The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2019-11-27 CPC Packet PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Council Chambers, 216 Fourth Street North November 27th, 2019 REGULAR MEETING 7:00 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Possible approval of minutes of October 23rd, 2019 regular meeting minutes IV. OPEN FORUM - The Open Forum is a portion of the Commission meeting to address subjects which are not a part of the meeting agenda. The Chairperson may reply at the time of the statement or may give direction to staff regarding investigation of the concerns expressed. Out of respect for others in attendance, please limit your comments to 5 minutes or less. V. PUBLIC HEARINGS - The Chairperson opens the hearing and will ask city staff to provide background on the proposed item. The Chairperson will ask for comments from the applicant, after which the Chairperson will then ask if there is anyone else who wishes to comment. Members of the public who wish to speak will be given 5 minutes and will be requested to step forward to the podium and must state their name and address. At the conclusion of all public testimony the Commission will close the public hearing and will deliberate and take action on the proposed item. 1. Case No. 2019-46: Consideration of a 20”-36” Variance to allow for a sign to project 20-36” higher than the structure’s parapet. Property located at 1400 (1570) Frontage Rd W. Alon Ventura representing Valley Ridge Holdings, LLC, property owner and Gordon Skamser Jr., applicant. 2. Case No. 2019-52: Consideration of a Conditional Use Permit amendment and associated variance to build a community building within a residential apartment complex. Property located at 14810 62nd St N, in the RCM district. David Walter representing Heartland Realty Investors, property owners and Susan Nackers Ludwig, representing, LNA Design, applicant. 3. Case No. 2019-55: Consideration of a Variance to the minimum lot size for a two family residence. Property located at 423 Laurel St W in the RB district. Judith Kalbrener, property owner. 4. Case No. 2019-58: Consideration of a Conditional Use Permit and Zoning Text Amendment to allow a school within the BP-I district. Property located at 1835 Northwestern Ave. Wild River Office Park LLC, property owner and Paul Loomis, applicant. 5. Case No. 2019-59: Consideration of a Conditional Use Permit to operate a Type C Short Term Home Rental at the property located at 301 Myrtle St W in the RCM district. Ryan and Emily Bretzel, property owners. 6. Case No. 2019-60: Consideration of a Special Use Permit to operate a distillery and tap room at the property located at 223 Main St N. Minnesota’s Wine Growers Co, Stephen Watkin, representative, and Christie Wanderer and Andrew Mosiman, applicants. 7. Case No. 2019-62: Consideration of a Special Use Permit to operate a restaurant and for a graphic design sign at 218 Main St N. Michael Lynskey Sr., and Lee Bjerk, property owners, and Dariush and Sarah Moslemi, applicants. VI. OTHER ITEMS OF DISCUSSION 8. 2020 Meeting Calendar VII. FYI – STAFF UPDATES VIII. ADJOURNMENT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES October 23, 2019 REGULAR MEETING 7:00 P.M. Chairman Lauer called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Present: Chairman Lauer, Commissioners Dybvig, Hansen, Kocon, Meyhoff; Councilmember Collins Absent: Commissioner Hade Staff: City Planner Wittman APPROVAL OF MINUTES Possible approval of minutes of September 25, 2019 regular meeting Motion by Commissioner Hansen, seconded by Commissioner Dybvig, to approve the minutes of the September 25, 2019 meeting. Motion passed 5-0-1 with Commissioner Kocon abstaining. OPEN FORUM There were no public comments. PUBLIC HEARINGS Chairman Lauer noted that the following public hearings would not take place at this meeting: Case No. 2019-46, 20”-36” Variance to allow for a sign to project 20-36” higher than the structure’s parapet for the property located at 1400 (1570) Frontage Rd W (tabled per applicant’s request); Case No. 2019-51, Conditional Use Permit to operate a Type C Short Term Home Rental at 1336 2nd Ave S (withdrawn per applicant’s request); and Case No. 2019-52, Conditional Use Permit to build a community center within a residential apartment complex for the property located at 14810 62nd St N (tabled per applicant’s request). Case No. 2019-50: Consideration of a Conditional Use Permit to operate a Type C Short Term Home Rental at 413 Nelson St. Property located in the CBD district. Michael McGuire, property owner and John McGuire, applicant. Ms. Wittman stated that Michael McGuire, owner of the historic Commander Elevator building at 413 Nelson Street East, would like to utilize a portion of the property as a Type C Short Term Home Rental (STHR) for two separate apartments, one of which has not yet been built out as a living unit. Staff finds that with certain conditions, the new residence and STHRs conform to the requirements and the intent of the Zoning Code, the comprehensive plan, relevant area plans and other lawful regulations and will not be a nuisance or detriment to the public welfare. Therefore, staff recommends approval of the CUP with 15 conditions. Mike McGuire, applicant, commented that while the historic and aesthetic importance of the elevator is well known, most people know the structure only from the outside. It is very interesting inside because of its construction style. It was built around 1900. Chairman Lauer opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. Chairman Lauer closed the public hearing. Planning Commission October 23, 2019 Page 2 of 5 Motion by Commissioner Kocon, seconded by Commissioner Meyhoff, to approve Case No. 2019-50, Conditional Use Permit to operate a Type C Short Term Home Rental at 413 Nelson St, with the 15 staff-recommended conditions. Motion passed 6-0. Case No. 2019-53: Consideration of a Variance to the exterior side yard setback, maximum allowed structural coverage, maximum accessory structural coverage and total ground coverage of accessory buildings in order to build an addition on the rear of the home located at 125 Sherburne St N, in the RB District. Brian and Sundi Dobson, property owners. Ms. Wittman reviewed the case. The applicants propose to construct an addition on the rear of the home and convert the one car garage into a two car garage. The project will require four variances: 1) a 16.7 foot variance to the exterior side yard lot line, to allow for the house to have a setback of 3.3 feet from the exterior side yard lot line, where a 20 foot exterior side yard setback is required; 2) a 13.73% variance to the structural lot coverage, to allow for the structural lot coverage to be 38.73%, where the maximum structural lot coverage is 25%; 3) a 454 foot variance to accessory building lot coverage, to allow for 996 square feet of accessory building lot coverage, where the maximum allowed is 542 square feet (10% of lot size); and 4) a 108 foot variance to the total ground coverage of accessory buildings, to allow for 996 square feet of total ground coverage for accessory buildings, when 888 square feet is allowed (footprint of the primary structure). Staff recommends approval of the variance to the exterior side yard setback, the structural lot coverage, the accessory building lot coverage and the total ground coverage of accessory buildings. However, staff recommends that the variance be modified to require that the second story of the addition be set back two feet from the lower story (garage) to reduce the mass and potential garage-dominance. Staff recommends that if the variance is approved, five conditions be imposed. Commissioner Kocon asked if the existing shed is removed, would they still need a variance to the total lot coverage? Ms. Wittman answered that the owners indicated that the shed will be removed but they still would like to preserve the option to have a shed on the property. They are already over on lot coverage so any improvement would require a variance. Sundi Dobson, applicant, said they would be willing to remove the existing shed. Chairman Lauer opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. Chairman Lauer closed the public hearing. Motion by Commissioner Dybvig, seconded by Commissioner Kocon, to approve Case No. 2019-53, a Variance to the exterior side yard setback, maximum allowed structural coverage, maximum accessory structural coverage and total ground coverage of accessory buildings in order to build an addition on the rear of the home located at 125 Sherburne St N, with the five staff-recommended conditions, adding Condition #6 stating that the second story of the addition will be set back two feet from the front face of the garage; Condition #7 stating that the existing two-story, 136 square foot accessory structure will be removed; and Condition #8 stating that no new accessory structure shall be permitted without first being reviewed and approval by City staff for conformance with the Zoning Code. Motion passed 6-0. Case No. 2019-54: Consideration of a Special Use Permit to construct a garage with an accessory dwelling unit on the property located at 303 Olive St W in the RB district. Todd and Jennifer Englund, property owners. Ms. Wittman stated that the applicants are planning to remove the existing accessory structures and build a 998 square foot garage with a 765 square foot living space above. In order for accessory structures to contain habitable area, they must be constructed as Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs), allowed in RB – Two Family residential zoning by Special Use Permit. The applicants are Planning Commission October 23, 2019 Page 3 of 5 requesting: 1) a Special Use Permit to construct an ADU above a new garage; and 2) a 198 square foot variance to the maximum 800 square foot garage size for an ADU. Written comments were received from neighbors Jeff and Deb Johnson at 309 S Fifth St in support of the ADU and variance. Staff finds the proposed garage and ADU meets the Special Use Permit provisions and the standards set forth for the issuance of a variance, and therefore recommends approval of the Special Use Permit and associated variance with seven conditions. Commissioner Kocon noted that in their letter, the applicants stated they will be taking down their existing accessory structures. Should this be a condition? Ms. Wittman responded that they are only permitted to have two accessory structures so they will have to remove them. Todd Englund, applicant, added that they hope to remove the existing structures after the new construction so they have a place to put things. They are considering constructing a breezeway between the two buildings but they have not yet included this in the plans. Ms. Wittman noted that the City has allowed property owners to keep a garage in place but asks for escrow up front to ensure demolition if the owner does not demolish the structure. As long as it conforms to the zoning district setbacks, there should not be an issue with a breezeway unless it becomes living space. Commissioner Kocon pointed out, if there is a breezeway connecting the home to the garage then it is no longer an ADU, it is an attached garage. Ms. Wittman clarified that, if the living spaces are separated by a door, they are considered separate units. The applicants don’t really want an ADU, they want a place for kids to play, but staff is trying to legitimize the use and give them the option as they finalize their plans. Chairman Lauer opened the public hearing. Jeff Johnson, 309 S Fifth St, voiced support for the application. He would like to ensure that the elevation facing Olive St has additional windows proportioned and styled to look like the house. He noted this is a condition of approval and agreed to by the Englunds. Judy Lacy, 318 W Olive St, said questioned why the exterior wooden staircase is needed. She would not mind if it turns into a rental unit but she feels the garage will be built too close to Olive St. Since they are going to tear down the other garage and the storage building they could push it back so it is not so far forward on the lot. As proposed, it will be too crowded and aesthetically unpleasing. Chairman Lauer closed the public hearing. Commissioner Kocon noted that the proposed garage is flush with the south side of the house which does not face Olive St. He is not concerned about the wooden staircase. Commissioner Hansen commented that the location of the garage is not what is prompting the need for a variance; the variance is to the square footage of the ADU. He feels it’s ridiculous that this must be called an ADU to get useable space over a garage. He supports the application. Motion by Commissioner Dybvig, seconded by Councilmember Collins, to approve Case No. 2019-54, Special Use Permit to construct a garage with an accessory dwelling unit on the property located at 303 Olive St W, with the seven staff-recommended conditions, modifying Condition #5 to include that additional windows shall be installed in a uniform pattern on the north façade to match the aesthetic of the primary residence. Motion passed 6-0. Planning Commission October 23, 2019 Page 4 of 5 Case No. 2019-56: Consideration of a Zoning Text Amendment and Special Use Permit to allow Dog Training Facilities to operate within the BP-I district by SUP. Property located at 1815 Greeley St S Unit 3. Michael McGrath, property owner and Therese Stoebner, applicant. City Planner Wittman explained that the applicant would like to lease the unit on the north side of the building at 1815 South Greeley Street for an indoor dog training facility. It will include outdoor scent training by one leashed dog at a time. If changes to the exterior site plan are desired (such as installation of agility training features), an amendment will be required. All dogs would be accompanied by their owners or handlers and there would be no boarding offered. No zoning district in the City specifically allows a dog training facility. So, Ms. Stoebner has requested a zoning text amendment (ZAT) that would allow the use by Conditional Use Permit in the BP-I District, and a Conditional Use Permit for a dog training facility, allowing retail sales of dog training products to clients enrolled in classes. Dog training facilities are not currently offered in Stillwater. The general community welfare is furthered by allowing a diversity of desirable uses and services within the community. Additionally, the proposed amendment is in general conformance with the principles, policies and land use designations set forth in the comprehensive plan. Therefore, staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the SUP with eight conditions and forward a favorable recommendation of ordinance amendment approval to the City Council. Therese Stoebner, applicant, explained the proposed business. Chairman Lauer opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. Chairman Lauer closed the public hearing. Motion by Commissioner Dybvig, seconded by Commissioner Kocon, to approve Case No. 2019-56, SUP for a dog training facility for the property located at 1815 Greeley St S Unit 3 with the eight staff- recommended conditions, and to recommend that the City Council approve the Zoning Text Amendment to allow Dog Training Facilities to operate within the BP-I district by SUP, and. Motion passed 6-0. Case No. 2019-57: Consideration of a Special Use Permit to operate a Heritage Center and Variance from the minimum required side setback to allow an addition to accommodate a new entrance. Property located at 1862 Greeley St S in the BP-I district. Washington County Historical Society, property owners. Councilmember Collins recused himself from the discussion and vote and left the meeting. City Planner Wittman stated that the Washington County Historical Society plans to remodel the property at 1862 South Greeley Street for the Washington County Heritage Center. It will house exhibit galleries, a history research center, a classroom, staff offices and archival storage. The only change to the footprint of the existing building will be to add a 5701 square foot glassed entrance. The Historical Society is requesting approval of: 1) a Special Use Permit to operate the heritage center in the BP-I Zoning District; and 2) a side setback variance to allow the glassed entrance to be 18’ 3” from the side property line rather than 20’ as required. Staff recommends approval of the SUP and variance with ten conditions. Brent Peterson, Washington County Historical Society Executive Director, offered to answer questions. Chairman Lauer opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. The public hearing was closed. Motion by Commissioner Hansen, seconded by Commissioner Kocon, to approve Case No. 2019-57, Special Use Permit to operate a Heritage center and Variance from the minimum required side setback to allow an addition that will accommodate a new entrance for the property located at 1862 Greeley St S, with the ten staff-recommended conditions. Motion passed 5-0. Planning Commission October 23, 2019 Page 5 of 5 UNFINISHED BUSINESS There was no unfinished business. NEW BUSINESS There was no new business. OTHER ITEMS OF DISCUSSION There were no other items of discussion. FYI STAFF UPDATES City Planner Wittman informed the Commission that the 2040 Comprehensive Plan has been approved by the Met Council and will be presented to the City Council on November 5. She provided the link to view: https://www.ci.stillwater.mn.us/2040compplan ADJOURNMENT Motion by Commissioner Hansen, seconded by Commissioner Kocon, to adjourn the meeting at 8:38 p.m. All in favor, 5-0. Respectfully Submitted, Julie Kink Recording Secretary PLANNING REPORT TO: Planning Commission CASE NO.: CPC 2019-46 REPORT DATE: November 21, 2019 MEETING DATE: November 27, 2019 APPLICANT: Gordon Skamser Jr. of Norman Quacks LANDOWNER: Valley Ridge Holdings LLC REQUEST: Consideration of a variance to allow for existing, nonconforming Norman Quacks’ sign to project higher than the parapet line of the wall to which the sign is affixed and to rise greater than 20 feet as measured from the base of the building wall to which the sign is affixed LOCATION: 1400 (1570) Frontage Road West ZONING: BP-C, Business Park – Commercial REPORT BY: Abbi Jo Wittman, City Planner REVIEWED BY: Bill Turnblad, Community Development Director INTRODUCTION In early May, 2019 In-Signity Sign Company approached the City about the installation of signage associated with Norman Quacks. The sign permit applications did not contain approval information from the property owner nor did they not conform to the approved sign plan for the property. The City advised the sign company the sign permits would not be able to be approved and that the signs would need to be removed or else applications for an amended sign plan and associated variances could be submitted for consideration by the City. On August 2, 2019 staff sent a notice of violation that nonconforming signage had been illegally installed on the Norman Quacks tenant space façade. On August 9, 2019 City staff met with the owners of Norman Quacks to discuss compliance options. On August 28, 2019, the City received the referenced applications from the owner of Norman Quacks. According to building plans on file with the City of Stillwater, Valley Ridge Mall is 18.5’ tall from the parking lot grade to the top of the roof with parapets extending to 22’ tall from ground grade. City Code Section 31-509, Subd.(2) indicates “A wall sign may not project higher than the parapet line of the wall to which the sign is affixed or 20 feet as measured from the base of the building wall to which the sign is affixed, whichever is lower”. The sign extends higher than the parapet and is situated greater than 20’ in height. CPC Case no. 2019-46 Page 2 SPECIFIC REQUEST Gordon Skamser Jr. is requesting consideration of a variance to allow for the Norman Quacks’ sign to project higher than the parapet line of the wall to which the sign is affixed and to rise greater than 20 feet as measured from the base of the building wall to which the sign is affixed. ANALYSIS The State of Minnesota enables a City to grant variances when they meet the review criteria below. 1. A variance may be granted when the applicant establishes that there are “practical difficulties” in complying with the Zoning Code. A practical difficulty means that the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the Zoning Code; the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; and the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Economic considerations alone do not constitute a “practical difficulty”. a. Is the property proposed to be used in a reasonable manner? City Code Section 31-509, Subd. 8(4) indicates “[w]here a principal building is devoted to two or more uses, the operator of each use may install a wall sign upon each share of the building. A sign plan must be submitted for the entire building that shows the location, sizes, types and elevations of all signs…The signs are subject to the following restrictions: i. All signs must be visually consistent in location, design and scale.” The first approvals for signage at Valley Ridge Mall occurred in 1987 when the City issued a variance for multiple signage on the property; the approval was conditioned. Containing all original conditions of approval, the existing Valley Ridge Mall sign plan was approved by the Heritage Preservation Commission in 2013. The installation of a sign that does not conform to the approved sign plan is not reasonable. b. Is the plight of the landowner due to circumstances unique to the property? The applicant has indicated their corner tenant space is unique in this multi-tenant building, requiring greater visibility requirements than other tenants in the building; this is the primary argument for the sign size, in excess of what has been permitted in this tenant space/zone. However, this is not a uniqueness for extension above a parapet line nor exceeding the 20’ requirement. Although the structure is set back from the property, this is not a uniqueness to this particular business. Numerous businesses in Valley Ridge Mall are set back 75’ further from HWY 36 than Norman Quacks. c. Are the circumstances created by the landowner? The landowner’s management representative has indicated preliminary approval was given for the installation of Norman Quacks signage; that approval was contingent on gaining permit approval by the City of Stillwater. No approvals were granted for the installation of Norman Quacks’ existing conforming and nonconforming signage. CPC Case no. 2019-46 Page 3 d. If granted, would the variance alter the essential character of the locality? City Code Section 31-509, Subd. (h) and (j) indicate:  “All signs must be compatible with the building and neighborhood where located”  “A sign must not obscure architectural features of a building” As the tenant space is located in a multi-tenant building in the West Stillwater Business Park district, a multi-tenant sign plan must be approved by the Heritage Preservation Commission (HPC); HPC approval of a comprehensive sign plan occurred in 2013. As the proposed signs do not conform to the plan, the applicant has requested consideration of an amendment to the multi-tenant sign plan. The Heritage Preservation Commission (HPC) reviewed the proposed sign plan amendments at their September 18, 2019 meeting. The HPC tabled consideration of the request, asking for additional information from the applicant. The HPC expressed the sign’s location, obscuring an architectural feature, was inconsistent with City Code and that they were not favorable to the placement of the sign in the proposed location. On November 20, 2019 the matter was brought back before the HPC without any additionally submitted information; the HPC denied the Design Permit request. Not only is the sign inconsistent with the approved sign plan, it is not consistent with the City Code as it obscures the architectural feature on this corner of the building. In this multi-tenant building, no other business is permitted to exceed the sign plan requirements nor the City Code. Therefore, the granting of the variance would alter the essential character of the building. e. Is the lone consideration an economic one? The applicant has indicated the sign was constructed at a significant cost. While the applicant has advised the removal of the sign would reduce business visibility from HWY 36, there are economic considerations to this request. 2. The variance must be in harmony with the Zoning Code and the Comprehensive Plan. a. What is the purpose of the regulation for which the variance is being requested? City Code Section 31-509, Subd. 1 indicates “Signs have an impact on the character and quality of the environment. They attract or repel the viewing public and affect the safety of vehicular traffic. As a historic community, this city is unique. The proper control of signs is of particular importance because of this historical quality and uniqueness. Signs must be kept within reasonable boundaries consistent with the objectives and goals of the community to retain its special character and economic advantages which rest in part on the quality of its appearance. The standards in this subdivision are therefore adopted to regulate signs.” The purpose of sign height is to help ensure the purpose of the sign code is met. Furthermore, the purpose of multi-tenant sign plans is to ensure each tenant may have some signage on a building that is not located in a fashion where the overall building’s signage is hodge-podge. b. If granted, would the proposed variance be out of harmony with the Zoning Code? The Zoning Code’s sign code is intended to ensure equitable access to signage in multi- tenant buildings and equal application of the installation of signage from one property to another. The allowance of the addition of this sign, rising taller than 20’ from ground CPC Case no. 2019-46 Page 4 grade and above the parapet is inconsistent with the application of the sign code on this property as well as other properties within this district. c. If granted, would the proposed variance be out of harmony with the Comprehensive Plan? Objectives of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan include supporting local businesses in the West Stillwater Business Park District. If granted, the variance would convey to this business special rights not afforded to other businesses in this building and district. This is not in harmony with the spirit of the Comprehensive Plan. 3. No variance may be granted that would allow any use that is prohibited in the zoning district in which the subject property is located. The property is zoned BP-C, Business Park Commercial. Signs are allowed in this district but those that rise above the parapet line, are greater than 20’ in height, obscure architectural features, or are inconsistent with multi-tenant sign plans are not permitted. POSSIBLE ACTIONS The Planning Commission has the following options: A. Approve the requested variances with the following conditions: 1. Unless specifically modified by other conditions of approval, the project shall be completed according to the plans on file for CPC Case No. 2019-46 in the Community Development Department. 2. The applicant shall obtain a Design Permit from the Heritage Preservation Commission for the amendment to the multi-tenant sign plan. 3. Sign permits shall be reviewed and approved prior to any construction occurring on the property. 4. Major exterior modifications to the variance permit request shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission as per Section 31-204, Subd. 7. B. Deny the requested variances. With a denial, findings of fact supporting the decision must be provided. C. Table the request for additional information. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION The installation of a sign above the parapet, greater than 20’ in height, where the sign obscures an architectural feature sets precedence for this and adjacent properties as well as within the community. While the applicant has indicated the sign’s placement is to increase visibility from highway 36, this is not sufficient grounds for the granting of a variance as other tenants on this structure are located in areas set further back from the highway. CPC Case no. 2019-46 Page 5 Staff finds the requested variance is not in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the zoning code, is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, nor has practical difficulty been established. Therefore, staff recommends denial of the application. Attachments: Applicant Narrative Amended Sign Plan Façade Elevations Sign and Wall Façade Dimensions Sign Photos (2 pages) cc: Gordon Skamser Jr., applicant Francis Skamser Lewis Alon Ventura, Valley Ridge Mall AMENDED SIGN PLAN PROPOSAL PLANNING REPORT TO: Planning Commission CASE NO.: 2019-52 REPORT DATE: November 19, 2019 MEETING DATE: November 27. 2019 APPLICANT: Susan Nackers Ludwig, LNA Design/Mitlyne Design LANDOWNER: David Walter representing Heartland Realty Investors REQUEST: A Special Use Permit amendment and associated lot coverage variance (to allow 24.18% additional impervious surface area) for the construction of a 1,045 square foot community building for the Birchwood Apartments housing complex LOCATION: 14810 62nd Street North ZONING: RCM – Medium Family Residential REPORT BY: Abbi Jo Wittman, City Planner INTRODUCTION In August, 1972 the City of Stillwater granted conditional approval of a Special Use Permit associated with CPC Case No. 128 for the construction of a 55-unit residential housing complex. Heartland Realty Investors, property owner, would like to construct a 1,045 square foot community building to house the residential complex’s manager’s office and community classroom space near the Case no. 2019-52 Page 2 of 6 southeast property corner. The proposed building will require the relocation of an existing trash enclosure facility to a location near the northeast corner of the property. SPECIFIC REQUEST The applicant has requested a Special Use Permit amendment and associated lot coverage variance to construct a 1,045 square foot community building for the Birchwood Apartments housing complex. ANALYSIS Special Use Permit City Code Section 31-207, Special Use Permits, identifies the city may grant a Special Use Permit or amendments when the following findings are made: 1. The proposed structure or use conforms to the requirements and the intent of this chapter, and of the comprehensive plan, relevant area plans and other lawful regulations. The City’s 1972 approval was fairly straightforward, allowing for the construction of 55 affordable housing units to house 236 Stillwater residents. A Federal Housing Administration project to which the City was a party to, the development did not account for any centralized gathering space nor a place for onsite management offices. As a result, one housing unit has been converted into a manager’s office but it does not adequately serve the community’s needs. The property owner’s intent is to convert the existing manager’s unit back to a housing unit once the community building has been created. While the historical case file includes detailed information about the partnership between the public and private sectors for the development of the property, no staff reports exists. Therefore, staff utilized the City’s approving Resolution, the Planning and Zoning Commission’s Findings of Fact, and approved development plans (including the site plan, data spec sheet, and landscaping plan) as well as the Project Fact Sheet for analysis of this request; these items are attached for Commission review. Zoning code Use The addition of a community building to the Birchwood Apartments site is complimentary to the primary use. Though the code is not specific to the allowance of this kind of accessory use, it will provide for easier organizational operations while serving as a benefit to the neighborhood community. Setbacks Case no. 2019-52 Page 3 of 6 The RCM district allows for a 10’ side yard setback for accessory structures. In 1972 62nd Street was determined to be a side yard. The southerly side yard setback imposed was 23’ for both primary and accessory structures. The new accessory structure is proposed to be setback 23’ from 62nd Street North, in compliance with original Use Permit approval. Lot Coverage The RCM zoning district allows a maximum of 30% lot coverage. While the 1972 application indicated the property would have 22.3% coverage, this only accounted for the coverage associated with the structural improvements. The existing structural coverage is actually 21.64% whereas the total lot existing lot coverage is 53.17%. The addition of the 1,045 square foot structure and 621 square feet of additional impervious surface coverage (to account for the addition of new accessible parking, and accessible walkway and ramp) will bring the total lot coverage to 54.18%. In other words, the original approval and the proposed improvements are both in excess of the 30% maximum allowable coverage. Analysis of the lot coverage variance is addressed in the subsequent section. As greater than 500 square feet of land area will be distributed, the Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization’s volume control requirements will be required. For the 1,666 total coverage area, a total of 152 cubic feet of volume control area must be installed on the site. The WMO’s guidelines for new volume control areas require they are not greater than 18” in depth. Therefore, an (approximately) 100 square foot area, 18” deep would be required. The applicant is proposing landscaping in this area; it is likely the landscaping can be developed to accommodate for the infiltration. However, it may be desirable for the property owner to construct an infiltration area near the Northeast corner of the property where parking lot drainage is daylighting, currently causing mild erosion issues. At the time of building permit submittal, the applicant will need to show compliance with the WMO’s rules and the City’s stormwater management regulations. Parking The development is required to have a total of 101 parking spaces for a 55-unit residential apartment complex; there are currently 102 parking spaces onsite. However, there are only 51 units to date. If the exiting manager’s office is converted back to a living unit, the 52 parking spaces would require a total of 96 parking spaces. The changes to the site will not result in a parking deficit for the complex. The applicants are proposing to increase the total number of parking spaces by adding two accessible spaces within a close proximity to the manager’s office. Despite being desirable, the installation of accessible parking will result in the increase of coverage discussed in the previous section and create excess parking. Comprehensive plan, relevant area plans and other lawful regulations The request does not conflict with the comprehensive plan, relevant area plans, nor other lawful regulations. Case no. 2019-52 Page 4 of 6 2. Any additional conditions necessary for the public interest have been imposed. While the property is not located in a Design Review District, it is recommended a condition of approval be the structure have four-sided design, as shown on the building plans, with materials and details substantially similar to the other structures on the site. This, along with other recommended conditions of approval, are noted in the Alternatives section, below. 3. The use or structure will not constitute a nuisance or be detrimental to the public welfare of the community. The proposed parking will be located in an area currently used for enclosed trash storage. This trash enclosure is proposed to be relocated to the north side of the parking lot. The trash enclosure is proposed to be enclosed on three sides. Variance The State of Minnesota enables a City to grant variances when they meet the review criteria below. 1. No variance may be granted that would allow any use that is prohibited in the zoning district in which the subject property is located. The property is zoned RCM, Medium Density Residential. As noted in the Use Permit review, a centralized community building for an apartment housing complex is not identified as a permitted use. However, management offices and centralized gathering spaces are customary accessory uses to the permitted multi-family development. Therefore, staff has determined the use is substantially in conformance to the City’s allowable uses in residential districts. 2. The variance must be in harmony with the Zoning Code and the Comprehensive Plan. a. What is the purpose of the regulation for which the variance is being requested? The purpose of coverage limitations is to help ensure properties have adequate setback and open space areas for visual appeal, building separation, and adequate, onsite drainage. b. If granted, would the proposed variance be out of harmony with the Zoning Code? While the zoning code permits 30% lot coverage, the property was developed with 53.17% lot coverage; in addition to maintaining setbacks and open space areas for visual appeal, staff is not aware of any infiltration issues on this property or runoff onto adjacent properties. While 53.17% lot coverage may seem like an excessive nonconformity, Stillwater’s oldest residential neighborhood (the RB – Two Family district) allows for 50% maximum lot coverage. Changing the lot coverage from the existing 53.17% to 54.18% would not be out of harmony with prior approvals, granted after review of the compliance with the City’s zoning code. Case no. 2019-52 Page 5 of 6 c. If granted, would the proposed variance be out of harmony with the Comprehensive Plan? The Comprehensive Plan encourages onsite infiltration. The proposed project will continue to allow for onsite infiltration. Therefore, the request would not be out of harmony with the Comprehensive Plan. 3. A variance may be granted when the applicant establishes that there are “practical difficulties” in complying with the Zoning Code. A practical difficulty means that the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the Zoning Code; the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; and the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Economic considerations alone do not constitute a “practical difficulty”. a. Is the property proposed to be used in a reasonable manner? The addition of a community building for management and resident use is reasonable. b. Is the plight of the landowner due to circumstances unique to the property? It is the desire of the property owner to create accessible spaces in close proximity to the community building. The nearest accessible spaces are located on the west side of the property, nearly 400’ from the proposed structure. It is unique to have accessible parking at such a distance from this building. c. Are the circumstances created by the landowner? This multi-tenant property was never designed with a management location nor an indoor community space. d. If granted, would the variance alter the essential character of the locality? As noted above, the property owner has indicated they will finish the structure to match the residential structures. e. Is the lone consideration an economic one? The property owner is seeking to improve the area with accessible parking. This is not a building code requirement. This is an added cost to the project, thus not being an economic factor that would adversely impact the property owner. ALTERNATIVES The Planning Commission should review the requested Special Use Permit amendment and decide whether to approve it or not. There are several alternative actions possible, including: A. Approval. If the Planning Commission finds the Special Use Permit amendment and associated lot coverage variance is consistent with the provisions of the SUP and variance review process, the Commission could move to approve the SUP and associated variance Case no. 2019-52 Page 6 of 6 with or without conditions. At a minimum, staff would recommend the following conditions of approval: 1. This Special Use Permit is in all ways a Conditional Use Permit as the term is used in Minnesota Statue Section 462.3595. 2. Plans shall be substantially similar to those found on file with CPC Case No. 2019- 56, except as modified by the conditions herein 3. Approval granted by case a-128-CPC shall remain in effect. 4. The structure have four-sided design, as shown on the building plans, with materials and details substantially similar to the other structures on the site. 5. The construction of the manager’s office/community building shall obtain a building permit prior to ground disturbance. 6. At the time of building permit submittal, the project shall be reviewed for conformance to the MSCWMO’s rules and Stillwater City Code Chapter 35, Stormwater Drainage. 7. All changes to the approved plans will need to be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director. Any major changes will need to go to the Planning Commission for review and approval. B. Table. If the Planning Commission finds the request to have incomplete information, the case could be tabled. C. Denial. If the Planning Commission finds the request to be inconsistent with the provisions set forth for Special Use Permits, it could be denied. With a denial, the basis of the action should be given. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION Though the code is not specific to the allowance of this kind of accessory use, it will provide for easier organizational operations while serving as a benefit to the neighborhood community. Staff has determined the proposed use to be in substantial conformance to the zoning code. Furthermore, staff has determined the property owner has established practical difficulty in compliance with the regulations pertaining to maximum lot coverage. Therefore, staff would recommend conditional approve of CPC Case No. 2019-56 with the conditions noted in Alternative A, above. Attachments: Site Location Map Narrative Request Site Photographs (5 pages) Certificate of Survey Site Diagrams (3 pages) Floor Plan Elevations (2 pages) Calculations (2 pages) a-128-CPC Case File Documents City Council Resolution Planning and Zoning Commission Findings of Fact Development Plans (3 pages) Project Fact Sheet Cc: Susan Nackers Ludwig David Walter OXBORO AVENUE NORTHOREN AVENUE NORTHC S A H 24STATE HIGHWAY 36PANAMA AVESTATE HIGHWAY 36 60TH STREET NORTH 60TH STREET NORTH 64TH STREET NORTH 63RD STREET NORTH 62ND STREET UPPER 63RD STREET NORTH PANAMA AVENUE NORTHOZARK AVE NEAST ORLEANS STREET C S A H 23SIXTHSOUTH OREN AVE CRT N 63RD STREET NORTH OSGOOD AVENUE NORTHST CROIX STREET WEST ORLEANS STREET 62ND STREET NORTH OSGOOD AVENUE NORTHC S A H 24OXBORO AVE NMERIDIAN STOSMANAVENUENORTHC S A H 24 65TH STREET NORTHSOUTHSOUTHC S A H 23SOUTHSOUTH62ND STREET NORTH 64TH ST N 14949 14702 6201 6120 6355 6060 14940 523 14810 6429 6180 6148 375 638163816381 6061 6450 6208 6303 111 6150 14759 14560 14575 6373 6143 6130 6282 6118 6440 14907 14894 6080 6120 14738 6438 6157 1342 14929 15055 15048 1337 1337 1342 1345 134413391338 1343 1346 15042 6472 6450 6388 216 1341 6398 134014011338 1405 1346 15024 1339 1336133313341334 1426 1333 13381342142213451346 1339 µ 0 460 920230Feet General Site Location Site Location 14810 62nd St N ^ Te xt PROJECT NARRATIVE Proposed Community Building and Improved Site Access at Birchwood Apartments October 24, 2019 Project Description and Land Use Description The existing property is a 51 unit apartment complex that was built in the 1970’s for low income residents. The owner would like to build a 1045 square foot Community Building that would house an office for an on-site property manager and a community room. It would also have bathroom facilities and some storage. The community room would provide an indoor gathering space for residents. It would also be used for after school programs and educational seminars. The proposed site for the community building is on the southeast corner of the property, adjacent to the eastern parking lot, just north of 62nd Street. The topography varies throughout the site and there are a number of walkways with numerous steps and uneven grade. The new site provides easy access to the Community Building from the parking lot and street. The existing manager’s office is currently a converted unit on the north side of the property. It is difficult to find and quite small for the needs of the apartment complex. The new location will have a public street presence along 62nd Street and be ADA accessible. Given the siting of the proposed building, the building entrance will require an accessible ramp to meet ADA compliance. The owner is proposing an addition of one open parking space that would meet ADA standards for parking to better serve the proposed building and the east side of the property. Unique Site Conditions Lot Coverage - The city approved a site plan for this development in 1973 that has a lot coverage of 22.3% for all physical buildings. There were no lot coverage amounts set for parking lots, sidewalks, retaining walls and other impermeable surfaces at that time. Currently the impervious lot coverage is well above the 30% required by the city. At the time of the original construction, they did not build all of the proposed structures. The initial lot coverage for the physical buildings (apartments and garages) is under the approved 22.3%. The proposed Community Building would bring the lot coverage total to just under 22.3%. The City of Stillwater has noted that the owner can increase the existing building structure coverage to meet the earlier proposed building structure coverage of the 1973 approved building plan. But, the proposed building, the proposed entrance (including a new walk, steps and ADA compliant ramp) and a proposed ADA compliant parking space further pushes the non-conformity of the lot coverage. Thus, even though a building is allowed such that it meets the compliance of the 1973 proposed covenant, any additional impervious surfaces to the site to aid in the ADA compliance of the new building would put the proposal in violation of current zoning requirements. The owner believes there is a practical hardship due to the current lot coverage. The inclusion of the new net impervious surfaces are unique circumstances to the site since the increase serves to improve the site to meet current ADA requirements, thus meeting building code and trying to improve the accessibility of the site for parking and general access. Essential Character of the Neighborhood The proposed work would not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. The new Community Building was designed to match the existing architecture of the apartments on the property. The new building is small in scale and does not change any existing curb cuts or access to existing public streets from the property. There will be new landscaping to create natural buffers between the proposed work and the surrounding neighborhood. 63RD STREET N.62ND STREET N.OSGOOD AVE. N.C.S.A.H. NO. 24 OXBOROAVE. N.17171515151515151516AAPID#3303020410029CONTACT:LNA DESIGNSusan Nackers LudwigPrincipal/Owner612-232-7294lnadesign.comsusan@lnadesign.comVICINITY MAPCOUNTY/CITY:REVISIONS:PROJECT LOCATION:DATEREVISION1481062ND ST. N.CITY OF STILLWATERWASHINGTONCOUNTYPID#330302041003007-16-19INITIAL ISSUE07-22-19IMPROVEMENT AREASCERTIFICATION:I hereby certify that this plan was prepared byme, or under my direct supervision, and that I ama duly Licensed Land Surveyor under the laws ofthe state of Minnesota.Daniel L. Thurmes Registration Number: 25718Date:__________________BIRCHWOODZZ143562SURVZZ356CERTIFICATE OFSURVEYLAND SURVEYING, INC.CORNERSTONESuite #2001970 Northwestern AveStillwater, MN 55082Phone 651.275.8969Fax 651.275.8976dan@cssurvey.netPROJECT NO.FILE NAMEAPARTMENTS1. FIELDWORK WAS PERFORMED JULY 11, 2019 .2. ELEVATIONS BASED ON AN ASSUMED VERTICAL DATUM(NAVD88).3. BEARINGS ARE BASED WASHINGTON COUNTYCOORDINATES NAD 1983.LEGAL DESCRIPTION:The following Legal Description as shown on theCommercial Partners Title, LLC as agent for OldRepublic National Title Insurance Company TitleCommitment File No. 39378 Third Supplemental, datedDecember 5th, 2014.Blocks Thirteen (13) and Fourteen (14) of Webster'sThird Addition to Stillwater, Minnesota, as surveyedand platted and now on file and of record in the officeof The Register of Deeds of Washington County,Minnesota, along with vacated South Third Street lyingbetween said Blocks.Washington County, MinnesotaAbstract Property*The above legal description along with the addedstreet vacation listed above form one contiguous parcelof land with no gaps or overlaps between the parcels.CALL BEFORE YOU DIG!TWIN CITY AREA:TOLL FREE:1-800-252-1166651-454-0002Gopher State One Call60300SCALE: 1 INCH = 30 FEETNORTHTHE UNDERGROUND UTILITIES SHOWN HAVE BEENLOCATED FROM FIELD SURVEY INFORMATION ANDEXISTING DRAWINGS. THE SURVEYOR MAKES NOGUARANTEE THAT THE UNDERGROUND UTILITIES SHOWNCOMPRISE ALL SUCH UTILITIES IN THE AREA, EITHER INSERVICE OR ABANDONED. THE SURVEYOR FURTHER DOESNOT WARRANT THAT THE UNDERGROUND UTILITIESSHOWN ARE IN THE EXACT LOCATION INDICATEDALTHOUGH HE DOES CERTIFY THAT THEY ARE LOCATEDAS ACCURATELY AS POSSIBLE FROM THE INFORMATIONAVAILABLE. THIS SURVEY HAS NOT PHYSICALLY LOCATEDTHE UNDERGROUND UTILITIES. GOPHER STATE ONE CALLLOCATE #191912233. SOME MAPS WERE RECEIVED,WHILE OTHER UTILITIES DID NOT RESPOND TO THELOCATE REQUEST. ADDITIONAL UTILITIES OF WHICH WEARE UNAWARE MAY EXIST.UNDERGROUND UTILITIES NOTES:SYMBOLS:AREA:TOTAL AREA OF ALL PARCELS = 165,500 SQ.FT. / 3.80 ACRES(INCLUDES 2,685 SQ. FT. ENCUMBERED BY EASEMENTS)BUILDINGS = 35,813 SQ.FT.WEST BITUMINOUS PARKING = 24,100 SQ.FT.EAST BITUMINOUS PARKING = 9,078 SQ.FT.CONCRETE WALKS/PATIOS = 18,122 SQ.FT.(INCLUDES 1,396 SQ.FT. WITHIN EASEMENT AREA)RETAINING WALLS = 724 SQ.FT.(INCLUDES 233 SQ.FT. WITHIN EASEMENT AREA)TRASH ENCLOSURE (WEST) = 161 SQ.FT.TOTAL = 52,185 SQ.FT./31.5%IMPROVED AREAS:15TOTAL NUMBER OF STRIPED PARKING STALLS IS 50INCLUDING 4 DESIGNATED HANDICAP STALLS.PARKING STALLSFLOOD INFORMATION:BY GRAPHIC PLOTTING ONLY, THIS PROPERTY IS IN ZONE "X" OFTHE FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP, COMMUNITY PANEL NO.27163C0266E, WHICH BEARS AN EFFECTIVE DATE OF FEB. 3,2010.SURVEY NOTES:EASEMENT NOTES:As listed on Schedule B - Section 2 of the Commercial PartnersTitle, LLC as agent for Old Republic National Title InsuranceCompany Title Commitment File No. 39378 ThirdSupplemental, dated December 5th, 2014.15. Terms and conditions of Grant of Easement per DocumentNo. 3858664, (AS SHOWN ON SURVEY, COVERS ENTIRE PARCEL)16. Terms and conditions of Permanent Highway Easement perDocument No. 3947786, (AS SHOWN ON SURVEY)17. Resolution No. 4084, vacating a part of South Third Street,filed August 15, 1968, as Document No. 268170.ADDITIONAL EASEMENT INFORMATION NOT SHOWN ON THEABOVE LISTED COMMITMENT:Subject to a Permanent Easement for drainage, utility,multi-purpose trail/sidewalk, retaining wall, and signagepurposes per Document No. 4157128.1716SANITARY SEWER LINESTORM SEWER LINEWATER LINESANITARY MANHOLECLEAN OUTHYDRANTWATER VALVESCONCRETEMONUMENT AS MARKEDDENOTES FOUNDCATCH BASIN/STORM MHTELE/ELEC BOXELECTRIC/GAS METEROVERHEAD UTILITYCURBFENCEUTILITY POLELIGHT POLEDENOTES MONUMENT SETAND MARKED RLS 25718A07-16-19 SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SANSAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX XXXXX X X X X X X X XXXXX X X GAS METERXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X X X X X X X X X X X X XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X XXX X X X X X X XXX X X X X X X XXX X X X X X X XXXXXXX X X X XXXXXX X X XXXXXX X X X XXXXXX X X XX X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X TPTVGASMBMBMBMBTPTVTPTVTVTPTPTVCOEMEMUGASGMTVTPTVTPTVCOEMTVTPCOTPTVTPTVCOCOTPTVTPTVCOEMEEEx xx xxx xx x x x xxxx x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I62ND STREET NORTHEXISTINGBUILDINGEXISTINGBUILDINGEXISTINGBUILDINGEXISTINGBUILDINGEXISTINGBUILDINGEXISTINGBUILDINGEXISTINGBUILDINGEXISTINGBUILDINGEXISTINGBUILDINGEXISTINGBUILDINGEXISTINGBUILDINGNEWCOMM.BLDG.EXISTING GARAGEEXISTINGGARAGEEXISTINGGARAGE EXISTINGGARAGEEXISTING PARKINGEXISTINGPARKING EXISTINGPARKING63ND STREET NORTHOSGOOD AVENUE NORTH OXBORO AVENUE NORTHLINE OF NEWALIGNMENTASSUMED PROPERTY LINE ASSUMED PROPERTY LINE ASSUMEDPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINENOT TO SCALESite Diagram1SITE DIAGRAMA01Project Number:Project Phase:Issue Date:2019-065Conditional UseApplicationSept. 10, 2019These documents are instruments ofservice and as such remain the property ofMitlyng Design and LNA Design. Use orpublication requires written approval fromMitlyng Design and LNA Design.Birdhwood Apartments 14810 62nd Street North Stillwater, MN 55082 Conditional Use Application | September 23, 2019 MITLYNGDESIGN +ARCHITECTURE1500 Jackson Street NESuite 422Minneapolis, MN 55413612 675 5413ashley@mitlyngdesign.commitlyngdesign.comLNA DESIGN2246 Stinson ParkwayMinneapolis, MN 55418612 568 8486info@lnadesign.comlnadesign.com X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXEMTVTPTPTVCOCOTPTVTREETO BEREMOVEDALIGNS WITH UNITS ONTHE WESTERN SIDE OFTHE PROPERTY±929.0±929.6±928.0±927.8±929.0±928.0±927.0±927.0±927.5±927.0±925.3±927.0±926.15±925.0±925.75±927.0±925.5092992892792692592992892792616'-2"VERIFYFINALGRADINGRETAININGWALLRETAININGWALLADA RAMP3 STEPSPLANTERRETAININGWALLRAMP WALL14'-8"±18'-10 1/2"16'-6 1/2"7'-10"NEW ADAACCESSIBLEPARKINGSPACENEWPARKINGSPACEREPLACEDPARKINGSPACEREPLACEDPARKINGSPACENEWCURBCUT12'-0"8'-0"9'-0"9'-0"9'-0"18'-0"RETAININGWALL±91'-2" TO PROPERTY LINE 16'-0"EXISTINGDRIVEWAY18 PARKING STALLS+ 1 ACCESSABLE STALL+ GARAGE STALLS12345678910111213141516171819NEW FENCEDTRASHENCLOSURETO MATCHEXISTINGNEWPLANTINGSNEWPLANTINGSNEWCOMMUNITYBUILDING(1,045 SF)REMOVEEXISTINGTRASHENCLOSUREREMOVEEXISTINGCURB CUT2'-0"REMOVEEXISTINGWALKEXISTINGBUILDINGEXISTINGBUILDINGEXISTINGBUILDINGEXISTINGBUILDING2'-8"924923 924 ASSUMEDPROPERLY LINEASSUMEDPROPERLY LINE 10'-0"6'-2"8'-10 1/2"10'-0"2'-0"26'-8"2'-0"30'-8" BUILDING(WITH EAVES)40'-0" BUILDING±23'-0" TOPROPERTY LINEEXISTINGEAVE/BUMPOUTEXISTINGEAVE/BUMPOUT±16'-4"±20'-0"ASSUMEDPROPERLY LINE45'-0"EXISTINGGARAGEScale: 1/16" = 1'-0"Birchwood Site Plan1SITE PLANA10Project Number:Project Phase:Issue Date:2019-065Conditional UseApplicationSept. 10, 2019These documents are instruments ofservice and as such remain the property ofMitlyng Design and LNA Design. Use orpublication requires written approval fromMitlyng Design and LNA Design.Birdhwood Apartments 14810 62nd Street North Stillwater, MN 55082 Conditional Use Application | September 23, 2019 MITLYNGDESIGN +ARCHITECTURE1500 Jackson Street NESuite 422Minneapolis, MN 55413612 675 5413ashley@mitlyngdesign.commitlyngdesign.comLNA DESIGN2246 Stinson ParkwayMinneapolis, MN 55418612 568 8486info@lnadesign.comlnadesign.com X X X X X X XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXABCDAAAAABBBCBCDDDAAAAAAAABBBBBBBBPRELIMINARY PLANTINGSGRASS, CALAMAGROSTISSALVIA, SENSATION ROSEHYDRANGEA, LIMELIGHTTREE FORMHYDRANGEA, ANNABELLEREMOVEEXISTINGTREENEWCOMMUNITYBUILDINGEXISTINGBUILDINGEXISTINGBUILDINGScale: 1/8" = 1'-0"Birchwood - Preliminary Landcaping Plan1LANDSCAPINGSITE PLANL10Project Number:Project Phase:Issue Date:2019-065Conditional UseApplicationSept. 10, 2019These documents are instruments ofservice and as such remain the property ofMitlyng Design and LNA Design. Use orpublication requires written approval fromMitlyng Design and LNA Design.Birdhwood Apartments 14810 62nd Street North Stillwater, MN 55082 Conditional Use Application | September 23, 2019 MITLYNGDESIGN +ARCHITECTURE1500 Jackson Street NESuite 422Minneapolis, MN 55413612 675 5413ashley@mitlyngdesign.commitlyngdesign.comLNA DESIGN2246 Stinson ParkwayMinneapolis, MN 55418612 568 8486info@lnadesign.comlnadesign.com COMMUNITYROOMCARPET TILE(OPTION FORVAULTED CEILING)DROPPEDSOFFIT ABOVERANGE SINK DW FULL HEIGHTCABINETBATHRM 1FLOOR TILEBATHRM 2FLOOR TILESTORAGE/MECHFLOOR TILEHALLFLOOR TILEENTRYFLOOR TILEOFFICECARPET TILEDRINKING FOUNTAINS3'-0"W X 6'-8"TFULL LITEDOOR3'-0"W X 6'-8"TFULL LITEDOOR3'-0"W X6'-8"T SOLIDDOOR3'-0"W X 6'-8"T SOLID DOOR 3'-0"W X 6'-8"T SOLID DOOR 3'-0"W X 6'-8"T FULL LITE DOOR WING WALL ABOVETO MATCH EXISTINGAPARTMENT BUILDINGSWING WALL ABOVETO MATCH EXISTINGAPARTMENT BUILDINGSDEEP SILL FOR INSULATIONAT CURB BLOCKDEEP SILL FOR INSULATIONAT CURB BLOCKLOW LEDGE FORINSULATIONAT CURB BLOCKVERIFY FINAL CONSTRUCTION(SYSTEM WITH CONTRACTOR.SLAB FLOOR OR WOODFRAMING/JOISTS)PLEASE NOTE: CONSTRUCTIONTV AND A/VWALL16'-6 1/2"7'-10"15'-7 1/2"4"8"5'-10 1/2"13'-3 1/2"5'-10 1/2"7 1/2"26'-8"7 1/2"3'-10 1/2"3'-9 1/4"3'-9 1/4"3'-10 1/2"7 1/2"7 1/2"8'-6"5'-6"4"8"2'-10" 7 1/2"40'-0"9'-10"7'-0"9'-10"4'-6"16'-7 1/2"9'-6 1/2"9'-4"2'-4"4 1/2"7'-0"6 1/2"7'-0"4 1/2"7'-0" 4 1/2" 5'-0" 4 1/2" 12'-3 1/2"1'-8"4'-0"WING WALLTO MATCH EXISTINGAPARTMENT BUILDINGSWING WALLTO MATCH EXISTINGAPARTMENT BUILDINGSFULL VENTED (THRUROOF) VENTHOODABOVE RANGE5'-5 1/2"3'-0"4"4"3'-0"2'-0"4'-0"4 1/2"4'-0"4"4 1/2"14'-0"2'-10"2'-5 1/2"2'-0" 2" 3'-0"1'-10"ENTIRE BUILDING TO BESPRINKLEREDPLEASE NOTE: SPRINKLERS3'-11"3'-11"WALL TO BE FIRERATED PER CODEWALL TO BE FIRE RATED PER CODE OPTIONAL SECOND EGRESSDOOR DEPENDING ON FINALASSEMBLY OCCUPANCYLOAD CALCULATION PERCODEScale: 1/4" = 1'-0"Birchwood Floor Plan1FLOOR PLANA11Project Number:Project Phase:Issue Date:2019-065Conditional UseApplicationSept. 10, 2019These documents are instruments ofservice and as such remain the property ofMitlyng Design and LNA Design. Use orpublication requires written approval fromMitlyng Design and LNA Design.Birdhwood Apartments 14810 62nd Street North Stillwater, MN 55082 Conditional Use Application | September 23, 2019 MITLYNGDESIGN +ARCHITECTURE1500 Jackson Street NESuite 422Minneapolis, MN 55413612 675 5413ashley@mitlyngdesign.commitlyngdesign.comLNA DESIGN2246 Stinson ParkwayMinneapolis, MN 55418612 568 8486info@lnadesign.comlnadesign.com NEW COMMUNITY BUILDING3'-0"WX 5'-0"TSASH3'-0"WX 5'-0"TSASH3'-0"WX 5'-0"TSASH3'-0"WX 5'-0"TSASH3'-0"WX 5'-0"TSASH3'-0"WX 5'-0"TSASHCONCRETERETAINING WALLCONCRETESTEPSGRADE UP TOBUILDINGALIGNS WITH UNITS ONTHE WESTERN SIDE OFTHE PROPERTY GRADEBEYONDASSUMED EXISTINGBUILDINGSLANDSCAPINGRETAINING WALLLANDSCAPINGRETAINING WALLASSUMED EXISTINGBUILDINGS3'-0"WX 5'-0"TSASH3'-0"WX 5'-0"TSASH3'-0"WX 5'-0"TSASH3'-0"WX 5'-0"TSASHRAMP RETAINING WALLEXISTINGWALKLANDSCAPERETAININGWALL±16'-2" TO LOWEST ADJACENT GRADE ±11'-4 1/2" TO HIGHEST ADJACENT GRADE ROOFSIDINGWINDOWSTRIMDOORSGUTTERS &DOWN SPOUTSASPHALT SHINGLES TO MATCHEXISTINGMATCH EXISTING OR EQ.(WOULD YOU WANT TO DOSOMETHING DIFFERENT???)MATCH EXISTING OR MARVININTEGRITYMATCH EXISTINGTHERMA-TRU OR EQ.MATCH EXISTINGGENERAL FINISHES±13'-1" ±6'-2"Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"Birchwood Community Bldg. - South Elevation2EXTERIORELEVATIONSA12Project Number:Project Phase:Issue Date:2019-065Conditional UseApplicationSept. 10, 2019These documents are instruments ofservice and as such remain the property ofMitlyng Design and LNA Design. Use orpublication requires written approval fromMitlyng Design and LNA Design.Birdhwood Apartments 14810 62nd Street North Stillwater, MN 55082 Conditional Use Application | September 23, 2019 MITLYNGDESIGN +ARCHITECTURE1500 Jackson Street NESuite 422Minneapolis, MN 55413612 675 5413ashley@mitlyngdesign.commitlyngdesign.comLNA DESIGN2246 Stinson ParkwayMinneapolis, MN 55418612 568 8486info@lnadesign.comlnadesign.comScale: 1/8" = 1'-0"Birchwood Community Bldg. - East Elevation1 3'-0"WX 5'-0"TSASH3'-0"WX 5'-0"TSASHLANDSCAPINGRETAINING WALL2'-2"WX 3'-0"TSASH2'-2"WX 3'-0"TSASHSTAIRRETAININGWALLEXISTINGWALK2'-2"WX 3'-0"TSASH2'-2"WX 3'-0"TSASHNEW RAILINGPER CODENEW TRASH ENCLOSURETO MATCH EXISTING(AT PARKING SURFACE)OPEN TO BACKASSUMED EXISTINGBUILDINGSEXISTING WALK BEYONDEXISTING WALK BEYONDEXTERIORELEVATIONSA13Project Number:Project Phase:Issue Date:2019-065Conditional UseApplicationSept. 10, 2019These documents are instruments ofservice and as such remain the property ofMitlyng Design and LNA Design. Use orpublication requires written approval fromMitlyng Design and LNA Design.Birdhwood Apartments 14810 62nd Street North Stillwater, MN 55082 Conditional Use Application | September 23, 2019 MITLYNGDESIGN +ARCHITECTURE1500 Jackson Street NESuite 422Minneapolis, MN 55413612 675 5413ashley@mitlyngdesign.commitlyngdesign.comLNA DESIGN2246 Stinson ParkwayMinneapolis, MN 55418612 568 8486info@lnadesign.comlnadesign.comScale: 1/8" = 1'-0"Birchwood Community Bldg. - West Elevation1Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"Birchwood Community Bldg. - West Elevation2Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"Trash Enclosure - West Elevation3 Birchwood Apartments 14810 62nd Street North, Stillwater, MN October 24, 2019 Lot Coverage Calculations Numbers below based on the 2019 survey by Cornerstone Land Surveying Building Coverage Item Square Feet Percentage Notes Existing Site 165,500 Per survey. Lot Coverage Allowed (30%)49,650 30%Per zoning code. Existing Buildings and Garages 35,813 Per survey. Lot Coverage 21.64% Proposed Community Building 1,045 Lot Coverage w/Proposed Bldg.22.27% Original Approved Lot Coverage Percentage from 1973 Plan = 22.3%(Actual numbers used in 1973 proposal = 37,118 SF lot coverage divided by 166,181 SF lot size = 22.34% lot coverage) Total Lot Coverage (Building and Impervious Surfaces) Item Square Feet Notes Existing Buildings and Garages 35,813 Parking Front/West 24,100 Per survey. Parking Back/East 9,078 Per survey. Concrete Walks & Patios 18,122 Includes 1,396 SF within easment area. Per survey. Retaining Walls 724 Includes 233 SF within easment area. Per survey. Trash Enclosure (West)161 Per survey. Total Existing Lot Coverage 87,998 Total Existing Lot Coverage (%)53.17% Proposed Community Building 1,045 Removal of existing walk at bldg.-153 Addition of new parking area at ADA 480 Addition of new walk/ADA ramp 294 Total Net Addtion 1,666 Proposed Total Lot Coverage 89,664 87,998 existing + 1,666 proposed net addition Total Proposed Lot Coverage (%)54.18% Building Coverage Breakdown Item Square Feet Notes Garage A 2,201 Garage B 3,948 Garage C 1,759 Garage D 3,778 Incorrect total shown on survey. Correct on overall calc on survey. Unit 1 1,849 Unit 2 1,850 Unit 3 1,843 Unit 4 1,842 Unit 5 4,482 Originally was planned as a group of four larger buildings together. Group of three was built. Unit 6 2,133 Unit 7 2,132 Unit 8 1,851 Unit 9 1,848 Unit 10 2,145 Unit 11 2,150 Subtotal 35,811 35,813 total shown on survey as result of rounding each garage/unit. Total Per Survey 35,813 Used in above calculations Parking Assessment Required Parking: 1.5 spaces per unit. 1 covered space plus 1 space for every 3 units for guest parking. Total Number of Units 52 Assumed existing 51 units plus 1 unit converted from old office space. Item Number Notes Number of Spaces Required Per Unit (1.5)78 Number of Guest Parking Spaces 18 Rounded up from 17-1/3 spots. Total Spaces Required 96 52 covered spaces / 44 open spaces Original 1973 Proposal For Site Number of Open Spaces 55 Number of Covered Spaces 57 57 Covered Spaces on 1973 site plan. 55 in written description. Total Spaces Approved 112 Existing Parking Spaces Per 2019 Survey/Site Observation Number of Open Spaces 50 Number of Covered Spaces 52 Total excludes maintenance garage space. Total Spaces Existing 102 Proposed Net Parking Spaces Removed spaces due to new trash -2 Open spaces enclosure New spaces at old trash enclosure 2 Open spaces New ADA space and clearances 1 Open ADA space 1 Net added spaces Existing total (see above)102 Total excludes maintenance garage space. Total Spaces Proposed 103 52 covered spaces / 51 open spaces (one of which is ADA compliant) Parking Assessment Summary The original proposal was approved for 55 units and 112 parking spots. According to the 2015 survey and the appraisal, there are 51 units and 102 parking spaces. With a potential total of 52 units after the original office is converted back into a rentable space, the existing parking spaces do satisfy the current parking requirements. The proposed changes to the southeast corner of the property would add (1) open parking spaces to the site. This added space is proposed as an ADA accessible parking space with appropriate clearances. 4758 RESOLUTION GRANTING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO SHELTER DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION. BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Stillwater, Minnesota that a Special Use Permit is hereby granted to the Shelter Development Corporation to authorize the construction of a 55-Unit multiple dwelling project on Lots '13 and 14, Webster's Addition, subject to the following conditions: 1. All construction is to be done in accordance with the approved site plan. 2. A performance bond is to be presented to guarantee the construction of on-site improvements such as landscaping, sidewalks, parking lots, recreational equipment, sodding, and drainage. 3. The Developer shall make the City a party to a satisfactory management agreement which shall remain in effect for at least twenty 20) years. 4. Occupancy of each dwelling unit is to be restricted to no more than two 2) people per bedroom~ 5. Final plans and specifications are to be in accordance with the approved site plans and are to be approved by the Buildin~ Inspector prior to the issuance of a Building Permit. Adopted by the Council this 22nd day of August, 1972. Publish--8-3l-72 August 2:i" 1972 STA'I'~ Oi ~Hl\;.\'''::Si.Yl'A CITY OF STILLW~t~R COC;~'l'Y Ol (.jAShING'J.'ON PLAliNING Al'W ZOl\:"NG \;O~I:lHSSION In r\:: 5hel~er Development Corp. FINDINGS OF FACT Spec~al US0 ~ornit The ?la~nir.g ~nQ Zoning Cownission of the City of Stillwater, upon thG Petition or Shelter Development Corporation for a Special Use ?c.;:mit said. ctition having boon duly filed and upon the calendar, having come on for final hearing on the 21st or August, 1972,) on hearing the evidence and being duly advised. "rl'itn re1,pect t.othis petition, makes the following Findings. The Petitioner clcsir.:::s to construct a fif"~y-five Uj,1it apartmen'~J.. cornp10x I con~;Lting of 16 three bedroom apartments, 24 two bedroom a~rtments and 15 on~ bedroom apartments under the Multiple Dwelling provision of the Ordinance. 2. li<.; apartment complex shall come in as straight 236 housir.g wit> ;",;;' rent ~>uppler,1ent. 3. hi1; apartment complex sr.all becon~jtructed in accordance with S,~;., c.n A-l a~) su'omittad by Shelter Development. Corporation. 4. iUl acceptable management agreement should be entered into with .the Ci~y of StillHater. 5. The density of the 55 units should be restricted to not more t~~ two occupants per bedroom of each dwelling unit. 6. SideHaiks should be incorporated on the periphery of the area. rl{~l-{~FO~~~ t the Planning and Zoning Co~mission of the City of 0~illwate~ reco~1ffiends that a special use perm.it be granted to ShGlter Development Corpo:::,c:..-=.io:'1 incc:~:,~;)~c;;.ting all of the previously Qiscussed reco~~endations including that the~G oe cx~c~~~~ an acceptable iilanagement, agreement 'l'Ii th the Oi ty; that the de~1.sity of the: 55 t.;~'-.~~ts be restricted to not mO~~G than tHO occu:?3.nts per bedroom of each dwellh:/: c. ::...:..0. that ~;id.Gl;:::.H::~; bo incorrJorated on tho poriphFJry of the area from ,the inters.:;.:.. ';;.10:'1. of Birch ~troot and Pra~riG Street and fourth Stroot to tho first si~owalk on Grovo Strout. Dated: August 21, 1972. 1_. 4:....( >;-'~~.. I{'/i. /,7 ~7fc' . 4 .; ...-.. ".,. __~ t,t l}.:.ane Arnd t ~ Chairman j ,Planning a~j Zoning Commibsion I t J I jj , I 1 C Ila:: .lJ: , i t- \ I I 1 c - . J ~-__ _'__'__"'_ "~""__,' q,~_--..-..._..__.,.___,,....__._ __ _.......... ....__......_'0_-_..__............--. ............. GROVE I'\:~'" .. . " .~ .' ':'.'=\'.#. .' .... '~~;'.., ".... " '~..v,;','"",~,'.'",,;,,"".<'.'" '.' "1 ilii ~. ~ '+~ .~'ol". ' l;o" "'...~ ~ "'.....v :'~ f. i.l'.i.,:~:..j..~...~..~.}i.*":.,. t"'" "-!l .;.~;\,;~..4~f~.~~~4.:~.~...:~~~_.~0I:~..,:"'~ ~ Ji ~~" l_ It,, : t' z- .\1.. '1 ~..' t.~~.....; ':".- .~'lI..:..__~ .,.. ~:....-.. _.~~",,~~., ~- >.:_ 1 _' ~>..,.~ "' A,t ~- ' .'.,'..' .:~ .', .' -f'<\~<('~ ,,_ ~l'""'....~. ""-'I: ..... ~-'" -~. 1:~..~..~-.......,.~~' lI... "'""jt;!- ~ .~~ ...;. t.'. 'C::::Z' ,'. .,. 11." !~. -,.' "!~~,'!>!"' r""4~_""~~' , y.", -.'. ~ '~~':r'!' )~l( 0':;>:::;>;::>: ",_oi~~~ .t;!'\i " ~ :.'., >,', J,.-';'..:,>';'/:,'." ..'.'. ",". ",:~..." ,>>;:' ."'" ce' ."." '~':". lo_~~-;;'''''' .... t-... , 1t'4t:.;.~.."...,.. ~~ ",,','''I:'''' '\', ,.,.""~~~,, ,""~..,:,:.,,,":..' . ','. -, ""~~ , "',~;, .'"",', ~/"'~ 'S', t!. ~ 0: 1. ... _'~< 1\ ~."~"'''W~il:''4~~'''''-';.fioil' " . -.:i. _>~ ,,:'. . ,"'l' , '. ",' ", , .' ~ ,'," -, , > . :-1:.1" . " f'-,"l'~"~'Ji!...,~~..". . . ,..,f~.. . '.' '1,' < ,\I' ~ ~ *"'. " j.'<t.. .;; !!Ii!. ~ t~~fo*1'~~~~'ft~~~~,~~ '~,'. .. .~ ,., ~,~ ~ IIi,' ", " "+f'''~~++''>t-<4:4:;-:,,(>''~''v"'J~.~..''I;.'fl~J,1~ ~i'S-'~ <'>. Jt,....j . t': ',W .,..'1;;.:. ...~ J("~~. 'f:'....:f.--.t~-t.~-+~..II~t.~'fl -. '_' ,. . . ____ -___ _..__ ...... -, _~W_ ~ _.' '.' ~, f.~.~ ..~~i:4;;,.~'+,... '\! ~~~ ~~~_ ~ ",. ....17>1<..".~~ -" : ':to: . _ ' ~ .- .- . ( t:o.t.~,...',!-~!l~ <~~}'. .,~ .,'_:; ~ ~,:~,"'~~; i , ~, .,-'" , ~.,.L."). i j,', '.. " t\'t'~. : . 4."'.Ei. .~m..~~ 't j~f. ~:i"'t.-,'tr::',~.'i~~: ot . 1T , '~, ' ~~..,. 1 ' , . .' :-..~"" ,..4 ~'>\j:-~.... ",'K~ ,~ of-,' . t ..1'",. "'.'.:,.'iJ'.'''..~.~':''''''--' UrL2 SJ~ . '1,;:.,.' ..... ~- ". .'~.t...:.,~,.~,:,.>.".,:~.~ ...-- t l"--.. ' i..",.~.:t.~'.'~... /-1\. l-i~ ~ ~ ' Ii' ~~~;~,,~~-~.+ r:;::1 L-.J. ....--J T- ,..:S.~4~"') i\- - 1.----.-1 k-J :i..~~t~~~:"lj; tt:.'!'4.j,"\.* "_~.+*- oJ.' , ' 1_.', O_.'.~- ~ - n- ~1~.,''':'..' '~,'.:...'..~'.......'....., '.. r- t-------- -- '-I . '. ....~.~,.....:.'..'...."',~~~~ '.. ;,t~+-;r" -[. ._ . D l-.I l-.I - .... L~ U (r-' - ~~$~;::;tk: L_ J (.. !~~~ ." 1 N.'.~. ' · , ~ t:::J ' :,.".~ I~ ~ ._~ 61~ ~ D ri n ~. ~.~ii~~.;~;:.;.~.j;...._~. '. t::::J ~'~ ~. ...~';~t:' '. "/l1 '. r ;:::.... J . ~ ..~"J.'t;.:~,\". .... ,,//'"e . ,'_ r-T ... _L... ~. . ,.,~ ' . ' ...r. p..,..::J ~ ~..c. D - ", ' ~ 1 i ~ c::: h; J;:::::::Ii _J'- 00;. ~ ' /1"'" I ~"\.' ~ 1 \" '. ' . , I, I ", ~; t\. "'.. "", '- ,,-:,' i..",. "0 ~<::~~. \.'<...i,,' ~ V . .'.,' r-" ',- \ ~ \ ' lI'O"'ll I., ". .~-.." \ ...._<'~. .... l; 0 ~ r~ I .. / 17J ~ '\,' " 1::':'>"-"'" '.~., ~ t::.~' ',' ......' _ _, i -' i 1 i~"\ l\f.;. J I, OO~'\" 0.. \. " ' h.', '''...' . ;Ii.' ....V.>;~ k , ~ \ 1'"',. -~'~,,~'\" '-, . - . s._ -~~>(Of..e:+~~~. '_ '1J.:. ), \,.1 '"<\""'." " . "~~~~~'~ ~~.'. c:::J t:::J" - . - 7j r' . · ~ \ ~- - . L..._ "'--.....-Il~ri , rY1l'V< 'r "T:""'=;:""'\~' ..' , . . .1\" ~'~';<' t:l. e e . j ,.". , ". . .....'. '. .' . r::::r.J.,:::::J, i ~/"...--tU, \...'-l,~l..biI~',....','"' .' '\ '~, , :.' r J,.,." Cil...'- l ,J;;.. \., '\. l:. . 'r:..~,. 7 '\ _ A , il'- '~<<~f".":!:o...'t,,''Ii.~{' : l---1 I "'\ 1\ ..,.,.... " ','\ ..... ~''- "', ''', ~ \. ' ~ ~ ' " -.... "\, " . !"~:~.r~~*~~j-i~,.~ ...-.~~. '1lI _ "'~ ,L. 1 I" "\ '_, \. ,_ ~...' . ' .~. ",,< ~ ,",,-, '\., ., '\tII-.." " "'" ~"'~"""" I_~I \ ,.'. ~ t-_, ..1~\,"",::",." . , , ij .",' . ." ,:~~ ,< Y'"" \,\'..,.'........., .~.~~ '". ~ 1;; 1;" ~ ~ ' ,., '"..."'. ".', \" "',"."""" ~ ~ t.. ".',~" '. .. ..~....., ~. ,. tl';.:<~,..~_~..,~i~;~~:";.\,~, . ", '."--"''.\''-I~_ <~.:'.\".:>><"\, . ,~.t- ,~.'~: t ~. .",' ~ j\J \ I<R ~ LJ . . ....... ' ... .,.,.. ..,'...',....,,,.... \~'~'~;~{.:~'~::.:,..~~!t'\:.~::~"'^ ~ . '. "".'., P "IQ..,~.... ".'::......,'-<.....,>~,'" .~<'~' .' ~ " ......... ~ j II)' ,.';. I ", f~~ ,~.;;~~1::; . .~ . .,'~~>~'\,:,.,G.QtJ. ,.,'Pm: ..~. '~, ~r;bl~, ' :'f'."''''l oj ,. ~ -,....,. ~-:r.-' ~ .,"" ' ',', },~, ~ . , '. \, ..'l1 . r:::=J""" t:::J --,-,. ''':'';:~~-,' :it ~ t:o .~~~r, -' ' "'. '\~ "'\. '\ \, \ "" " , ' ''\.~ "... \ '\, . ,.,.,;, "...~:' t:~." ". ...1 ( J . -. ,~.q: ,~~:.'\'~'1 '.. ( t. '' i <"'-'" \, ""\'" "', " "" '<, .,>.~ '"' t; t'~:""~~~~L'Co-*~ \.. ~ ~ t- ' r----, , '~~.;,'~,1,..i~......t.~"'..~;~.:".."," ..... \.. .""~ r~;;';" '.' ..".. .'. ." \, :,'-.. ":",'\'~'..,'.. ..,..".........~'..\.,.". ;'\ :: '" 'f ~ ( JL~ ___---I .~;~~~~~~~;~,. ,~_~{,.-:~~~.!,. ~ , :~:",.>.~&:,~~<'~,~~~~' << " a:: c::::! l::::1 .,'r,~1{~:~~~;W · 'il \'\1::~~'\ \" \ \"'. " '.. \"\. ", " i'\ ;:: a:: 1 ~ ~~:;;~:~~~~;~..!~~,4 ~'... .f1 .' " ,,,.... \~ ~ .~- ...... "- '~'.. ~" . ='- _ Q ...,(.....".,...,.',., J \ f I ". ~'<- - N\b-~;,{:_;:;:~:~:::~,~~.~i2~:;;;:~::~:< - t , .! : I -~ \ : . ....o . . (^ 1-. t\ ;)~*'...t;"..,~~~;;!,.:--~<:",.;,~.. . . ~,~.~~. . : ,~. (;j , . '\ l~~~<<<;.:..~<.>~.:' , ~ .;-~;'~:.;~~\:"..~~.,.[ft~ ..:. .~ . LL. ~-- -,.-.. ~ ~.- r---" -' j,~"':.,!;;.,;...'>."..,.,...,',y,... . '. '4',.,,,'. ~tl."'. ' ;:-::J IT' 1 r--1. r---J f r L r-: t .~:;;';" . / n 11 ., .......H'...' , '" . 'to~;t.;;1. m:. ~ ~ ::J.. IS: , ' ~~l '. ~ - fL- . "~"'''~l;...tI',.'f;.......~..,..~~.~. lo..~~~",':J:-....\. .~- . ,,' .,.... [j 1--.---- t-.- r .,~~ I -- - , ~ '1:r~.<~t,.:<~~<,~~.\'.\-~:~~~ -t~'!;~,,*,~~;,;~~;~. .I.~'-:'.-~ Fa.~ ~,,~."'jO~ ," 1 --,ii. _,..~'"'.,.".c.' '.'..,.. .. _. . ". .~". ~ ~.. "' J.r;: L:=....j" ~ il' r<f.'" ~ .~ ~ -" t: fu.. <.~' ~lf"';':$~~i'.~.(-...t<, a,~~~~~f;~ 'l~;>.-" ~ . . ~ ~.~;/t.- -, . . ,) _it ~--, ,.........., ',t , .. I..i t,. l .. l{ " t .....--, ~ ..,~t.."'!}. ",";~,,+,,-".."~'4"'\\."'.~1_. ". "~'4'.';"1t~',~ ';"''''-:--'.-_ ~ ~'. _' ---' - .' ~ , . '\ J ~. ~"""""""'.' m'"'''' ". ^ ........", p ,,' - ':' I ",. ,'I " , i----, · . ~"'. ,. . ,. , . 4' . . . ' " l:',.",' I I "., .;:Jm., ' rJ"'ga' '.....:...:tt......:...., .~ "!Ii. ,1 ~.. ~, . .. I' ," ~ ~f;:'\'. --- r------ ... ~ .,,~. . ",,""... ')........~ J-lo, "- I '{ffi f 'J..~ ~..~......."'......~..'~J; .... >"~,, i)~ t:::1 t:::::l.~oj '-:,..~"' i':.;;<... i.~~......~ ,,,,:+~.,.~\", .~. l "- I '~';' l.......... r.~................O,?A..... ,..'. ~ r R t . '-' ~ t!-.I ~1l;.J.~'f't1<-':t-i:t'..,..."".~.J!L~.-'t.""_ '" l. , _ ~~.~.. w-~.""t?"'~#:,.~.:;...,/i!?t "'~~'I.i. . I.. ... .. t, ' l,.~'"1! l':.~~.;_.;,,;.,,-\ _ " ::. '." '.: '1!i _,~oI l I .""...,......~.....;..t;..'.. d rJ... S1l~c '" It'~ >. ./ t;r~~::1r~::;~~~~=:::~r(~.~'~,,-.. : .. ~ . ~. ~~.t...' '~-'~:1,. . (1!.~..."..,..;'....."..,.'.'...'..,..'."....'..'.~.',.".-": lii."".': t::::::1:;r '1; c::! Li ',. ::-:: J r' I I r-:1 "N;~" .,... ..".".'....,.."..;<.~...'.....'.... .. ~1".. ....;".:;..,. .....,jO ~.\ l";f~~~..-: <;. ,,~y,f\'~ !.f.~' 1 ~ ~ ~ >>c:. . :~-t~.~~ ...-~'~,?..i'"",\..>:,..,~":....~~,,, J ,"' te_i:........,.,',,,:.~.TII\,.:~:'f.. f":-~:~;,'r;:..,~~ ..t -"'lfi' ."'---- r----1 I ~-- l' _~.;.'f..:~~Air~'"",t!k~~.,';~y,.~'t. , l'~-.-'.'''',''''''''..';'t('''''''_~~'''',<h:-- f~' - i:,'a:.'-."';~-:"~<""l_'''''~f..i;:':9' ~ r~~~'~:""~~4,"'l', ..,. L___ J--- J '.. __J ' ;'_1'~~:'t {.......-;:t;~<j~.;:.:'l< ;,t>-,..""~' '. I ' * .'~!5.x..:i-t,!":~:-'~~~~"~~~.:~'~~i~..,~ .~ ..------ g- -L/ ----- - ----- ~ ~ - '1- , --'- "' - .,>~~~~:'~ ~.~""~~ " ~}~:'."te .,~~,.. .. 1; 'ti.;\., ~1f I I,. ~ 1-('.(s.\\~;'l*"~~'::>",:'~~;,..~~,"; l\:;::,1j:-t~~;~ ~':: L::J"" r- c::::J ..' ~ i ~ .... ~ ....._~~..., .~>. O\ ": ' ,~. ~~;:~;~;~;~;:~~~~~~!{;$~~: t~ -w I I - ~~9~'- " ,~.;(.,< ~ C"'~ v,:,:~:+..:~.~~~'" r:-t i=l t~.~:i~'~~~~:~;f'i'" '.' ~: ~ \~: / '\ \ '~.'- ~ ~:: r j,.'~"~ - -....~...~...~,......-..,'\.,)-.;,.....\-,:t:,.... .. ~"./-- -.. r~- '''. 10-'''1 .. ','.' , . ,.'.....-:..~..." '.' . ~.. .. 1f-j . I ~tf 'l~'~~{:.~t: j~~~!12~~'t:_ cio~):"O'" _~io';~" . _ f> . .'~ . 1 ',' .~..."".:...1y.~~ t:.:::.."... ~.... I ''\I . '.' ~ '. ;." ,I tf .~~ i . i 'tf-.,,~, ~ ':!>.' -'$ ~- :-., , - v~ c::.::J t:::J .... ~ l..f.~.:+:~l. ~ :to t~.. . " '. '. : \ ,.~;,'.... , ' l; . " ; ,.. . ..,'" ....~ I t\ ~.~.. if... . ~ ~. .~: .' .. . , . I' ~v~~! t.. 1;7.~~..\:'I".~'Jt:.'\-i..'t...4'\~ ""*_' '~;; .'!i,"-. . 'r. ~ . "'~ 'to ;=::::- l~~~~."f.!-'. '~.~"+~)~+: '...~~..~:~;; ...~ t-;;"~"~ -' i > .. ii~'" ..:.:.~:~.~i{~j~~';'~:,.: !Ii O:~ ;,> ,;" v:" -~- . . -- *:~. ~ .~ 7:~.rj_~~.;";'I>rlt:\O;e-~~:.:~;~:.~~:;o-;t;'1:__;":~:";~:~;.:t;..:<~.=~,~~().k~~+.*::~~:;:~~' ~~~~.~j,:<~ ..~~t:i'::"t~:~~~'1j I'.' ,'.-'-" ~, . t3ll:." tt~ '~ ~~"."!'-~+~"'''\.~~~''''''~.~ 1>.~it"....'f.''..~.1r~t;,t,''.'4-''''._''f,,-+...,ir-~'t'' t....,'\.'!> 1i~f,,~.~'''..z~..~.... ft.. '~","~"";t"~. _ ! if~"'~.+.~~.."'~ ..'4F'' 4;. . ~1I -t, j..... ~'. ~.(..:..~......~f81.~:. . ',t; +~..~~ "',,...., ~~~.-.~-i~~'..~~~..."'-."*\.~.~.~J.~,.~ 4.....\i..~.'<it:, It.'! il...1'c.~.t~*.''~.;''*'!t~~~~..~~;:-,;:,,,.J.:.''''' It ~ ~ t, "':.' ,~, \~..l,j.~.\,.",,",:I"..."".~"-.;i l , _ ,. . " .. '. .~'. t ~ "J-ti>. . 4 .,..... ~ lo ":.. '~.')-... i\'~:'''. a~'l'..'!-~~~ l-+"t "' ff~1-" 1-+".".'f..r.,+*:t,.i>: '~~"-f~ ..~. .. , .'!' ~~/.~'~~.~".~ft~>t If J:.'- ~.~t~:/.. . ,.... .~ ": n ~ , ,~{~\". ..:~~.;~'~~ C};-!i'~~.:" .. ;-r." f1:, ,'~' ~" -;;;:., ,~~' ......'~~-..f\~~..-~..~~0 /:f.::>' ~i\ . ~~{ ~-~.l ":....~..:t ,,.:{~:~. ~/ .t" o..-~~.'!t - ..... ~.. t'4 ...'~ -t-.. ~. _ 41 ~..."""," . ~ .~'~-~~..;,,-#-- 'I-~~ ~ i......: ~. :to. ~.!'.~....~..J""~ :ft+.."'.~"~ ~~~.~t~."..;!~:~' ~ + ~;~t.,~.. ,.t:~~;~~~- - -iti iIk_ .... . ~.!4l: ....)'It.- ~.. .ii '-~,.. - .. ~-......~;+ . ~~";''f' .i..~:"":9!:" 'it:,' Vl."".~ '''':.tl' ~_ ~,4:~. <9--. :~ . '",_ ~,~.i'l!'~~-4<~~~~';":c.~-lto~~ ' 4r.~+:."'~~:"'~"~~.~~ ",,,,~~.,.,~,'.',~,,,,".,~. .*.~~.: t--~~""" 1f,.~+~".~.~+'" . f;l,..1-01 ;.. , .< .'!O<....~....'-' -' - ' ."'''''', i ...., ,1', >)Jt".,'...""'I'.~""~""'?,, "' .... l' __....,..___ PRARIE f site plan proposed housing stillwater minnesota o 10 32 64 100 miller melby & hanson architects Inc 1. ., I I I shelter development corporation A'J1 \ I i 1I . 1 lL) ~'. I ~ I ~. ______ '.___. _,~, ~_ . ft.~j 1 (JV ~ r "'~ we I S?;' . t"-- ,,-,,-- - "~,,-.~,, " "l i l' i l 45' 7' .-> I I . ,.' ~ - I 1 1.0 rO- f= N ~ il l' ?\ - i i o-"I;;.--' Ii", '\.." " "-, ", '\.\. '... '\.,,~ "\ '" .,,~, '" \ ....'\ " '''-\ ""-.", -"",,' ", .'\. ,...., \, ", \, ',"'".1 0. ~ ".... \ ....:\ '\ \, ''\. ">--~..~. ";.~..... ,. 0., '\ f " '-" ", '\'" '. \ ", '" ...., ,.,~ .... \ ", '\, '~\. "" "', '-. '. 'Ii - n \....., \..... "\ '\. ' t",. \." \.. ...~ -.... L.. -".-. ,,- -"_~,, " " ,,-,~ "~,, ,,- ,,-,,~~~~ -- ~,~-,,- ~ ' I~~" I, ,,--1 rJ7,78' mne proposed housing stillwater minnesota TA I _.,"-1- /... '.' ' ".-, tt miller melby & hanson architects inc @ sHe ~d I (Pil, 1'21 ~ .3, '8/5 a::.re'S (g L..CI u:>:f.;{"d::fe-37, if. '3 % shelter development corporation o 10 32 64 100 ~ Uv<<t wu'/<. IS... (oR., "I I I 2.4 P z. E3Fl (f) t=tx::JI ~ ~o 1ft; .3& '. L.- C} ~ -I-4Q.)r- ~~"1d &/ (.po. rT-'-- . cf; _ :2 f55WllVll~ f I'! Ql e (; 7, 1 -~.. '. -. ~ J L I ;~ 1 a: ( f?\ '~_ ~ . 21'"....;') I 4 cp tr ., Q DeUSJ ll., 'V-I~, I t#tA ,-, ,; ,~,.f Pt, 5 ~/~ ~ 1<i:cre3frOVPi A-eos 21,445rP =- 17.7% I @ ~q 55 crncaes _ ~ 55 q;e;~/t l6Paces \ I -' I f I II t i r&\ 6:tove 1P\ fE\V ~ _ -. \2.J \.J:.}I --,.._,,--~--.. -. ~-~- -. -~ -'-"'''''~-- 1' .~""""~ ~''''--... . ..,.,. .----"- ~~'-....--..... . ..... '. .. --"~-~.-'-~"=-~'" --- _i'r!-] ....,j!'''"'. ,,'>~.r,,;~"..\.\; b:'i~.~..~ V.';;~~ 1 I -...... r - t f '\ , ~ ~~,,~..x4:+ !J~~'*'~~'l~~~;~~l~o~'~ '~~;~> t~1t:~ ~1~:.~ ,4 . ~ ""1'!'~"5r~, \l'3~~:''9'!''~~'*-~'.~-i. i) ~1I,~ot:. ........~~... IQ , . ~ @t~J ~:~~ \~lfrt:.W "" ( . I~;;:::< l ~ r--- .. " " .. " "" --. " """ ." . I. '\.~. H;.L" _" _ . I &L "_ . . ...." . ----- r-' .r · ~] - ~"'" - r----- I --- -.. . ""-<-'" _. , . . - .,--....... -..........--....---. ...---- ... ....- -.. , '.., "'-" ..-..... '.-". . .-.. ..... ........ 1 ~'. ""l~1I ( I .~ ........M~ ....:.:. {~\ Id'i"...,.'. _"..'..;.~~....~.'..., . I ' , ~w.' r ~ ~ ~ 1'1:/-+ . ~~U ! I. ~;4~ ":~; . ~"*,;,~~.(-;\~~.~~~~.; iiili/I, I i ~ .'" \ i ...,.,.~..~_..~,'t; \ I } ~ ~:~~~<t~'~~;:i,:~ i . j {~~:':t:~~)>~""'~ii+.. ~ t~~;.~~'~'~~~~?', Sit?- A'!'' i<' \ 1 ' ~ +~.-I;t'f'i<." '4;,;. t1'}~}~ """,, Q..,}.~ ..I ~.('t.,.~,~". ..1 v"""""'- - I '\. -. \ -..' '",. .. '" ,. ,'. . ...---' .... . ... .. ....~'" . .. -- . ... ,... ~;~.,:''' II - ~.-~-.... . ~lf1Y; *.? . s: 1lo""'~) .re~ fS;\ ~ ':t.. t~"'f'i~"~';~, D ~ '~_____--'.... . I ..' ,. '''.. .""''''. f;;;;1 ~ex.(~ a -frees. J. ..... .. ret~.:.,.,. . ....... W ';~;E:~W \d_ J \ I J" "'~.~;~:~i~:~:r~~. 8 \ ~ t!I' I ,. ~,~}. .,' · .<.~ ~ ~... ' ft.):" < { J:> \ I __U ~'" ;\'.~~>'! \jJ rD t ... ~~,4...11! v....' - -{... ~.. ;;.:. ..... J...... t'"vl' :T i:'''t.'f-~........ a;-' . ' t .. ..*..t;_.." I I .. .... 1it">i..'!' ~ 1 - I.... .; ~~,~ ""~..}' . ; . I r ~ - - .... - .- "'" .... Ii'~~..{ J..-.1 \ r- ~ ;", ~'~ Oii >. LP\ \ = Vh~', + ,,~.. ~. ~I I ~\~"".,... ..' \. I J ..... . '"' ~ 1 L D I....'! ..... ;";i"- I .. -- ~ F · ~... 4~:~:*..;;' _ / \.U ? .~ .. }....~..:. ~I I, \:y ...~~ . \".411IooI '-t. ( ,... , r- '. ....'..~.. Zt.. : ..~. l P_l I J l.. h ' ..... .r-" ~ ~) t.;,..,i't~."".." \ V ..... ............... --......it.. . W Dl'i.~.,".. ..... '- .. / .. . " 0' .. . . ..'!t~..' '"l ~- ...................... / - .,. .,..... '.. y ....;.~~~ij;,S .. ~ I~~~~: ::: i~::~' ~.~irilt~~,. at; _ ~ ~ ~ ~,' t~!f"If?... ~..~~~~!: ~~ ~~r~ ! ____ 4 ~., .~, ,. . L.,..,'.".!J."1I>>. .<<E.':.~ . ~.+t' . '~'{~ __ """""" . r- .'~ f I'L \ A :. ... " ';'<.!' ..... ... .... . - '.. . ...;.:.' .. ~. , .;,,~l1 .*:..fA\ ......~.~.~.,'~... .....!....',;.MI,'''~..l:<:':it.~it. ,.,;...+t> ..~... '''~... ii!. 'f"~+ic...<;;:~'.'~ !iii,... .' '" ,,~,' ~,. ~L-':!.......i - . ' i. ..._.~.. ':"'<'11II,' "H "'.' j,'.. ":.'. ~'f. ~~., .. . " "! i'~ ".,"ji... (C::J \ It- I)' .. '&J J\. f'f / .~. ; \..LJ ,'ii;....~.:.l;t."::It".:.,~l:~;~~~.".~t~;:~:.,. .i:-li..)....'.~ · .'. ~w'" ".~'" _.. l",".." ~~ '~.~~.'" .:;. i10t "<+ \.U dJ'l" . . ,".. ", ~>.'" !ii"" u"'", ~ '.." .h!."l:!~.... -W ~,..w,...~.." I :i'l:~.;z.)! +'~"'~'".... ", '...!~ aiillll', : f ,., , ...::':;;.; , .~ '. ~. . .. \ ""'.. . .' +.4 ' It'Ntl ' +~.. . . 1'>i ,i.~' ~}" .. ". t. , . Q:.~. ~A 1- ; ~ \ /5 J \ -~---- ( ~. ~...,~:~:~ "t~ ..~t.... r.~ ';0.:* ( .-. \~~:;. ,. ~ ) . * i +.'; .jt. . ~"'~, '" ...'t u .~~. ~~ i f. . H...... !It;. '.. ~.,. '. _ """'" ..! t!i..~ . .. . a.~ , of:. ~"..t" . . ~~ f'"f.1:fr" \ ""A' ~~i&>;.. ~"':~...iO.. ~~ '>i~'...'~'.'~"".' "II",. ......~~~~~...~.j~8i ;:i.~P 1.1""\ , ..., . . .., . ......""".. '''' 0'"'1' ..... "!'> lo~.......~"'- .,.' II "'it'~;'!l...~t.. LC'\ \.V ~ ".' ~.,:J' .,,,. >1'>. ~.. ." -i':.....". ...., ~.. ".", f jri \II ,. -}> .,.., . C ( Ij". jt:~le.";iIt, :<loj.."io' . '.:;"'c 't;<~ ~'\ :+. i ').g~\,lf;~\ ..~. ~+ J ~ I. I'L_ " . ';_. .'.," "",' ~+ .~~~ . ,,'+...~.'; t;~.tif/ 'lIIiiI-" ; cr.... . "', .. 1: .. , .... ... . . ," '. !~.. .......... .;~ ~ l!l'III ' f'. "'rl: .."'i ,. ~ i1;"" 4 -{.~ .;.', .. '. . . __ +.+. . ..' .. ~. ,,~..I ".:.' i .~ '''~~~.'.'';'.';':''.~:~;O If. '.4 '..'~.'. fill tt :t';:\\.Y IT\ 1 ~::~,~ ;;~~:~ 1;:" 1.(~N"''>>'.''.~~..!(l' ....~.. ~ 8::::.1 .$ I ........ ._. q ~ ~.,: r..''';~:; V i:~. · &. '."': .+......., . ;~"'. "':< .. ~~;?" ~~ t~<' \ \ \ 'Z. J ...t.,.. --- '<.,,' f.~t,', .... ""'..'Jf. . .... ,....,. ; , ~.. ~, ,,' Ii " ~, "'~., . .. \ 5 } ~!; .'.~ u.'>' ~~. l'j7~~~~ :1'......... i : ",:Ii, iii'" .J!j'"... ~ t:~. ~..' .. ~. .:.. .:. T · , ~ ..~~.;.;~.;.-;:.~~ ...~" \ \,~~:;;. .' '" .. . "+~. '. ~ tl.~ . i I.." :;s. '01!i .i. .~'';: . ......... __'_'~"'_"_'_'___'" "._. ,. ~.. .P' t 1>~<ril~':~~~ .{ I"'>1Oi, · .g. ~!!I. ~.~. ... . v;....~~. .. . .Ii! . ~.}.~ \ I J f_ ~ \ .. .. .. t r: f ~ \ ~ "'., 'L+..~~"". ~~'.'''''''''''' ~ .+'J' , t...,. ~-.....;::::-_. ~~....1 . ~. .~. ~ t-~.,. *c..:+t-ll<~ 'f~.li~",...-+.,'l-+~"C!~. Jl"'~ t .<l~ 6'r - : 01.,/' '-e:;Pff-~ . U . \ 3 1 ~ ~"1';'~~~~~:.'j'''. ,.!It''~~'4''';'}~' . ...'#.10.4 . --~ ~ .... ~ "' iI".... '~.'. ...,. U\fG\ ~ . ~.i~~ .~~ . . :N F 1_'f..~.... " G Cl. ~"'''.. ""~<!l ;.-~f;;;;1 ..". *<$; ~..f'.~ \ I JSt. ,~::t::,..;l - ..~. y:}~" . ~+...",'.:~~ '-J../ iii; "'. . ".: ..' ,. . II..- ..... _.. ,..." ~C'.~,,' .... LB\ ff\ ~~~. .~.~.r~-:.. \ ...,} \ 4 }~. ."....~..... .i~~ - '....... .'". '",," li"..'''.'" ~ ~ ~...",*'li' D .:~ ~.'.'.,'.~~:II G'.':;~.'..S:.~:'.",".'.: i~':*.:'."~ J ~..':.~,"1ii .......' (~::k:t.t,.~..:.:,~:;.... . . \ f4 J \ I J !1l<, " .'.'-"" A I .....' ..~~ ~l'; . ~~,,,. H~''''l': '~~'~!l' . "1;~~~~ ."I!t'i:'1',;,!~" " ~ 'W/ ~ ,~ ,,', ,.:.1 r ,"\ \ l ' ~~.l to: or., ... : ,~ i ~."t:~.. ~ . ..4t;:.:..'~.'~!fj;;~~~;'~~~ ~ ~.:~: '~.'~~.~~'.."..' ~~~' II~- tot ;t .... .=.9~.. ~ ~ \ I }) ~.. ,.... . '*, ,. ~ ~ \U ii.I ... . ; ii;"'3;.?t"~ . ~;'f l"~Zj ...,. , ..... - "W . ~ \ .."!':'~' =I . \<,' . i:'~' t1':'''~ ",,-, " ~'" ..... J B' . ~ JE\ --- ~. ~ -f 'JtZ-r;;-*,:{:t'. --- .11:,.: ,,'1'; , : e'. ~~'. ll" ~'. ~., .. ~~, E. - ...\, ~ / "" ._~-..~ _ , ,. . .'~ H ,'> i . +.:+t~ '!;.t~ ;_.~~~j ~ :+ " ii~t ,~':-':.':"1" ~ ti. .~f;.- .~ ", .i... :2. *..t.. ~~'. .: ' 1-l-tt:. \:<i" ....'t. .....,....... v...,....:".....'. ..' ". # Jt.t:t~~' ,~:l ~ "!J.."": It..'i""~({ ff:."".;..i:. ~ ( C\ 1'....- . "... .......:.....~ ..... . v .....~. ". '"I.... ~t;~"":.v. ~I$~;::~.::: f8\ ~ ~.i::.t.~,............~.'~...,~.. ;.:~.;.:..-t:.~)''''.... .... Cf4. L_E_} t..r."~.:}:;s~,'l'~'\.+-~~ .......,.'i"..,.t~':.JJ& J'G\ ~.~~.. \6:..} B J \ 2. 1 ...:*;.,~~:;.}~.. '.:..~1i-!.~ ~fi '.. t':...~~i$~.t~{+.t.~1i' ~ ~~~r:.:.. ~ -....:;;;:;;./ , ~,",~"'" .. ...'" \,.;7 ........!...~l+i...t:j:." !Om+.'~.'"'.,Zl. ...... j _I:::t J: \ 2 } I............. 1 : t~t~.:,.: .. ":.~. ~~~. .; ,~~ ~.__.____ it ___..__..... !R.ti:~~.' , ~~~ ,~.:v-l' ;:,~:~...St~~ ~;~oi ~ ~. ..~.':.~..~..'f.~:+:,~... ~.. ~. g,~..:~ . f H' "'. ."'i.''', · '" · 9'1"......, ."'....r~"'l L......."iIJii.~.. i: ...... . .. .". ......~~ ' .. :---~.__;. '. . ...._..__.,~..... ..~.... .._____. l Joo.':. > ., ... . H... .. .' . H . ... ... t '. '.+ ,..,." " J' . j;,. ... . f:~:"" '\..,....~: i4....... ~.,.,~.,. . .... .o'~' ~. '.~ It. ,,: Ge. .~..:. ~ ~:~.;~~ & . · ... ~'::W. ". ,,:~;,~ti& ~~.;.,....!~~~t .... "'..'.l?\ . ' I f H" ... .. ~." f......, ~ .... ~.. ............ ~ ~.. '.. t.. .. . . \ JJ I i\:...~;..; . :~~~,~~ ~~~ . ':r(~~ ""+ 4 ol,;:~:~.:A ~., .., ~.. t ~~~+- If:~~:'';~''';4.1'''' \. ~~~';':~~,i;"to.~' a . ! It ~'..... .'.... "'... uc"" { .... . . "'.~.:;.:... ~""., . I l Ii'-' ,. . :0+, ""!'~r;;-;~;:'."9 ---==-.-..... ,i. yu ,.' ~ . .. ",. . .I" 11it. ....~g.+&..~ ..~. . . ... 11 .. ...... .---- --'--'~'._"-' r. .' 1 '.. . ~.#f.'".".&....." .....~1!t,.. . '"" ..".....~.,' ~ J ~ l ~-,..~~~...f;.... '':'~.. f. ,.~ ~ ffi j ,"'.;l f'~~~.~>t" lt~'t ~ L ~ , 4".:t>~'<... .i$..[lt : t-"iJ.:t: ,-:;-.q" A \.:;;I .....H" ~''\''~'. .,"." lIf \ \4 1 J!}.<< t,' .,+" ~~;' ....... \l,....;.~..'. ~~.~.~~ 7 ; ~ P . tl ~~ II ;<". ,~'" \..U \.bJ '\ '~:'K~,o!".""" ~.t:>:.'lt' I ~ II! . tii.~ '- . h,'~"'" ' l ' J.-~ '.?4-'*. Ii.",.. ~/ I.'\'!;...,...'fd<-...,. ~H-h. ."" . II ,,-" ~'" '1'_._., "~..' '.. "~"- I' ,~~ "~,, ". " '. .._, ~ ,. II t. 1 ft....,. ,. .."'.. ,.4 ". ~~, / lJf."., . .__ J is.. '. II I1~P'~I!... .~..~., "U · 0=' ., r~--~ .,J 11 '::...~ "".;; f., t 1 t:"!'~~; '~:~i~ . . ~ ~~X:;:* '.1:~:~," :t,' rj \\t~.:~ :~~~~:$.' , . \3tf ,... ..!o,.'" ~ "~', ~: ~. t.!>;. ~... ~,.,,'.'. . ,,_.....-_ M'-'_."~__~ _=_ ..,~_~'____~ ,_.. . I ~ .fA) fF\ ~ _ , I iF\ 1.Yc \..U ~ \.J..,J \V ~ tE.:\m1!rreJJ '-V \.U \Y I!'" - A0-~~, 1o103264100 · r~~y~~ -~J~I I I ~~-'_"~""""-"_ ...~~. _~.~~ ~~~~,._ .,,_~__ e_ A 3::) beeM AA I 'Iii ~f, B e~ 1f;If6cd-- '!V2~- -- f5'---- ( II c;jl.ve..er. . .~/jvJ. _~_..__ _ 23 ~(, --.M~ ;.! I J WeeDM7i ~rlbN 2.!1 c.o ~ . \ II ;-.~- -~ ' proposed. hOUSing I If:.1i (~;:e ~ ~~- -~ , stillwater minnesota i II ~ ~~~-~~~~ mffier m~by& hanson are~~cts !nc I IIi 1 .~~\~ she~er d~lopme~ corpo~bon I I I PROJECT FACT SHEET I Site: 3,815 Acres (Approximately 165,528 Sq, Ft,) Exact Square Footage to be Determined by Survey I Present Zoning: RCM Medium Density Multiple Family Residential District Area Requirements: Unit Type Sq. Ft. Required I 1 Bedroom 2,800 2 Bedroom 2,800 + 300 = 3,100 I 3 Bedroom 2,800 + 300 = 3,100 Max. Lot Coverage 30% I Max. Floor Area Ratio (F.A,R,): 75 Max, Building Height: 3 Stories Recreational Area: 10% of Gross Project Area or 200 Sq. Ft./Unit, Whichever is I Higher Area Analysis: Type No. Uni ts Sq. Ft. Tota 1 I Requi red Sq. Ft. 1 Bedroom 16 2,800 44,800 2 Bedroom 24 3, 1 00 74,400 I 3 Bedroom 16 3 ,100 49,600 Total Square Footage Required 168, 800 I or 3,014 Sq. Ft,/Unit Under RCM Total Square Footage Available 166, 181 I or 2,968 Sq. Ft./Unit Under PUD Lot Coverage I Bui 1 dings 31,880 Sq. Ft. Garages 6,720 Sq. Ft. 38,600 Sq. Ft, I 38,600 ~ 166,181 = 23,2 % Lot Coverage Floor Area Ratio 61,780 ~ 166,181 = 37 I Buildings: 5 Two-story apartments I 1 Recreation & Management Building 4 Detached Garage Structures I I 3- a-128-CPC File I I I Unit Mix: 16 - 1 Bedroom Apartments I 24 - 2 Bedroom Apartments I 3 Bedroom Apartments 56 - Total Units I Parki ng: 56 Garages I 56 Open 112 Total Units I 2.0 Spaces per Unit I Projected Population: 221 Adults Maximum 139 Chi 1 dren Maximum I 360 Total I Projected Rent: Subject to FHA Approval) 1 Bedroom - 99.75 I 2 Bedroom - 156,00 I 3 Bedroom - 182.50 Includes ALL Utilities and Services Provided I I I I I I 4- PLANNING REPORT TO: Planning Commission CASE NO.: 2019-55 REPORT DATE: November 8, 2019 MEETING DATE: November 25, 2019 APPLICANT: Judith Kalbrener LAND OWNER: Judith Kalbrener REQUEST: Consideration of a 4644 square foot Variance to the minimum lot area for a two-family dwelling. LOCATION: 423 Laurel Street West ZONING: RB: Two-Family Res. PREPARED BY: Graham Tait, City Zoning Administrator REVIEWED BY: Bill Turnblad, Community Development Director INTRODUCTION In 2016, the property owner, at 423 Laurel Street West got a building permit and refinished the basement. This project included installing a bathroom and a wet bar. During this process the property owner had an email discussion with the Planning Department, in which it was stressed that “the basement must be connected to the main house; the two floors must remain a single unit […]” due to the lot size not being the required minimum size for a two-family dwelling. Given there is no separation between the basement and the rest of the house, this proposed construction would pass the three criteria the City uses to determine that a residence is a single unit. In August 2019, the Planning Department fielded a complaint regarding the property functioning as a two-family house. The complaint specifically stated that the tenant was living in the basement portion of the house. Subsequently, a letter was sent to the property owner requesting that she reconvert the house into a single dwelling unit. Ultimately, leading to the property owner requesting a variance to the minimum lot area for a two-family residence. SPECIFIC REQUEST The applicant has made a request for consideration of the following variance:  A 4,644 square foot Variance to the minimum lot area for a two-family dwelling, to allow for a two-family residence on a 5,356 ft2 lot, where a 10,000 ft2 lot is the minimum area required. ANALYSIS The State of Minnesota enables a City to grant variances when they meet the review criteria below. 1. No variance may be granted that would allow any use that is prohibited in the zoning district in which the subject property is located. The property is zoned RB, Two-Family Residential. Having a two-family dwelling in the RB district is permitted. 2. A variance may be granted when the applicant establishes that there are “practical difficulties” in complying with the Zoning Code. A practical difficulty means that the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the Zoning Code; the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; and the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Economic considerations alone do not constitute a “practical difficulty”. a. Is the property proposed to be used in a reasonable manner? The use of the property, as a two-family residence in a two-family residential neighborhood, is reasonable. Using the property as a two- family residence even though the lot area is around half the required size, is not reasonable and fails to establish practical difficulties. b. Is the plight of the landowner due to circumstances unique to the property? The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property to a certain extent. The property is a below average lot size, and is under the minimum required lot area for even a single-family dwelling. However, the property is not unique for this block, because most of the properties on this block are too small to host a two-family residence. c. Are the circumstances created by the landowner? These circumstances were not created by the landowner. d. If granted, would the variance alter the essential character of the locality? Granting a variance to allow for a two-family residence would not alter the character of the neighborhood. This neighborhood is zoned to accommodate two-family house, and while this property is small, it is a corner lot that allows for easy access to the basement apartment. e. Is the lone consideration an economic one? The variance requested does not reflect economic considerations being the lone consideration in this case. The property owner resides, on a more permanent basis, in Hawaii and prefers to have someone in her house for a multitude of reasons, including the upkeep of the property and to prevent the appearance of the property looking “vacant”. 3. The variance must be in harmony with the Zoning Code and the Comprehensive Plan. a. What is the purpose of the regulation for which the variance is being requested? Minimum Lot Area The specific purpose of establishing a minimum lot area is to provide reasonably sized lots that allow for adequate room for the principal and accessory structures, driveways and off-street parking, sidewalks, and yards. b. If granted, would the proposed variance be out of harmony with the Zoning Code? Minimum Lot Area On the surface this proposed variance is out of harmony with the zoning code, because that property is roughly half the size required to have a two-family residence, however in this case it is imperative to refer to the above stated purpose of the code. The following table breaks down the purpose of the regulation, in order to analyze if the variance would be in harmony with the zoning code: Purposes of establishing a minimum lot area: Is the Variance in harmony with the particular purpose? Allows for adequate room for the principal and accessory structures Since the primary structure and accessory buildings are already established and no new ones are proposed, this variance would not impact this particular purpose. Allows for adequate room for driveways and off-street parking Section 31-510. of the City Code requires that each dwelling unit have “two spaces per dwelling unit of which one is covered”. This property has a garage that allows for the parking of two vehicles. However, the driveway’s length is only 13 feet, so therefore only one car can fit perpendicular to the garage. In conclusion, the property is shy 1 parking space in order to accommodate the required parking for a two-family residence. Allows for adequate room for yards Both the front yard and the side yards and back yard are small, however the difference between having one or two dwellings will not alter this fact. Therefore, a variance will not impact this particular purpose. Based on the above analysis, the City would argue that the proposed variance is not in harmony with the zoning code, because the property does not provide adequate parking. It is recognized that for a majority of the time the owner will not be residing at this house, however this situation could change and also it is inevitable that at certain times both the owner and tenant will be co-residing. c. If granted, would the proposed variance be out of harmony with the Comprehensive Plan? No, it would not be out of harmony with the Comprehensive Plan. The comprehensive plan promotes a higher density in the downtown area. PUBLIC COMMENT There was no public comment. POSSIBLE ACTIONS The Planning Commission has the following options: A. Approve the requested variance. A. Deny the requested variances. With a denial, findings of fact supporting the decision must be provided. B. Table the application and request additional information from staff or the applicant. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends denial of a variance to the minimum lot area required for a two-family residence. The City supports its recommendation based on the facts that: 1. The size of the lot is roughly half the required square footage to have a two-family residence. 2. It was put forth to the property owner during the renovation of the basement that this must remain a single residence, and this variance was only initiated because a notice of violation was sent to the property owner following a complaint. Therefore, it is the Planning Department’s concern that granting this variance would set a precedence that encourages property owners to violate code under the assumption that, worst-case scenario, if they get caught, all they will have to do is apply for a variance to make it “right”. Attachments: Site Location Map Street View Photos Applicant Narrative Floorplan CC: Judith Kalbrener CHERRY STREET PARK P L 523 502 409419 522 417519 515 506 501 407 451 512 333 408416502 323 516 415 332334 411 401 329527 515 420424 406 404 521 511 319517505507515 423509 501 417 323 317 326 726 324522518514510506502709418414410408702 µ 0 140 28070Feet General Site Location Site Location423 Laurel St W ^ Te xt 1 Jenn Sundberg From:Melissa Wetzel <everettwetzels@gmail.com> Sent:Monday, November 25, 2019 2:06 PM To:Jenn Sundberg Subject:423 Laurel St W Case Number CPC 2019-55 Good afternoon, My name is Melissa Wetzel and I reside at 515 Everett St N. I am writing in response to the notice we received in the mail about a request for a variance that our next-door neighbor has submitted (Case Number CPC 2019- 55). I have discussed the matter with my husband and we wish to express our opposition to the request. While we understand that the basement has been used as a rental without any incidents that we are aware of, we do not believe that a variance is wise, appropriate or in the best interest of the neighborhood. We understand that currently the owner resides in Hawaii and visits occasionally. We appreciate that a tenant means that the property isn't left vacant for long periods of time. However, variances are attached to the property, not to the owner. They are not limited to a specific time-frame or circumstance and this is most- certainly not a permanent situation. Inevitably ownership and intentions change and the property in question is wholly unsuited to two full-time households. After reviewing the planning report prepared by Graham Tait, (available at https://cityofstillwater.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=&event_id=1358&meta_id=84777), we fully agree with his recommendation that the request for a variance should be denied. Thank you, Melissa Wetzel 1 Jenn Sundberg From:johnson david <dvdhytjohn@comcast.net> Sent:Sunday, November 24, 2019 11:31 AM To:Jenn Sundberg Subject:Case #CPC 2019-55 To the Planning Commission of the City of Stillwater, I am writing concerning the application of Judith Kalbrener for a variance to allow for a two-family residence on her property at 423 Laurel Street West; case #CPC 2019-55. My name is David Hoyt Johnson and I own the property adjacent to Judith’s to the east. My address is 417 Laurel Street West. I have only spoken to Judith a handful of times as I manage a Landscape Supply business, (Patio Town) and work 60 hour weeks for nine months. The three winter months I am around don’t lend themselves to getting outside with the neighbors. There are some things that Judith may smartly not wish to disclose in a public televised hearing that I believe should have an impact on your decision. Judith is a professional who lives between two states. My understanding is she wishes to retire one day here in her hometown. Unfortunately at this time this means that her home is left unattended for periods of time and is subject to potential criminal issues. There have been times when I’ve known her to be away that at night I have had to discourage teenagers from going on or across her property. Judith of course has proper outdoor lighting and does the inside light timer thing but that only works for so long. That has not been the issue when someone has been living in the lower apartment. It is evident that someone is home and people leave the property alone. I have noticed that Judith tends to have single working professionals there that are in that stage of life where owning a home is unpractical. The neighborhood is better for this. Having lived in Stillwater on and off for over 60 years I knew the reputation of the Laurel Street neighborhood before buying my property. It has long been a working class diverse section of town. There are many two-family homes scattered up and down the street and the streets are vibrant with the chatter of family’s going about their business. On a warm Saturday evening the children scamper between back yards and across the street to play with their friends. The laughter of good friends sitting on front porches: welcoming any who pass to join in, drifts into the evening. This is Laurel Street and to have a unnecessary silent house is an anathema to the spirit of our community. As a Real Estate Broker in Hawaii she knows the value of property. She contracts with professional landscapers who maintain her property and clear her sidewalks in the winter. The improvements she has made have been by qualified licensed personnel that do excellent work. As a owner-occupied two household property there would not be the issues many times associated with commercial or absent landlord situations. I understand in your considerations you must also look to the future. Should one day Judith, (or her estate) decides to sell the property it would still be zoned for two-family. It is not the type of house that investment individuals would be interested in. There has been too much attention to detail in the interior handcrafted woodworking and restoration to make it viable to simply rent out. Instead I could see a family who has the lower apartment for an aging family member; what I believe is referred to as a “Mother-in Law” apartment. Please allow her the variance required to make this come about. Sincerely, David Hoyt Johnson 417 Laurel Street West 2 Stillwater, Mn PLANNING REPORT TO: Planning Commission CASE NO. 2019-58 REPORT DATE: November 22, 2019 MEETING DATE: November 27, 2019 APPLICANT: Paul Loomis, representing Chesterton Academy LANDOWNER: Wild River Office Park, LLC REQUEST: 1) ZAT allowing schools by Conditional Use Permit in the BP-I Zoning District 2) Conditional Use Permit for a High School at 1835 Northwestern Ave LOCATION: 1835 Northwestern Avenue ZONING: BP-I, Business Park - Industrial REPORT BY: Bill Turnblad, Community Development Director INTRODUCTION Chesterton Academy, a Catholic High School with its west campus in Hopkins and its east campus in St Paul, was opened 11 years ago. But, due to lease issues, a different location will be needed for the east campus beginning with the 2020-21 academic year. The vacant office building at 1835 Northwestern Avenue has been identified as their preferred new location. The property is zoned BP-I, Business Park – Industrial. And though schools are allowed in the BP-O Zoning District across the street (see map of neighborhood zoning on next page), schools are not allowed in the BP-I Zoning District. Therefore, Chesterton Academy is requesting that the City amend its Zoning Code to allow schools by Conditional Use Permit (CUP) in the BP-I District. They are concurrently asking for a CUP in the case that the City were to approve the requested Zoning Code amendment. SPECIFIC REQUEST 1) Zoning Code amendment to allow schools by Conditional Use Permit in the BP-I Zoning District; and 2) Conditional Use Permit for a school at 1835 Northwestern Avenue. Case 2019-58 Page 2 ANALYSIS I. Zoning Code Amendment The Zoning Chapter of the City Code (Ch 31-205(g)) makes allowance for amendments, if those amendments are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and if they further the general community welfare. Goal 1 of the Land Use Chapter of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan is to “maintain a healthy balance in land uses between residential, commercial, research & business park, industrial, and park/open space.” Unconditionally changing the allowed uses in the industrial zoning district to non-industrial uses works against this goal. Currently only 52.8 acres, or 0.9% of the City’s land area, has industrial uses on it. An interesting note is that 105.5 acres are zoned BP-I, but only half that acreage is currently put to industrial uses. Changes like the one requested would allow one more non-industrial use possible. Neighborhood Zoning The use erosion on industrially zoned property could be limited in this case if conditions were attached to the amendment. For example, the City could decide to allow schools only if their size and/or enrollment were limited. So if there is Planning Commission and City Council support for this amendment, then an 8,000 square foot floor are maximum could be set for school uses in this district. And/or an enrollment cap of 200 could be established. On the other hand, it could be argued that if the amount of industrially zoned land was insufficient, there would be pressure to increase the amount of land available for these uses. That has not been the case for decades. So, perhaps the better approach would be to acknowledge actual uses and need by rezoning the Case 2019-58 Page 3 property identified below from BP-I to BP-O, Business Park - Office. This would also require a minor Comprehensive Plan amendment to change the guided use of the property from Business Park/Industrial to Highway Mixed Use. Every one of the identified properties have uses that are more consistent with the BP-O Zoning than the BP-I Zoning. BP-O uses in Neighborhood 2040 Future Land Use Map Case 2019-58 Page 4 So, a CUP could be issued if either the identified properties were rezoned to BP-O or if the list of uses allowed in the BP-I Zoning District were amended by adding schools as a conditional use. Chesterton Academy has requested the use list amendment approach. Staff believes rezoning is the more appropriate (but admittedly more complicated and time consuming) strategy. II. Conditional Use Permit General information Chesterton Academy was established in 2008 by parents looking for an affordable High School choice that offered an integrated classical curriculum faithful to the Magisterium of the Catholic Church. The desired 1835 Northwestern Avenue location currently has 7,200 square feet of office space. It would be converted to a school use, which would require only minimal modifications including removal of several non-load bearing interior office walls. Enrollment for the 2020-21 academic year is expected to be 40-50 students with two full time teachers, five part time teachers and nine to ten staff members. By year five the enrollment is projected to reach 100 students. The maximum number of students allowed in one of their schools by the Chesterton Academy Network is 200. When the school would reach full enrollment is not known1. But, the Hopkins campus is in its 11th year and has 150 students. At full enrollment another three to four teachers would be needed. The Chesterton Academy transportation model is for parents or family members to car pool students to and from school. Generally, students from the same neighborhoods or geographic areas are pooled and parents or family members would ideally rotate driving responsibilities. Students at the St Paul campus are currently car pooled from St Paul, West St Paul, Western Wisconsin, Stillwater, Woodbury, and many other locations. This model would be used at the Stillwater campus as well. Vehicles would circulate through the parking lot and drop their students off directly at the front door by about 7:45 am and pick them up at about 3:00 pm. School officials note that the car pooling model results in an average of more than two students per vehicle. So, the 50 students expected in the first year or two would result in no more than 25 vehicle drop-offs/pick-ups. In a standard High School setting evening activities generate the greatest parking demand and impact upon a neighborhood. However, Chesterton Academy has limited after school activities and no athletic events on this campus. Another potential disruption to neighborhoods is students coming and going throughout the day. But, Chesterton Academy has a strict closed campus model. High School students do not leave for lunch. The daily schedule is included in the attached materials. Review standards Sec 31-207(d) of the City Code establishes guidelines for reviewing requests for Conditional Use Permits. They are: (1) The proposed structure or use conforms to the requirements and the intent of the zoning ordinance, the comprehensive plan, relevant area plans and other lawful regulations. 1 Full enrollment will actually be the lesser of: a) the Chesterton Academy Network maximum of 200, and b) the maximum building occupancy as calculated by Stillwater’s Building Official. Remodeling plans and plans to convert the space from an office to a school occupancy have not been submitted to the Stillwater Building Official yet. That will occur after a CUP is issued. Case 2019-58 Page 5 Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan As noted above, the proposed use does not conform to the requirements of the zoning ordinance or the intent of the Comprehensive Plan. Therefore, an amendment to the Zoning Code was requested. If the amendment is approve, or if the property is rezoned to BP-O, then the school would conform. Signage The school plans to use the existing freestanding sign on the property, see photo at right, but will re-face it. The new faces and any other exterior signage will require a sign permit from the Community Development Department prior to installation. (2) Any additional conditions necessary for the public interest have been imposed. Parking How much parking is required? If we use the standard High School model, then it is reasonable to apply the requirements found in the Zoning Code. When applied to Chesterton Academy the result is shown in the table below. Parking requirement as specified in Zoning Code Enrollment 1 space/4 students 3 spaces/classroom2 Total 50 12.5 12 24.5 200 50 24 74 The parking lot on the property has 35 spaces. So, the standard zoning code standards will be met for the first several years. As enrollment increases, the standards would no longer be met. However, the Chesterton Academy model is not what is experienced in standard High Schools. Only rarely do students drive. Currently of the 30 students attending at the St Paul campus, only two drive. If we determine the parking need based upon actual experience for the Chesterton Academy model, then the 35 spaces in the lot would be sufficient to handle the routine daily needs of the school. This can be seen in the table below. 2 The first two years while enrollment is around 50, there would be four classrooms and they would all be on the ground level. As enrollment increases as many as four more classrooms would be added on the second level. Case 2019-58 Page 6 Actual Parking Demand experienced by current Chesterton Academy campuses Enrollment 1/staff member 1/teacher FTE Students Visitors Total Spaces 50 9 4.5 2 4 19.5 200 10 8.5 8 8 34.5 Key to this analysis is that the number of students driving has to be limited by the school administration. A condition of approval for the use permit should therefore be that school policy must limit student parking in the lot so that normal daily activities do not generate a parking need larger than the on-site parking lot can satisfy. But what about parking needs for evening activities? After school activities can generate a large demand for parking in a standard High School setting. Fortunately, the only school activities foreseen in the near future on this campus during the evening would be two student dances, three open houses (currently 5-10 families attend these), and two evenings with parent-teacher conferences. The parent- teacher conferences are done by appointment and spread out over the course of four to five hours. So, parking is easily accommodated in the parking lot. Traffic circulation As mentioned above, car pooled students will be dropped off and picked up at the front door. Vehicles will enter the south side of the parking lot and circulate one way through the lot. Drop-offs would occur by about 7:45 am and pick-ups at about 3:00 pm. Drop off will not likely be an issue for cueing vehicles, since the lot can handle a cue of about 13 vehicles. But, pick-up will almost certainly create a cue of waiting vehicles that will stretch onto the northbound lane of Northwestern Avenue. It is estimated by the school that the total School entrance marked with red arrow number of cars that would drop students off is at most half the number of students. With an initial enrollment of 40-50 students, 20 to 25 cars could be expected to cue for student pick up. This means 7 to 12 cars may have to cue onto Northwestern Avenue. Staff recommends this cueing to occur in the parking lane south of the school entrance on the east side of the road. Signage should be installed here that would prohibit parking, but allow school cueing. Fortunately, the street is wide enough to allow for this. The down side is that the health club across the street gets very busy during certain periods of the day, and their parking spills into the street. So, with school cueing, this stretch of Northwestern Avenue could get congested. (3) The use or structure will not constitute a nuisance or be detrimental to the public welfare of the community. Activities that might be expected to be potential nuisances have been addressed above. Case 2019-58 Page 7 POSSIBLE ACTIONS The Planning Commission has the following options: A. Recommend that the Council approve the ordinance text amendment with conditions on maximum allowed building size and enrollment, and recommend approval of the Conditional Use Permit, with the following conditions: 1. The Conditional Use Permit shall only become valid after the requisite ordinance amendment becomes effective. 2. The school’s maximum building occupancy will be established by the City’s Building Official when a building permit is submitted for the necessary remodeling. 3. Student parking shall be limited so that normal daily activities do not generate a parking need larger than the on-site parking lot can satisfy. 4. Any vehicle cueing for dropping students off or picking them up must occur in the parking lane south of the school entrance on the east side of Northwestern Avenue. Signage must be installed that would prohibit parking but allow school cueing in this lane. 5. Any exterior signage, or re-facing of the existing freestanding sign, requires a sign permit from the Community Development Department prior to installation. 6. Plans shall be substantially similar to those found on file with CPC Case No. 2018-58. 7. Unless trash is kept inside until trash collection days, a trash storage enclosure must be built. It must be completely enclosed with building materials compatible with the principle structure. And, its location must be approved prior to construction by the City Planner. 8. All minor modifications to the plans shall be approved in advance by the City Planner. All major modifications shall be approved in advance by the Planning Commission. B. Recommend that the City Council deny the text amendment. With a denial, findings of fact supporting the decision must be provided. C. Table the request for additional information. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION City staff finds that the continued conversion of industrially zoned property to non-industrial uses is poor practice and inconsistent with the land use guiding for the property given by the Comprehensive Plan. If the City believes that the proposed High School is an acceptable use at 1835 Northwestern Avenue, then a better practice would be to amend the future land use map of the Comprehensive Plan and rezone the property and surrounding properties to BP-O. Therefore, staff recommends denial of the request. Attachments: Application materials Copy: Paul Loomis bt APPENDIX We are a Religious Association Chesterton Academy is a safe and healthy environment dedicated to educating young persons to think critically, act wisely, and contribute to society. As part of our religious mission, we educate students in the Catholic faith, teaching them to reject the modern fallacy that faith and reason contradict each other and to understand their complimentary nature. As a Catholic high school we embrace the responsibility of instilling personal, community, and religious values. We also take seriously the importance of emulating these values to the surrounding community at large. Chesterton Academy is a religious association that will benefit the immediate geographic area on Northwestern Avenue through various activities, including gatherings, service-related initiatives, and ministerial outreach. It is our aim to be front and center with our ministry. First, we will employ a chapel inside the building for daily Masses for students, teachers, and parents. This also entails opportunities for local Catholic business professionals in the vicinity who may wish to attend. We also intend on hosting periodic theological courses and seminars off hours for adult groups. The Association further looks to integrate the student’s involvement in the immediate neighborhood to explore volunteer opportunities. The locale is wonderfully suited to our participation in benefitting the immediate area in conjunction with the already existing assemblies. Surrounded by non-profit organizations on either side of the building, we would become part of a larger community of service and make our own contribution in a unique way: providing daily faith-based experiences otherwise not available in the area. Chesterton Academy is highly impressed by the number of associations and assemblies in the general geographic area. For example: 1. Family Means - 1875 Northwestern Ave, Stillwater, MN 55082 - Located adjacent to the South of 1835 Northwestern Ave. - Multi service, nonprofit that was founded in 1963 - Allows outside groups and organizations to meet and gather - This location is the headquarters for Family Means 2. Courage Kenny Rehabilitation Institute - 1460 Curve Crest Blvd W, Stillwater, MN, 55082 - Located 940 ft from 1835 Northwestern Ave. - Offers opportunities for individuals with disabilities to socialize and participate in activities - Physical fitness and life enrichment programs are offered - Scholarships and fee adjustments are available to individuals 3. Valley Outreach - 1911 Curve Crest Blvd, Stillwater, MN 55082 - The only nonprofit in the area that provides people with a wide range of support - Services include: food shelf, clothing program and client support - Located 1050 feet from 1835 Northwestern Ave. 4. Valley Dental Arts - 1745 Northwestern Ave, Stillwater, MN 55082 - Located 345 feet from 1835 Northwestern Ave. - Provides aesthetics dentistry since 1974 - Valley Dental Art’s Amara Institute offers classes and lectures throughout the year at this location 5. Office Building – 1815 Northwestern Ave, Stillwater, MN 55082 - Located adjacent to the North of 1835 Northwestern Ave. - Office building with no industrial operations - Tenants include: Ahola, Mack and Associates and James Honsvall CPA - Empty space is listed as office space by several real estate companies As a religious association, we are excited to join ranks with these associations and to work in tandem with them for the community at large. 11/26/2019 RE: CPC 2019-58 Chesterton Academy Special Use Permit 1835 Northwestern Avenue South Dear Planning Commission, I am the owner of Wild River Office Park LLC, which owns 1835 Northwestern Avenue South, a 2 acre property with an 8,000 square foot office building, and I am writing in support of the Special Use Permit to allow a school on site within the BP-I zoning district. The property at 1835 Northwestern Avenue South has always used as office space since it was built in 1985; it has never been used for any use resembling industrial. All the adjacent properties to the north and south of the building are office space as well, not industrial. The "Industrial Zoning," that this and adjacent properties are subject to, is inconsistent with the history of the area and with the actual and future use of the properties. With Family Means next door and the River Valley Athletic Club across the street, we feel that Chesterton Academy is a great fit for the area, making it a hub for education, health and wellness. They would be a stabilizing tenant for the property and a complimentary, unobtrusive neighbor. I ask for your support to further the vision of Chesterton Academy making 1835 Northwestern Avenue South it's home. Roger W. Kuehn Managing Member, Wild River Office Park LLC Attorney at Law 612.747.3071 -Mobile roger@stillwateroffices.com PLANNING REPORT TO: Planning Commission CASE NO.: 2019-59 REPORT DATE: October 31, 2019 MEETING DATE: November 27, 2019 APPLICANT: Ryan and Emily Bretzel LANDOWNER: Ryan and Emily Bretzel REQUEST: Conditional Use Permit for Type C Short Term Home Rental LOCATION: 301 Myrtle Street West ZONING: RCM, Medium-Density Multiple-Family Residential REPORT BY: Graham Tait, City Zoning Administrator REVIEWED BY: Bill Turnblad, Community Development Director INTRODUCTION Ryan and Emily Bretzel own the single-family residence at 301 Myrtle Street West, situated on Myrtle Street across from the intersection of 5th Street North. The property owners would like to utilize the property as a Type C STHR. A Type C STHR requires both a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) and a Type C license to operate. The CUP runs in perpetuity with the property in its chain of title, whereas the license is issued for a three year period to a specific vacation rental operator. City staff can issue the license administratively, but the CUP can only be approved by the Planning Commission after holding a public hearing. SPECIFIC REQUEST The property owners request the Planning Commission to approve a Conditional Use Permit for a Type C Short Term Home Rental at 301 Myrtle Street West. Case No. 2019-59 Page 2 ANALYSIS The purpose of conditionally permitted uses is to allow the integration of essential or desirable uses which may be suitable only in certain zoning districts or designed or arranged on a site in a certain manner. In approving a Conditional Use Permits, it must be determined by the Planning Commission that:  The proposed structure or use conforms to the requirements and the intent of the Zoning Code, and of the comprehensive plan, relevant area plans and other lawful regulations;  Any additional conditions necessary for the public interest have been imposed; and  The use or structure will not constitute a nuisance or be detrimental to the public welfare of the community. A Type C vacation rental license can be issued for a property in Stillwater if: 1) A Conditional Use Permit has been approved by the Planning Commission; and 2) The total number of STHR licenses does not exceed the limit. The applicable review standards for the STHR Conditional Use Permit, per the Licensing Chapter of the City Code, Section 41-8, include: A. Zoning Type C Short Term Home Rentals are allowed by Conditional Use Permit in all Residential Zoning Districts and in the Downtown CBD Zoning District. The subject property is zoned RCM, Medium-Density Multiple-Family Residential. Google Maps. May '19 Case No. 2019-59 Page 3 B. Performance Standards Parking In residential zoning districts, all guest parking must be accommodated on improved surfaces located on the property and no on-street parking is allowed for guests. This property proposes to offer three bedrooms to guests, therefore two off-street parking spaces are required. This property has enough space to accommodate six spots in the driveway. Number of guests The maximum number of guests allowed is limited to two times the number of bedrooms plus one. So, with three bedrooms, the maximum number of guests for the house will be seven. Similarly, the applicants have indicated on their application form that they allow a maximum of seven guests. Proximity of assistance The STHR ordinance requires, that for Type C Short Term Home Rentals, the property owner or a manager/representative must be located within a 30 minute travel time of the property. In this case, the property owners, Ryan and Emily Bretzel, reside in Grant, which is around fifteen minutes away. Their phone number will be provided to the guests. Signage No signage is allowed on the property of a Type A, B or C Short Term Home Rental, to which none is being proposed. C. Events Events are not allowed to be hosted by guests on the premises. The STHR ordinance defines an “event” as a gathering of more than three un-registered guests. Events hosted by the property owner are allowed, however they must abide by all applicable city ordinances and polices, specifically including the prohibition on renting residential property for events. In their submitted Guest Disclosure, the applicants have stated that events aren’t allowed and alludes to the fact that the police station is only a block away. D. Proof of Insurance Proof of appropriate and sufficient insurance was submitted with the use permit application form. E. Safety Inspection The applicant has passed all necessary inspections that were performed by City Building Department staff F. Total Number of STHR Licenses Though there is no limit on the total number of Conditional Use Permits that can be issued for Type C STHRs, there is a current limit of 25 Type C licenses. Ten of these Type C licenses are allocated to be located in the CBD and 15 are for residential districts. Currently nine of the fifteen licenses for residential districts have been issued (with two currently pending). Case No. 2019-59 Page 4 POSSIBLE ACTIONS A. Approval. If the Planning Commission finds issuance of the Conditional Use Permit to be acceptable, it could approve the use permit with the following conditions: 1. Plans shall be substantially similar to those found on file with CPC Case No. 2019-59, except as modified by the conditions herein. 2. Parking – All guest parking must occur on the subject property; none on the street. 3. Number of guests –The total number of guests shall be limited to two times the number of sleeping areas found to be code compliant, plus one additional guest. In this case, no more than 13 guests will be allowed. 4. Proximity of assistance – a. The property owner or a manager/representative must remain located within 30 minutes travel time of the property. b. The property owner must provide the name, address and phone number for the owner or manager/representative to all property owners within 150 feet of the lot lines of the vacation rental property. This must be completed within ten days of issuance of the license. The owner must also provide the community development department with the neighborhood notification list within this ten day time frame. c. The community development department must be notified within ten days of a change in the contact information of the owner or manager/representative. The property owner must also notify neighboring properties within ten days of a change in the contact information of the owner or manager/representative. 5. Garbage - As required by City Code, all garbage must be kept in rubbish containers that are stored out of view of a public street. 6. Signage – No signage identifying the Short Term Home Rental is allowed on the property. 7. Events - Events are not allowed to be hosted by guests on the premises. For purposes of Short Term Home Rental, an event means a gathering on the premises of more than three un-registered guests. 8. Length of guest stay – The property is not permitted to be rented for a period of less than one whole day. 9. Guest records - The owner must keep guest records including the name, address, phone number, and vehicle license plate information for all guests and must provide a report to the city upon a 48 hour notice. 10. Guest disclosures –The owner must disclose in writing to their guests the following rules and regulations prior to arrival and must be conspicuously displayed in the home: a. The name, phone number and address of the owner, operating or managing agent/representative. b. The maximum number of overnight guests on the property at a time is limited to fifteen. c. All guest parking must occur on the property. No guest parking is allowed on the street. d. Property rules related to use of outdoor features, such as decks, patios, grills, recreational fires, saunas and other recreational facilities. Case No. 2019-59 Page 5 e. City nuisance ordinances will be enforced by the Stillwater Police Department, including reduced noise levels between 10 PM and 8 AM. f. No events with more than three unregistered guests are permitted. 11. License number - The owner must post their city license number on all print, poster or web advertisements, in addition to posting it on the booking agent’s website. 12. Lodging tax - The owner, or booking agent on their behalf, is required to pay the city lodging tax quarterly. If no sales are made during a quarter, a report must none-the-less be submitted to the city stating that no sales were made or lodging tax collected during that quarter. 1. Table If the Planning Commission finds the request to have incomplete information, the case could be tabled. 2. Denial If the Planning Commission finds the request to be inconsistent with the City’s vacation rental regulations, it could be denied. With a denial, the basis of the action should be given. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION The STHR conforms to the requirements and the intent of the Zoning Code, the comprehensive plan, relevant area plans and other lawful regulations and will not be a nuisance or detriment to the public welfare of the community. Therefore, staff recommends approval of the CUP with the conditions listed in Alternative A, above. Attachments: Location Map Guest disclosure Site Plan Floorplans (two pages) cc: Ryan and Emily Bretzel W E S T M Y R T L E S T R E E T SOUTH FI FTH STREETSOUTH SI XTH STREETW E S T C H E S T N U T S T R E E T O L IV E S T R E E TRAMSEY S T SOUTH FOURTH STREETJEANNIE STREETHOLCOMBE ST216 114 115 118 208 216 206 208 306 120 315 102 410 220 220 220 116 216 116 215 201 221 128 310 108 121 415 225 205 318 321 320 119 201 1320 102 212 123 132 211 301 215 207 136 122 108 117 115 356 322 115 207 406 204 219 µ 0 180 36090Feet General Site Location Site Location 301 Myrtle St W ^ PLANNING REPORT TO: Planning Commission CASE NO.: 2019-60 REPORT DATE: November 20, 2019 MEETING DATE: November 27, 2019 APPLICANT: Christie Wanderer and Andrew Mosiman of Forge and Foundry Distillery LANDOWNER: MN Winegrowers Co-op REQUEST: Consideration of a Special Use Permit to operate a distillery and tasting room LOCATION: 223 Main Street North DISTRICT: CBD: Central Business District REPORT BY: Abbi Jo Wittman, City Planner INTRODUCTION Christie Wanderer and Andrew Mosiman of Forge and Foundry Distillery would like to operate a distillery and tasting room in downtown Stillwater. They have applied for use permits for two different locations in the past; however, each of those properties presented challenges for the Forge and Foundry’s business plan. The property at 223 Main Street North has been used as Northern Vineyard’s Winery for four decades. Their operations include a (approximately) 2,250 square foot production, warehouse and storage space, a (approximately) 1,100 square foot tasting room, 1,150 square foot, second-story office and storage space, as well as a 195 square foot, second story outdoor dining area. Forge and Foundry is proposing to utilize the same spaces for the similar uses. The City allows the transfer of a use permit to a new business owner if the proposed operations are Main Street Façade (Google, May 2019) Case No. 2019-60 Page 2 similar to the existing use. And, that would apply to the Forge & Foundry. But, for whatever reason Northern Vineyards Winery never obtained a Use Permit for their operations. SPECIFIC REQUEST The applicant is requesting the following to be located at 223 Main Street North: • A Special Use Permit for a distillery, light industrial that is clean and compatible with surrounding properties; and • A Special Use Permit for a tasting room to include outdoor seating, including a future first-level 195 square foot patio in the rear of the building, similar to a restaurant with outside eating facilities. ANLAYSIS The proposed structure or use conforms to the requirements and the intent of this chapter, and of the comprehensive plan, relevant area plans and other lawful regulations. • Zoning Ordinance  Use: o Both breweries and wineries have been classified as “light industrial that is clean and compatible with surrounding properties” in the Central Business District. These uses have operated in the Central Business District without complaint. Distilling operations are similar to breweries and wineries.  The applicants have indicated the production will let off steam but no odor or gas. Additionally, the building is set up with two controlled AC units, one to service the production area and another to service the tasting room.  While spent grains will be kept in sealed containers, onsite and indoors, it will be removed greater than one time weekly. o Outdoor dining areas in the Central Business District generally operate without complaint. However, complaints typically involve the use of outdoor music and/or entertainment. With certain conditions, however, staff has found these types of uses help enliven the downtown area, creating a more pedestrian-friendly environment.  Parking: The property is located within the Downtown Parking District. It has been determined that there is no change in the use of the property. As Northern Vineyards was grandfathered into the Downtown Parking system, Forge and Foundry would not be required to mitigate for parking. That said, if Forge and Foundry would seek to develop the (approximately) 195 square foot, first-floor outdoor patio, then downtown parking district mitigation would need to occur. • Comprehensive Plan – The Downtown chapter of the City’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan cites a goal to “[e]ncourage a viable and compatible mix of community and visitor- serving activities that builds on the assets of Downtown as a desirable place to live, work, shop, recreate, and visit consistent with the capacity of public services and facilities and the natural resources. Promote a diverse range of uses…” Case No. 2019-60 Page 3 Any additional conditions necessary for the public interest have been imposed; and Staff has not identified any public interest concerns.  Waste Accumulation, Storage and Screening – The City has experienced a rise in trash- related nuisances associated with businesses that have not been required to keep their trash in their building, on their own property and/or out of public sight. The applicants have indicated trash storage will be located where it has always been. However, the area is not screened; a condition of use permit approval should be trash area be screened on all four sides with a material approved by the Heritage Preservation Commission. Additionally, there has been a greater effort to clean up cigarette butt waste on public sidewalks and streets. The City has been petitioned to require cigarette butt receptacles on private property where there may be a higher prevalence of smokers. Consequently, staff would recommend a condition of approval requiring the property owner to keep the public spaces adjacent to their business free and clear of trash and debris.  Exterior changes – Section 31-319 of the Stillwater City Code requires that the Heritage Preservation Commission (HPC) conduct a design review on exterior changes, signage and waste receptacle.  The HPC has not reviewed any exterior changes. At this time, the applicant is seeking use permit approvals to begin the local, state, and federal licensing processes.  Miscellaneous  Plans and the use will need to be approved by the engineering, fire and building officials before the issuance of a building permit. The use or structure will not constitute a nuisance or be detrimental to the public welfare of the community. Staff has determined the distillery and tasting room would not be a detriment to the public if all distilling operations are conducted within the structure. POSSIBLE ACTIONS The Commission has the following options: A. Approve. If the proposed use permits meets the Special Use Permit guidelines, the CPC should move to approve Case No. 2016-39. Staff would recommend the following minimum condition for approval. 1. This Special Use Permit is in all ways a Conditional Use Permit as the term is used in Minnesota Statue Section 462.3595. 2. Plans shall be substantially similar to those found on file with CPC Case No. 2019- 56, except as modified by the conditions herein 3. Exterior façade modifications, including the installation of signage, additional outdoor patio area, and trash screening shall be reviewed and approved by the Heritage Preservation Commission. All signage approval shall go to the Heritage Preservation Commission for review and approval. Case No. 2019-60 Page 4 4. In the event the 195 square foot, first level patio is desired, the applicant shall secure approval of a parking mitigation plan from the Downtown Parking Commission and a Design Permit from the Heritage Preservation Commission prior to the release of a building permit and/or on premise liquor license. 5. Plans and the use will need to be approved by the engineering, fire and building officials before the issuance of a building permit. 6. Prior to the operation of the tasting room, the applicant shall secure an on premise license from the City Clerk’s office. 7. Prior to distilling operations, the applicant shall secure state and federal permits and licenses. 8. No exterior amplification, pipe music, or entertainment is permitted. If these uses are desired, an amendment to this Special Use Permit shall be obtained prior to the activity commencing. 9. Abutting sidewalks must be kept clean of cigarette butts and other debris. 10. All changes to the approved plans will need to be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director. Any major changes will need to go to the Planning Commission for review and approval. B. Approve in part. C. Deny. If the CPC finds that the proposal is not consistent with the approved Special Use Permit guidelines, then the Commission could deny the request. With a denial, the basis of the action is required to be given. Furthermore, the denial would prohibit the applicant from resubmittal of a substantially similar application within one year. D. Table. If the CPC needs additional information to make a decision, the request could be tabled the December, 2019 meeting. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION Staff finds that with certain conditions, the proposed use conforms to the requirements and the intent of the Zoning Code, the comprehensive plan, relevant area plans and other lawful regulations and will not be a nuisance or detriment to the public welfare of the community. Therefore, staff recommends conditional approval of a Special Use Permit to operate a distillery, tasting room, and outdoor dining area on the property located at 223 Main Street North. Attachments: Site Location Map Narrative Request (2 pages) Floor Plans (2 pages) cc: Andrew Mosiman Chris Siedow Christie Wanderer Stephen Watkin Case No. 2019-60 Page 5 STATE HWY 95A L L E Y NORTH WATER STREETALLEYBURLI NGTONNORTH WATER232 333 350350 350 350350 350 350 242 221 270 130 201 350 204 225 223 218 212 220 219 222 217 212 126 225 217 251 µ 0 110 22055Feet General Site Location Site Location 223 Main St N ^ 1 Jenn Sundberg From:Tom Wortman <tomwortman@comcast.net> Sent:Tuesday, November 26, 2019 8:23 AM To:Jenn Sundberg Subject:Case # 2019-60 Distillery Good Morning Jenn, I am the owner of the building next to 223 Main St where they are seeking a Special Use Permit. The building next to this proposed distillery houses the River Market Coop grocery store and the Kagan Binder Law firm for the past 25 years in Stillwater. They have a huge concern regarding the distillery aspect of this Permit. # 1 and foremost: Will this distillery create odors that will permeate into the building that is attached to their building and if so, we are totally against the distillery portion for the permit. The odors would create a hardship on both business as the Coop is a food store and the odors would permeate into the various food products. As far as the legal firm that has offices next to the distillery, ( buildings are attached ) would create a hardship on there 30 employees that have been a part of Stillwater for the past 25 years. The bottom line is if they can guarantee that no odors would permeate into the attached building at 221 MainSt., they would have no problem with the permit. Please make sure that this is stated at the meeting. Regards, Tom Wortman TreMar LLC Tom Wortman PLANNING REPORT TO: Planning Commission CASE NO.: 2019-62 REPORT DATE: November 6, 2019 MEETING DATE: November 27, 2019 APPLICANT: Dariush Moslemi LAND OWNER: Michael Lynsky & Lee T. Bjerk REQUEST: A Special Use Permit to operate a restaurant with a graphic design sign in Downtown LOCATION: 218 Main Street North ZONING: CBD: Central Business District. PREPARED BY: Graham Tait, City Zoning Administrator Abbi Wittman, City Planner REVIEWED BY: Bill Turnblad, Community Development Director INTRODUCTION The applicant, Dariush Moslemi, owner of Rusty Mile, LLC, is requesting a Special Use Permit to operate a restaurant at 218 Main Street North. This two-story downtown building previously housed a barber shop and a photography shop on the first floor and offices on the second floor. The applicant is proposing an interior remodeling on the first floor, to combine these two units into a single unit that will operate as a nostalgic 90’s-era restaurant (the second floor will remain offices). The property has access both from Main Street and the city owned alley on the south side of the building, and the proposed remodeling of the ground level into a restaurant will include a new door at the back of the building for deliveries. Off of the alley, in the rear, is a nose-in parking area that is proposed to accommodate space for six vehicles. The construction will be interior in nature, and there will be no structural changes to the building. Included in these changes are: - A new rooftop HVAC system - Installing a new rear-faced delivery door - Adding a hood ventilation exhaust on the south elevation - Combining the two interior spaces into one unit - Replacement of the existing signage and installation of a graphic design sign on the south elevation. SPECIFIC REQUEST The applicant is requesting the following for the structure at 218 Main Street North: - A Special Use Permit for a new restaurant. - A Special Use Permit for a graphic design sign (i.e. a mural) ANALYSIS Municipal Code Section 31-207 indicates the following must be determined by the Planning Commission prior to the issuance of a Special Use Permit (SUP): The proposed structure or use conforms to the requirements and the intent of this (Zoning) chapter, and of the comprehensive plan, relevant area plans and other lawful regulations. Zoning Ordinance Use In the CBD district, restaurants are permitted with a special use permit. The City has determined that, with certain conditions, restaurants do not constitute a nuisance or prove to be detrimental to the public welfare of the community. Trash The building at this property is situated in the corner of the lot, abutting both the rear lot line to the west and the interior side yard lot line to the north. Given the location of the building and its parking lot, there is no additional space to store a trash enclosure without losing a parking space or two. Additionally the City is experiencing ongoing issues with the exterior storage of trash Downtown, due to the limited land area to put additional trash enclosures. Therefore, the City puts forth that all trash will have to be kept inside the building and cannot be kept outside without the applicant providing proof to the City that they have access to a shared trash enclosure with another business(s) downtown. Furthermore, trash may not be stored on public lands without a permit from the City. Also of recent concern to the City, there has been a greater effort to clean up cigarette butt waste on public sidewalks and streets. The City has been petitioned to require cigarette butt receptacles on private property where there may be a higher prevalence of smokers. However, staff has determined approval conditions should address the issue, requiring property owners to keep the public spaces adjacent to their businesses free and clear of trash and debris. Noise The use being proposed will take place indoors and should not produce excessive noise. Additionally, this building stands alone with no immediate neighbors on the south side of the building. Lastly, the uses are required to comply with City Code Section 38 -3, Noise control and regulation. Parking When there is a deficit of onsite parking, the City allows for a mitigation plan to be submitted for review and approval by the Downtown Parking Commission prior to the release of the special use permit. The following compares the existing parking (credit) to the proposed uses and their parking requirements. Use Requirement Spaces Existing Barber 3 / Chair 6 Photography Shop 1 / 200 sf 7.4 Office 1 / 300 sf 5.9 Total Credit 19.3 Proposed Restaurant 1 / 120 sf 8.3 Office 1 / 300 sf 5.9 Total Required 14.2 Currently the existing uses at the property require 19.3 spaces and the proposed uses will require 14.2 spaces. Also, there is nose-in onsite parking in the alley in the rear of the building, which is being proposed to accommodate 6 spots. In brief, the proposed uses require less parking than the existing uses requires, therefore no parking mitigation is needed. Heritage Preservation The design permit for a graphic design sign was approved by the Heritage Preservation Commission at the regularly scheduled meeting on November 20th, 2019. Specifically, the HPC has allowed for the design of mural signage displaying a bottle cap that contains the word "Roadhouse" Comprehensive Plan The proposed use of a restaurant in the downtown area is in line with the goals put forth in the City’s Comprehensive Plan. The Downtown Plan section aims to promote a mix of uses that satisfy both residents and visitors, aspiring to make Stillwater a desirable place to live, work, shop, recreate and visit. Additionally, the Economic Development section of the Comprehensive Plan states that one of its goals is to “provide new locations for job growth in close proximity to housing and with convenient access, which may include transit.” PUBLIC COMMENT There was no public comment. POSSIBLE ACTIONS The Planning Commission has the following options: A. Approve the requested variances with the following conditions: 1. This Special Use Permit is in all ways a Conditional Use Permit as the term is used in Minnesota Statue Section 462.3595. 2. Plans shall be substantially similar to those on file with the Community Development Department’s Case No. 2019-62. 3. Trash must be kept indoors, unless the applicant can provide proof to the City that they have access to a shared trash enclosure with another business(s) downtown. Trash may not be stored on public lands without a permit from the City. 4. Property owners must keep the public spaces adjacent to their businesses free and clear of trash, cigarette butts and other forms of debris. 5. All signage and exterior alterations including, but not limited to, the installation of new windows, doors, lighting, mechanical equipment, and signage shall be reviewed and approved by the Heritage Preservation Commission prior to installation. Any conditions attached to the Design Permit issued by the Heritage Preservation Commission for this addition are incorporated by reference into this special use permit. 6. Plans and the use will need to be approved by the City of Stillwater engineering, fire and building officials before the issuance of a building permit. 7. All changes to the approved plans will need to be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director. Any major changes will need to go to the Planning Commission for review and approval. 8. A building permit shall be reviewed and approved prior to any construction occurring on the property. B. Deny the requested variances. With a denial, findings of fact supporting the decision must be provided. C. Table the application and request additional information from staff or the applicant. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION Staff finds that with the above stated conditions imposed, the proposed use is in conformance with the requirements and intent of the Zoning Code, the comprehensive plan, relevant area plans and other lawful regulations, and or will not be a nuisance or detriment to the public welfare of the community. Therefore, staff recommends the approval of a Special Use Permit for a restaurant located at the ground level story of 218 Main Street North. Staff advises that if the Special Use Permit is approved, that the conditions stated above, in Option A, be imposed. Attachments: Site Location Map Applicant Narrative Survey Floor Plan Street View Photo Rendering CC: Dariush Moslemi Michael Lynsky SOUTH SECOND STREETSTATE HWY 95A L L E Y C O M M E R C IA L A V E N U ENORTH WATER STREETALLEYALLEYNORTH WATER232 123 201 242 221 130 270 350350 350350350350 350350 350 350350 350350350 251 103 204 200 225 220 225 223 218 212 220 219 217 102 222 114 112 217 212 226 120 126 124 118118 102 350 µ 0 110 22055Feet General Site Location Site Location 218 Main St N ^ Planning Commission 24 Oct 2019 re. 218 N Main St. Stillwater, MN. Proposed Business: Rusty Mile LLC. Our proposal is to convert the existing space at 218 N. Main St. from a barbershop and former photoshop to a restaurant. Rusty Mile LLC. will combine the two spaces into one via internal demolition only, no structural changes to the building. The space was built in 1984 and is in good condition. We are proposing a new rooftop HVAC system to modernized the efficiency of the space (attached are layout, dimensions and unit type), installing a new delivery door to the back of the space so food and liquor deliveries do not impede parking or main street traffic flow (we will match the existing side door in look and materials), and also, adding a hood termination on the south elevation of the building on the parking lot side (which can be customized per any design request, location is on an attached document). We also plan on re-centering the main sign, materials will be metal backing with metal custom raised lettering utilizing the current bracket system on the building, dimensions are 120 inches by 24 inches. Please see attached concept plans for south elevation logo which will be painted. We also propose to remove the lower level awning which is dated and quite used looking. We deemed this location perfect due to the fact it has its own parking lot, located directly next to The Crosby and Candyland, and across from The Co-Op. We will need to make no changes to the existing property other than internal demolition and remodel. The business itself will bring affordable lunch and dinner flow with a family friendly atmosphere. The decor will have a nod to the 90’s with a few pinball machines and sit down games that are from the era. Music and atmosphere will combine the best of the 1980’s and 1990’s. However, the food is our greatest passion. Our mission is to create foods that we all crave, in a healthy and natural way, utilizing our extensive knowledge of plant based recipes, keto based foods, paleo and gluten free. We currently own Studio One Yoga located at 402 N Main St, The Velveteen Speakeasy at 123 N 2nd St, and are partners in The Lumberjack 123 N. 2nd St. as well, in addition we have Studio One Yoga locations in White Bear Lake and also Roseville. We are long-time Stillwater residents and are committed to preserving and enhancing our town within the guidance of existing bodies and are happy to answer any questions regarding our newest project. Thank you, Dariush and Sarah Moslemi 651-280-7715 PARCEL 2PARCEL 1NORTH MAIN STREETS.T.H. NO. 95(PUBLIC STREET)NORTH SECOND STREET(PUBLIC STREET)EAST MULBERRY STREET506060666613G13GG2G1PARCEL 1C1PARCEL 2C29a9b9c9d9d(CITY PARCEL)(CITY PARCEL )(GARTNER PARCEL)(GARTNER PARCEL)ANNE LOFFAMG314 1ST AVE NORTHSUITE 300MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401612-987-2044FILE NAMEPROJECT NO.REVISIONDATECONTACT:PRELIMINARY ISSUE09-07-16Suite #16750 Stillwater Blvd. N.Stillwater, MN 55082Phone 651.275.8969Fax 651.275.8976dan@cssurvey.net40200SCALE: 1 INCH = 20 FEETNORTHREVISIONS:COUNTY/CITY:SURVEYCERTIFICATE OFSURVRM03RM05003VICINITY MAPPROJECT LOCATION:SHEET 1 OF 2SEE SHEET 2 OF 2 SHEETS FOR LEGALDESCRIPTIONS AND EASEMENT INFORMATION.INITIAL ISSUE10-04-16UNDERGROUND UTILITIES NOTES:THE UNDERGROUND UTILITIES SHOWN HAVE BEEN LOCATED FROM FIELDSURVEY INFORMATION AND EXISTING DRAWINGS. THE SURVEYOR MAKES NOGUARANTEE THAT THE UNDERGROUND UTILITIES SHOWN COMPRISE ALL SUCHUTILITIES IN THE AREA, EITHER IN SERVICE OR ABANDONED. THE SURVEYORFURTHER DOES NOT WARRANT THAT THE UNDERGROUND UTILITIES SHOWNARE IN THE EXACT LOCATION INDICATED ALTHOUGH HE DOES CERTIFY THATTHEY ARE LOCATED AS ACCURATELY AS POSSIBLE FROM THE INFORMATIONAVAILABLE. THE SURVEYOR HAS NOT PHYSICALLY LOCATED THEUNDERGROUND UTILITIES. GOPHER STATE ONE CALL LOCATE TICKETNUMBER(S) 162462206. SOME MAPS WERE RECEIVED, WHILE OTHER UTILITIESDID NOT RESPOND TO THE LOCATE REQUEST. ADDITIONAL UTILITIES OFWHICH WE ARE UNAWARE MAY EXIST. OTHER UTILITIES MAY EXIST ON THISSITE THAT WERE NOT MARKED UP.LINETYPE ADJUSTMENT11-08-16TITLE UPDATE12-05-16 9'-3"26'-8"14'-5"9'-0"6'-0"6'-1"3'-0"x24"36" 74"-POST x24"60" 74"-POST x24"60"74"-POST x18"36"74"-POSTx24"60" 74"-POST x18"60"74"-POST x24"48"74"-POSTx18"60"74"-POST x24"48"74"-POSTx18"36"74"-POST 1 1/2"14'-11 1/4"1 1/2"3'-5 7/16"40"11.21.122233.23.1444556677.1131617181922242325262829273826.126.326.226.450515755REST ROOMREST ROOMFREEZERCOOLER12VERIFY LOCATION5559240"53.15354545253.256212"39323437151514363558.1587.21813098 George Weber Dr. Suite 100Rogers, MN 55374p. 612.331.1300This document contains confidential information, is an instrument of a professional service, and the property of TriMark. It shall not be used on other projects or for the extension of this project without TriMark's written approval.DATE:SCALE:DRAWN BY:SHEET TITLE:SHEET NUMBER:APPROVED BY:trimarkusa.comREVISIONSOwner and all Contractors to check and verify existing dimensions and conditions in the field before starting construction and to notify TriMark of any material or detail changes.THIS DOCUMENT WAS ORGINALLY PRINTED ON A 24" x 36" SIZE SHEETPROJECT NUMBER:10/10/2019 3:55:26 PM 1/4" = 1'-0"C:\Users\AdolphusZ\Documents\revit\2019\RUSTY MILE R19 CENTRAL_Adolphus.zelee.rvtQF100FOODSERVICE EQUIPMENTPLANJT/AZRusty Mile Restaurant 218 No. Main St Stillwater MN 55082 Project ScopeProject Number02' 4' 8'SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"DATE NO. DESCRIPTIONNot to Scale3D - BAR INTERIORNot to Scale3D - COOKLINEFOODSERVICE EQUIPMENT SCHEDULEITEMNO.QTY DESCRIPTION REMARKS11WALK-IN COOLER OWNER/NIKEC1.1 1 WALK-IN COOLER CONDENSINGUNITOWNER/NIKEC1.2 1 WALK-IN COOLER EVAPORATORCOILOWNER/NIKEC23WIRE SHELVING UNIT EQUIP. SUPPLIER31WALK-IN FREEZER OWNER/NIKEC3.1 1 WALK-IN FREEZER CONDENSINGUNITOWNER/NIKEC3.2 1 WALK-IN FREEZER EVAPORATORCOILOWNER/NIKEC43WIRE SHELVING UNIT EQUIP. SUPPLIER52LOCKERS OWNER/NIKEC62WIRE SHELVING UNIT EQUIP. SUPPLIER71ICE MAKER - MODULARCRESCENT CUBEREQUIP. SUPPLIER7.1 1 ICE STORAGE BIN SERIES EQUIP. SUPPLIER7.2 1 WATER FILTER EQUIP. SUPPLIER8-11 1 SPARE NUMBER12 1 WAREWASHER EQUIP. SUPPLIER13 1 WIRE SHELVING UNIT EQUIP. SUPPLIER14 1 3 COMPARTMENT SCULLERY SINK EQUIP. SUPPLIER15 2 48" WALL SHELF EQUIP. SUPPLIER16 1 2 COMPARTMENT SINK EQUIP. SUPPLIER17 2 36" WALL SHELF EQUIP. SUPPLIER18 2 HAND SINK EQUIP. SUPPLIER19 1 MOP SINK EQUIP. SUPPLIER21 1 SPARE NUMBER22 1 UTILITY SHELF EQUIP. SUPPLIER23 1 CO2 TANK SODA VENDOR24 1 BAG-N-BOX SODA VENDOR25 1 WIRE SHELVING UNIT EQUIP. SUPPLIER26 1 EXHAUST HOOD SYSTEM OWNER/NIKEC26.1 1 EXHAUST FAN OWNER/NIKEC26.2 1 MAKE UP AIR OWNER/NIKEC26.3 1 HOOD CONTROLS OWNER/NIKEC26.4 1 FIRE SUPPRESSION SYSTEM OWNER/NIKEC27 1 COUNTER TOP 4 BURNER RANGE EQUIP. SUPPLIER28 1 REFRIGERATED STANDW/DRAWEREQUIP.SUPPLIER29 1 COUNTER TOP GRIDDLE EQUIP. SUPPLIER30 1 SPARE NUMBER31 1 SPARE NUMBER32 1 36" CHARBROILERW/CONVENTION-OVEN BASEEQUIP. SUPPLIER33 1 SPARE NUMBER34 2 Fryer EQUIP. SUPPLIER35 1 48" WORK TABLE EQUIP. SUPPLIER36 1 REFRIGERATEDSANDWICH/SALAD PREPEQUIP. SUPPLIER37 1 REFRIGERATED WORKTOP, 2DOOREQUIP. SUPPLIER38 2 36" WALL SHELF EQUIP. SUPPLIER39 1 SINGLE PASS THRU SHELF EQUIP. SUPPLIER40-49 1 SPARE NUMBER50 1 HIGH TOP BAR STOOL OWNER/NIKEC51 1 BAR COUNTER OWNER/NIKEC52 1 UNDERBAR HAND SINK EQUIP. SUPPLIER53 1 24" UNDERBAR DRAINBOARD EQUIP. SUPPLIER53.1 1 12" UNDERBAR DRAINBOARD EQUIP. SUPPLIER53.2 1 18" UNDERBAR DRAINBOARD EQUIP. SUPPLIER54 2 24" UNDERBAR ICE CHESTW/COLD PLATEEQUIP. SUPPLIER55 2 FLAT TOP BOTTLE COOLER EQUIP. SUPPLIER56 1 UNDERBAR HAND SINK EQUIP. SUPPLIER57 1 UNDERBAR GLASSWASHER EQUIP. SUPPLIER58 1 REFRIGERATED BACK BARCOOLER, 2 DOOREQUIP. SUPPLIER58.1 1 BEER COOLER W/DISPENSER, 2DOOREQUIP. SUPPLIER59 1 GARBAGE RECEPTACLE EQUIP. SUPPLIER BONUS IDEA: SIDE MURAL PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE: November 27, 2019 REGARDING: 2020 Meeting Calendar PREPARED BY: Abbi Jo Wittman, City Planner The November 25 and December 23, 2020 Planning Commission meetings will fall close to or on the Thanksgiving and Christmas weeks/weekends. Staff is proposing changing the meeting date to avoid conflict. In the past, the Commission has been favorable to changing the meeting date to the Thursday prior to the Planning Commission’s regularly-scheduled meeting. For 2020 that would mean the dates would be: Thursday, November 19 Thursday, December 17 Please bring your calendars to the meeting to set the 2020 meeting dates so the City may be able to finalize the 2020 public meeting calendar.