HomeMy WebLinkAbout1993-05-10 CPC Packetwater
mom
THE BIRTHPLACE OF MINNESOTA
May 5, 1993
THE STILLWATER PLANNING COMMISSION WILL MEET ON MONDAY, MAY 10, 1993 AT 7:00
P.M. IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS OF CITY HALL, 216 NORTH r URM TRCET.
Approval of Minutes - April 12, 1993.
AGENDA
7:00 P.M.
Case No. V/93-17 - Continuation of consideration of a Variance to the
setback requirements for shoreline and frontyard (90 feet proposed, 100
feet required) and construction on slopes of greater than 12% for
construction of a 20 foot by 24 foot garage. The property is located at 118
Lakeside Drive in the Bluffland/Shoreland, RB Residential District. Michael
and Sheryl Meyer, Applicants.
2. Case No. SUB/93-21 - Continuation of a consideration for a minor
subdivision of a 75,625 square foot lot into two lots of 38,500 square feet
and 37,125 square feet. The property is located at 1030 W. St. Croix Avenue
in the RA, Single Family Residential District. Doug Flory, Applicant.
3. Case No. SUP/93-26 - A Special Use Permit for the placement of a 40 square
foot wall sign an a 90 square foot wall sign. The property is located at
514 East Alder Street in the RB, Two Family Residential District. Wolf
Marine, Inc., Applicant.
4. Case No. V/93-29 - A Variance to the sideyard setback requirement on a
corner lot 30 eet required, 18 feet requested) for a garage addition. The
property i"s located at 2117 Dundee Place in the RA, Single Family
Residential District. Dan Dalluhn, Applicant.
5. Case No. SUP/DR/93-30 - A Special Use Permit for the construction of a
9,000 square foot office/retail building. The property is located at 1900
Tower Drive in the BP-0, Business Park Office District. Krongard
Construction, Applicant.
6. Case No. SUP/DR/93-31 - A Special Use Permit for the construction of a
7,500 square foot Veterinary Clinic. The property is located on the
northeast corner of Washington Avenue and Curve Crest Boulevard in the
BP -I, Business Park/Industrial District. Kellison Company, Applicant.
7. Case No. V/93-32 - A Variance to the height requirement (20 feet required,
24 eet requested) and to the total square footage requirement for an
accessory structure (1,000 square feet allowed, 1,350 square feet
proposed). The property -is located at 206 Locust Street in the RB, Two
Family Residential District. Todd and Kathleen Remington, Applicants.
CITY HALL: 216 NORTH FOURTH STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 55082 PHONE: 612-439-6121
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA
MAY 10, 1993
PAGE TWO
8. Case No. SUB/93-33 - A minor subdivision for transfer of a 1,399 square
Tooparcel of property from 1047 West Sycamore Street (Lot 1, Block 1, Oak
Glen Second Addition) to 1401 Amundson Drive (Lot 3, Block 1, Oak Glen
Second Addition). The property is located in -the RA, Single Family
Residential District. Mark Thibodeau, Applicant.
9. Case No. DR/93-27 - Design Review for the renovation of an existing school
into an office u7 ding. The property is located at 110 East Pine Street
(East Junior High School Building) in the PA, Public Administrative Office
District. CUB Foods, Applicant.
10. Case No. DR/93-28 - Design Review for a parking lot for 150-170 cars. The
property is located at 100 West Pine Street (West Junior High Building) in
the PA, Public/Administrative District. City of Stillwater, Applicant.
11. Case No. SUP/DR/93-25 - A Special Use Permit and Design Review for a 90
room hotel, conference center, and restaurant use along with a parking
review. The property is located at 405 East Myrtle Street and 127 South
Water Street in the CBD, Central Business District/Flood Plain District.
Stillwater Hotel Associates, Applicant.
12. Possible Zoning Ordinance Amendment:
- Storm Water Ordinance
- Conservation Regulations (slopes)
- Sign Ordinance
2
STILLWATER PLANNTNC COMMIS'lOC1
M I NU T F. S
Date: April 12, 19`t
Time: 7:00 p.m.
Members Present: Cer a l it Fontaine, 7h3 i `r'1.= n
Glenna Bealk_._a (at: 7:45), Dorothy Fester,
Rob Hamlin, .Jay Kimble, Kirk R oetman,
Darwin Wald, and Don Val.svik
Steve Russell, Conn. Dev. Director
Ann Pung-Terwedo, Planner.
Absent; tJuane Elliott
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Motion by Darwin Wald, seconded by Don Valsvik to approve the
minutes of March 8, 1993,as submitted. Carried 7-0.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. Case No. 1T/93-1.7 - A Variance to the Erontyar-d setback
requirements (30 ft . regn i red, 12 f t . proposed) :and the s i ope-
d(e`JelO :Bent standard (no development pment on slopes over 12 0 !
P - - - - b ) for .r the
e
construction of a 20 ft. by 24 ft. attached garage at 118
Lakeside Drive, in the RB, Two Family Residential District/
Bluffland/Shoreland District.
Michael and Sheryl Meyer., property owners, presented the request,
They bought the house in .September. The home currently has a
tuck -under garage but it is accessed by a steep slope which gets
dangerous in the winter. They wish to build -a garage at street
l r-.vel. and will no longer use the tuck--anier- . Theirs is the only
house in the neighborhood without a street -level garage.
Rob Hamlin stated that a hardship is ::mown in this case because
of the topography of the lot.
There are six recommended conditions of approval. Mr. Meyer_
asked for clarification of No. 0 prohibiting tree cutting or
trimming.
Mrs. Weiss, neighbor directly across from the applicants, stated
that she understaNds their need to build a new garage, but it -
wi 11 Mock her only view of the river unless a large pine tree i
removed from their . ya dThe applicant stated that the t�rpe
1 l ;_
half on his propery and half on the neighbor's property.
Steve Russell stated that this tree could be cut down because it
is outside the sakhac.k From the blufflinc .
Mr. Hamlin ;-i_ated that the feels this is not the best location
0
Stillwater Planning Cnmmis i,-,r;
April. 1.2, 1993
for the garage, and it would he more aesthetic if built Further
back from the street. He .asked about making an effort to obtain
a variance From the DNR to build the iJc:1yagp closer to the hln F.
Mr. Russell stated that it is difficult Lc yet a variance fr rr;
the DNR, especially in this sensitive area. ri variance of eight
feet would be reriui.red to build the garage flush with the 1;,_use.
Application to tho ONR cy "Id C;,au':;p a delay Uf _ veral ?Tn"?;ths.
The applicant st,at d hp would also rKnfor to havp the garage
farther back. Mt. 1•.I1G•sell oll;jg;_ - +•ed t=1"`.=at I. -}?is case be continued
to next month's meeting in order to get the DNR''s official
p0 1 t 1oil . Two variances -:ciIt1 d be required from tho DNR: t!t.-
closer to the bluff l ins. than allowed.
Motion by Rob Hamlin, seconded by Darwin Wald to continue Cn:=e
No. V/9 3-17 to next: month's meeting with plan modification for an
opinion by the DNR. Motion carried 7-0.
,7r7y K IM > tf_!{'tlmm e P ded that G11!'! new plan contain n ;l:"':o-r I y_f r i ,if;
l,t-!(lsi'a1i11•!g to s!'r!'-'l:tl i.,;l'_'. garage _t:Y'.7111 t-.'l'_' r1VP?' aY1!_. uF_lh'r MOP
to make the plan ,as attractive as possible.
2. Case No. SUP/93-13 -- A Special Use Permit to condoc:t ,a sales
office for fitness equipment at 222 West Cherry Street above art
existing garage. The proVerty is located in t-h" RB, Two gamily
Residential District.
Jeffrey H. Palmer., owner, presented the request. He is starting
a new business setting up home gyms and selling free weight
equipment. He has warehouse apace downtown, and most of hi,
business will be held there, but he will occasionally have
customers come to his house. There is space for two cars to park
in front of the garage. He has a signed ,statement from the two
most affected neighbors who have no r!h_ir.ectiuns. There are four
recommended conditions nf approval which the ap t1_n- aJra--
to
There were no comments from the audience. Mr. ra ir? ez c:l.az if in -I
that the house is in the RE district.
'1(�Lion Liy Don V?i vik, s�c�,llci(�d by Du:rothy roster to approve the
Special Use Perm.i L as; conditioned. Carried 7-0 .
C.es(- No. SUP/93--1.9 - Special UsePermit to conduct .:a
theatrical. Production in ._? 40 ft. by 60 ft. temporary tens: _
str_uc"t_ure. The p.roVerty is l.owaLed ,at. 501 North Main Street in
he (=Bn, Central Business D j tL" i._ r .
Miry Lou Meagher-Gammans presented the application. Shn ;t,at=cl
I:hat parking will 1_,e in the public 1nh and on tho Orent. she
also hoping the many Inc..al residents will walk downtown. OLher��
would probably park ,_?I_ Lhe wu,.l h (end of town and speHd the Jay
downtown, walking to the north end fnr Phe pe-_for_m,_?nce. Mill_'-
Stillw,_ttcr Planning Commission
April 1, 1993
Fxr avat. .ing has offered to It el the area and bring in a load OF
dirt or gravel. The tent will have risers, and some hay bales
for the children, a1_-;d _y canvas floor. The hopes to he able to
put a 61 by 10' sign up on May 15. The tent will. he 1n use for
une month snme'time between .Tune 15 and August 1.5. She is hoping
to develop this into a local professional theatre company with
sununer- long pei or mances in the Future-
Thpre are three C" 1 11',li 1 P- condikinns n F ;Z yl p i` n v a l . Ann P _l g -
t' wodu " nnI( e _:wo �ll- _ i -T:1 conditions: S taEf revicwa i at
the end of the season with a report for the file; and a plan fur
next year submitted by March 1994. Mr. Russell ugge9t-ed a Sixth
condition: Thn Special H _ v `,7n r In l- h L`_approve! for _- r_ - a-mo i !
period between .tune 15 and August 15, 1993.
The .applicant sLated that concessions way be sold at the
performances, and she hopes to find a high school business or
theatre group willing to take on l.hi;s responsibility.
There were no comments from the public.
Motion by Rot- Hamlin, seconded by Darwin Wald to approve the
Special Use Permit- with six conditions as recoa needed. Under.
discussion, Mr-. Valsvik stated that this request is placing
further demands on downtnwn parking, and noted that Lhore
currently a housed theatre at the south end of town which is
trying to make, a profit. M1:. Hamlin stated he is glad to sea_
increased activity at the North end of town. Mr. Kimble stated
that the parking problem is not as serious at the North end. The
vote was taken and the motion carried 7-1 (D. Valsvik opposed)
4. r,ne No. SUR/V/93-?a - A Variance to the lot width
requirement (75 ft. required, 74.17 ft. proposed) for a minor
. nbdivision of a 27,244 square foot lot into two lot-- oC 11,122
square feet,. The property i = located an Lots 3 and 4, Block ?4,
Ca.rli and Schulenburgis Addition (tile 1500 black of North First
,street) in the RA, Single family Residential District.
The r.e(Inest was presented by Robert Walters, current owner, and
Ken Bjorlin, who has a purchase agreement on the property and has
requested the subdivision. He plans to build a 2-story colonial,
2, 000 sq. f.t home in the i150,000 price range on one lot, an(_1
hold the second lot for possible future development.
Bob Fritts, 1575 N. 2nd Street, whose property borders the lot mn
thl' Sn!lthwent, st.atgd he. 15 str nngly opposed to the subdivision.
He stated that most neighboring lots are 100 f_eeL with nice
homes. He }.relieves all abutting property values will b-
,a E Eected .
Cindy Tihei.ts, 1524 N. inL Sk. asked if Mr. Biorlin would be
living in the new house and whether he will be selling the other
Stillwater Planning Commission
April 12, 1993
property. She in conc ecn" d that it will become rental property,
which world not be conducive to the character of the neighbor-
hood. She also for ee5 potentiol problems building into the
steep site, and is greatly concerned about runoff. She asked
what, if any research has been done as far as excavating,
retaining walls, etc. She also was concerned about the colonial
AM M K home because of L:hn height. She c hated that two small
homes oft these lots would be detrimental to property values.
Mary Malmquist, 1605 1`I . 2na St., stated that there is a covenant
on the:_p lots with a height restriction of 23 feet from the
center nE t..ite street.
Ross Anderson, 1603 `` . st Street, across the _.'tre t From +.ho
lots, stated he is also opposed to the request.
Marie Olsen, River heights Drive and No. 1st St., is opposed.
•:7agk ni el anti d i .. d 1 f]'_ Y:i 1 _:T at-7 i_ijr-.iir` ri{ Kh 7 Lt., lots l !
that space: and topography. He is ,also concerned about: erosion
control. ,and drainage.
The applicant stated that this will not be rental property; he
will be building to :cell the home, but it will be owner -
occupied. He plans to deal with the .rungEf problem.
Bob Brown, 1611 N. lst St., is opposed.
Mr. Russell stated that., Uecause of the public commenta, it woo.ld
be within reason for the Commission to request further
information on topography, drainage, etc. to consider the
request.
Motion by Don Valsvik to table the Subdivision request until more
details, including a topographic survey, are available. Seconded
by Rob Hamlin. During discussion, most members indicated they
were not in favor of this request. Mr.. Valsvik amended the motion
to deny the subdivision request. Rob Hamlin seconded the
amendment. Motion carried 8-0. It was noted that thy: api,lican'-_
could reapply for the subdivision if h" could bring information
detailing }-tow the house would fit on the topography.
5. Case No. SiJB/93--21 - A minor subdivision of a 751625 sq. Et.
IOU into two lots of 32,500 sq. ft. and 37,125 sq. ft. The_
property is located at 1030 W. St, Croix Avenue in the RA, Single
F._liiiily Residential Districh.
Bev Flory, owner, }_rCE'`;e'nted the 1er1llent. S}'lt_ c1uunkltJlied whe_Lhel
il.yi i.nTrruved St. `:rl_li , Avenue was MClr'i:'tl a City street. There was
also d iscnss lon regarding the cost of connection to City
services, and the location of the existing drain field. Because
of the number of unanswered questions, moth the Commission and
Sti-llwal_r�r Planning Colllllli,S.�lOil
applicant ,agreed to cone roue this t:o the next meeting.
Motion by Dc,r Valsvik, seconded by Rob H,.lmli.n to coc.Lirtut_ Ca�c,
No. SUB/93--21. to the May 10 meeting for further clar1ficatio;r.
.ar-r ied 3-0 .
[} FT�7. ','lT}�. /�1Z'- ? - i•Tr,'i_t,;il } •,i ii.y-id1*i L P ti
al-,-il in 1_i _11'p I C='Ilt,' r.!_'(1, es,t for wi ts,''=3;'•
OTHFR BTTSII•!ES:_
Rcy lew of Ord in nce r�:3tab2 i::sh i rim t'?ra Zuii i�t;cBoard
Stevr Ri_rsse11 expA,ained that the City Council i't I,eb-t,ablis"he-
Zoni ny Board and certain planning applications will it:lve „nly a
one-step process. The decisions of the Board can be appealed to
the City Council by anyone.
M0ti011 by Don Valsvik, seconded by Rob Hamlin to r e c omme nd
approval of the Zoning Ordinance Amendment. C_arrit�(] 3--0.
Review r_r.-:.ift Planni,n2 C.Qni: s en
Mr. Russell explained that U,,e rules of the Commis=ion are being
established in writing because the Commission will be tinder more
public scrutiny when the Zoning Board becomes effective.
The Coi-remiss.ion amended Article VI, No. 2 to state drat the Chair
will abide by Roberts Rules of order in deciding on all points of
orrl_r_ and pr_or-.;edi_rre during the meetings.
I;
}' de-velnipfrrent Lix-oaram for De. vt�l�)prr;erit-o - - -�rl� -- � T 1 C� ,_ 1 e 1"1 t c-,
D r ict III for Junior High r, to-,,e t�rt�iac�t .
MnI:i.on by Don Val-sv , ,-tec rj ked by V "rr. t<o-1--man to : dopt t.h
rest?Iot.:ioin f1nding I-hr Cit:y's modification of tiie d.evel_op?:bent
progL -am fo.r Development: District No. -1_, the modified Lax:
i_iici %tt:r�tt. f.inanc-1ny plans for Tax Increment Financing District
Nos. 1 uhruuy.h 5, and Li't,_: pl_upo::�ed tax increment Einanc-Ing plan
for pr.opo: eel Tax Incr�,rri_-nt District No. 5, all located
thereinIFto be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan of tiro
City. Roll call vote was taken. Carried 19 -0 .
ADJOURNMENT
i,i,,..iun by Rob Hamlin, secondt,,1 t,y Darwin Wald, to •-adjourn the
tiC?�� _� t i Jr, p.il'.. C.,?rri -0 .
S I-ibmi ti: e l by -
She1.1y Schaubach
Recording Secretary
r
PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW
CASE NO.
Planning Commission Meeting: May 10, 1993
Project Location: 118 Lakeside Drive
Zoning District: RB, Bluffland/Shoreland
Flood Plain? Yes Shoreland/Bluffland? Yes
Applicant's Name: Michael and Sheryl Meyer
Type of Application: Variance
Project Description:
The request is to construct a 20 ft. by 24 ft. garage with a 90 foot shoreline
setback and on slopes of over 12% requiring variances to the Bluffland/Shore
land Ordinance. The proposed frontyard setback is 18.8 feet, 20 feet is
required.
Discussion:
This item was considered by the Commission at their meeting of April 12, 1993
meeting and continued to this meeting to allow a modification of the design
to better meet the frontyard setback requirements.
The current proposal places the garage 91.1 feet from the shoreline, (ordinary
high water mark (O.H.W.)). The garage would be constructed on slopes greater
than 12%. Under this proposal the front of the garage is setback 18.8 feet
from the front property line. A 20 ft. front setback is required.
The applicant indicates in his letter of application that construction of the
garage will result in improved erosion/drainage conditions by removal of the
paved driveway and redirecting the run-off. A condition of approval requires
removal of the storage shed that is located on the top of the bluff.
The garage design is consistent with the design of the existing residence.
A review of the site indicates that vegetation along the river's edge between
the residence and the river was topped without benefit of the required tree
trimming permit.
The setback proposed for the garage is similar to other setbacks in the area
that are legal non -conforming.
This application has been referred to the DNR and Boundary Area Commission for
review and comment as required.
The DNR has reviewed the proposal and commented on the request (letter
attached). The letter indicates the DNR's concerns and findings; mitigation
and documentation requirements. That will be reviewed by the DNR when they
receive the City decision regarding the variance.
The final decision regarding the variance must be certified by the
Commissioner of the Department of Natural Resources.
1
Recommendation:
Consideration of revised plans.
Conditions of ADDroval:
1. The garage addition shall be painted an earth tone color approved by the
City Planner to minimize the structure's impact as viewed from the
river.
2. Gutters and drain spouts shall be installed on the rear (river side) of
the garage directing the rain water to the street.
3. The asphalt driveway leading from the street to the rear of the house
shall be removed and grassy lawn area restored.
4. The shed located on the top of the bluff shall be removed from the site.
5. The City's variance decision shall be certified by the Commissioner of
Natural Resources before the decision is final.
6. No tree cutting or timming shall be allowed without required permit from
the Community Development Director.
Bluffland/Shoreland Variance Requirements:
5. Variances
a. Variances shall only be granted where there are particular
hardships which make the strict enforcement of this ordinance
impractical. Hardship means the proposed use of the property and
associated structures in question cannot be established under the
conditions allowed by this ordinance, the plight of the landowner
is due to circumstances unique to his property, not created by the
landowners after May 1, 1974; and the variance, if granted, will
not alter the essential character of the locality. Economic
considerations alone shall not constitute a hardship for the
reasonable use of the property and associated structures under the
conditions allowed by this ordinance. In addition, no variance
shall be granted that would permit any use that is prohibited in
this ordinance in which the subject property is located.
Conditions may be imposed in the granting of a variance to insure
compliance and to protect adjacent properties and the public
interests, especially in regard to the view from the river.
7. Factors to be considered:
a. When considering a conditional use permit, variance, subdivision,
proposal or zoning amendment within the Bluffland/Shoreland
district, the City shall address the following items in making its
decisions:
1. Preserving the scenic and recreational resources of the St.
Croix Riverway, especially in regard to the view from and use
of the river.
I
t's�STATE OF
JH[E�4Q
IDEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
PHONENO. METRO WATERS, 1200 Warner Road, St. Paul, MN .I 6
772-7910
April 22, 1993
Mr. Steve Russell
City Hall
216 North Fourth
Stillwater, MN, 55082
RE: Meyer Garage Construction Slope Variance Request
Dear Mr. Russell:
Metro Region Waters has reviewed the information submitted on
behalf of Michael Meyer to construct an attached two car garage on
a slope greater than 12% in the Riverway District. As in any
variance situation, the need for a variance should be minimized to
the greatest extent possible. The revised plan also shows that the
proposed garage does not meet the 100 foot setback from the river.
The applicant should provide justification and a thorough
discussion of the alternatives considered. The city's findings
should document this discussion. In addition, the applicant should
provide written documentation from a professional that the slopes
will be stable during and after construction. We are also
interested in seeing a drainage and erosion control plan for this
property. We suggest that a professional be consulted regarding
removal of the asphalt and revegetation of the yard area between
the bluff and the structure.
The application does not discuss what measures will be taken to
screen the addition from view from the river. This should also be
discussed at the hearing. Due to a prior commitment, there will
not be a DNR representative present at the hearing. Therefore, our
certification decision will rely entirely on the written record and
Findings of Fact.
If you have any questions, please contact me at 772-7910. We
regret that we will not be able to attend the June 2, 1992 meeting.
sincerely,
(l1�OCy-�
Molly �h'adeen
Area Hydrologist
c: Sandy Fecht Dan McGuiness Michael Meyer
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
'At.; IOU
CASE NUMBER
Casa Numbor
Fee Paid
3
Date Filed,.____
PLANNING ADMINISTRATIVE FORM,
Street Location of Property: __________________..____________..___-______ _
Logal osc p on^of�Pr pertyc L�_t Z/ _c. �ci� ----- ----- -- fZ-6' d .cT
Owner: name _____ ___ .. 'f ___ ._-___ .. _-______
Address _ �l ' _ L �����'� -c' -- o�-__------ Phone. A= y - z--yq C�; - 7, -�3E
Applicant (if other than owner): dame ----------------------------------
Address ------------------------------- Phone: ---------------
Type of Request:- ___ Rezoning ___ Approval of Preliminary Plat
___,Spocic;l Use Permit ___ Approval of Final Plat
_.Variance ___ Other-r_-----___- ______
Description of,RRe ost:--_-------�` -_
------ ------------
Signature of Applicant:
Data of Public Hearing: ---------------------------------------------
NOT'E: Sketch of proposed property and structure to be drawn.on back or't-
tached, showing the following:
f;, r1. North direction.
2. Location of proposed structure on lot. �' ,. �','".F' Tr
3. Dimensions of front and side set -backs.. �yaT cn„
4. Dimensions of proposed structure. r. 0f ,
5. Street names.
6. Location of adjacent existing buildings. Sr 4P
7. Other information as may be requested.
Approved ___ Denied ___ by tho'Planning Commission on ----------- (dute)
subject to the following conditions: -_--_-_____------_-------------_----
Approved ___ Denied ___ by the Council on ---------------- subject to the
following conditions: -------------
--------------------------------------
Comments.
To: Steve Russell
From: Michael and Sheryl Meyer
Subject: Variance for garage addition at 118 Lakeside Drive
Date: 3-24-93
We would like to build a garage at street level in the location shown on
the survey map. The size would be 20X24 and the elevation drawings you requested
are included. A variance to build closer to the street is being sought.
We have three main reasons for wanting to build the garage at street level.
First is the safety issue, our current driveway is steep and it heads right for
the bluff and a 35 foot drop. During the winter the drive becomes icy and very
dangerous to use. Someone unfamiliar could find themselves sliding over the
bluff as there is nothing to stop them.
Preservation of the bluff is another major concern. Currently the entire
yard between the house and bluff line is asphalt. Every time it rains the
water comes off the house roof and also down the driveway and runs over the bluff
causing errosion of the bluff line.
Our house is the only one in the development that does not have a garage
at street level. We are not asking for anything different than what all the
other houses already have.
Our plans along with building the garage include removing all of the current
asphalt drive and landscaping the yard. This would be replaced with grass
so the water runoff has a chance to soak into the ground instead of eroding the
bluff. We would be making a natural fence of shrubs along the bluff line to
keep people from falling over but also to help hold the soil in place along
the bluff line. Flowers and other landscaping would be done further back from
the bluff.
We will be out of town from 3/26/93 to 4/13/93.
Michael
Meyer
o a,
rul V)
ra L S tr
u v, a
0
J 2�2
m C
41
a)
O
ro 4- ro
Z
S O
C:
ro
CD c s
O
O ro
n
a) +�
>
In IV
O U O
a)
O O O
a)
ca.2
S- d
I
n�
W
a) C
lM
rn
'o •.-.
a) M
I
ro
Ql
a)
N
-
N
0
0
LL
x
U w a C
I-om
In Z � � �
In z w h
W
W
W o o z
In Z
xQ
Z-3
Q
<
V
U.
W
V'
ro m
T
In 4�
O C
n ()
al
o E
O
O. n
z
ro
Q)
>
N a) N
O
O. C
C
4� ro O
a) V Z
I
(1) V
-C
(')
V) C
Q\
r7 i.
Ib
a) -
N
7-1 -C,
C
= IC
:rof/ 6Z6/ 011 'J 'rY a SL � �6-zi-/ ' �� ��7 dot � •
4-1 IC Cl
ro O O to ti F- O a) 'Q 1 t I•�'�_ 11\ ) =+ - _
Lf-) d N N (,1 n a I�I! W •� I - I
C V ct v, 3 N n G�
v c L c ro � c •--� >
o n w s v N VI 4,q IN - 1 ? �°, '4 E c c-)
T C ro •, a)
a) 4--0 C1 -W ro v C 14- T + > +I +I 4
N 0 Cl)r 1 �j "+ v ,I c)
> c c o c c
s ua)os +� +�a)cu +1+� �.
G Y C U al C) vl O C ro 4- 4- '1 V I� V r s N
a) O O c r0 S O L
Ti .2 4- U C)3 G 7 4- +� +� ro Q _
p T� W ro
Q
NP I +•.I �.h e 1
a) C C.. a) a) C O �O C
a) 4� +-' N E C L O M 00 I Q \.••� �.dnZ�r III ! � �I„ ll J
C N ct iI W �••� �r � � � I,n f„ I L v �F.
-� ro +1 E
N vl � lva IS
41S-•� ro +1 4- >, ro 7
00 a) O 0) O 4� +1 a) aA `)
^O a/ h C ••-, L ro S_ L 3 •-I Cl) ro
s n ca).,vc� +�Oc +1 o >a
r
a; O N L C: c
v ro c+) •.., o a) t E c vl
o o ,�TN U w a 4� 4- ro ro a) c
N ro V) O E �
o o ro dVo✓n
—
s_ c o 4- w - r c-0 s- c ,n i- > +) n a: Q ll� \ -1rrx xmar/ I v 1 I v hl
a) C: z oI-4� � nE0a)a)0 +�s
.0 •.-. < O a) rG O ro
V) a) 1 3 +-+ -� +J -o o 4J 4-) +-� c Q 4J o , O , � � K r \ � � � � M1 7 �• c �- � , � �
a) J N 11 E Q) a) Ct O ro O . 4 +
- + a) j (1) v, In o U n +1 1-
4- o c• \ ee
ro ro a) a) In a) V ' S• a N ►� I`2 4 h20. Y !4� ^ I ,
+ In �+ > n +J u4 u o n v
N W ��
ro 4- o u rn � a) � o a In o -..-, � 41 �
a 3 0 ov4 a n,cca) + c. ro O o h Q \ @ ru cl, r; l4 kQ ,rr}
f- c o 4- ro T+� a ••-' o
c c c4N N 4
u• +x Tz c u w -., O > a) nca
-+ +� L +--+ O •.•U. 4- S- S- O C Q) S-- E •'� c l�
�u� o s o. ro• o- c���
U O F- •'�'� ti N C +� c v7 U ro O C .., -� • tl , 7 -E ` Q _ =r h _
4- '0 al U ••-, `ilf� �r I c D
O ro O� CL••-• 4- a) OL •� 7r ,1
a O L In S N X •. O L S S C
y} J 4J roO < ) u a 4-i•4+•"Ld C�.
tri
) OO
n aOa) ONa) 4J --.
a
S
Irf.
a) al
W s_ co 4� c In 4-- In E a) S- 41 S- o: a I ` ,�' 41 q! V, ` ' 7/ln hI
O - In ..-, O .- C .-. -C v) 4- O ro a) IC n I K
.0 L C 3 C O U T
in a) +J m a) -0 o c w o Io ro •-. z o a) Io -
C Z Y S- L O a) N L 3 O O C .--' E C
`] v7 C J J U +� ro O CI U C 4- CIL
X < ro o ro u•. In C c ro c s Of a) \ •,L)b,PEo PS --' ����sXpy
xL >, 41 +1 4Ja) omC v
>In Nuca)a nn --
Z a) I-- -• 4- O O L O. C w Y, S-
S- C _0_a O OW CL`Z 3 O� 3Wa-
.`ri i 7 ro-0 C C I` _�7 d�$:IS 'N.91/�
o w ro N
:N
I®
.-+
10 ro VN
Z ro a F_
r I'-
V QI r0
O
i
••
I J � •
M C
C:)
a 7-1
+1
C;)
O
ro 4- ro
Z
S O
C
ro
C.J C L
O
O 10
a +�
VI 10
>
O U 0-
0)
d 0 O
S- G
W
a C
0)
LT
a -0
Vf ro 1n
lip:
CJl
.� a
I�
1
a C •.-r
�
,LLrX�x
o
U
�
zy�e
N
V w h
_z
W
= '
W o F o z
x < w
CQ
r
wN
W
ro ac
a
V7 +�
o c
a O E
4> s a
O CL u
Z ro
a
> N a
a G
c +-I ro
a u
1 a VL
L �
M rn C
tT ro
Q�
cv Z v
I— C
Q ro
O SL9 '7-7 H9'/N cep
_co fy
a
CC
w C
4- r-
1 C-)
o C 00
rl d
--
C • -
M 2' >
i
~
uy
ft
!
Lf) G a (NJ
O
J-r 3 O
4f rZ
S- a
- v3 a G G
❑ h9
•1
i
41
a C L C ro
T. 7 •--• > G
i
C ro 41 ••-• E
a O a u
1�1Li
•5
o f
wz v a
1 O,+� _0
•-+ a Y a L
`
>, c ro a
i- L d S- -0 +1
V
a
4- -0 G+-1 10
VI C 4- >y+-> +I +1
>
•-+ 7 C 'O
C a 0 M C
V
S-
U a 0 S_
+1 +1 a C U +1 �
C 11--
C
Y C U a
01 ut O C ro 4- 4-
a
O O C ro
L O t
+� U 0 3
G- 7 4- 41 +1 10 Q Q
.
m O a +1
O +1 Vi N
N
C S- 07 r.
U ro 10 O7 L
a
C •-+
••-• CIl a a C O LD O
1
Y
.C-r
•rr 1 a +-�
4 N E C f_ O M 00
J
••10 +' VI
ro a r• O ro O
�lJ-
N
-- ro +-+
+1 4- >,
E •--• t o
ro 7 VI C +� ro •.-+ II II
Q
\
^O
a V) C
Z ro C L 3 .-• a ro
lV
:>,
F- C S- a s
a 3 7 U O a •r• +� 7 'oa
ro
-
M
.-� O 0)a-C
E � • V) +1 c 7 rn
"E: 4-
M
t Z U C +-
7 7- C0 L a 4�•-� i�
O
V
O U
VI a +-� N 4- ro ro a vl C
,
J ^ ro 4- 4-
Vl Y Z VI .-. O E 4- 41 ••-+
y•s'9�
>� a
•
K O O
r0 C- 3 a ro L L ro
C C
a C
O
Z
4- Ul .•
O F- +� S- +-�
1: C a C C �> 4� 0- a
rn E O a a O '-•to •-� +l i_
�
1,
L •�
Q O a ro
•--• Ul -C •.-i L a S- L O ro
`"
V
t
N E
a
+-� 3 r• +-L •--�
+� O +-� +-r i-+ C 0- t O
h
O
aJ VLG
E a a G 0 ro o --•4- 4�
n
4- LT-0
10 i 'O O Vl V) O M.
N
C L
•-.
r--i ...
-P
C
ro a
H
f ro a n
n a 1] Gar+ C C C i
.--� ro
a
4-
O U
V O 0; 4- a
V•, .-• a � O � w C .-• ••--� � 41
C S C C a• 41 _ C
(`
�
3
ccr.
O
�-- ♦- C O 4-
-.
C: ro ro >, C +� L' V •-. O
OQ•
V
i
a
•--• C C Cl rn > a n c-0
4
1
--• +-�
S-
+� O• •� U d
S- L O c a S- E ' � c
� v7
a
S .--� O-
r0 •.. a •.-. r+ 7 T L C O
U
o - —4- rn
a S_ +1c rn .-. U ro O c -.-+
C ro 0-0
CL•-+ w a OL
x
o
to s
n x of s s
E
O
+� Q+ I a ro
C a a , U a a_0
� r
;y
7 a L G
L 3 C +1 S- C> 3 Q
a
O Ln a Y a
+= = O O C O a 0-0 ,0
}
-0
In - L L
N -C- a a
S_
C7 C c/')
4- vl E a C L r
v
1 1
o
arrV) cn•-.
c� c-.t m vl+� o a ro
U
.0 C
3 ^� U C O V >> S-
rn
a
41 M a-0 O
C N C) 'uro •-+ Z- O a ro
Z)
C
Z Y S- S-
O a V) L 3 0 0 C .-. E C'7
U
V1
C J -1U Z:
41 (CO 0) V_ O+-� M-0
x
Q
ro a
ro U•+ n C C ro C L O C a
Ln
v) S_ 4-
a C G
a
O
O O-0
--p
0
a
Yv.7
S-Cr>
4-
CGG-0aZ S-
-0-0
LLJ Oa
OC C) 3 0C3 W
d
O r0 _0 C C
h 3
^
—
o a ro a+
•-. E
v ;
..
:f
J •0 a r0
+� C V
J U > 4- Q
�.
xioa%2
pS[59
Zol'
1,S'
.ZYb' 7
vv•ot
'r'
U�
lnr lar
•s
1
_
}
N I
ti I
V
V
�
n
o �
r^
u
1 �
1
I
ti Q 2
v
I
�
o h
J1
ti
I
r.. v: --I - .. - .. - -
A E� 17 TI 0
-�I=y ALL :D:MLI!�31CPA3,
J C' A P 17- A!
O - F . - E.�,K201�.F; Ai4, �PR(jIS Or (V
MEMORANDUM
TO: PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: ANN PUNG-TERWEDO, CITY PLANNER
DATE: MAY 5, 1993
SUBJECT: CASE NO. SUB/93-21
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
S tabl as reviewed additional information regarding the request to subdivide a
75,625 square foot lot into two lots. As indicated in the Staff report, the
property does not have City services nor is St. Croix Avenue an improved City
street. The proposal was referred to the City Engineer and the City Attorney.
Their comments are attached.
Sewer services for these properties would have to extend from Amundson Drive
through the Amundson Farm. Since this property is not planned to be improved
in the near future, sewer services could not be extended at this time. The
properties are large enough for on -site systems or the existing system could
be enlarged to serve two homes. Water is available from the intersection of
North Center Street and West St. Croix Avenue.
The City Attorney has advised the City as to the present ownership of this
portion of St. Croix Avenue. It is a public street. City plat records show a
40 ft. right-of-way. The standard for a City street is 60 feet. However, this
portion of St. Croix Avenue could be improved to City standards with minimal
width and not allow on -street parking.
The Planning Commission has a few options regarding this subdivision. These
include:
OPTION 1: Deny the subdivision request as premature until all City services
can be extended to the property.
OPTION 2: Approve the subdivision request with the following conditions:
1. St. Croix Avenue be shall improved to City standards with a
variance to the width requirements (24 feet).
2. The properties shall be connected to City water services.
3. On -site septic systems shall be installed to provide service
to both homes. When the Amundson property is improved, sewer
services shall be extended.
Both options meet the purpose and intent of the Subdivision Ordinance.
PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW
CASE NO. SUB/93-21
Planning Commission Meeting: April 12, 1993
Project Location: 1030 W. St. Croix Avenue
Comprehensive Plan District: Single Family
Zoning District: RA
Applicant's Name: Doug and Beverly Flory
Type of Application: Minor Subdivision.
Project Description:
The request is fto subdivide a 75,625 square foot lot into two lots of 38,500
square feet and 37,125 square feet.
Discussion:
The proposal is to subdivide a 75,625 square foot lot into two lots.
Presently, the proposed west parcel has a single family home on the property.
With this subdivision, it is proposed that another home be constructed on the
lot to the west.
The parcel does not have sanitary sewer service or water service. If this
subdivision is approved, both properties should be connected to City services.
The Public Works Director has stated sewer services would have to come from
Amundson Drive adjacent to the property to the south.
The Water Department has not commented on the project.
St. Croix Avenue is not an improved street and does provide access to two
homes to the south and the home of the applicant.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
1. The proposed home and existing home shall connect to City services.
2. St. Croix Avenue shall be improved appropriately to City standards.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approval as conditioned meets the intent of the Subdivision Ordinance and
Zoning Ordinance.
ATTACHMENTS:
Application Form
- Site Plan
- Legal Description.
CASE NUMBER
Caso Numbor-r�-Ldly3-i4�
Fee Paid
Date Filed
PLANNING ADMINISTRATIVE FOI2NI
Street Location of Property:
Logal Doscription of Property: _________________.._--_--_-_
Owner: Name Q _ _ __ ?R` ---------------------------
A d d r e s s L�___1 QLL_ Phone:
Applicant (i; other than owner): Name __--_-_-_____________________---_
Address ------------------------------ Phone: ---------------
Type of Recluesti- ___ Rezoning ___ Approval of Preliminary Plat
Special Use Permit ___ Approval of Final Plat
Variance _✓_ Other _Llr-t�D-!' iLsi c:1�___
Description of Request: J o=��!_►____t_-oT L 2�_v
J_ x .:7 ---------------
Signature of Applicant:
�I
Date of Public hearing: _-_--__..-_____-_-_ ______________--
NOTE: Sketch of proposed property and structure to be drawn,oel,
' rya or at-
tached, showing the following: - 1. North direction. = -2. Location of proposed structure on lot.'� 3. Dimensions of fr .nt and side set-bac:.s. PA10
4. Dimensions of proposed structure. 'r 0TY0P-Srk4- r , ,
5. Street names. `� '. 6WILW47Fk r
6. Location of adjacent existing buildings.
7. Other information as may be requested. `:; '�� �� ��•`:; `
Approved ___ Denied ___ by tho'Planning Commission on _________. _ (dote)
% subject to the following conditions: ------------------------------------
_________________r
Approved ___ Denied ___ b______________________-____________________
c, y the Council on ---------------- subject to the
following conditions: ------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------
Comments: (Use other side),
ma`s 1 60 91 /00 60
112. 39
N w `"
D
.0
t
C)
U
r—
tie
p
974
�
soles//'as"f
LL
N
'
90.31
so/011 ' Q3 "f \'.`y
� , _ of
75
O_
Na a
b v,;
i a 4r �
~ s0/ 'o5E ti9
y O N O
Nip � _ U . y•
3l7 Q A Uia., .
,t2o N- N a O
W N d lit ,v 0,0/103
.2/
/92
4
w e14.97 - t• - - .. d ..�
fT'
r vlk
r
_1��
A-PP-Ro
17
6 r
A�Vpp�bx,
k
G � �
z4 Y 2Ac--->
_E
i i �usn�Y Q z�
SF-1�'u
W • �r-: �.oti � ��.
MAGNUSON & THOLE
LAW OFFICE
LICENSED IN MINNESOTA AND WISCONSIN
THE GRAND GARAGE & GALLERY 324 SOUTH MAIN STREET SUITE #260 P.O. BOX 438
TELEPHONE: (612) 439-9464 TELECOPIER: (612) 439-5641
DAVID T. MAGNUSON
ERIC C. THOLE
Ann Pung-Terwedo
City Planner
City of Stillwater
216 N. 4th Street
Stillwater, MN 55082
RE: SUP/93-21
Dear Ann:
April 27, 1993
STILLWATER, MN 55082
Legal Assistants
Gail A. Mahr
Shelley L. Sundberg
The property being considered for subdivision is abutting that
portion of W. St. Croix Avenue westerly of Cooper's Addition to the
City of Stillwater.
This street is not part of a plat and has not been dedicated as a
public street by an instrument of conveyance.
It is, therefore, a question of whether this road has been
dedicated to the public by user pursuant to the provisions of
Minnesota Statutes §160.05.
That statute provides that when a road or portion of a road has
been used and kept in repair and worked for at least six years
continuously as a public road, it shall be deemed dedicated to the
public until lawfully vacated.
The dedication has two elements. First, the road must have been
used by the public. The recent case, entitled Town of Bell Prairie
v. Kliber, App. 1989, 448 NW2d 375, established that public use can
be shown when, "a comparatively small number of persons used the
road for six years continuously."
Next, the road must have been worked by the public. It is not
necessary to show that every part of the road was worked at
government expense during every year of a six -year period. In one
case, road by user was established by testimony that one or two
times a year, a township dragged a road and leveled it off.
Prior to this road's annexation to the City of Stillwater, it was
used and maintained as a public road by the Town of Stillwater to
provide access not only to the houses that access this road, but to
the Oak Glen Dairy. This dairy provided some retail product to the
general public and commercial traffic on the road was fairly heavy.
Ann Pung-Terwedo
April 27, 1993
Page 2
During this period of time, the road was also plowed by the Town of
Stillwater.
Since it has been part of the City of Stillwater, it has been used
by the five families whose driveways access the road and has also,
according to the Public Works Director, been graveled and plowed
continuously by the City staff since the latest portion became part
of the City in 1984.
In my estimation, therefore, the portion of St. Croix Avenue lying
west of Cooper's Addition has been dedicated to the public by use
and is a lawful City street.
Respectfully submitted.
Yours very truly,
v
David T. Magnus n
Stillwater Citx,'Attorney
DTM/sls
April 26,1993
Ms. Ann Pung-Terwedo
City Planner
City of Stillwater
216 North Fourth Street
Stillwater, Minnesota 55082
Dear Ann:
3535 VADNAIS CENTER DRIVE, 200 SEH CENTER, ST PAUL, MN 55110 612 490-2000 800 325-2055
ARCHITECTURE ENGINEERING ENVIRONMENTAL TRANSPORTATION
RE: Stillwater, Minnesota
City Engineer
Planning Application Review
Case No. SUB/93-21
Planning Case Review File
Pursuant to your request, we have reviewed the Planning Application Review for Case
No. SUB/93-21 which is a proposed subdivision of Parcel No. 09020-2200 at 1030 West St.
Croix Avenue.
This parcel has been reviewed in the past for sanitary sewer service. The sanitary sewer
in North Center Street is about 7' deep on the end near West St. Croix Avenue. There is a
jog in what was right-of-way at one time when the property was within the township, and
the roadway was called 81st Street North. This jog is to the south of St. Croix Avenue
between North Center and Owens Street approximately 135' centerline to centerline.
Our records indicate that 81st Street North originally was probably only a half a right-of-
way, or approximately 30' wide. It is our understanding during some discussions with
area land surveyors, that this right-of-way may have been vacated and you have
requested that the City Attorney review any right-of-way available in this location.
Past history on the parcel in question indicates that, at one time, when a house was to be
constructed on this parcel, the concept of constructing a sanitary sewer service from
North Center westerly to the parcel, between parcels 09020-2150 and parcel 09020-2160,
was explored. Apparently, the discussion with property owners broke down, and when
the house was constructed by Mr. Raduenz on the subject parcel, a drain field system was
installed.
We understand the request at present is to subdivide this parcel in a north/south
direction such that a new home may be constructed on the westerly half of the parcel; and
City Code requires connection to City services and access by City right-of-way improved
to City standards.
The proposed parcel decreases in elevation basically from the easterly line to the westerly
line along the 81st Street right-of-way. Because of the depth of the manhole near the center
SHORT ELLIOTT
HENDRICKSON INC. MINNEAPOLIS, MN ST CLOUD, MN CHIPPEWA FALLS, WI MADISON, WI
Ms. Ann Pung-Terwedo
April 26, 1993
Page 2
of North Center Street and West St. Croix Avenue, and the distance required to place a
sewer service southerly on North Center Street and westerly on 81st Street, the sewer
service would not be deep enough at the westerly one-half of the proposed subdivision
to accommodate gravity sewer service to this residence at the present elevation of the
parcel. The lot would require considerable fill, which may not be practical with the
existing house on the easterly half of the parcel.
We also reviewed this area at the time of the Oak Glen Development and at the time of
annexation from the township. The area was again reviewed in June of 1987 and sanitary
sewer service roadway alignment and drainage considerations were proposed for the
area between 81st Street, the Stonebridge School and easterly of Amundson Drive. This is
the Amundson property. When the Oak Glen project was constructed, an 8" sewer stub
and manhole were provided from Amundson Drive in a northeasterly direction to serve
as sanitary sewer service to the Amundson property. This sewer service would also
provide service at the proper depth in question. We have enclosed Drawing No. 1 of the
North Center Street Study dated June 12, 1987, indicating the proposed alignment of a
street net system for the City of Stillwater across the Amundson property, connecting
with the entrance provided on Amundson Drive. This also indicates the sanitary sewer
construction within this right-of-way. We also enclosed Drawing No. 2 which indicates
drainage facilities which were proposed to be constructed in 1987. These drainage
facilities were not constructed. This study came about because of problems with septic
tank and drain field in the lower area indicated by the Vielhaber property.
Once again, the proposed sewer service from Amundson Drive would have the proper
depth to serve the properties adjacent to 81st Street North.
Although water service was not addressed in this study completed in 1987, water was
stubbed out on the proposed roadway entrance on the east side of Amundson Drive with
the sanitary sewer, and watermain is available in the intersection of North Center Street
and West St. Croix Avenue.
We recommend that the City consider carefully the sewer service as proposed on the
drawings dated June 12, 1987, since the sewer service depth is not adequate at the
intersection of North Center Street and West St. Croix Avenue.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
r i
Richard E. Moore, P.E.
REM:kam
Enclosure
c: Mr. and Mrs. Doug Flory
David Junker, Director of Public Works
PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW
CASE NO. SUP/93-26
Planning Commission Meeting: May 10, 1993
Project Location: 514 East Alder Street
Comprehensive Plan District: Residential
Zoning District: Duplex Residential/Bluffland/Shoreland
Applicant's Name: Wolf Marine, Inc.
Type of Application: Special Use Permit
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Special Use Permit to place two signs on an existing marina building.
DISCUSSION:
the proposal is to place two signs on the marina building. The signs would be
located on the front (south) elevation of the building and rear (north)
elevation of the building.
The front sign is 3 ft. by 13.5 ft. or 40.5 square feet. The building is
approximately 60 ft. wide. The lettering for the sign is 12 inches while the
logo is 3 ft. in height. The south elevation business identification sign can
be seen from the river. It would be difficult to read by the letter from any
distance and certainly not from the main traveled river channel.
The second sign is on the rear of the building. The proposed sign is of
similar design with the addition of 18 inch letters advertising "Slips
Available". The rear building sign (north) can also be seen from the river by
boaters using the DNR launch ramp.
The Bluffland/Shoreland regulations do not allow advertising signs visible
from the river. The basic Wolf Marine sign is a business identification sign.
The "Slip Available" addition to the sign does advertise a product.
It is suggested that part of the rear sign be relocated to the front of the
building in 8 or 12 inch letters located lower than the business sign. This
would make the advertising very difficult, if not impossible, to read from the
river.
Business identification signs are necessary for the efficient movement of
people to their business destinations. The size and locations of the proposed
signs will have minimum visual impact from the river.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approval with condition.
CONDITION OF APPROVAL:
1. 'Slips Availa-61e" shall be removed from the rear sign, reduced in size
to 12 or 8 inches and located on the front of the building beneath the
main sign.
ATTACHMENT:
- Application
- Plans.
'AC 100
7a
CASE NUMBER
PLANNING
Case Numbar��.�?.
Fee Paid .--_ ZU ---_-
Date Filed,
ADMINISTRATIVE FORM
Street Location of Property: _-514- East Alder Street, Stillwater, -Minnesota
Lot "B" Exc 11023-2025, Registered -Land Survey 473
Logal Description of Property:LDt_'P�'_Exc _110_23 _2025, Registered Land -Survey ##73
All in Stillwate_r City -
OWner: Name __Wolf_Marine Inc.
Address 514 East Alder Street -------- Phone: --- 439-2341
Applicant (if other than owner): Fame __---------------------------- ---
Address ----------------------- -- Phone: ---------------
Type of Requesti ___ Rezoning _-_ Approval of Preliminary Plat
Special Use Permit _-_ Approval of Final Plat
Variance :__ Other -------------------
Description of Request. -5 gnac e on the front and rear of the Wolf Marine
--------------------------------------
---- building -, located on the -described premises,- as according to Exhibit "A
attached hereto
-*NOTICE-ENGINEEING-FEES MAY BE BILLED TO -APPLICANT. --
Signature of Applicant: -___ -
Date of Public Hearing: ---------------------------------------------
NOTE: Sketch of proposed property and structure to be drawn.on back of this form or at-
tached, showing the following: ,
1. North direction.
2. Location of proposed structure on lot.
3. Dimensions of front and side set-backs.o
4. Dimensions of proposed structure. ►►� r��''�.�a1���
5. Street names. OF'�i�' lY
6. Location of adjacent existing buildings. °�� G 51WVoo °
7. Other information as may be requested. ,' (` r
rL'r yf~r
Approved _ Denied _-_ by the Planning Commission on - _---- dat0)
subject to the following conditions: ____________________________________
--------------.-'----•---•--T--------------------------------------------
Approved _-- Denied --- by the Council on ________________ subject to the
following conditions: ------------------------------------------------
Comments: (Use other side),
�D
a1
0
F- .A ---I
71
W
W
Ok
As,
PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW
CASE NO. V/93-29
Planning Commission Meeting: May 10, 1993
Project Location: 2117 Dundee Place
Comprehensive Plan District: Single Family
Zoning District: RA
Applicant's Name: Dan Dalluhn
Type of Application: Variance
Project Description:
A Variance to the sideyard setback requirement on a corner lot (30 feet
required 18 feet requested) for a garage addition.
Discussion:
The request is to add on to an existing one car garage. This 12 foot addition
moves into the existing 30 foot setback on Fairmeadows Road. The addition does
meet the front and rear yard setbacks.
As proposed, the garage will be approximately 30 feet from the street. It will
not impair traffic visibility on the corner of Dundee Place and Fairmeadows
Road. No additional landscaping is proposed.
Condition of Approval:
The garage shad— set back thirty feet from the street.
Recommendation:
Approval as conditioned.
Findings:
The ting of this Variance is necessary for the reasonable use of the land
and garage on this residential site.
Attachments:
- Application Form
- Site Plan
- Elevation.
I'll. 1J0
Cuso I�lumbor Vr3
Fee Paid
CASE NUMBER Date FiledL.-°�...Z�1_-?__-_..
PLANNING ADMINISTRATIVE FORM
Street Location of Property: P><ck_C- —
Logal Description of Property,�__�
Owner: name__��._�1�1C1---------------------------
` o,�e�_ ag�a
Address __� LL�__��.b�LP Z_ ��_____ Phone:
Adplicant (if other than owner): dame ---------------------------------
Address ------------------------------ Phone -----------------
Type of Requests. ___ Rezoning ___ Approval of Preliminary Plat
___ Special Use Permit ___ Approval of Final Plat
_ Variance ___ Other ----------- ________
r
Description of
Request:
L,----
_C.LL�-.
( _ Gz _—______
S.eC�c�__—��-
L�__O __f,�cL�C'r� Cc.✓ Q_
11.________7__—
- -____^--___
Date of Public Hearing: ---------------------------------------------
NOTE: Sketch of proposed property and structure to be drawn,on back of this form or at-
tached, showing the following:?) �,
1. North direction.
2. Location of proposed stricture on lot. AN, , 99
3. Dimensions of front and side set -backs.• ����
4. Dimensions of proposed structure., '
5. Street names. ;,a Q�QFTk.LW4TEq
6. Location of adjacent existing buildings. P $?ZJ fi
7. Other information as may be requested. 6/
Approved ___ Denied ___ by the'Planning Commission on (duce)
subject to the following conditions: ____________________________________
Approved ___ Denied ___ by the Council on ________________ subject to the
following conditions: ___-_____________________________-_--____-_-_-_
------------------------------------------------------------------
Comments. (Use other side),
- ---------- =
I E X. 1 -e;T t 1-1 C, -->�
I
V41
W.
PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW
CASE NO. SUP DR 93-30
Project Location: 1900 Tower Drive
Comprehensive Plan District: Industrial Park
Zoning District: Business Park Office, BP-O
Type of Application: Special Use Permit
Project Description: The proposal is to construct a 9,000 square foot
office retail uiiding at 1900 Tower Drive. The site is located between St.
Croix Bike and Skate and Arrow Building Center, A Special Use Permit is
required for the retail use in the Business Park Office District.
The proposed site plan shows 30 parking spaces. If revisions are made to the
plan 'to meet the setback requirements, 20 feet in front and 10 feet on the
sides, 25 spaces can be provided.
Thirty spaces are required for a 9,000 square foot office building. Retail
parking requirements is one space per 200 square feet or 45 spaces for a 9,000
square foot building. Either the building must be reduced in size or a
variance to the setback and parking requirements must be approved. The
applicant has not provided a basis for a variance.
The project design was reviewed by the Design Review Committee at their
meeting of May 3, 1993. The Design Review Committee recommended approval of
the design with the conditions listed below.
Additional Planning Commission use and parking related conditions of approval
are recommended for project approval.
Recommendation:_ Approval with conditions.
Special Use Permit Conditions of Approval:
1. The STH--o-F—tFe—F—u-ilding shall e reduced so the 25 parking spaces
equals the building area for the intended use:
(7,500 square feet office = 25 parking spaces or
(5,000 square feet retail 25 parking spaces)
2. The building landscaped setbacks shall be met 20 foot front, 10 foot
sides and rear.
Design Review Condition of Approval:.
1. A detailed sign plan showing the monument sign materials, size, color
and setback 15 feet from the front property line shall be submitted for
Community Development Director approval.
2. Construction details of the trash enclosure shall be provided for
approval by the Community Development Director. the materials of the
enclosure shall be compatible with the colors and design of the
building.
1
3. A detailed landscape plan shall be submitted for review and approval
showing a 10 toot landscaped area on the east side of the building, 20
foot front landscaped area, 2 1/2 inch minimum Maple trees (14), plant
material around the sign and sodded areas.
4. A maximum of 25 square feet of signage per tenant shall be allowed on
the west side of the building.
5. The monument sign shall be a building sign or site sign but not a
business sign unless the business does not have a sign on the west side
of the building.
6. A revised lighting plan shall be submitted indicating the type of light
showing that the light source will not be seen off the site.
7. All landscaping shall be in before building occupancy.
Findings:
Tie use and design as conditioned is consistent with the West Stillwater
Business Park Plan and Zoning Ordinance.
Attachments:
- App ication
- Plan.
2
1'AC 100
Case Numbol--SY2/�J_ 90
G
a -
Fee Paid _ ________
CASE NUMBER Date Filed
PLANNING AD,-INIS Y RAT IVE I ORi'A
A �
Street Location of Property: ____ �_' �'.._- �J C ' -- __�_--
Legal Description of Property: ----------------------------------------
Owner: Name __�� � __� �.• — i( -------------------------
Address ------------------------------ Phone:
Applicant (ii other than owner): dame __ '..#� _`{`t�'?__�.:�!'��!
Address Phone ----------------
Type of Request: ___ Razoning ___ Approval of Preliminary Plat
= Special Use Permit ___ Approval of Final Plat
-__ Variance ___ Other ------------ _______
C"..
Description of Request:
-*NOTICE EfdGINEERI1dG FEES -PLAY BE -BILLED TO APPLICsJINTw rj
Signature o Applicant: _ . C1•J(
Date of Public Hearing: _____W_____-__--------- �—__..__"-- - - _
NOTE: Sketch of proposed property and structure to be drawn -on back of `
tacked, showing the following: �Rp'7 I -
1. North direction.
�• tiR
2. Location of proposed structure on lot.�y
3. Dimensions of front and side set -backs. t PAiio �
4. Dimensions of proposed structure. Ra! CfTY0F9TILLWA7-H
5. Street names. S�7tL'�VATE.4,
6. Location of ad4acent existing buildings. �� '�1' 0
J g g .? a]-3
7. Other information as may be requested.
Approved ___ Denied ___ by the Planning Commission on ----------- (duce)
to the following conditions:
subject.__..----------------------- ------_-_
--'------ -_ter.--..-.----........._T.------..._-----..._-..----------_..._----------_---
Approved --_ Denied ___ by the Council on ________________ subject to the
following condi►ions:--------------------------------------------
Comments. Comments: (Use other side),
.f
the
architectur
network
S.UMMAjt
1- o r 4 1 'L f; 74 0l 3 1 8 8 F
. 1.
b V l L. o I N r. A R E A rl a 00, -P
PhP-KINv i I I'+105 ;
-,OThL. PAILWHb )O SPACES, -
I i
r
Mo N uME NT S ICON D
4TAaL 'r bf CVLVMN AHCHaf-
PleAs"AL b61.OIU- PAlnr-
I .=
o y
N 11
I
"F 61 -
„4. V+A.
7'd. n•
.... s
Tn rrN.
rsv:o�� 2or_or
•V �
ro§.cy
�� rlre
• G
1,k4• r � Cif r' `
Trl'��L
- i
� 4
A
WALL PA6 -- Q
A V Iv n•Ir'I 6
P14 9�2.11—,_-.____ w
w
U ;r
wait. Pao yy
i J 1
\ r o.
I t
It ! aullx �1Yrl
I- I MI
'I YO '-
V -
L v.p pSAI>'
'v CA66Mt1 Pit
SLI+r. D41E GVM1b j yVT7ERJ LrNN 6
.. �.� Ha.�Sg1,Lb
r o w E (z D I v E
S ITE Pi-14r1
NeT9
A ;,L ]r IT G�[Y-Arkl rl? YYwan rN4 A'I Tp•S1 tH•i•G AT1s+1 llrl(x -
IAl'GN FACJA A "tW% Y iSQ r'iA R><1P •iY b/,yrC r[��2• I A�wl�.
V ArdV Varr*Y ap• T� Gra�AvliyA-lf + p V Ir✓ fr-rp 7
rA,cr T+ •n *yrnacrron r rpM1r nHY a!>sAr<r r�cicr 7v6M•
I 1
1 1
tk
r
4"
l 1
f I I
1
• � � � t
r it i
i� Gsrr7� PARKIriW 1f• cAo � ►1KQ ' i i
NA sAA7I l
1 l ,
1 I
Tor ucV 1 ��,�4>
4
L 1 1
=xKr Iy' IMP r. 1Y67,111A,AlN
� F><ISs: b•JaA SAnIia4Y pwfM1 reluSr.HAMnO:E
I -P, —!Aft 6lWEL
Feslpr CATCH eAsni
1809 Northwestern Avenue
Rlver Ridge Professional Buii
Stillwater, Mlnnesota 55082
phone 612/430-0606
fox 612/430-1505
cellular 612/670-1106
architects
engineers
construction managers
KRONGARD
CONSTRUCTIO
COMPANY
lo56 CURVE CRtST SL—o
STILLWATER. MINHESOTA 55oB2
PHONE: 16121 A30-231 t
I hereby certify that this plan• specificatic
report was plepored by mn or unoar my
suporvision, and that I ear a duly rnislo,
,Inder the lows al the S1e1v Or__
Date nag- No-
Sianed
No. 13810 Revision D
t- P,V.Ckl °I PF I,1T
Project No.
/jPRIL 2-7, 1g93
Drawn b
• 2 o '. 4'
C2 e v tti el cVe+-�ion.• o
West G�eyg.dor2_- .
oP�(on b
i
T
141;
fff I h. ii ,
iI
+
5, 11
fl !j
,r��rt stirs �
Y/n�l-
r.�/��c� c-,-rrr
I
1: I
i
I 1 �
;f
KRONGARD
CONSTRUCTION)
COMPANY :i '.
1056 CURVE CREST BLVD.i
STILLWATER. MiNNESDTA 55082
PHONE: 16121 430-2314
e a s e. e l c Y"t-,� / o n.
the .
architectural
network
1809 Northwestern Avenue
River Ridge Professional Building
Stillwater, Minnesota 55082
PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW
CASE NO. SUP/DR/93-31
Planning Commission Meeting: May 10, 1993
Project Location: Northeast corner of Washington Avenue & Curve Crest Blvd.
Comprehensive Plan District: Commercial
Zoning District: Business Park Industrial
Applicant's Name: Partners of Stillwater Veterinary Clinic
Type of Application: Special Use Permit
Project Description:
Special Use Permit -'or Veterinary Clinic with an outside animal exercise area.
Discussion:
TF�e�request is to construct a 7,500 square foot Veterinary Clinic with a 750
square foot outside animal exercise area. The Veterinary Clinic is a permitted
use. The outside exercise area is subject to a Special Use Permit. The
exercise area is enclosed by a six foot wall. Animals in the area will be
supervised and kept inside the clinic at night.
The 7,500 square foot building requires 25 parking spaces, 50 spaces are
provided. The project meets the zoning and design requirements as conditioned
by the Design Review Committee.
The Design Review Committee reviewed the proposal at their meeting of May 3,
1993 and recommended it for approval.
Recommendation:
A—pproval as conditioned.
Conditions of Approval:
1. A detai e sign plan and the light fixture type shall be approved by
the Planning Department before building permits are issued.
Attachments:
Application and Plans.
PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION FORM
CASE NO. SUP DR 93_31
Project Location: Northeast corner of Washington Avenue and Curve Crest Blvd.
Design Review Area: West Stillwater Business Park
Type of Review: Design Review
Project Description:
The project is for a 7,500 square foot Veterinary Clinic. The development is
located in the Stillwater West Business Park Design Review area (guidelines
attached). The site is across from Brine's and Arrow Building Center on the
corner of Washington and Curve Crest on a two acre site. The building fits
comfortably on the lot with room for expansion to the north.
The one level structure uses brick veneer and wood siding for the walls with a
shallow pitched shingle roof. The building has as residential/office
character. The trash area is located on the north side of the building. It is
screened with a structure made of building material similar to the building.
The landscape plan shows the perimeter of the site (between the parking lot
and street bermed 2.5 to 3.5 feet above the parking lot. Sod and street trees
are planted in that area. Bushes are located around the south and west sides
of the building. Low growing Junipers are planted around the base of the sign.
The vegetation meets the size requirements of the guidelines.
A sign is shown on the corner of Curve Crest and Washington Avenue. The sign
is down lit with florescent lamps. The sign is four feet tall. (Specifics of
the sign design are not presented.)
Parking lot, building and pedestrian lighting are shown. The light fixture
types have not been presented. All light sources should be contained on site.
The parking lot light standards are 15 feet tall with cut off (box) type
fixtures, similar to other parking lighting in the area.
A proposed animal exercise area is located on the northeast corner of the
building. A six foot high fence similar in design to the building wall
material is proposed.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approval wit conditions.
FINDINGS:
The project design as proposed is consistent with the West Stillwater Business
Park Plan.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
1. A ae ai a sign plan and the light fixture type shall be approved by
the Planning Department before building permits are issued.
ATTACHMENT: Plans.
Case Numbc���-
Fee Paid _ y' ----------
CASE NUf4BER Date Filed -------
PLANNING ADMINISTRATIVE FORM
Street Location of Property:
Logal Description of Property:_I.._Pi1Qc��_StiU��iex?1�Lli�stFar}L__ ,
Owner. Name _Parrners_of Stillwater VeterinaLLClinic_______—_--_---__
Address 9550 60th St. N. Stillwater_____ Phone: __ 7'0--6166______
Applicant (if other than owner): Name -------
Address_ 3880 Laverne Avenue North,_La'ce Elap,,gone.
MM, 55042
Type of Requests- -__ Rezoning _-_ Approval of Preliminary Plat
_X_ Special Use Permit ___ Approval of Final Plat
___ Variance :__ Other'
Description of Request: __ Walled _in outside exercise area for veterina v clinic.
Signature of Applicant: ----__-----___-_--__-_
Date of Public Hearing: ---_--_-____..________________________________
NOTE: Sketch of proposed property and structure to be drawn -on back o: +aus fo:-m or at-
tached, showing the following:
1. North direction.rNk
2. Location of proposed structure on lot. `1eY •
3. Dimensions of front and side set -backs. h�`�
4. Dimensions of proposed structure. ;PAID --,�
5. Street names.
6. Location of adjacent existing buildings.,'7Y+ilLlaP
7. Other information as may be requested.
Approved ___ Denied ___ by the'Planning Commission on (date)
subject to the following conditions: _____________
-----------------------
______________________T----------------_--------------------------
Approved ___ Denied ___ by the Council on ---------------- subject to tl;e
following conditions: __---------___________________________
Comments. (Use other side),
STILLWATER VETERINARY CLINIC
o C
S
STILLWATER, MINNESOTA
1[ELLL90M COMPANY
V
o
08B0 LA1'WW A" —No, SWY 270
9
L�lm ICap, 41 .2
r$j
;kI
cl Imuc'l
�N-S
wowNcrnNI+NwtatP
1
I c
F
N L.
W W
m
�r��
N
Wpp
•� NiT
(_
� N
x
i
t s
e.57CILLWATER,
STILLWATER VETERINARY CLINIC
MINNESOTA
b d0
y
'y ��
Lbw)
e
kELLISONCOMPANY
W9.mA Na. N270
Iakc�rjna. Mlmn4 55W4R
•
QGY
!lid
i'
STIL4WATE1t VETS N CLINIC
0}
I
7-K0=140H
-
I ES
STILLWATER, M1IVNLSfYEA
Mgr
�..
OUMPANY
�W`a aL.�AYlrru 9MAt� �
r ti
PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW
CASE NO. V193-32
Planning Commission Meeting: May 10, 1993
Project Location: 206 East Locust Street
Comprehensive Plan District: Two Family Residential
Zoning District: RB
Applicant's Name: Todd Remington
Type of Application: Variance
Project Description:
A variance to the height requirements (20 feet required, 24 feet requested)
and to the total square footage requirement for an accessory structure (1,000
square feet allowed, 1,350 square feet proposed) for the construction of a
carriage house.
Discussion:
The proposal is to construct a carriage house/garage on the property at 206
East Locust Street. The carriage house, as shown on the elevation plan, will
be of similar architectural character as the home. This accessory structure is
higher than the regulation for height. It is also 350 square feet larger than
what is allowed. The applicants have stated their basement is not usable for a
workshop or storage space.
No trees are presently located on the area where the driveway and carriage
house will be.
This lot is large enough to accommodate a duplex as regulated by the Zoning
Ordinance.
Conditions of Approval:
1. No habitable living space is allowed on the second floor of the
carriage house.
Recommendation:
Approval as conditioned.
Findings:
This proposal will not impact adjacent properties and is consistent with the
uses requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. The height of the building
maintains the historic character of the area.
Attachments:
- Packet
- Application.
Caso Number V---------
Fee '
Paid
CASE NUMBER Date Filed --2 i3 ____
PLANNING ADMINISTRATIVE FORM
Street Location of Property. -.w________________
Locgal Description of Property:_-__----.._____M___.._-____....___-____..___w
Owner: Name . Q� 4'____r_______________
Address I�-SI_% _____ Phone:
Applicant (if other than owjier): Name_________________w___.______.___��__
Address -------------------------------- Phone -----------------
Type of Requestv Rezoning ___ Approval of Preliminary Prat
___ Special Use Permit ___ Approval of Final No,
Variance ___ Other -___________________
Description of Request. - w__--_w___--- ________
r~ *NOTICE: ENGINEERING FEES MAY BE BILLED TO APPL----�_______
Signature of Applicant. _ _- - _________..___--
Date of Public Hearing:w..._____..___-_..._______________________________
NOTE: Sketch of proposed property and structure to be drawn.on back of't-
tached, showing the following:
ry
1. North direction.
2. Locatior. of proposed structure on lot.
3. Dimensions of front and side set -backs....
4. Dimensions of proposed structure.
5. Street names.
6. Location of adjacent existing buildings.
7. Other information as may be requested.
Approved ___ Denied ___ by the Planning Commission on ----------- (duta)
subject to the following conditions: _______w_-__-__-.._________________--
------------r-r---------_--•----------------.._.....-----------
Approved ___ Denied ___ by the Council on______________M_ subject to the
following conditions. _______
---=-------------------------------------
Comments. (Use other side),
Request for Variance
Todd and Kathleen Remington
206 Locust Street East
Stillwater
It is our intent to request a variance to build a traditional carriage house to add to
the existing character of our lot and our neighborhood. This carriage house will
serve as a garage and storage space/workshop for us since we have an inadequate
basement. To achieve the traditional carriage house look it is necessary to build
slightly higher and larger than existing zoning allows.
We are asking for a variance on the heighth and square footage requirements.
Instead of 20 feet high our carriage house will be 24 feet. The square footage will
exceed the allowance of 1000 square feet by approximately 350 square feet to allow
for a dormer and a steeper roof pitch to create a carriage house look.
There are three reasons we feel justified in our request:
• We have a triple lot and it's impractical to split the lots. Considering all
the land we have the density of our lot is less than the neighborhood
average. Without the variance we will be deprived of the full use of our
property. Granting the variance will help remedy the situation.
• In our neighborhood, the majority of the buildings were built before codes
were in place. In order to be compatible with the neighborhood we should
build a carriage house to fit into the neighborhood better, improve values,
and enhance our lot.
• Because we're very secluded, this building will have no negative impact
on others. A one story garage won't hide the back of our neighbors sheds
and garages because of the placement of our house on a hill.
• Our house is on bedrock so the basement is not fully useable. We need a
bigger garage for storage purposes and other normal basement functions
that are lacking in our home.
Thank you for your consideration.
PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW
CASE NO. SUB/93-33
Planning Commission Meeting: May 10, 1993"
c
Project Location: 1401 Amundson Drive
Comprehensive Plan District: Single Family
Zoning District: RA
Applicant's Name: Mark Thibodeau
Type of Application: Minor Subdivision.
Project Description:
A minor s-6-H vision for the transfer of a 1,399 square foot parcel of property
from 1407 West Sycamore Street (Lot 1, Block 1, Oak Glen Second Addition) to
1401 Amundson Drive (Lot 3, Block 1, Oak Glen Second Addition).
Discussion:
The request is to transfer a 1,399 square foot parcel of property from one lot
to another. The applicant has stated the reason for this subdivision is to
provide additional area on *r.� 144bw4eau' s property for a swimming pool. The
proposed subdivision does not affect the minimum lot size requirements for the
RA Zoning District. After the subdivision, Lot 3 will be 20,175 square feet
and Lot 1 will be 31,050 square feet.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
1. The 12 ft. ut7 1ty easement shall remain as dedicated on the plat.
RECOMMENDATION:
Ap`pr—ov—aT as conditioned.
FINDINGS:
This minor subdivision meets the intent of the zoning district and Subdivision
Ordinance.
ATTACHMENTS:
- urvey
- Legal Description.
VAC 100
CASE NUMBER
Caso NumboT-Qd/ -3
Fee Paid --____-
Date Filed`
PLANNING A.DMINIS T DATIVE FORM
Street Location of Property:___------..__--
Logal Description of Property: �-c? _� �____�' __ 'r_ _ 66,4 l
��o ��i-rv\--
Owner. Name -________________
Address Phone: C--
Aaplicant (if other than owner): Name
Address ------------------------------ Phone -----------------
Type of Request:- ___ Rezoning ___ Approval of Preliminary Plat
Special Use Permit ___ Approval of Final Plat
___ Variance ___ Other ----------------
Description of Request: ----------------------------------------------
— M r— --------
*NOTICE: ENGINEEING FEES MAY BE BILLED TOAPPLICANT.
_7 _____ -
J
Signature of Applicant:
Date of Public Hearing: -----------------__--__--__...________-_-_---_
NOTE: Sketch of proposed property and structure to be drawn,on back of this form or at-
tached, showing the following:
1. North direction.
2. Location of proposed structure on lot.
3. Dimensions of front and side set -backs.
4. Dimensions of proposed structure.
5. Street names.
6. Location of adjacent existing buildings.
7. Other information as may be requested.
Approved ___ Denied ___ by the Planning Commission on ----------- (duce)
subject to the following conditions: ____________________________________
-------------------___T____------ _--___-_________-_-----_-_M_--
Approved ___ Denied ___ by the Council on ________________ subject to the
following conditions. ------------------------------------------------
Comments: (Use other side),
BRUCE A. FOLZ & ASSOCIATES
LAND SURVEYING • LAND PLANNING
1815 NORTHWESTERN AVE. • STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 55082 • (612) 439-8833
LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR SALE FROM
JACK SMITH TO MARK THIBODEAU
April 23, 1993
Part of Lot 1, Block 1, OAK GLEN 2ND ADDITION.
The West 15.00 feet of Lot 1, Block 1, OAK GLEN 2ND ADDITION according to the
plat of record in the office of the County Recorder, Washington County,
Minnesota, as measured at a right angle to the west line thereof, containing
1,399 square feet, more or less.
Subject to Drainage and Utility Easements as dedicated on said plat.
I hemby certlfy that this survey, ,dan, 'or tancn
was prepared by me or under my dire::
auparvision and that I am a duly Reg!Lzerad
Land Surveyor under tta laws of tho St3to ro'
Minnesota
�
Q
BRUCE A. FOLZ
oMIa I/- Zg -9.3 Reg. No. 9 Z 3 Z- _.
LOT I — -
M
�..
�dv Ft 5 p I
I 2, 33
4
; o7 fi51 W-
r � OUT .4T r
a� L
�-- -- - • � � `• � i �s I :ti _, r 3, ter" as'4{ ��' -- _ -
e ,,, ►a
N16
� _ I
y ' C) 1 i
2ir
— --j-
-• h�}i
tp.
k1=7 T9 4
I�
o s rrt, rwt
H I f G --eOU NT`
lop 170 / r , , E Li E OF r NE I/ _
.�
- t �. / m a
Z
Np
SKETCH PL-AN FOR•
MRRK. TH 16oDEAU
5 i I L101 Amundson Drive
S t l I w ntc (-, M i n n e5ota 6S Ve2
S LWAT
TIL
�J
3E° —
r
CD
O � `
~ r\ it
O
Nze
I G
EAST LINE FF -. N01°11651N Y' \ 1
f7U1{�:T O J
9+- Q NOI°!103"h rf 6f /•'I`• �� Mw, r
rlo
criOf
9�J 5 �� \ � •0�1/ a� ,. phi ':�?Q � �i� � S!.
Z
rW7 N 1 T , \ •
` zm2 G
i17 mow.. Pqx' � o�
� — ro
O� � m n I �o � ••I 1fD r`-L4, 25 � w'r��
OD—
o- CD i_
z �^ o
N O p m I —I� i �° '� �� I F
m oZ I I
ooc r, ; � �1 m os I
o AI
OD m= n I _--
cD _ �c
n~
I =
--
�
II
I 1 r
I 1
N
IfV!7 119
Sir` t7yp'V1 W W
T� � �,T •NI 7!rP 1' A! Omit
f� �Y j%, i� W Aa�G1
NQ of
! Z c 2
— N2P9
� / 'mYTm I• Nyl
O
NZ
Omr 1
40
r
EAST LINE of THE -EAST _INE 3i- THE NEI/4-SEI/4 SEC 20 Y
3EI/4 -SEI/4 SEC 20 ° --
._--1322.20•-
'771011•:',' N
PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW
CASE_ NO. DR193-11
Project Location: 110 East Pine Street
Zoning District: Public Administrative/Office, PA
Applicant's Name: BWBR Architects, Inc.
Type of Application: Design Review
Project Description:
The appl 3 ca,J on s for renovation of and adaptive reuse of the East Junior
High Building for an office use. The 1930 Junior High is a good example of a
Moderne Style school building that was typical of the times. The renovation
plans reorientate the building from the south (Pine Street) to the north
(Third Street/Downtown) by relocating the main entryway and constructing a
three story atrium.
Changes to the extension of the building are mainly on the north elevation.
The emergency metal stairways are eliminated and replaced with windows.
Windows similar to the existing windows are added on either side of the old
stairs are open on the building to the north. A three story atrium entryway
opens the interior of the building to natural light and the sloped metal
roofed atrium lowers the profile of that new building element and merges it
into scale with the building. The cupola on the building is reminiscent of the
Central School which once stood on this site.
The west, south and east building faces remain as they currently exist.
Rooftop mechanical equipment are shown in approximately the middle of the
roof. This should minimize the view from the south or north sides. Additional
consideration should be paid to the location of the mechanical regarding noise
and view.
No landscape plan has been submitted. This plan should coordinate with the
landscaping across the street on the West Parking Lot site.
No trash storage area is located on the site plan. The landscape plan is
conceptual only and lacks detail. The parking layout shows a turn -around and
drop-off to accommodate off site parkers. A lighting plan will be required
before final project approval. The lighting plan should indicate fixture type,
location, height, and direct lighting down so the light source can not be seen
from adjacent streets.
The color of the atrium should be a color compatible with the existing
building, possibly a brick, grey or dark green color. No signage is proposed.
If any signage is requested, it must go through Design Review. If a sign is
desired, a low profile ground mounted sign along Third Street near the
driveway entry is suggested.
It is difficult to see from the site plan but a sidewalk should be constructed
from the entryway to Third Street connecting to the west site parking lot.
Before final approval of the design, additional detail should be provided as
listed in the conditions of approval.
1
Parking demand for the 58,100 square foot building is 194 spaces. Thirty four
spaces are provided on the east site and the public lot across the street will
provide 166 spaces, total 200 spaces. Previous site plans for the east site
showed 60 spaces. It is strongly recommended that maximum parking be provided
on the office site consistent with the good site circulation.
Recommendation:
Approval.
Findings:
e renovation and adaptive reuse is consistent with the Downtown Design
Guidelines.
Conditions of Approval:
1.A detailed lean scape plan shall be submitted for review and approval.
The plan shall indicate plant type, size, location as shown conceptually
in the proposed plans.
2. No trees by the ravines to the north and east sides of the building
shall be cut or removed without approval by the Community Development
Director.
3. A light plan shall be submitted showing the fixture type, location and
lighting pattern. Lighting shall be maintained on site and the light
source shall not be visible from adjacent areas.
4. There shall be no night lighting to the south and east of the building.
5. The color of the atrium and window color shall be reviewed.
6. A sidewalk shall be constructed from the north building entrance to
Third Street and West Parking Lot.
7. If trash is not kept outside, it should be screened by a structure
compatible with the color and material in the school building as
approved by the City.
8. No signage is approved for the building. Any signage other than parking
lot directional signage shall require design review.
9. The service entrance and access to the building should be located to the
northeast side of the building.
10. The material of the mullion of the atrium and the window alignment of
this atrium shall line with the existing windows.
11. The mechanical equipment shall be placed on the northeast side of the
building.
12. The service road on the north side of the building shall be removed.
13. The east site shall accommodate maximum on -site parking consistent with
good circulation.
Heritage Preservation Commission Recommendation:
Approval as conditioned.
Attachment:
A --A -1
Case Number -----------
Fee Paid _______________
CASE NUMBER Data Filed
PLANNING ADMINISTRATIVE FORM
Street Location of Property: __110 Pine-Street---_------_-r___-__----__W__
Locgal Description of Proportys .._ .__See attached - sheet
--------------------
Owner: Dame _- Cub -Foods, -a Division of----------In----------w_------
Address_ 126 Water Street Phone.• 779-2025
BWBR Architects, Inc.
Applicant (if other than owner): Name ____.._� ________-_-________- --__
Address - 400 Sibley St., _..
Suite 500 222-3701
-------- Phone. Phone: ---------____--
Type of Request: ___ Rezoning ___ Approval of Preliminary Plat
___ Spocial Use Permit ___ Approval of Final Plat
___ Variance ___ Other Design _Pormi-L-_____
Description Of Request: _Rnc�vT:t:ion of_exi5eing east_�unic�r. hiCh school to ---
Cub Foods_ CorLnz i Le_ He:.id(ivarters- (See attached) _--_-_-__---_-___--___-_
*NOTICE: ENGINNEERING FEES MAY BE BILLED TO APPLICANT.
Signature of Applicant: --------------------------
Date of Public Hearing: ___ HPC-May 3_-1993,-Planning Commission May 10__1993
NOTE: Sketch of proposed property and structure to be drawn.on back of this form or at-
tached, showing the following:
1. North direction.
2. Location of proposed structure on lot.
3. Dimensions of front and side set -backs.
4. Dimensions of proposed structure.
5. Street names.
6. Location of adjacent existing buildings.
7. Other information as may be requested.
Approved ___ Denied ___ by tho'Planning Commission on ----------- (date)
subject to the following conditions: ____________________________________
---------------------_r------_--__-_-----_____----_----- -__---
Approved ___ Denied ___ by the Council on ---------------- subject to the
rollowing conditions:
Comments: (Use other side),
F
`.-CUBF.O.ODS
.CORPORATE
HEADQUARTERS
Class dismissed...
Stillwater ' ,Junior High School. For
over 50 years this building has been
. , a place with. knowledge and
learning serving the community.'
This June - its halls Will grow quiet.
Theschool's end has provided an
opportunity .for a new beginning.
Cub Foods, a long time neighbor,
needs- a new home.- . Remaining a
Stillwater resident being one of its
-top -goals, it is -decided to give the.
junior high new life: Once again
its halls will enjoy the -activity not
of children but of the over 200 Cub
• Food employees 'currently spread
throughout several buildings iii
downtown.
The .school sits on a unique site. On
the ..edge of the river bluff, it
straddles- a line . between the
residential and commercial areas of
downtown. Turning the building's
'front' around signifies this
transition to a new . commercial
service while at the same time,
taking advantage of the wonderful
views to the river valley to the
northeast,
%%I%f
vWM APWECTS
NO Y'RUTZ
CUB FOODS
CORPORATE
BWBR ARCHITECTS
� { HEADQUARTERS
April 28, 1993
The intent of this project is to give new life to an existing school building by consolidating
the operations of your long time neighbor, Cub Foods.
Ik
The first move on the site is to turn the back into the front, signifying the change of use
from school to office, and orienting the building toward the river. A three story atrium
will take the place of the existing courtyard and make an elegant entry into the new
building.
Removal of the existing interior clay tile walls will provide the opportunity to make three
i
levels of flexible office space. The open office plan will focus on the new three story
atrium that looks to the river and floods all three levels with sunlight. The rotation of the
atrium recalls the old and new street grid of the city, making the Cub Foods headquarters
a link between Stillwater's past and future.
i Repaving the existing parking lot and adding a turn around drop-off area will provide a
total of 34 spaces. This lot will accommodate all of the disabled parking stall
requirements. The remainder of the required 144 stalls will be provided across Third
Street at the site of the demolished west campus.
The building will include 42,600 s.f. of renovated space
7,000 s.f. of unfinished space
f 8,500 s.f. of existing Gym and Locker
space that will remain unfinished
Total:
58,100 s.f. usable space
I
d
i;.
CITY PLAN
scale: 1"=545'-0"
9)]
SITE PLAN
scale: 1"=136'-0"
I�
J
ID El
� o
0 0
O oo
o
op %o O
J
0 0 0 ;
rt
Future West Parkh
(For plan layout see mbWttal by SEH
� l_ ■
n �� MIN
■■
K ' im
,•,
L+
%
r� ■
, Pine Street
X
Bluff line
'M'MM.,Mae
a
•
•
0 0
CUB FOODS
CORPORATE
HEADQUARTERS
Good neighbor
The relocation of the main entry
to the north side buffers the
adjacent single family residential
neighborhood to the south, keeping
the noise and traffic zoned to the
north and west sides of the campus.
Access and parking
The primary circulation routes to the
new corporate campus lead off of
3rd Street with a secondary parking
access off of Pine St.
Parking Summary:
Parking required by city
zoning ordinance: 178 stalls
Parking provided: East side 34 stalls
west park 165 stalls
* as per ADA code 4% of all spaces
are accessible parking spaces
All surface parking areas are provided
with significant landscape buffers and
low glare lighting for security and
general illumination.
Service to the new corporate head—
quarters will be from Pine St.
leading to an entrance off the north—
east corner of the building.
1`%f
NO 93017
•p�u 25, 1093
I
I
EHYnv
m +�
• R£CP,
I r YECAI
• • LOSS
ATRIUM PREVENTION
4 I
G+�F'EIEFnA ELEVATOR
. I cow. AND
1 NMS BTAiRB
f OFFICE
SERVICES
■
• I ■ I ■
• I 1NFDRMATIC
SERVICES
• .ONFERFJFCE ROOM CONFERENCE ROOMS
r�
CUS MN . PERgO/ TOILET ROOMS TOILET ROOMS OFF
LOS% PREVENTIONN MISC SERVICES MISC SERVICES SERV
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE
• as
= ■ ■ • ■ • SHIPPING/
PPING/
FRANCHISE/ INFORMATION _ RECEIVING
TRAINING SERVICES
(COMPUTER ROOMS) LOADING
AIR ST AIp DOCK
,1 ' -
FIRST FLOOR PLAN Z
I
I
i
VP ATRIUM
■ ■ BELOW HUMAN
PAYROLL RESOURCES
I �
CUB Mi1JNL••SOTF
jU1Vl'3K]fi
a RAV-
EL ATOR AUDIT
• • AND
STAIRS
1■ it ■
■
CONFERENCE ROOMS CONFERENCE ROOMS
TOLET ROOMS TOILET ROOMS
MISC SERVICES MISC SERVICES
■ r • ■ ■ . WORD
ACCOUNTING — — PROCESS.
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE / ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE 1 - _
SECOND FLOOR PLAN 4
tlllllllll�l llll�I I,I FI.
:I
FUTURE
EXPANSION
FUTURE
EXPANSION
THIRD FLOOR PLAN !!III . 11111111IT1111 "I „
CUB FOODS
CORPORATE
HEADQtJARTERS
FLOOR PLANS
The new planning reorients the
building — changing the existing
back into the new front and
signifying the change of use from
school to office. At the same time
it orients the building to the river.
A three story atrium will take the
place of the existing courtyard and
make an elegant entry into the
new building.
Removal of the existing interior
clay tile walls will provide the
opportunity to make three levels of
flexible office space. The open
office plan will focus on the new
three story atrium that looks to
the river and floods all three levels
with sunlight.
The rotation of the atrium recalls
the old and new street grid of the
city, making the Cub Foods
headquarters a link between
Stillwater's past and future.
BWSR ARCHTEGT3
NO B9017
APrD 20, 1993
Light cupola with vinyl clad
wood windows —
Existing brick school
with vinyl clad wood windows
Replace existing doors with
new wood windows -
--
NORTH ELEVATION
SOUTH ELEVATION
Standing seam metal roof
Vinyl clad wood windows
Aluminum panel infill
between windows
Entry canopy with standing
seam metal roof
man ONE
MEE
111 II1 :P 11N 111 1°III milli! 2"�°Iloilo milmiliellin '' 111 11 ::111 11New Wood windows in
ONE Eli OWN � �R the existing brick wall
..
111 M ::JINN 111 1i.�11� ■ilui �mlta III ■ 111 illy :' i:! lil Replace block
rull,vsuI�lil■ Ifs. IIIlrlrl�ii swith new wood windows
111 111 111'� 111 lil
111 111 111 II I !! !! M 111
Rooftop mechanical equipment
Rooftop mechanical equipment
4Liemosms
a i1Nir,Nl11N1 1I1111111M1111-1111lIIli
iiNi1ii�iIiidIi0i illi 10111ri111111
CUB FOODS
CORPORATE
HEADQUARTERS
ELEVATIONS
The rotated atrium acts as the
focus of the new Cub Foods
Corporate Headquarters in
Stillwater. The atrium overlooks
the historic city center and the
river while also providing natural
sunlight to the three levels of
open office space.
The existing portion of the building
will have several new windows to
provide additional daylight and
views to the river.
%BWM IW
NO 93017
Apra 25. 1903
EAST ELEVATION
WEST ELEVATION
i�
i j
1{
CUB FOODS
CORPORATE
HEADQUARTERS
SECTION
The (w)hole in the middle...
is greater than the sum of its parts. It
is the spirit of the Cub Foods team and
corporate pride which fills the new focus
of the headquarters building. Serving as
the hub of public entrance and circulation,
all departments relate or look out over
the corporate community space. An
essential place for greeting, gathering
and corporate ceremony.
A building with a heart.
A corporate identity can be defined by
our surroundings. The definition of a
quiet dialogue of organization, details
and space. All these elements combine
to support the people of Cub Foods and
enhance the company.
%%%f
BWBH AACHTECT6
NO 70017
Apr11 2E. 1993
5
PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW
CASE N0. DR 93-12
Project Location: 100 West Pine Street
Comprehensive Plan District: Public Administrative/Office, PA
Applicant's Name: City of Stillwater
Background:
h�i ty Counci 1 directed Staff to prepare a parking lot plan for the West
Junior High site. The primary reason for preparation of a parking lot at this
location is to provide parking for the CUB Foods office use across Third
Street to the east. This parking lot is also planned to provide additional
parking for uses on the South Hill and Downtown Stillwater.
Because of the sensitive visual nature of this neighborhood witn the Historic
Courthouse and 'historic homes, extra time and additional design experience was
needed to create a parking area which would blend with the surrounding
structures. Three Heritage Preservation Commission members, Mike McGuire,
City Staff, representatives from BWBR, the firm which designed the East Wing
and the landscape architecture firm Sander, Wacker, Wherman and Bergley,
(Lowell Park Master Plan designers) along with our City Engineer met three
times to discuss and develop plans for a parking lot.
There were some original ideas that the lot provide for recreational
opportunities as well as parking but it was indicated by a neighborhood
representative that this was not a neighborhood need and important to the
project. Issues which were important included concealing the parking from tihe
street and the Historic Courthouse, the orientation of pedestrian access from
the Historic Courthouse and the CUB Office Building. It was important the lot
provide for CUB required parking.
Discussion:
T e proposal is to demolish the existing West Junior High School facility and
construct a 160 (166 spaces shown) car parking lot. This lot will provides CUB
employees parking during business hours and provide the churches and Historic
Courthouse with additional parking on the South Hill. The lot will also be
open to the public in the evenings and on weekends for overflow parking from
the Downtown.
The site plan shows how the parking will be orientated on the site. Access
will be provided from collector streets, Third Street and Pine Street. Two
vehicular entrances on Third Street is not recommended because of the traffic
conditions on this street. Also, because of the grades on this site, internal
circulation could not be accomplished by one vehicular entrance.
This parcel of property is the "front" yard to the Historic Courthouse and has
a strong visual presence. Landscaping,* which includes street trees, hedges,
and other vegetative plants are important to buffer the lot form Third Street,
Pine Street, the Historic Courthouse and various homes in the neighborhood.
A sidewalk connection lines up with sidewalk extending from the front of the
Courthouse, then ends at a plaza which then connects to sidewalks extending
east toward Third Street and west toward Fourth Street.
The lot shows approximately 166 parking spaces. This may be modified slightly
as the plan develops. The CUB Foods office site will provide additional
parking spaces on its site.
Recommendation:
Review and approval of parking lot site plan with conditions.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
1. A fnal landscape plan showing plant type, size and location shall be
submitted for review by the Design Review Committee before construction
permits are issued.
2. A lighting plan showing light location, height and type of fixture and
light intensity plan shall be submitted for review and approval before
construction permits are issued.
3. Comments from the Design Review Committee shall be incorporated in the
final design of the project. Landscape items, including the wall facing
material, fencing, paving material and plant material shall be
submitted and reviewed by the Design Review Committee. Also, the design
of the plaza area.
4. The design of benches and trash receptacles shall be reviewed by the
Design Review Committee before construction permits are issued.
Attachment:
Plans
DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION:
Approval as conditioned.--
2
ad.Vn f vN.tathr .br. sO
nm.ln
prkMt bs - I4 .p.c o
(Includlne I h.ndlwp @UMJ
SANDERS
1 WACKER
] WEHRMAN
BERGLY
LANDSCAPE ARCHTECTS AND PLANNERS
365 East Kelogg Bcdevard.
Saint Patl, Mimesota 55101
612-221-0401 Fax: 612-297-6617
rin. Strwt
whbul.r.1Kranu
F-- vahbular antr.na
FOv
[psh.11ng ! hrnlrc.P
.tallq
mW kbak p.dntrlan
eme.walk
tv"I pint (Orton. may
Includ. dawmWe pool and
Ibun"In, Interpr.twe
ahelt r and/or ar wrort7
P.rkln0 bt - el.p.c..
(Includln/ 4 handbp
.tau.]
Preliminary Concept Plan for the
West Parking Area
Stillwater, Minnesota
20 April 1995
4 �f5
North
Scale: 1" . 30'
LEGEND:
M15CELLANEOUS
existing contoursto remaln
proposed contours
property line
SITE ELEMENTS
retaining wall
�T ornamental fence with atone columns
• ornamental light standard
�r� r parking lot light standard
- L bituminous parking lot
concrete walk
> paver surfacing
- w era steps
OtrE FURNITURE
ornamental bench
ornamental bench with chairs
PLAN77NG5
street tree In tree grates or pavers
columnar shade trees
evergreen trees
txcrn
screen hedge
ornamental shrubs and perennials
PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW
CASE NO. SUP 93-25
Planning Commission Meeting: May 10, 1993
Project Location: 405 East Myrtle Street
Comprehensive Plan District: Central Business District
Zoning District: CBD
Applicant's Name: Stillwater Hotel Associates
Type of Application: Special Use Permit
Project Description:
A Special f Use Perni-t and Design Review for a 90 room hotel, conference center
and restaurant at 405 East Myrtle Street.
Discussion:
The request is to construct a 90 room hotel, conference center and restaurant
at 405 East Myrtle Street. This hotel will be a mixture of new development and
renovation of the Lumberman's Exchange Building for suites. The attached
Planning Application Form reviews the design of the project according to the
Downtown Design Guidelines. The Heritage Preservation Commission/Design Review
Committee reviewed the project at their May 3, 1993 meeting. They recommended
approval of the concept design with nine "Conditions of Approval".
As shown on the site plan, the parking lot (60 spaces) directly to the north
of the site will be for the hotel use. There will be 42 public parking spaces
to the east of the site along with additional parking north of the property.
The parking demand of the hotel complex, including 90 rooms, conference
center, and bar/restaurant, is approximately 122 parking spaces. This can be
accommodated in this area. Presently the CUB offices lease most of the spaces
along Lowell Park Monday through Friday. The lots are open to the public after
business hours. Once the CUB offices leave Downtown, this parking will be open
to both the public and the hotel use.
The Parking Commission reviewed the proposal at their regular meeting of May
5, 1993. The Commission supports the project and feel there is enough
parking spaces in the area to accommodate the hotel/conference center, and
restaurant use.
The hotel site is in the Flood Plain District. All habitable living spaces and
mechanical equipment will have to be one foot above the 100 year flood plain
as regulated in the Flood Plain Ordinance.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
is —T-he Cou ntruites parking lot to the north of the site shall be
improved.
2. The river parking directly to the east shall be improved.
1
3. All habitable living spaces and mechanical equipment shall be one foot
above the 100 year Flood Plain.
4. All employees of the hotel shall park in the lot on the southeast
corner of Mulberry Street and Water Street.
5. All design review "Conditions of Approval" shall be met.
FINDINGS:
-he hoteT proposal meets the intent of the Zoning Ordinance and Downtown
Plan.
ATTACHMENTS:
Hotel Packet
- Application Form
PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW
CASE NO. DRj93-i0
Project Location: 405 East Myrtle Street
Zoning District: Historic Commercial District
Applicant's Name: Stillwater Hotel Associates
Type of Application: Design Review
Project Description:
Design Review for —a hotel development at 405 East Myrtle Street and 127 South
Water Street.
Discussion:
The request is to construct a ninety room hotel on the existing Hooley's site
and renovation of the Lumberman's Exchange Building into hotel suites. The
hotel will be orientated to the north (Myrtle Street) where hotel parking is
located and Lowell Park and the pavilion can be seen. The following is an
overview of the projects elevations.
LUMBERMAN'S EXCHANGE BUILDING
The Lumberman's Exchange Building will be renovated and not restored; however,
the first floor wood panel trim will be removed along with the replacement of
the existing windows. No traditional storefronts will be placed on the first
level. A canvas awning will be added which will lend character to the
building. The second and third story windows will also be replaced. The
proposal does not call for using the original window openings.
NEW STRUCTURE
The new o et 1 structure has various design elements based on each elevation.
The Water Street elevation (west) as shown has a textured brick facade which
will appear similar to the existing buildings in the downtown and the
Lumberman's Exchange Building immediately to the south. A wood -sided structure
defines the space between the Lumberman's Exchange and the new structure.
Water Street will provide the service entrances to the hotel.
The front facade (north) elevation has a variety of design elements which
gives the feeling of several structures.. These include the brick northwest
corner structure, a wood faced center structure, and a rounded glass section
with trim. The canopy will be metal. Typically, metal awnings are not
appropriate in the Downtown. No color has been provided. The east elevation
has wood siding with millwork on the cornice and lattice work.
The proposal has not identified elements such as lighting, signage,
landscaping, railing materials, and awning colors and materials. These should
be reviewed before final plans are approved. No trash storage is located on -
the site plan.
The plan also shows a series of flags above the hotel suites. These may or may
not be appropriate.
The image of the hotel design is that of a riverboat. The Heritage
Preservation Commission must determine whether this overall design is
appropriate for Downtown Stillwater. The National Register Standards state
that additions to buildings should be products of their own time. This means
that a new structure should not be designed to look like an 1800's building.
The Stillwater Downtown Design Guidelines state that buildings should be in
proportion and scale to adjacent buildings. This proposal meets this criteria.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
1. ignage shall e reviewed by the Design Review Committee.
2. The canopy at the north entrance shall be of canvas or other material.
The color shall be reviewed by the Design Review Committee.
3. No flags shall be placed above the roof line or anywhere on the
structure.
4. The detailed landscape plan for the hotel and parking lot and lighting
shall be reviewed by the Design Review Committee.
5. The architectural features which includes railings, lattice work, and
glass shall be reviewed by the Design Review Committee.
6. The awning color and materials shall be reviewed by the Design Review
Committee.
7. Any exterior lighting shall be reviewed by the Design Review Committee.
8. Trash shall be stored in the building or completely screened from public
view by a structure compatible with the materials and colors of the
building as reviewed and approved by the Design Review Committee.
9. The front of the hotel, including the awning as it visually relates to
the Myrtle Street site line, shall be reviewed by the Design Review
Committee.
10. The applicant shall consider reducing riverboat appearance in the final
design.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approval as conditioned.
FINDINGS:
The plan as submitted will meet the intent of the Downtown Design Guidelines
if all conditions of approval are met.
ATTACHMENTS:
Hotel submission package.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION:
Approval as conditioned-.-
• d%V AVV
Caso Numb, r
U C'
Fee Paid
CASE NUMBER Date Filed ---------
PLANNING ADMINISTRATIVE FORM
Street Location of Property: - 127 Water Street
Generally hounded by Chestnut, Water and Myrtle Streets
Logal Description of Property: and Lowell Park-_ See attached drawings_-w___-
Stillwater Hotel Associates, A Wisconsin Limited Partnership
Owner: game ______...._ ._ .-.._....__ _- -------------------------_
lley
ir
Address pt__ Phone. _ 414_731--2322Apreon,-WI--um 1--________---
Applicant (if other than owner): flame __BWBR-Architects _--`--------- ----
Address _ 7 Sibley _ ff-5ef03Suite - ---_- phone: - 612_222^-3701 ---
Type of Request:' ___ Rezoning ___ Approval of Preliminary Plat
Special Use Permit ___ Approval of Final Plat
___ Variance ___ Other ___________________
Hotel & Restaurant in CBD
Description of Request:.�____--------
* NOTICE: ENGINEERING FEES MAY BE BILLED TO APPL42AL_L
r .
Signature of Applicant. ------------
Date of Public Hearing: _________________________________________
NOTE: Sketch of proposed property and structure to be drawn,on back or this form or at-
tached, showing the following: �9 3
1. North direction.
2. Location of proposed structure on lot.
3. Dimensions of front and side set -backs.
4. Dimensions of proposed structure.
5. Street names.
6. Location of adjacent existing buildings.
7. Other information as may be requested.
ejT't get ���• .3`�
Approved ___ Denied ___ by the Planning Commission on
(duto)
subject to the following conditions: _____-___.-__________________________
Approved ___ Denied ___ by the Council on ---------------- subject to the
following conditions: ----______..______________________________..______
------------------------------------------------------------------
Comments: (Use other side),
-III 1•/i i.rr _ Z .:.-- r�+�L 3�Fi=• pi'.:-'�; .:L' F.a •-� Sr
a Y
.� . ; y ►►ma�yy !r
- . r _ _-S•sµ:': Crr �` .rC.� 2cs.'ti .�i.'.•f,.°� ��.; � �' �� K+'ak"r .�.v/,..$.�::... �•� ;i � �� � x � • � z
11
PrId's finest travel and hospi6ality companies. ;u.
N a ,�i r.�•.....� x�'� �YZr.T'ps:•`��
r.�ti ` '7.�rY �..•. 4 -Sr
W�_
"r'AM
}� \ '.ems,::: �' �..i • ^^�_�i}��'�� +�.�w.:�• ~{'' r•§%�
��11�1 � � ' • �
• _�s; j�r�.�•�! �kk � � i - r• i _�• ` dam- -"�'r• '�'' �► _.
x .'•y-r"".= •�,» :�= `.•.� `tom � �
Z.
a3S�ir T,: t.��C'._., v + ;l�cr�� 7i N-= '�•�R } _ MTM
4t.
1• Rx:[ �- r..:Jr �� 1�"`+' :• r• :��A�t :� r
�'-Ss •�. ..�.. ?t i*• •�,•�"�% i.C= =' r �y a: �� { ��+Je "'•a,��-
tiF�.-�r�'4!L�1- � �A•1�:+�\ �+i`w �4� / �M. n'! s- rt---Y•'S--j�^�i 1• _ •y.�Vl�irw .�`s• . ���� y •��i� Y>`c
_Ty-.:ll. r+- :: �.. 1 ��� _'~'.;' as } •W,���L 6. �!-i_ ' �3�. •'/_. /y: 'w4• • + •n. - •-.'�.7:'-.'l,',;'!fi�a-. r_ :.a ,i�M �
fhr'�•, ~2•.4'�1x�±"`' ._ h?{.�i':'1+ - �=+_ �:b:.4 S. ^:t Y• .-:s•�,..�` �N. .• -• „ ..'..ir •y •;,�1��`,�•• - : � } s .� _ .� a..
r�q `•� ? _�.-. •:fy?. _ . ; r-r�� ' ��. ' �'i:: '"r-:.2 :�•='f' � . �L; ` ' �� k': - ��'• 6.ti; � '*�i `e -
.?? ^'•'Y...r. •k'__V7�i:?-•rE�'+`' ~.r^^r ,� ��=�L; ,•- :. r. +s -jai: S'•. }•,i•SyiY.C••. �r nh':_.='i :'a:+•� y ef.J
..�' _ _ :. =.tom � � +: x.. - ri�- '• ; � . 3 r• ..r �- J w •.i . +�, l�.�Kae�� -
- -ACE-
:Y1;.�: .' ,,i�� -•r _ -.. +C:,. t•
: s AAA, 4;; �� ar`'�;►`3 _R"
��► � • -� aiw.. '��ti r M� _• !? ,-31' �• r3..t • w'�l � :4' � �} ' r.�a :7 't. - •i. iii�� : •L•�.- .
;+"=i arr•�:-.Mx+}•a "f►;.�.•.�- ,-�';•• sJes•- �tiV - :1,,� ik •�.- �•�' - '�s^���. � _ r_,
•�y,;.,r;.�.k.. �•.-••�,e,�„ �. '� ._.'=�.,f ;;r,-K' ��F _�.. e.;•.� t�.�� �?�..�.* ""�S-�i:^y!�,.. �,�• � �_;i:; wl..'�`.�r� � •M1•T - �--� � �ri•..:
•"'�'•r w 4. :�i�-�t.G. .�_�.� �►���'r� .. �`.�. � 1_ ', •- rl•.r � �'�-3.' :C- � � •� "•• � � • 1: '.fir_ �.r'x: - Ll" _ _ •.: • .• 1 yr. T.,k,• _ �:r� �:�� i+f='�'�I..-.: _ *v - ..5.".: - •i s%' '�"�= "•�`"• .g��'+ ~'-ya
'.r-ti •.. -' .
■!.� .!� i 4 ,.w y. , a.•aS�$--�,,-"-rt"••.. ,, ..;� Y ;r . • R' w .� r-'' • y!e J-'. .:fir+ K2
•r-r. µj :7' - ••`-�,' ^^,1-` `'��: !.i = • �:,r-
"•--,. -�+. w. _ 4�jJC'", !r-'��• r w�'r +" �`rr`__ .fw'�"= �•.ry7' �•-��'` - �',-..._
�`i'y''�'^ .�'�G����•��' • 4.r 1.r-r S�i«t;- w ,� •^r:K�'_%. �", �`. _
�f 3�dtf wT!.! •r �r �:� i �• x.7�' 1.r:�Y'•r' _�+ �` �Macme
•A� :. i► f�
•!�:•` !,.' ' : "."f.' . �.y'..�"-,� ts�d ':r '' -'.:,"y,„.F� ..i,,, y� �• ti; . j�tc ' yr , y -`",1-- } '�' l it •�� •a• + - .•>•... �w
.Azr!;,'--�'^,. Y r 3M•1 i6 '1f --.•�- ,•5� - :'� :i• _,'j y.'r�, ;.L� ..,� '3S " • :".y:.r� 7' ; _
��"� _ ��: y.. _ . " - .,:� .1.0 �,�.; :Y:i ,r _�' � � �:.�"f '�i 9S'3a w ' .4..L a --�-- - - ��,';,r: ;�� ».w,�=�'C�'��;� ^• A=' ��::.':'•: •�' .. .•,r r
'`�'«."�T w14:="s✓y ram,• C;•-�• 1 !r j __ r •'�w' +.-!,� �r-_ t'^
.+i:: • 1' iF 'r4'W--'i Hk=ia ]. . -tea + �7 =�a�, r�`lt,A�. _ z.. •"s�'r a� rwa •ter• j z";
1 WeR
�� -�1x�• r] y} ci�r� •` 4'� ' ,i ,' r;� �� f.ti., �.-��+�"1
*h++ +t`3�'was ,r ti:+. .-`r;+c.• •; �� �+• •.+ ++ ;4`4.. 4. ;; },: -�i'r .i' �t� y-.,Y� :e »1 +�. ,7 S+ c �� _ r.
"•:y.d f % . �=r �.ls"w : • F� `.Syi+ r... w• [.F ww.•+�y. ia.• �,' - „"'•r.�a..1.4•�'�
F �;�:.: r•� �•_.•.y��+�'erE,�-•r•,.�"�'-.``„`"rk-•"�ae•:r� _._. •- nru_• s
� �� � � � Willy .,�f"'.��. j: ; "" 'E'.-�'��� �'• .s7�, - �:����� .���•'.� ' �, '� "-A k�„y..�
�^'��'•�'' - ral •a .•:� r� � r _ 'r,,:., !"-i.:•�n' :L""-ski.;•, '�'LT � . �aiiS'i T� y`, �'!.� �K+.+�is+�:..Zrr Li: �e �� APO
•yi...rr ,
��4�•i/ +� •. y .�: � '� yr � � T,1 ... _ � y.,n �R +�.'
,... .,,..: DIN i
Fir f ^
FW
:�. :� 1 1= y.j 'ia. ^••,: e�j:,:�{.�+ •n•ti.�a�+-•.'t : 'S
w•":`.��_. .'��a'},`•f.�r+.;:,r n'+as�yl!n�'rf�' �`�+-. ,��r-.:�¢r;+'yw arfi,1• .�3�hrZti'avrxt�i7`�'74t%!rr 'y_•�; ''p�;!'tilF;,r t� cM�w .��rir�?� rr=ii?"•+`s�'. �,� rM^M`.Fr:•i '.,"•.4..�.�.F -i,f1.t.}f.�%,�:!.•L �.a:1+;''"-r'.•.w _7.�.�5f•ray.. .<:i�e� f.~•s''Aa:Ri`:s`r+;,-�,':�,y.'.�re..".c}.�w'• Jr-�.-...r.r1.�";;`::i;►-�. ;r.?,y,,:r;y.trrir�r•:ys,.d_• ,til�.•.Y'�{'dY•�' '_i'.;:r'�y{°_o•.�a�1.: ..c'�w..y....�•�...r�;'c.�}.:,.•.i.i.,ri^,. •?y�,iC-`yvri+r:•ti+^.r:}._A-,y "��,•,,etrF •,�.y"`.r'y':•h�';,iaN;'�.}'"�'!��c��am•'•�n.h,.����s�. ;'+' l,i��S'a:rsr��ccr� :!w�. �9�X.n'3•:.'+'+'S.�'�t1•:-� '.�'S
rl
5' {rTt.�'.r5�.,`:.r •.•c�i�••4, i•+:` � r=. •-�R- �..ni"-�irizy.s Y,.•xL6.G�y- ri�Yf• ';+� :L:.r..:'. -�+%s.w::.i.•:y.:.r-.r•.���-wl• !�r„s N
Fki�r^••`�t�'-r+yN'.�s• �fixr�wr�. 7•"l4+Tiu its�+,`',�ti�r'r i�w` 1$ ':�•L,t.,c r;? Y{ r� c�> �•-.N_• .+c�t.i
.r�. :���=•"}'_��.:� rT�^:r,
..;.
7
t-
•",;1yyLP•
Y -
•' � !-a �• �r�, � ;=��•- ZT,r •X`s•-'r.•;•,_,--::' -: ?�• _
:.Y. � -rye • ti./ �.:�*,.? ''-.:-:.; � --^-..:ri„.-. %•,(ra : �r ;,;.;��,.
�:}K� 'i::�. arye .F'Lr �•�{ !� i'� L .� r.`n"i�'��-�` �r� Zr.'"y,y,i i�` - - �.# .... • � R v =` •�y"�.. +�
��� •}��.`�'�{.E �: %���f 1?ea�.`..��i�.'�i •_Y7e: l-�►':y.. Cy.fy. `afr'•• .in,. � �.. r- - i1�~�•L.wi� ,,ys L .. .�, � •�.y.-,��i� tf'�1rK �r.F �•.. F'Y i1: - � A• �,l•� `r �. `• - � ,4F�•,�.•.y��� .w •� .Y _ - • wOW. ' .-.
�1?i;k7� -' �±'^?sr�7..;,�4.r�-r;rf:: iRx�•�Y.ar�•r-• �rc� +'i• 'L;! at'?:L. i, � .r:' '•�T� +.�� saisncy±w� y� �.�F'�;.�r►'i�'•� .:�Z-- _ L•..- .
'r.
F
rich Alley
Lumberm n's
Exchoge
-,Building
k�
POI/S
S
� u n ult
1
O
V
E E-1
+s
' I.IFllflli FFIFFl�1lfk�ll:illfll:fin..-�:�rhv.;.?.',�__
BEN HUR
Today once again Stillwatt�r reflects on its
history and strives to renew its relationship
with the river. This offers a unique
opportunity for the Lumbermen—Hooley site.
Development of a hotel in this location
supports the planning established in the City
Master Plan and the details of the Lowell Park
reconstruction. Coupled with the redeveloped
Lowell Park, it allows for the City to again
turn to the river creating a new front door wiU'
an image reminiscent of a simpler quieter time.
There are a number of significant issues to
consider in the development of this site:
There is no "back door" and access, both
physical and visual from all sides.
Major traffic congestion along Chestnut now
and even with the construction of the proposed
Highway 36, bridge traffic over the Historic
Bridge will be significant.
Preserve the view of the Pavilion, both from
the bluff down Myrtle and from downtown.
u A Preserve the scale and character established in
the logging and railroad eras.
Water Street
- r� kT�7 ►'�kl•iktitiikt�
III IN
®:
Primary service is along water for both Main
Street and Lowell Park commercial
establishments.
E Railroad right—of—way to be maintained though
traffic is limited and at very slow speeds.
Lumbermen's Exchange Building is a
contributing structure to the historic district
and its preservation is an important ingredient
in "fitting in" to the site.
Site is an important link between Lowell Park
and the Central Business District.
The Downtown plan proposed parking along
the western edge of Lowell Park. Pedestrian
circulation between main Street, parking and
the river front promenade will be encouraged
and improved, �\
� 0UHU��
0 0 0 0 o 0 o
��Gr
i
i
TJ
S�I..ViVlJ
■!■■/■u111aitnaarlfr0 aa[I:i'lCC 1lfl'f fRI
J. S.
PLANNNIN(N
Each Country Suites by Carlson blends the best
of a bed and breakfast with the service and
amenities of a traditional hotel. That translates
into a "just like home' atmosphere not
normally found at a hotel. The interiors are
warm and inviting and include a lot of extra
touches, including a wood floor and a fire
place in the lobby, tasteful decorating with lots
of woodwork, dust ruffles on the beds, even an
old—fashioned pigeon holed key box behind the
front desk.
PROJECT DATA
90 Suite Hotel on three stories
Bar/Restaurant/Kitchen on second floor
Meeting Center on third floor
DESIGN CRITERIA
® Enhance and strengthen the river town image
® Maintain/preserve the historic uniqueness of
the Lumbermen's Exchange Building
® Maximize views to Lowell Park and the River
® Maintain continuity with the historical
character of the District
® Provide a gracious, accessible building which
relates well to all its surroundings uses
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
%%I%f
BWBR ARCHUCTS
er DIA 5
IRLLM
n ar, n•
nnrt nr
E A S f
i�
i
NEST III��I
0 5' 10' 20'
mLL ram
am
0.nv route. MR moors
root =M
TOO Door
MAL ram
,s,DM Ima
SOUTH
FRED SWAIN
LUMBERMEN",�-
EXCHANGE
BUILDING (1890)
"The Lumber man's Exchange Building" (a
PIPE Ir-C Mo contributing structure) was the first modern
business block in the city, equipped with
modern heating, plumbing, electricity and even
an elevator."
FYom the APPUcatioo to the National
MPA Lam' Register of Historic Places.
The design calls for the Lumbermen's
Exchange Building to be incorporated
functionally into the Hotel yet remain a distinct
and distinguished anchor at the southern end of
the site. The new construction accommodates
the needs for a grand entrance, disabled access
and a better relationship to parking that would
otherwise place a difficult and undue
architectural burden on the Lumbermen's
Exchange Building.
The exterior rejuvenation attempts to recall the
scale and detailing of the original architecture
within the limitations of its subsequent
alternations. The brick will be cleaned and
tuck pointed as necessary, fire stairs and
incompatible wood detailing removed and the
windows will be replaced.. Where previous
alternations installed large "picture" windows,
new windows with divided lights more in
keeping with the scale of the original will be
installed within the same openings. Canvas
awnings will be installed on the first floor
reminiscent of the original building. The
interior plans will transform the building to a
hospitality use, exposing its brick bearing walls
in individually and uniquely designed studio
suites.
p o D C O O D
s flM
Ul
BWBR ARCHrrECTS
4
ND P9WaDO
r/te/Y]
�T�E)�.7 FROM
CHESTNUT
AND MAIN
VIEY FROM
L �VELL PARK
VIEW FROM
MYRTLE AND
MAIN
VIP( ALONG/
AVATER STPEI�
T
Q�
I
1�
R13a
NEW
STRUCTURE
The new construction assumes a prominent
role in further linking the downtown business
district with the river front promenade. With
the primary entry on the north, the building
frames and preserves the views to the Pavilion
along Myrtle. The hotel's western facade is
wrapped in a masonry mass with openings,
stone detailing and brick color reflecting those
of the district. The building steps back from
the Lumbermen's Exchange Building
permitting the older structure to maintain its
own identity.
To the park the hotel, Meeting Center and
Restaurant curve graciously to capture the
panoramic views up river. Anchored by the
Lumbermen's Exchange Building to the south
and the new masonry mass along Water Street,
this lighter facade recalls details of the
steamboats that historically played such a vital
role in supporting the economic interests of the
City and contributes to the many vital images
of what Stillwater is today.
�, V J� � Jan
0 c 0 0 0 0 c
IVAr
BNBR ARCHTECTS
No DSW000
1
water
THE BIRTH PLACE OF MINNESO T A
MEMORANDUM
TO: CHAIRMAN AND PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: STEVE RUSSELL, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
DATE: MAY 7, 1993
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF POSSIBLE REGULATIONS LIMITING AND REQUIREMENT
SETBACK FOR STEEPLE( SLOPED AREAS.
Background:
Last year the Community Development Department prepared a Stillwater St. Croix
River View Study in conjunction with the Department of Natural Resources. The
study identified issues and actions the City could take to minimize view and
environmental impacts.
Later last year, community residents approached the City regarding the
protection of ravines. (See attached memo.) The Planning Commission reviewed
the View Study and discussed the ravine issues, and changes to City
requirements to protect views and ravines. The Draft Conservation Regulation
would protect slopes of greater than 30% 1:3 foot slope by eliminating
development on them and requiring a 20 foot setback. The purpose of the Draft
Ordinance indicates the benefits of the regulation.
Recommendation:
Review of Stillwater St. Croix River View Study and Draft Conservation
Regulation for discussion and possible action.
Attachment:
Stillwater St. Croix River View Study
Draft Conservation Ordinance
Amendment to the Zoning Ordinance.
CITY HALL: 216 NORTH FOURTH STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 55082 PHONE: 612-439-6121
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF STILLWATER
PROHIBITING DEVELOPMENT ON SLOPES
Conservation Regulations
Purpose. The purpose and intent of the conservation regulations is to protect
the pubic health, safety and community welfare and to otherwise preserve the
natural environmental resources of the City of Stillwater in areas having
significant and critical environmental characteristics. The conservation
regulations have been developed in general accord with the policies and
principles of the Comprehensive Plan as specified in the Middle River and Brown's
Creek Watershed Management Plans and the Bluff land/Shoreland Regulations and any
adopted area or specific plans. it is furthermore intended that the conservation
regulations accomplish the following:
1. Minimize cut, fill, earth moving, grading operations and other such
manmade effects on the natural terrain;
2. Minimize water runoff and soil erosion caused by human modifications
to the natural terrain;
3. Minimize fire hazard and risks associated with landslides and
unstable slops by regulating development in areas of steep slopes
and potential land slide areas.
4. Preserve riparian areas and other natural habitat by controlling
development near the edge of ponds, streams or rivers.
5. Encourage developments which use the desireable, existing features
of land such as natural vegetation, climatic characteristics,
viewsheds, possible geologic and archaeological feaLure5 auu ULhei
features which preserve a land's identity.
6. Maintain and improve to the extent feasible existing water quality
by regulating the quantity and quality of runoff entering local water
courses.
General Provisions
Applicability. The conservation regulations apply to every zoning district
within the City except as specifically provided herein. Where conflict in
regulations occurs, the regulations set forth in this part shall apply.
Relationship to Minor Land Division and Subdivisions. To the greatest extent
feasible no minor land division or subdivision shall create lots which would
necessitate exceptions to these regulations. Where a division of land would
require an exception to these regulations, precise building envelopes shall be
specified on parcel and tentative maps so that maximum feasible conformance with
the part can be attained.
Slope Regulations
Applicability and Purpose. The following regulations are enacted to minimize
the risks associated with project developemnt in areas characterized by
vegetation and steep and/or unstable slopes. Such areas include ravines,
blufflands and shorelands. A further purpose is to avoid the visual impact of
height, bulk and mass normally associated with building on steep slope.
a. Building permit applications for new structures on slopes of 12
percent or greater shall include an accurate topographic map. The
map shall contain contours of two -foot (2') intervals for slopes of
12 percent or greater. Slopes over 30 percent shall be clearly
marked.
b. Slopes 30 percent or greater shall not be considered in the density
determination of a property.
C. Parcels with a portion of the area in slopes of 30 percent or greater
shall require the minimum lot area of the applicable zoning district
in slopes of less than 30 percent. The area in slopes of less than
30 percent must be contiguous to the proposed building site.
d. No structure shall be located on a slope of greater than 30 percent
or within 20 feet of a 30 percent or greater slope.
Driveway Design Standards
a. Driveways shall be designed to conform with existing contours to the
maximum extent feasible.
b. Driveways shall enter public/private streets in such a manner as to
maintain adequate line of sight.
C. Driveways shall have a maximum grade of 10 percent.
•� rM1� ` �-�•^`�'.1 � J J�-.�C lam. � i1Y'r
. 'Gri � ., �r � ail �P, � � � Lg :r• -. �+M t
le
s �) .b � � s � t � ��� 'till Y� I' j�; �:� .:4`'r�.':'•.,� � ^ � � '�� C��� � .�
N-t r+Gi� .1't �5� 7 1 i { •"
� _ Y� 1---'J 11C.—��- �---�—L�l`"" �_ _ _ ��h`��'`��-i�� =;=1; h5�, - _ 'l L{�• 'j"�.{i-
Stillwater St. Croix
R fiver View Study
March 1992
Stillwater Community Development,
Department
STILLWATER ST_ CROIX RIVER VIEW STUDY
PURPOSE
The purpose of this study is to analyze land within the City of Stillwater's
jurisdiction outside of the official riverway land use district that has a
significant impact on the riverway view corridor and study the efficacy of
adopting zoning provisions which will preserve the appearance of the City's river
face.
EXISTING CONDITIONS
The following is a visual inventory of the City of Stillwater as seen from the
St. Croix River in August of 1991. The riverside areas are described from south
to north based on their appearance from the river.
South Stillwater
Viewing Stillwater from its south boundary; looking west, you first notice the
bluffs rising 200 feet above the river. Natural vegetation frames and envelopes
steeply sloped rock out croppings. The vegetation consists of Aspen, Birch, Elm,
Maple with some Pine. Scattered along the bluff overlooking the river, sit large
residences built in the 1950s to 1960s. Most of these residences have flat or
minimally pitched roofs and are white, brown, blue or gold in color.
As you travel north and approach the downtown area of Stillwater, homes become
older and roof lines steeper. These older homes, with one exception, were built
during the Lumber Era of 1860 - 1910. The exception is a large grey with white
trim, victorian style home built in 1989.
Highway 95, a two lane highway, parallels the river below the bluffline. Cars
traveling along this stretch of highway can be seen at various points partially
screened by vegetation. The shoreline in this area is tree lined with trees and
bushes overhanging the river. There are two distinct breaks in the natural
shoreline. One is the Aiple Barge Offices, a boat located at rivers edge. The
other is a fertilizer warehouse and loading dock. The Oasis restaurant and bait
shop on the inland side of Highway 95 can be seen just south of the warehouse.
Downtown Stillwater
Traveling north from south Stillwater the Historic Stillwater Lift Bridge,
connecting Minnesota with Wisconsin, dominates the view. To the west, Historic
Downtown Stillwater rests in a pamaramic bowl framed by bluff top trees and
houses. Church steeples, Victorian peeked roofed homes and a newer high-rise
apartment building punctuate downtown views. The appearance of downtown has
remained relatively unchanged for over 100 years.
Historic Downtown Stillwater buildings provide a striking contrast to the natural
beauty of the upper reaches of the lower St. Croix. The downtown buildings
create a town or village image in contrast to the natural riverway of the St.
Croix River above Stillwater. The contrast of shoreland development and riverway
natural beauty complement each other and provide a unique setting. The Dock
1
Cafe, Lowell Park retaining wall and gazebo, the lift bridge, Mulberry Point and
the Stillwater Yacht Club provide a mixture of manmade features and urban open
spaces. The concrete levee wall and gazebo define the rivers edge and separates
Lowell Park and the background buildings from the river.
There are many colors in the bowl of Downtown Stillwater. The Historic buildings
are brick red. The newer buildings range in color from white, cream and gold
to dark brown and green. Interspersed trees frame and block views of the town.
North Stillwater
Traveling north from Downtown Stillwater the shoreline returns to a narrow strip
of land. This steep bluffline covered with vegetation creates a natural wall
appearance. Vegetation in this area consists of Aspen, Spruce, Pine and Walnut.
There are large homes along the north end of the bluffline. These homes are
painted light colors, white and grey.
As one enters the Brown Creek Ravine area, another vista opens up. This one
smaller then the Downtown, has steeper side hills. Residential structures
peeking out from the trees and sidehill. The feeling in this area is not town
or village like downtown Stillwater nor natural/wild like the lower St. Croix
north of Stillwater but more riverside rural.
North from the Stillwater Yacht Club, the view from the river turns natural,
similar to south Stillwater. One break in this area is a single large residence
located at rivers edge. A boat and dock front the residence.
North of the single residence the Lakeside residential subdivision projects an
urban appearance. Most of the homes hover on the bluffline overlooking the
river approximately 30 feet below. These homes were built the late 1950s to
mid 1960s with minimal bluffline setbacks. The homes vary in height and color.
Lakeside residences have there own marina and docks at the base of the bluff.
Two marinas mark the north City limits. These marinas have scattered dockage
leading trom an irregular shoreline. There are some residences located above
the marinas on the inland side of Highway 95.
The view of downtown Stillwater from the north channel is breathtaking. The
church steeples rise over the river, vegetation and blufflines. The building
outline remind one of a quaint New England town or a village along the Rhine.
PAST DEVELOPMENT
Since the 1970s the views from the river have not changed much in the south
Stillwater area. Activity at the barge operation has decreased while warehouse
operation continues to be seasonal with most activity in the spring.
The residential area on top of the bluffs overlooking the St. Croix has also not
changed much. Three houses that can be partially seen from the river have been
constructed and one site redeveloped with a new large Victorian style house.
The vegetation cover has remained about the same with some tree trimming for view
and maintenance along the railroad right-of-way and highway. Most of the trees
on the bank and sidehill slopes are volunteer native growth.
Downtown Stillwater has seen some growth in the past 20 years. A pair of light
colored similar in design three-story buildings were constructed at the corner
of Olive and Third Streets. More recently the Dock Cafe, a 200-seat restaurant,
at the foot of Nelson Street and further to the north across from Staples Mill
on Main Street the 15,000 square foot Desch Office Building was constructed.
A wood sided 35-foot tall dry boat storage building was constructed just north
of Laurel Street on the Stillwater Yacht Club grounds. During the '70s a 7-
story, 100-unit Section 8 Senior Housing building, Rivertown Commons, was
constructed just west of Second Street at Mulberry.
Other structural changes have occurred. A transit boat dock and docking for the
Andiamo charter excursion boats was constructed in the early '80s. The
Stillwater Yacht Club, formerly Muller Boat Works, was expanded with additional
slips and a restaurant with outside eating and awning.
Much of the riverside land north of Downtown Stillwater is in single ownership
or developed. The land directly north of the Stillwater Yacht Club is owned by
the owner of the large, single family residence. This site probably has the
greatest chance of river side development and river visual impact. In 1991, a
single family residence was constructed on the bluff overlooking the old
territorial prison site and river. Most of the remaining bluff top parcels are
developed or difficult to develop because of site condition; steep slopes, lack
of sewer service or road access. The Lakeside drive subdivision was constructed
before 1970. Some decks and patios have been added since that time with one
house increasing its height. Other houses have redeveloped to expand living
space and capture views. The Penthouse Acres area just north of Highway 95-96
intersections has developed since 1970. Bluff top residences can be seen from
the river.
Overall, the Stillwater viewshed area has experienced some growth and change of
views but the overall character of the area has remained that of a river town.
FUTURE VIEW AREA DEVELOPMENT
As previously discussed, most of the land in the City of Stillwater that can be
seen from the river is developed or owned by the City of Stillwater. The City
of Stillwater owns over 4,000 feet of shoreline from the south City boundary to
just south of the Dock Cafe. The barge company and fertilizer transport business
currently leases the property from the City. This lease is in effect until
1998. At that time, the City of Stillwater will retain possession of the
property for its own use. The Downtown Plan calls for a specific plan for the
site to be prepared when the City's possession is closer.
The Downtown area appears developed from the river. Although all of the
immediate shoreline from the Dock Cafe to Stillwater Yacht Club is owned by the
City, land north of Chestnut Street between Water Street and the railroad has
recently been purchased by the City from the railroad for future development.
The development of this area would change the town view from the river. One
other site north of the Desch office building will probably redevelop in time.
r
The north Stillwater area contains the largest riparian vacant site that could
impact river views. The site is located directly north of the Stillwater Yacht
Club and runs for about 3,000 feet to the Lakeside residential subdivision area.
The site is long and narrow between 150 and 250 feet in depth. The west side
of the site is bounded by the Minnesota Transportation Museum railroad right of
way and Highway 95 and on the east bounded by the river.
The bluffland is developed in large single family lots. There remain one or two
bluff top lots that could develop. All the lots in the Lakeside Drive area are
developed as are the lots in the Penthouse Acres area that can be viewed from
the river.
The color of homes will continue to change over time and accessory structures,
decks, patios or additions will probably continue to be added to existing
residencies to capture view of the river or add living space.
VIEWSHED DEVELOPMENT REGULATION
The river viewshed is partially in the riverway bluff land/shoreland zoning
district area although most of the viewshed is outside the district (refer to
Map 2). The bluffland/shoreland district area includes the land area between
the railroad right of way and river. The district is 100 to 300 feet wide and
2.5 miles long to the intersection of Highway 95 and 96, at that point the
boundary widens to include the City of Stillwater territory north and west of
the intersection although much of the area nan not hp sppn from the river.
The broader viewshed varies in width dependent on topography. For the south
Stillwater area the viewshed generally includes the residential development on
the west side of the first public street west of the bluff. For the downtown
the viewshed widens to a one-half mile in depth due to topography. The north
Stillwater area with its characteristic steep bluff and bluff top residences is
similar to the south Stillwater area. For the bluff land/shoreland area special
development requirements are in effect due to the Wild and Scenic designation
cf the river rp) o +-.Inl n h_nl nTa 1 i ctc tho_ cncri al ri worwav rarttil ati nnc _ Fnr �
detaileddescription of the regulations the ordinance shouldbereferred to.
Bluffland/shoreland Area Urban
District
Without UrbanDistrict
Sewer & with Public
Water Sewer & Water
1. Minimum lot size above ordinary high watermark 1 acre 20,000 sq. ft.
2. Lot width at building setback line 150 ft. 100 ft.
3.
Lot width
at water line
150
ft.
100
ft.
4.
Structure
setback from ordinary high water mark
100
ft.
100
ft.
5.
Structure
setback from bluffline
40
ft.
40
ft.
4
Urban
District
Without UrbanDistrict
Sewer & with Public
Water Sewer & Water
6. On site sewage treatment system setback from
ordinary high water mark 100 ft.
7. On site sewage treatment system setback from
bluffline 40 ft.
8. Maximum structure height 35 ft. 35 ft.
9. Maximum total lot area covered by impervious
surface
10. On slopes less than 12%, the controlled
vegetation cutting areas setback from:
Ordinary high water mark
Blufflines
20% (8,700 20% (4,000
sq. ft. sq. ft.
100 ft. 100 ft.
40 ft. 40 ft.
For the viewshed area outside of the bluffland/shoreland area, regulations are
different. The lot size requirements are smaller (7,500 square feet or 10,000
square feet for single family residence with utilities versus 20,000 square feet)
and taller buildings are allowed. Tree cutting is not regulated, bluffline
setbacks are not required and house color not controlled (with the exception of
the Downtown Historic District). The City's subdivision ordinance for all areas
of the City require minimum lot area to be with lands of slopes 30 percent or
less. Where urban sewer service are not available, a 20,000 square foot lot size
is required. The table below lists the residential duplex (RB) development
regulations.
Viewshed Outside of Bluffland/Shoreland Area
Area, Setbacks and Height Regulations:
PROVISION
1. Maximum Building Height:
Main Building
Accessory Building
2. Minimum Lot Area
3. Minimum Lot Width
4. Minimum Lot Depth
SINGLE FAMILY
2-1/2 stories and 35 feet
1 story - 20 feet
10,000 sq. feet.
75 feet
100 feet
5
5. Maximum Lot Coverage 30%
6. Minimum Yard Requirements:
Front Yard 30 feet
Side Yard 10 feet
Corner Lot Street Side Yard 30 feet
Rear Yard 25 feet
7. Frontage Requirements At least 25 feet on an improved
public street.
For the Downtown area special design review guidelines are in effect to retain
and preserve the historic character of Downtown Stillwater Commercial Historic
District. A nine block area in the downtown including the 60 year old Historic
Lift Bridge and Lowell Park are on the National Register of Historic Places.
(Refer to design review guidelines for specific guidelines.)
PERCEPTION OF RIVER VIEWSHED ISSUES
In the fall of 1991, a questionnaire was administered to the Stillwater City
Planning Commission to get there input on views from the St. Croix River and
development impact. Four open-ended questions were asked:
1. What are the most important scenic qualities of Stillwater as viewed from
the St. Croix River?
2. What is the most important natural beauty or views of historic buildings?
3. Is the Rousseau House more visually conspicuous from the river than the
homes that surround it?
4. What should be done to protect the scenic bluffline of Stillwater?
A video tape of the summer shoreline as viewed from the river channel was
presented and the questions discussed.
Commission members felt that views of the Stillwater area were special because
of the way the natural features, topography, cliffs, vegetation is interspersed
with the "core" of downtown buildings. One commissioner said it appears as
though Stillwater is enclosed and protected by the natural elements. Another
person thought the south and north Stillwater bluff top houses trimmed the
bluff line and provided a gradual transition and visual introduction to Downtown.
Question 2 responses ranged from calling out the historic and natural resources
as equally important to those who felt that what appears to be a natural bluffing
now is not natural at all but created when highway 95 was cut into the side of
the sandstone hills. Another person felt that nature and wilderness areas (such
as the Wild and Scenic St. Croix) has preference over structures.
The Commission felt that the changes made to the Rousseau House did not make it
more visually conspicuous as viewed from the river. They felt it was in
character with the surrounding residential district.
0
Ways that were suggested by the Planning Commission to better protect the scenic
bluffline and river views included:
1. Limit tree cutting and foliage removal.
2. Limit height of buildings.
3. Establish a tree planting requirement for new residences that can be seen
from the river.
4. Purchase key sites that are owned by private land owners where views are
critical.
5. Hillside development regulations (setbacks from bluff).
6. Increase City lot area requirements where no urban sewer service available.
METHODS TO PROTECT RIVER VIEWS
For purpose of this study, it is assumed that the bluff land/shoreland regulations
are adequate to protect those areas. This review will consider the upland
viewshed area that is not regulated by the riverway ordinance.
Action that could adversely effect river view include vegetation removal on
private property and infill development in the remaining vacant lots. Current
City zoning regulations allow building 35 feet in height (because of definition
of height building may actually appear as high as 45 feet). There is no
bluffline setback requirement and trees can be cut or trimmed at the property
owners discretion. The residential zoning of the area does not appear to be an
issue. But where City water and sewer services are not available existing City
requirements allow a 20,000 square foot lot area while the bluff land regulations
require a one -acre site for new subdivision. (Smaller lot sizes can be developed
if the lot is of record.)
The Downtown area is almost completely developed except for parking lots and
vacant lands recently purchased by the City for redevelopment. The views from
the river of Downtown are of a built-up village or town. The Central Business
District zoning regulations allow buildings of 4 stories or 50 feet maximum.
This height is equal to or less than the tallest buildings downtown. It does
not seem appropriate to try to change the Downtown into a natural area but to
recognize it as a historic town and allow it to continue and change as a built-
up settlement area. The Lower St. Croix Master Plan calls for the preservation
of the historic and cultural resources as well as the natural resources.
The City is currently preparing a plan for the reconstruction of the levee wall
and extension of Lowell Park to Mulberry Point. A landscape element will be part
of that plan.
Methods to reduce the visual impact of development as viewed from the river are
described below. The methods seem most appropriate for the south and north
Stillwater areas.
/1
- Land Purchase - using federal, state or local funds to purchase
key sites to preserve views from the river. Similar to outright
purchase view easements could be purchased for critical areas.
This method has been used north of Stillwater on the Lower St.
Croix and for Mulberry Point.
- Extend Riverway District - the riverway district could be
extended to more adequately include the viewshed. For example,
the boundary could be moved to the east side of the first public
road above the south (City limits to Main Street stairs) and
north blufflines (Elm Street to Highway 96). This approach
would apply more stringent tree cutting height, lot size and
setback regulations to the entire river viewshed except for
Downtown.
-- Zoning Amendments - selective sections in the existing zoning
ordinance could be amended that would result in reduced view
impact. Possible zoning ordinance changes include:
Bluffline Setback. (Currently 40 feet setback required in the
riverway district none in other viewshed areas).
Height Limit. Reduce height limit by redefining height.
Currently residences 45 feet in height can be constructed in the
south Stillwater and north Stillwater areas.
Building Painting. Require all new houses to be painted earth tones
(green or brown).
Unsewered Areas. Require larger lot sizes for unsewered areas.
This would reduce the number of building sites and reduce
potential for ground water contamination and visual impact.
Transfer of Development Rights. Allow the transfer of
development rights from the viewshed to other areas in the City
that can better accommodate higher density development. (This
concept has been used for other purposes.)
- Tree Planting. Establish a tree planting program on public
lands and along highways and railroad right of ways in the
viewshed.
Some of the ways listed above can be implemented by a change in City zoning
regulations. Others require actions by other agencies.
0
water
THE BIRTHPLACE OF MINNESOTA
MEMORANDUM
TO: PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: STAFF
DATE: JUNE 4, 1992
SUBJECT: RAVINE PROTECTION ORDINANCE
Recently, the Community has become aware of how important
the City's ravines are. This has led to a clean-up
campaign to clear out much of the garbage which has been
accumulating in these areas through the years.
The development of housing may also negatively impact
these ravines. Should we be concerned about this impact?
There are development regulations which can be placed on
the ravine areas to protect them. Staff will review such
policies at meeting time.
CITY HALL: 216 NORTH FOURTH STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 55082 PHONE: 612-439-6121
r
i
1water
THE BIRTHPLACE OF MINNESOTA
MEMORANDUM
TO: PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: ANN PUNG-TERWEDO, CITY PLANNER
DATE: MAY 5, 1993
SUBJECT: SIGN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT
RE: "OPEN" SIGNS IN'DOWNTOWN
The Heritage Preservation Commission and Downtown
Businesses have come to a compromise regarding temporary
"Open" signs in the Downtown. The attached Ordinance is an
amendment to the Sign Ordinance allowing these signs in
the Downtown with a sign permit.
Please review the Ordinance.
RECOMMENDATION:
Recommend approval of the Ordinance.
CITY HALL: 216 NORTH FOURTH STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 55082 PHONE: 612-439-6121
ORDINANCE AMENDMENT
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE STILLWATER CITY CODE, SECTION 31.01, SUBDIVISION 27,
SIGN REGULATIONS.
Section 1. Adding. The Stillwater City Code is hereby amended by adding
SecLion 31.01,--S-u=vision 27 (3) "Open" Signs and Section 31.01 Subdivision
27 (5) (m) which shall hereafter read as follows:
31.01, Subdivision 27
(3) Definition
"Open"�S ign - A thirty five (35) inch by eleven (11) inch, cloth fabric
sign which states "Open" and is intended for information purposes only.
(8) Permitted sign is by a Sign Permit in the Central Business or General
Commercial District.
GENERAL REQUIREMENTS:
A. 5 "Open" Sign. Open signs are permitted as an additional sign as approved
by the Community Development Director.
(G) "Open" Sign
1. Area. The total area of an "Open" sign shall not exceed thirty five
(35) inches by eleven (11) inches.
2. Height. An "Open" Sign shall be hung seven (7) feet above the sidewalk
and small not extend below this elevation.
3. Color. The color of an "Open" sign shall be:
r blue
- dark grey
- dark green
- burgundy
- dark brown
Section 2. In all other ways, the City Code shall remain in full force and
effect.
Section 3. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its
passage publication according to law.
Adopted by the City Council this day of , 1989.