins provided that such improvements benefit identifiable park and recreation water resources. The City Council, upon review and recommendation of the Parks and Recreation Board, may annually review and determine by resolution an adjustment to the industrial/commercial fee based upon the City's estimate of the average value of undeveloped commercial/industrial land in the City. 8. REQUIRED PLAN AND IMPROVEMENTS TO PARKS: Developers shall be responsible for preparing concept plans for the parks or trails based on the Parks, Open Space and Trails Plan as identified in the Comprehensive Plan as approved by the Parks Board and for making certain improvements to their developments for parks, playgrounds and public open space purposes as follows: A. Provide finished grading, appropriate ground cover or sodding for playground, paved trails and perimeter landscaping. B. Establish park boundary corners for the purpose of erecting park limit signs. The developer shall contact the appropriate Parks and Recreation Department personnel for the purpose of identifying park property corners. C. Provide sufficient improved public road access of no less than 300 feet for neighborhood parks and additional frontage for community parks. 6 New Brighton Yes General Benefit Prior to release of mylars/hardshclls for recording Yes Oakdale Yes Number and type of unit Single family $525/unit Twnhomes/duplexes $425/unit Apartment $425/unit 10% land dedication 10% PUD See previous cell for land dedications General Benefit At time of building permit issuance $1575/acre Yes Orono Yes City Assessors fair market valuation of property pre- development 8% of fair market valuation, pre- development 8% of gross land area General benefit None 8% of land or cash in lieu of land Yes Plymouth Yes City Assessor's estimate of average value of undeveloped residential land in the city $885/unit at a density of not less than 2 units/acre Depends on needs identified in the cites Comprehensive Park and Trail Corridor Plans (dedication can be reduced by up to 17% where amenities are provided as part of (he development) General benefit At final subdivision approval or issuance of building permits $3600.00/acre (10% of value of undeveloped land for property in (he zoning classification) Yes Richfield No St. Louis Park Yes (not used in last 15 years) 5% of that part of a proposed public site lying within the subdivision None None Yes Shakopee Yes Fair market value of land 10% of fair market value 10% of land to be developed, unless fair market value of dedication is greater than average fair market value of the land in the plat; then limited to 10% of all the property being platted. General Benefit At time of final plat approval Yes, same as for residential Yes Shoreview • Yes Average value per lot 10% maximum of fair market value of land to be developed 10% of total area to be platted General Benefit Installment payments permitted Yes Shorewood Yes $750.00/unit(8% if the value of the raw land) 8% of the total area General Benefit Prior to release of final plat Yes, same as for residential Yes Stillwater Yes Assessed market valuation 0- 4 units/acre $400.00/unit 5- 8 units/acre $250.00/unit 9-15 units/acre $100.00/unit 16+ units $150.00/unit 0-1.9 units/acre 7% 2.0-3.5 units/acre 8% 3.6-5.9 units/acre 9% 6-10 units/acre 10% 10+ units/acre additional S% for each unit over 10 General Benefit Before final plat $.10/sq.ft. of net land area or 7S% of net land area Yes Victoria Yes Ordinance says market value per tax assessment records, hut City Council has set $500/lot $500.00 per lot General Benefit At final plat approval/execution of development agreement Yes Waconia Yes Average value of land to be subdivided 5% of the average value of land to be subdivided 10% of land General Benefit (Developer required to construct required trails) Prior to release of mylar for filing Yes White Bear Lake Yes Single family $500.00/unit Two-family dwellings $1000.00/unit Apts, Twnhomes, Condos, etc. $325.00/unit + $75.00 per bedroom above the first of ea. unit "reasonably acceptable" General Benefit At time of Building permit 5% of land value or $2500.00/acre Yes Woodbury Yes Land valuation Single-family detached, minor subdivisions, cluster developments $725.0onot All attached housing $500.00/unit Mobile Ilome Parks $350.00/Iot 10% (add 1% for each unit above a density of 2 units/acre) General Benefit At the time of recording final plat Industrial, Commercial, Office $1600.00/acre Yes Lakeville Yes Number of lots Single-family $650.00/unit Multi -family $650.00/unit Density:Units I'cr Acre 0-2.5 10% 2S-4 11% 4.+-6 13% 6.+-8 15% 8.+-10 17% 10.+ 1790-20% Gencnd Benefit Cosh -Prior to approval of final plat 5% land Cash - 5% of current market value of unimproved bind as determined by County Assessor Yes Maple Grove Yes Average sales as determined by Assessor (Fair market value of undeveloped land x 10%) divided by average density of residential development in the city Leas than 9 dwelling units/gross acre-10% of subdivision area 9 and more dwelling units/gross acre - 1I% + 1% additional for each dwelling unit per acre over 9 General benefit At the time of final plat release 7S% land 7.5% x fair market value per acre of undeveloped land Yes Maplewood Yes Single-family $515.00/unit Two-family $817.94/unit Townhouses $408.97/unit At the time a building permit is issued No Minnetonka Yes Residential- Number of Units Commercial/ Industrial -Square Footage Single-family $400.00/unit Twnhomes/duplexes $300.00/unit Apartments $250/unit Reasonable portion of the site; not less than 10%. General Benefit Cash dedications due prior to filing of the plat with the county $.20/sq. ft. building area - olTice, industrial $.10/sq. ft. building area - commercial Yes Mound Yes "Total fair market value of the Land" 10% of total fair market value of land, with a floor of $500/lot 2-3 lot subdivisions - according to schedule adopted by Council, with a floor of $500.00 10% of the property may be used General benefit Same Yes Mounds View Yes Assessed market value Gross Density Cash /acre 0.0-2.0 $100.00 2.1-3.0 150.00 3.1-4.0 200.00 4.1-5.0 250.00 over 5 10% General Benefit 30 days following approval of the subdivision 10% of the land or equivalent cash value Yes CITY PARK DEDICATION VALUE BASIS PARK DEDICATION SURVEY JANUARY 1994 CASII DEDICATION LAND DEDICATION NEXUS TEST TIME FRAME BUSINESS/ COMMERCIAL COPY OF ORDINANCE Minnetrista Yes "Fair market value of the equivalent undeveloped land that would otherwise have beta conveyed or dedicated" The greater of 1) proposed dwelling units/acre or 2) zoned density. DU/A /DU % 0 -0.1 10+ 25 0.1-0.2 5-10 25 0.2-0.5 1- 5 5 1 -2 1 10 2 -3 1/2 11 3 -4 1/3 12 4 -5 1/4 13 5 -6 1/5 14 6 -7 1/6 15 Same General Benefit Prior to filing final plat 21/2 percent NA Chanhassen Yes Land values, density and park acreage standards of 1 acre/75 people Single-family, duplex $900.00/unit 'frail dedication fees are 1/3 the cost of park dedication fees Multi -family 5790.00/unit General Benefit $4500.00/acre Fee schedule Ilaslings Yes No answer $850.00($650.00)/ unit 0.0-1.9 9% (8%) 2.0-3.5 11%(10%) 3.6-5.9 13%(12%) over 10 add .6%(.5%) per unit over 10 Direct Benefit Due prior to recording of final plat 8% of gross land area or $1200.00/acre for industrial, $1500.00/acre for commercial Yes Inver Grove lleights Yes Land -Gross Acreage Cash -Ordinance fees based on land valuation A&E Districts- $850.00/unit R1,R2 Districts- $850.00/unit R3 District- $650.00/unit A&E Districts- 5% R1,R2 Districts- 10% R3A,B,D Districts- 20% General Benefit Single-family,at final plat All others, at lime of bldg. permit 10% land $75.00-$175.00/1000 square feet of gross floor area Yes It is agreed that a cash payment of $ will be paid according to the above stated policy for the following subdivision/lot split: It is agreed that the following land dedication is provided according to the above stated policy for the following subdivision/lot split: The undersigned further agrees to notify all future property owners or assigns of the case payment requirement, if it is to be collected at the time of issuance of final plat or when a building permit is issued. Date Property Owner City of Stillwater 1994 Policy Statement on Park Dedication Fees for Subdivisions (5-94) In determining fair market value of public areas for the subdivision of land for cash payment as required by the City of Stillwater Park Dedication Policy, the following values will be used: Residential Subdivisions $ Residential Lot Split $ Commercial/Industrial Subdivision $ *This fee is paid at the time of final plat or lot split approval. The City may defer collection to the time a building permit is requested for individual lots created by such a subdivision. The City retains the option to accept an equivalent amount in cash from the applicant for part or all of the portion required to be dedicated. Park Fee Agreement The undersigned understands that according to the City Subdivision Ordinance, the following public park land dedication is required for the final plat on all residential, commercial or industrial property. It is further understood that the public land dedication or cash payment equivalent is at the discretion of the City of Stillwater. MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Steve Russell, Community Development Director RE: Review of June 6, 1994 Comp. Plan Public Meeting DATE: June 9, 1994 Attached to this memo is the record of the June 6, 1994 Comp. Plan meeting held at the high school auditorium. Take time to fill out the evaluation form so we can discuss it at meeting time. STILLWATER PLANNING COMMISSION COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE PHASE II June 6, 1994 7:00 p.m. Stillwater Senior High School Auditorium Present: Glenna Bealka, Duane Elliott, Dorothy Foster, Jay Kimble, Kirk Roetman, Don Valsvik, Darwin Wald Absent: Gerald Fontaine, Rob Hamlin Others: Steve Russell, Community Development Director Ann Pung-Terwedo, Planner Glen Van Wormer, Consultant Joyce Levine, Consultant 1. Acting Planning Commission Chairman Valsvik called the meeting to order at 7:18 p.m. He explained the background of the Comprehensive Plan Update process and the four alternative plans to be discussed. He introduced the Planning Commission members, Planning staff, and consultants. 2. Community Development Director Steve Russell reviewed the Comprehensive Plan Update process up to this point. The planning area is the same as the previous Comp. Plan which was completed in 1980, bounded by Highways 96, 36, and 15, and the river on the east. Mr. Russell noted that this is the first of four meetings to be held on the alternative plans: upcoming meetings are scheduled for June 14, June 18, and June 22, 1994. He also invited citizens to write letters to the Planning Commission or to call the Planning Department to express an opinion. 3. City Planner Ann Pung-Terwedo reported on new land use for existing City areas. Some single-family residential uses will be moved further east. Townhouse use will be added as a land - use designation. 4. Steve Russell presented the planning area growth alternatives. With the use of slides, he indicated the 15 planning areas, the existing land use map, and the zoning map. The location of vacant and agricultural land was identified. There are currently 250 acres vacant in the City of Stillwater, and approximately 750 acres vacant in the Township. He reported on Stillwater's population growth, actual and projected by the Met. Council. 1 Stillwater Planning Commission Comprehensive Plan Meeting June 6, 1994 Land Use Alternative A would accommodate an additional 2,469 housing units, with a population growth of approximately 7,000. Alternative B. is similar to A, but less developed. There would b an additional 1,705 housing units, with a population growth of 4,332. Alternative C indicates a 65 acre light industrial park with no residential development. This would result in an population increase of 1,358 people in the Township. Alternative D indicates no growth in the City. Population growth in the Township would increase by 1,431. 5. Ann Pung-Terwedo reported on planning for greenways, trails and parks. She reported that the City-wide survey indicated a strong concern in this area. The Stillwater Parks and Recreation Board is currently working on a Parks Plan. They have identified existing parks and park deficiencies. 6. Glen Van Wormer, traffic consultant from Short -Elliott -Hendrickson, reported on the transportation element and growth impact on traffic. He stated that Stillwater is currently overloaded because of the number of cars attempting to cross the bridge. He reported on projected traffic for each alternative: Alternative D would result in an additional 4,700 daily trips. Alternative C would result in an additional 12,500 vehicles per day. Alternative B would generate 13,000-25,000 additional trips per day. Alternative A would generate 32,500 additional trips per day. 7. Joyce Levine, consultant for Camiros, reported on the fiscal impacts of the four alternatives. She explained property tax capacity and how anticipated tax revenues were determined. She also reported on the anticipated increase in expenditures based on each alternative. The City would benefit financially from three of the alternatives. Alternative A would result in a net gain of $508,404 per year in taxes. Alternative B would result in S41,084; Alternative C would result in $844,759. Alternative D would result in a net loss of $20,525 per year in taxes. The meeting recessed for 15 minutes and reconvened at 8:50 p.m. Acting Chairman Valsvik introduced Mayor Charles Hooley and Councilmember Rich Cummings. He also thanked the Planning Department and Planning Commission. Mayor Hooley 2 Stillwater Planning Commission Comprehensive Plan Meeting June 6, 1994 acknowledged the Planning Department and Planning Commission and thanked them for their work. Mr. Valsvik opened the meeting to comments and questions from the audience. David Johnson, Stillwater Township Supervisor, stated that the Township has gone through the same planning process, in 1980 and 1990, and solicited input in the process. The consensus was that the area should stay the same, with 2 1/2 acre density. There were environmental concerns addressed with a policy developed to address those concerns. tilr. Valsvik stated that the City respects the Township's plan, and appreciates the cooperation of the Township on the joint task force. Paula Kroening, Stillwater Township, commended the Planning Commission and Planning Department for working with the Township. She stated that as a resident of the Township, she wa not informed of the Township's updating of the comprehensive plan. Bob Meisterling, Stillwater Township, questioned what the financial projections were based on. Ms. Levine stated that it was assumed that all available land would be built upon. Leo Lohmer, 303 West Olive, stated that with tax increases, there will be plenty of homes for sale in Stillwater. Denise Simon, City resident, asked how the current questionnaire will be used. She stated that the previous survey indicated that 60 percent of the citizens wanted no -growth. Mr. Russell stated that the questionnaire will be used as a piece of information in the planning process. Carla Mills, Stillwater Township, questioned the increase in sewer services. Mr. Russell responded that the regional sewer plan has been expanded to accommodate future growth. Hannah Lohmer, Stillwater Township, asked why do we want to make this town bigger. She stated that she does not want to live in a big city. Bill Spangler, 62nd Street, stated that he moved in 1983 because it was a rural area. He asked if the four alternatives could be placed on referendum. Don Bromen, Stillwater Township, stated that he works in the City of Stillwater. He spoke in favor of Alternative C, business growth, because it will generate more taxes without the need for expanded City services. He stated that industry built the City of Stillwater, and industry growth would provide tax relief. 3 Stillwater Planning Commission Comprehensive Plan Meeting June 6, 1994 Steve Ogborn, Stillwater Township, asked how the process of annexation works. Mr. Russell explained the process. Rick Hill, City resident, questioned how this could be put on referendum. Planning Commission and Councilmember Jay Kimble explained the referendum process. Nancy Purcell, Hazel Court, stated that maybe there should be another plan. Gary Kriesel, City resident, stated that he is concerned about the development of 2 and 1/2 acre lots. Rob Erwin, Township resident, asked if the City Council would or could vote on annexation before the comprehensive plan is completed. He also asked about the timing for a recommendation to Council. Mr. Russell responded that public hearings will be held in June. In July the Planning Commission will make their recommendation to the Council. The Council will vote to direct staff to prepare a final plan. Denise Simon stated that the City Council is elected to serve the wishes of the people and should not be paternalistic. Dick Huelsman, City resident for 52 years and now a Township resident, asked how the City will deal with the increase in traffic, etc. with the substantial increase in population. Glen Van Wormer stated that the plan is addressing future and existing problems. David Stone, stated that the questionnaire is complicated. Mr. Russell responded that the comprehensive plan is a complicated issue. Dean Boge, Boutwell Road, asked why in Alternatives A and B, there are no City services indicated. ivlr. Russell stated that those lots already have on -site septic and wells. John Ludwig, City resident, stated that existing septic systems will not need upgrading. Eric Jackson, City resident, stated he is concerned with traffic increases. Jerry Johnson, stated he has a family history of 135 years in the City and he is in favor of no growth. Jennifer Harms, Marine Circle, asked about the environment impact of building houses on the west side of Long Lake. Mr. Russell stated that there are many layers of environmental protection in place. 4 'Stillwater Planning Commission Comprehensive Plan Meeting June 6, 1994 Tony Zanko, City resident, asked about the impact on secondary schools and parks, and the impact of TIF on commercial development. Mr. Russell responded that the City has not considered TIF assistance for the new industrial area. He also reported that a referendum for a one percent City sales tax will be on the November ballot. Richard Kilty, 118 West Oak, asked about the figures for projected population growth, and also about the antics ated increase in expenditures. Karen i l t, Township, stated that she helped organize the Alliance In Managed Growth, and they a e hoping to educate the citizens of Stillwater through this organization. 10. The meeting adjourned at 10:10 p.m. Submitted by: Shelly Schaubach Recording Secretary 5 Alternative A Alternative B - Alternative C - Alternative D - Current Trend Reduced Growth Economic Development - No Expansion STILLWATER CITY COMPREIIENSIVE PLAN EVALUATION OF LAND USE ALTERNA'I'IVES Issue 1: Growth and the Preservation of small town character. Goals Retain Stillwater's appearance and character as a small rivertown which serves as the economic, tourist, governmental and cultural center for the St. Croix Valley by maintaining the balance of residential and commercial development and open space lands. Provide for orderly growth consistent with the Comprehensive Plan while maintaining the general pattern of activities and preserving and enhancing the city's natural features. Provide for the city's share of regionally projected population, housing and employment growth. Maintain areas outside the city within the city planning area needed for future development in a transition/urban reserve designation to protect it from premature rural Large lot development. 1 Mark the box under each alternative 1, 2, or 3, 1 being least supportive of the goal, listed to left of box, 2 being neutral and 3 being most supportive. Alternatives A B C D Guide and regulate growth to preserve the natural character of the city expansion areas. Issue 2: Preservation of Open Space and Natural Resources Goals Protect Stillwater's unique natural setting to maintain the quality of life, provide visitor enjoyment, protection against natural hazards, and for public recreational and educational purposes. Maintain and restore significant open space areas to provide a framework and natural setting for future development. Preserve, protect and restore ravine areas and blufflines to prevent site erosion, sedimentation of streams, drainage ways and rivers and provide a natural separation between developed areas. Preserve natural features including trees, vegetation, slopes, wetlands and wildlife habitats. Recognize the lower St. Croix River and its bank as a valuable scenic, open space recreation and natural resource to be preserved for public enjoyment and recreation. Develop pathways along the river banks, ravines and natural areas as appropriate. Develop a system of trails and bikeways which connect the city with the St. Croix River, its lakes, Washington County trails and other natural areas. Develop trail systems along natural areas to connect neighborhood and community parks and other desinations. 2 Alternatives A B C D 1 P 1 F 1 l Issue 3: Preservation of Historic Resources and Community Character Goals Preserve historic properties which reflect Stillwater's cultural, social, economic, political, visual, aesthetic or architectural history to safeguard the heritage of the city. Protect and enhance the city's appeal and attraction to residents, visitors and tourists using historic properties as a stimulus to business and industry. Enhance the historic visual and aesthetic character, diversity and interest of Stillwater. Issue 4: Traffic Congestion Goals Develop a coordinated transportation system that provides for Local as well as area -wide traffic demand. Provide efficient and environmentally sound transportation facilities consisting of roads, bikeways, transit lines and pedestrian paths. Support construction of the new interstate bridge and I lighway 36 corridor improvements to provide for regional traffic demands and to relieve traffic from local streets. Develop and site new roads sensitive to historic structures and sites and natural features. Protect residential areas from through traffic by routing through traffic onto collector and 3 Alternatives A B C D 1 1 arterial roads. Develop pedestrian pathways and bikeways to provide for recreational and commuter trips. Work with the county and state in developing park and ride lots, trailway systems and other programs to reduce auto use. Increase carrying capacity of through streets while minimizing impact on adjacent land uses partially in residential areas. Maintain the areas adjacent to Greeley, Owen, Olive, Myrtle, Chestnut Third, Fourth and Pine streets as primarily residential areas and do not allow the conversion to commercial uses. Link neighborhoods and other destinations by developing trails along ravines and greenways as appropriate for pedestrian paths. Issue 5: Economic Development Gals Encourage economic development to secure the tax base, provide new jobs and needed products and services for the Stillwater area. Designate land for commercial and industrial uses properly located with adequate support services to accommodate future projected employment growth. Protect the city's limited industrial land base for industrial development. 4 Alternatives A Q C D L 1 r 11 Issue 6: Parks and Recreation Facilities Goals Enhance and expand existing recreational facilities for Stillwater residents based on the recreational needs of the community and its neighborhood. Provide both passive and active recreational opportunities for Stillwater residents. Provide safe and accessible parks and recreation facilities. Prepare and implement park master plans for existing neighborhood parks. Locate, acquire and develop land for a neighborhood parks in the Oak Glen and South Hill planning areas. Consider the armory and City -owned site in the West Stillwater Business park for a community facility/ice arena. Identify a major 40 - 50 acre community park facility in the City expansion area along with pathways and trails linking neighborhoods and recreational facilities and open space areas. Preserve unique historic and sensitive areas within existing and future parks and open space areas. Provide water recreational opportunities for the public enjoyment. Preserve existing ravines as natural open space areas where pedestrian pathways may be appropriate. 5 Alternatives A B C D L L -J I Preserve the natural area around McKusick Lake as an education/nature conservancy area. Limit access in environmentally sensitive areas. Provide pathways along natural areas and greenbelts such as wetlands, woodlands, lake shores for recreational purposes and to provide neighborhood and community -wide movement. Link city bikeways and walkways to Washington County, Stillwater Township, Oak Park Heights and MnDOT existing and planned facilities. Issue 7: Provide a range of Housing Opportunities Goals Provide a quality living environment for the citizens of Stillwater by maintaining and improving the city's existing housing stock and by planning for a range of new housing opportunities. Provide a choice in housing type and density suitable to the needs of the young, locally employed and elderly through zoning and land use planning. Preserve Stillwater's desirable small town character by gradually, carefully planning and controlling residential development and expansion. Maintain the mix of housing types and tenure in Stillwater's older residential areas surrounding downtown. Use development concepts such as mixed use developments and cluster housing to maintain the open space character of the land, provide a mix of housing types and provide for neighborhood commercial uses. 6 Alternatives A B C D P Provide an adequate supply of affordable housing for the elderly and residents who want to live in the community. Provide for low and moderate income housing needs according to the community's fair share of metropolitan area housing needs. Design local streets, in area plans and through subdivision review, to provide for neighborhood access and limit through traffic. Provide neighborhood parks for existing and new residential areas consistent with adopted community and neighborhood park standards. Provide for neighborhood convenience store locations within walking distance of residential areas without negatively impacting those residential areas. Define land use and encourage residential development sensitive to natural land conditions by using specific area plans and the planned unit development process. Provide for a range of housing opportunities in the city expansion areas both single family and multi -family attached and detached. Issue 8: Condition of city streets, sidewalks and other public facilities Goal Maintain and repair existing public infrastructure (i.e., water, sanitary sewer, storm sewer) and develop overall maintenance schedule and program for improvements. 7 Alternatives A B C D L [ I Issue 9: Coordinate new development with public facilities Goals Phase the expansion of public service and facilities consistent with population growth and city expansion. Maintain a high level of public facilities and coordinate the efficient provision of public services with growth and development. Work with the school district to plan for future school facilities and maximize public use of existing facilities. Coordinate orderly annexation and municipal urban service area line extension with annexation and the provision of urban service. Annex lands and provide urban services consistent with the availability and capacity of urban service systems. Identify needed school facilities to coordinate with planned growth. Issue 10: Cost of New Development to City Taxpayers Goals Place emphasis upon "quality" and not "quantity" of future development. Stage new growth and development to not out -distance the community's ability to pay for the increased need for public facilities and services. 8 Alternatives A B C D L Weight fiscal impact of new development with other city objectives to determine the appropriate rate, type and staging of development. Consider fiscal impact of new development on city taxpayers when reviewing future development plans. 9 Alternatives A B C D r I J