Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1989-08-14 CPC PacketZoning 111 1 111 HEIM Ulwater THE BIRTHPLACE OF MINNESOTA August 9, 1989 THE STILLWATER PLANNING COMMISSION WILL MEET ON MONDAY, AUGUST 14, 1989 AT 7 00 P M IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS OF CITY HALL, 216 NORTH FOURTH STREET AG® Approval of Minutes - July 10, 1989 PUBLIC HEARINGS 1 Case No SUB/89-48 - Subdivision of three lots totaling 16,605 square feet into two lots of 9,180 square feet and 7,425 square feet with modification to lot size requirements at 412 and 418 West Wilkins Street in the RB, Two Family Residential District Stanley and Elizabeth McDonald, Applicants 2 Case No V/89-46 - Variance to the sideyard setback requirements for an existing garage (2 feet proposed, 5 feet required) at 412 West Wilkins Street in the RB, Two Family Residential District Stanley and Elzabeth McDonald, Applicants (Refer to SUB/89-48) 3 Case No V/89-47 - Variance to the sideyard setback requirements (2 feet proposed, 5 feet required) for the construction of a 16 foot by 22 foot single car garage at 418 West Wilkins Street in the RB, Two Family Residential District Stanley and Elizabeth McDonald, Applicants (Refer to SUB/89-48) 4 Case No V/89-52 - Variance to the Fence Ordinance for a three and one half foot fence (four feet required) at 1421 North First Street in the RA, Single Family Residential District Ned and Christine Windmiller, Applicants 5 Case No PR/DP/V/89-53 - Variance and Design Permit for the placement of an awning sign and parking review for a pool hall at 112 North Main Street in the CBD, Central Business District Kathy and Gerald Sanford, Applicants 6 Case No DP/PR/89-61 - A Design Permit for the renovation of a storefront with a fire stair addition and Parking Review at 212 North Main Street in the CBD, Central Business District LeVerne and Sharon Stefan, Applicants 7 Case No SUP/89-55 - Special Use Permit to conduct an over -the -phone sales and service company for pool supplies at 313 West Churchill Street in the RB, Two Family Residential District Richard LaCasse, Applicant CITY HALL 216 NORTH FOURTH STILLWATER MINNESOTA 55082 PHONE 612 439 6121 -oueR- Planning Commission Meeting August 14, 1989 Page Two 8 Case No V/89-56 - Variance to the lot size requirements (7,500 proposed, 10,000 feet required) for the construction of a home at 1914 North First Street in the RA, Single Family Residential District Mitch Hurlburt, Applicant 9 Case No V/89-57 - Variance to the sideyard setback requirement (three feet proposed, five feet required) for a twenty four foot by ten foot garage addition at 1112 West Linden Street in the RA, Single Family Residential District Ronald A Zaniewski, Applicant 10 Case No V/89-58 - Variance to the Sign Ordinance for the placement of a new four foot by twenty foot pylon sign, at the same location of the present sign, at Crown Auto, 14450 60th Street North in the IP-C, Industrial Park Commercial District Richard Fox, on behalf of Crown Auto, Applicants 11 Case No SUP/89-59 - Special Use Permit for a concession stand in the Issac Staples Mill Building at 402 North Main Street in the CBD, Central Business District Terri Brine, Applicant 12 Case No ZAM/89/43 - Referral from City Council for reconsideration of rezoning of lots 6 and 7 of Dallager's Estates from RB to RA OTHER ITEMS - Park Dedication Policy - Expiration of Special Use Permits and Variances • • • r A. STILLWATER PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Date July 10, 1989 Time 7 00 p m Members Present Members Absent Gerald Fontaine, Chairman Glenna Bealka Jean Jacobson Judy Curtis Nancy Putz Mark Ehlenz Don Valsvik Ann Pung-Terwedo, Planning Assistant Rob Hamlin Jay Kimble Chairman Fontaine called the meeting to order APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion by Don Valsvik, seconded by Mark Ehlenz to approve the minutes of June 12, 1989 as submitted All in favor PUBLIC HEARINGS Case No V/89-37 - Variance to the rear and sideyard setback requirements to renovate an existing Carriage House into personal living quarters at 306 West Olive Street in the RCM Medium Density Family Residential District Charles and Judith Dougherty, Applicants Mr Dougherty explained to the Commission that his plan is to convert the Carriage House into personal living quarters for himself and his wife, with one additional rental unit for the Bed and Breakfast Two of the existing rooms in the Bed and Breakfast would be combined so that the total number of rental rooms will remain at nine He stated that the Bed and Breakfast was purchased with the assumption that future renovation of the Carriage House would occur Leo Lohmer, 303 Olive Street, Mary Weber, 205 West Chestnut, Barb Flo, 225 West Chestnut, and George Schmidt, 208 West Chestnut stated their objections to the proposal The Commission discussed the concept of a Bed and Breakfast and determined that if the owners do not occupy the home, it would not be in compliance with the Bed and Breakfast Ordinance Motion by Mark Ehlenz, seconded by Don Valsvik to deny the variance request Motion carried 7-0 Case No V/89-38 - Variance to the sideyard and rearyard setback requirements (22 foot corner sideyard, 2 foot rearyard proposed, 30 foot corner sideyard, 5 foot rearyard required) for the construction of a garage at 820 West Pine Street in the RB, Two Family Residential District Carl B Quist, Applicant 1 r Stillwater Planning Commission July 10, 1989 There are three recommended conditions of approval The Planning Commission added a fourth 4) Existing garage to be removed upon completion of new garage Motion by Mark Ehlenz, seconded by Glenna Bealka to approve the variance request with four conditions Motion carried 7-0 Case No V/89-39 - Variance to the sideyard and rearyard set- back requirements (two foot sideyard, four foot rearyard proposed, five foot sideyard and five foot rearyard required) for the construction of a garage at 416 North Greeley Street in the RB, Two Family Residential District Tom Eichten, Applicant Motion by Don Valsvik, seconded by Judy Curtis to approve the variance request with five conditions Motion carried 7-0 Case No DP/V/89-40 - Design Permit and Variance to the Sign Ordinance for the placement of an awning sign, change copy on canvas sign and add three pennants on the Grand Garage Building at 324 South Main Street Robert Tanner, owner of Esteban's in the the Grand Garage presented the request The request is being made because the loss of the rear parking lot has made the Nelson Street entrance more significant The Downtown Design Review Committee has reviewed and approved the request Mr Tanner stated that he plans to remove the present chimney sign The Commission agreed that the present chimney sign is not adequate and additional signage is needed because of the location of the restaurant Motion by Mark Ehlenz, seconded by Nancy Putz to approve the Design Permit and Variance request with two conditions Motion carried 7-0 Case No SUP/89-41 - Special Use Permit to operate Program (before and after school child care) at Elementary School located at 900 North Owens Street One Family Residential District Independent School 834, Applicant Dan Parker, representing the informed the Commission that presently at Afton -Lakeland and a Latch -Key Stonebridge in the RA, District No School District was present and Latch -Key Programs are in place Oak Park Elementary Motion by Jean Jacobson, seconded by Don Valsvik to approve the Special Use Permit with one condition Motion carried 7-0 Case No. SUP/89-42 - Special Use Permit for the placement of two portable classrooms at the Stillwater Senior High School, 523 West Marsh Street in the RB, Two Family Residential District 2 A r Oa • • • Stillwater Planning Commission July 10, 1989 Motion by Glenna Bealka, seconded by Judy Curtis to approve the Special Use Permit request Motion carried 7-0 Case No. ZAM/89-43 - Request for consideration of a Zoning Map Amendment to rezone lots 6 and 7 of Dallager's Estates from RB, Two Family Residential to RA, One Family Residential Adjoining property owners have requested the rezoning in order to prevent the building of eight-plexes on the property Neighbors attending the meeting were Shelly Michaelis, owner of Lot 8, Ted Raduenz, whose property abuts Lots 6 and 7, Bill Marvin, owner of Lot 9, Pat Hoyt, owner of Lot 3, and Jean Smith, whose property abuts Lot 4 All were in favor of the rezoning request because of the single-family nature of the surrounding area It was also pointed out that a drainage problem exists in the area, and multi -family dwellings would increase the problem The Commission agreed that the RB zoning is not consistent with the neighborhood Motion by Mark Ehlenz, seconded by Don Valsvik to approve the Zoning Map Amendment request Motion carried 7-0 Case No V/89-44 - Variance to the Sign Ordinance for the placement of two additional signs for the new TCF Bank in the Cub Foods Store, 2001 Washington Avenue North in the IP-C, Industrial Park Commercial District Color Sign Systems, Applicant Motion by Don Valsvik, seconded by Mark Ehlenz to approve the variance request Motion carried 7-0 Case No SUP/89-45 - Special Use Permit for the placement of a new sign at Oakridge Community Church, 610 County Road #5, in the RA, Single Family Residential District Oakridge Community Church, Applicant Dan Parker was present to represent the Church There are two recommended conditions of approval The Commission requsted that a third condition be added 3) The sign shall have a timer to turn the lights off by 11 00 p m Motion by Nancy Putz, seconded by Jean Jacobson to approve the Special Use Permit request with three conditions Motion carried 7-0 Case No. SUB/89-48, Case No V/89-46, and Case No V/89-47 - The subdivision and variance requests were made by Stanley and Elizabeth McDonald, owners of the property The Commission asked that these items be tabled because the applicants were not present Motion by Mark Ehlenz, seconded by Jean Jacobson to table Case s Stillwater Planning Commission July 10, 1989 Nos 46, 47, and 48 until the applicants are present for discussion Motion carried 7-0 Case No. PUD/89-50 and Case No. SUB/89-49 - PUD, preliminary plat approval for a subdivision containing 42 single family homes and subdivision request for 42 single family lots with a zero sideyard setback on 61st Street (directly behind Greeley Square) in the RB, Two Family Residential District Parlay Group (Richard Ernst II) Applicant Several Forest Hills area residents were present at the meeting to state their concerns with the project Bob Morrow, 1601 Morningside Rd , stated that he and other neighbors are concerned with the high density and the drainage problem at the site Other concerns mentioned were substandard housing and its effect on the property values of neighboring residences, the movement of students through the neighborhood to and from the high school, the design of the buildings, and the fact that the residences will be abutting a shopping center The Commission informed the residents that the density is allowed within the RB zoning district The Commissioners stated that the plan is a good transition between the commercial and residential areas There was discussion of the eight recommended conditions of approval Condition No 2 was modified to require an escrow account be established to guarantee the completion of the landscape plan At Mr Ernst's request, Condition No 1 was modified so that the in lieu park fee amount will be determined by staff before final approval Motion by Don Valsvik, seconded by Mark Ehlenz to approve the PUD for a subdivision Motion carried 7-0 Motion by Don Valsvik, seconded by Nancy Putz to approve the subdivision request with eight conditions Motion carried 7-0 Case No SUB/89-35 - Continuation of preliminary plat approval to subdivide an 8 68 acre lot into two lots of 2 87 and 5 81 acres at the corner of the Northwest corner of the intersection of Washington Avenue and Curve Crest Boulevard in the Industrial Park Industrial District Curve Crest Properties, Applicant Guy Wrightmeyer, architect, was present to represent Curve Crest Properties Motion by Mark Ehlenz, seconded by Jean Jacobson to give preliminary plat approval for the subdivision request Motion carried 7-0 ADJOURNMENT Motion by Judy Curtis, seconded by Glenna Bealka to adjourn the meeting at 9 40 p m All in favor 4 PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW CASE NOS SUB/89-48, V/89-46, V/89-47 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING August 14, 1989 PROJECT LOCATION 412 - 418 West Wilkins Street COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DISTRICT Two Family Residential ZONING DISTRICT RB APPLICANT'S NAME Stanley and Elizabeth McDonald PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS The project has three planning reviews, a resubdivison to modify a property boundary (SUB/89-48), a variance required for the existing garage that results from the location of the new lot line (V/89-46) and a variance for the construction of a new attached garage (V/89-47) SUB/89-48 - The request is to resubdivide two lots (lots 25 and 26 of 11,070 square feet and lot 27 of 5,535 square feet) into two lots marked Lots A and B on the site plan of A = 68'x135' = 9,180 square feet and lot B 55'x135' = 7,425 square feet The single family lot size requirement is 7,500 square feet Existing lot 27 is 5,535, so the modification brings one lot more into conformity with lot size requirements V/89-46 - One variance is for the existing garage that would be located on new Lot A The proposed sideyard setback is 2 1/2 ft, 5 ft is required V/89-47 - A second variance is requested to construct a new attached garage to hhe a sting residence at 418 West Wilkins Street The proposed garage is a sixteen ft one stall garage The proposed setback is two ft The adjacent residence to the east is approximately 30 ft away It would be possible to reduce the width of the garage to fourteen ft and for the garage to accommodate a one car stall RECOMMENDATION 1 SUB/89-48 - Approval 2 V/89-46 - Approval 3 Approval with possible reduction of width of garage to 14 or 15 ft FINDINGS Because of the existing structure location and small lot sizes, the proposed is consistent with the intent of the Subdivision Ordinance and Zoning Ordinance ATTACHMENT Plan • w > k/I z i 17/, ,l �or 2S /37 Gt1 / hKr/t) s WO Q 1-7)//S {-1-3 /7rv"�1 rX I yT/I✓ G. a/g w w(L,16/i) 40r 2C 0 P4A/ Pa,e c rF 0 A r.� /c//7 F—r uT 2 /3 4k 7 lt// 4k/Ns /2 // '4-1 * / 7 V6- /-/mq s (y,� 6 gt i/ ?r/{ FA G.tz rf • S77I u 44 t 20 ,04- c, v Pc 6ax v EAR Ate/2Tli 1 • IF PACKAGES /?7 �/Joz/ pf 12 i. Cam--' _ ...s.P Y M`•"---�Qe• - ��' M —w M yVVY+ J. •L • ol7fl.. 16' x 22' SINGLE CAR ATTACHED GARAGE PACKAGE Designed to match your home s construction with a box enclosed overhang Provides a protected passage from your home to the car PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW CASE NO V/89-52 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING August 14, 1989 PROJECT LOCATION 1421 North First Street COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DISTRICT Single Family ZONING DISTRICT RA APPLICANT'S NAME Ned and Christine Windmiller TYPE OF APPLICATION Variance PROJECT DESCRIPTION A variance to the Swimming Pool Ordinance for a three and one half foot fence (four feet required) for security of a pool DISCUSSION The request is to determine that a three and one half foot cyclone fence, approximately 40 feet in length, is sufficient to protect a pool area for the reasons of safety and security The fence is not the pool owners but the neighbors to the North of the Windmiller property As can be viewed by the site plan, the three and one half foot cyclone fence area extends 40 feet, then rises to five feet for approximately 60 feet The rest of the pool is enclosed by a five foot wrought iron fence, owned and maintained by the Windmiller's The determination must be made that the neighbors three and one Half foot fence protects the pool area from intruders and that this is will provide adequate security for the pool The alternative is for the applicant to construct a paralel four foot fence The Windmillers are also requesting that a five inch allowance to cross over the neighbor's property line be made on the Northeast and Northwest corners of the area for extension of the horizontal bars of the wrought iron fence The City cannot give such approval for the use of someone elses property This will result in a one foot gap between the pool owner's fence and the neighbor's fence CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1 The applicant shall plant shrubs on their property to protect the Northeast and Northwest corners of the property where the existing fences do not meet 2 If the neighbors three and one half foot fence is removed, the applicant shall construct a minimum four foot fence to secure the pool RECOMMENDATION Approval The determination has been made that the neighbor's three and one half foot fence provides adequate protection of the pool area FINDINGS the granting of the variance is necessary for the reasonable use of the land and fence This o s the minimum variance that will accomplish such purpose • • • ATTACHMENTS - Two site plans - Application forms • • • REQUIRED FINDINGS The Planning Commission must make the following findings, based on the proposed project, to approve the application SPECIAL USE PERMIT The proposed use will not be injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare and will be in harmony with the general purpose of this ordinance VARIANCE PUD (a) There are special circumstances or conditions, fully described in the findings, applying to the land or building for which the variance is sought, which circumstances or conditions are peculiar to such land or buildings and do not apply generally to land or buildings in the neighborhood, and that said circumstances or conditions are such that the strict application of the provisions of this Ordinance would deprive the applicant of the reasonable use of such land or buildings (b) For reasons set forth fully in the findings, the granting of the variance is necessary for the reasonable use of the land or buildings and that the same is the minimum variance that will accomplish such purpose (c) The granting of the variance will be in harmony with the general purpose and intent of this Ordinance and will not be injurious to the neighborhood or otherise detrimental to the public welfare In addition to considering the character and use of adjoining land and buildings and those in the vicinity, in making such finding, the City Council shall take into account the number of persons residing or working in such buildings or upon such land and traffic conditions in the area among other considerations The proposed use is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and zoning land use SUBDIVISIONS - the project preserves significant natural features, i e large trees, water courses, scenic points, historical spots and similar community resources - the project provides the public site and community open space according to Subdivision Ordinance requirements (31 06 - 9 (2)) - the proposed land division is consistent with the use and lot size requirements of the Zoning Ordinance and Comprehensive Plan PAC 100 Case Number __Y. • • Fee Paid Data Filed 7,./4_47/ig PLANNING ADMINISTRATIVE FORM Street Location of Property ___2 /r" l Legal Description of Property: L oT Si pee/-f4 ' l Ex-00% /4- %-i' r of Are-6, y C°f/Rf 7 7E k// V /z'f i Owner Name Address may,"/ l �C S/ Applicant (if other than owner) Name Address Phone �`f9 - ) s Phone Type of Request. ___ Rezoning ___ Approval of Preliminary Plat - Special Use Permit __Owl Approval of Final Plat - Variance ___ Other Descripton of Request it-A7c‘ doer' �I wQiv 3 /; f PLUS A 5' A L-LOWANG1c Tv ce2-ass fY/S sP.20P6Q7Y�01S ✓ tiv/TH oNLY 774E Ho4I e-09.'74L. Signature of Applicant _____ ,ea02.-s FeN'E" f &5,45E se- 77:46 f-10 eo Ma o� Data of Public Hearing NOTE Sketch of proposed property and structure to be drawn on back- or at- • ,01.7 * -4. o4t dG ,edG tacnea, showing the following 1 North direction. 2 Location of proposed structure on lot. 3 Dimensions of wont and siae set -backs 4 Dimensions of proposed structure 5 Street names 6 Location or adjacent existing buildings 7 Other inzormation as may be requested. Approved ___ Denied ___ by the Planning Commission on (date) subject to the following conditions Approved ___ Denied ___ by the Council on sublet: to the following conditions Comments (Use other side), • yZ >r T G yot,o-NE 5 rT C yc LO I r — ._ . 60 r T - — _ _ _ -_-1 x mAtzvL5 etc/ la- A R. E A. o.r RE; ckl) ter' I N 0R.DE-�-., F t�G'I " OUg-S .LVEy rep M 1 N' -P,A) S I W E MUST Sxl-CN A d wi e v a FE44c. Tie. i-;ep_tZDNVT�i sL. ELRS 5" oUsht..Tit NG►G PRai.t.r2_ice% L. 4 .. W C A RR.0 5T ILL Nei- TVL)C 4-4 IN - Tt-i t✓I !Z F EN c E WXAQ,� APP,`/LNG- FO A 5 "ALLic, wAN c€ `V Gito5G ovE d 'r�- 1P�. P12oPGe.-ry LI NE W 1-4 t C4-1 Li-- 0 N v tJ ltv+ . 4412E P!-AN1 tI N G- ` aD MovN, AND INA4 N-I-A I I Pi2.0 PE-R,Ty ON 54-o u DN ' -r-N-► IS; -r N, A L L a'N U ?RN! I,�%C OF cLoSING- oV(L 1-EtJccC 7o PR.of3Lt✓MS VNJ G Iut 6- T° oTt-z r, I y t-Act ? • of T - 1 NEST i >/A R T o F 73-(& w eAG-H g o(z.'S P fZe1' TY l S . S Ne--tt? WITH EX ceen 0 N) Td 11-+ lg.. SASI tr Dc a � ►dam ' } K " DpS EXTRA. 7 fLOTZ C,r1 N ro US . Guest 1 tcis 3%Z . cyct o N� t=NCE rs•PP f�,ox ►�� �r0 FT rt-i s is ,4 t+ l64(-f2. LcV/LL a L t J rcLoN€, IENce 513CGI N SFr wPcuQ--cr 1R.oN SAsr -}-i -�- ` i I t i r t 5FT WILD U—hT +P—Pnl --r t � ► 1 I • • PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW CASE NO PR/DP/V/89-53 Planning Commission Meeting August 14, 1989 Project Location 112 North Main Street Comprenensive Plan District Central Business District Zoning District CBD Applicant's Name Gerald and Kathy Sanford Type of Application Variance and Parking Review PROJECT DESCRIPTION A Variance and Design Permit for the placement of an awning sign and parking review for a pool hall DISCUSSION The proposal is in two parts, the first request is for the placement of an awning sign above the south entrance of Cat Ballou's (the entrance to the pool hall on the second floor) The awning proposed will be approximately five feet in height and three feet nine inches in length The awning will extend two feet, six inches from the building The total signage already exceeds the Sign Ordinance requirements in the Central Business District The present "Cat Ballou's" sign is 62 5 square feet The Design Review Committee reviewed the awning request on August 2, 1989 Their recommendation is as follows - Approval of the awning as pictured without the additional advertising The second request is a parking review for the new pool hall on the second floor The new CBD District requirements allows these uses with review of parking in the area Due to- the age of the building in which Cat Ballou's occupies, parking cannot be located on site However, a City parking lot directly across has approximately seventy parking spaces There are three pool tables, assorted games and seating in the pool hall for 35 patrons CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1 The sandwich board and statue shall be removed from the sidewalk in front of Cat Ballou's 2 All requirements of the Building Official and Fire Chief shall be met RECOMMENDATIONS 1 Approval for awning sign without the words "Saloon and Eatery" 2 Approval for a pool hall on the second floor of Cat Ballou's ATTACHMENTS - Pictures of building - Awning diagram - Diagram of pool hall I --- I o . I • • • I ' r • i • • 5#0 a-6 ,fe a•ve).oil et/ o w4/ ?e it-7`-fir., ..- TOTAL P 02 X x )< x • I °Q4_ • • • PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW CASE NO DP/PR/89-61 Planning Commission Meeting August 14, 1989 Project Location 212 North Main Street Comprehensive Plan District Central Business District Zoning District CBD Applicants Name Sharon and LeVerne Stefan Type of Application Design Permit and Parking Review Project Description A Design Permit for the renovation and addition of a storefront and Parking Review for the "Wrap and Ship" building DISCUSSION The request is to renovate the storefront of the "Wrap and Ship" building and add an interior fire stair to the building The design is sensitive to this building which was constructed around the turn of the century The central detailing of the cornices will remain and echoed in the stairway addition The storefront is very sensitive to the rest of the building It could not be restored due to the fact that the original columns, transoms, and detailing were removed The Design Review Committee reviewed the project and unanimously recommend approval This is Phase I of the project Other phases will be submitted as they are ready for implementation The "Wrap and Ship" building will also be adding offices on the second floor There is parking in the rear and also on the side of the building for this use at this time RECOMMENDATION - Approval of the storefront and fire stair design - Approval of parking review FINDINGS The granting of these two requests is sensitive to the use of the land and provides adequate parking ATTACHMENTS - Application - Plans w/pictures PAC 100, • Case Number Fee Paid Data Filed 1 �1 '2 PLANNING ADMINISTRATIVE FORM Street Location of Property 212 MAIN S [ eT N\O Tt\ La & Doscnpt►on of Property; LOCo"31 - 2510 Owner Ncrna L-a 11et/int k. v v, Is Address _-1 L--P:141_Phone 439' S6° ' Applicant (if other than owner) Address Type of Request Name Phone Desc-ipt,onn_of Request _Chi& �7�11- des(gvi Atrotkat Rezoning Special Use Permit Variance ___ Approval of Preliminary Plat __ Approval of Final Plat _x Other _ O8 t terwtft Koviouacliovt oa siore,-Cvbvti awtr a i iova of lard Signature of Applicant. Wag Date of Public Hearing NO= Sketch of proposed property and structure to be drawn on back oz this form or at- tacaea, showing tl'e following 1 North direction. 2. Location of proposed structure on lot. 3 Dimensions of front and side set -backs. 4 Dimensions or proposed structure 5 Street names. 6 Location or adjacent existing b,41dings 7 Other information as may be requestea. Approved ___ Denied ___ by the Planning Commission on (date) subject to the following conditions Approved ___ Denied ___ by the Council on sublet: to the following conditions Comments. (Use other side), r I • • I • 212 NORTH MAIN STREET STILLWATER MINNESOTA 55082 ¢7Stij;1� {/.�� �•yT,� . ]��y►11`)',l1111 ^ 11 / „�C. 11 'Y � Crp? 1.l .h '' rx i� P:rls 1 a t�E"I Kt a6 -� _`l i STEAN ASSOCIATES 4952NEWTON AVM SO Mp MN 594O9 L 612 926 4168 FAX 812 4391061 0 0 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction and Existing Conditions 1 Master Plan 2 Phase I First Floor Plan 3 Phase I Second Floor Plan 4 Phase I Elevations 5 Future Developement 6 Enlarged Master Plan 7 Phase II First Floor Plan 8 Phase II Second Floor Plan 9 Phase II Elevations 10 Phase II Section 11- INTRODUCTION 212 North Main Street currently houses Wrap-N-Ship, a shipping business, and Little Red Riding Hood gift baskets This property and the adjacent property, 214 North Main Street, have been purchased by Mainstream Developement for renovation and future developement The renovation of 212 North Main Street will include upgrading the first floor interior for the existing tenants -and creating commercial office space for new tenants on the second floor The majority of the work will be interior with the exception of the work proposed to the front of the building and replacing the enclosed stair on the north side of the building Included in this submittal are drawings for planning approval of the renovation of 212 North Main Street and drawings of developement ideas of 214 North Main Street This proposal requests a change of use permit and a review of parking for the renovation of 212 North Main Street EXISTING CONDITIONS 212 North Main Street is a 2 story brick building The first floor is a retail space for Wrap-N-Ship and Little Red Riding Hood gift baskets The second floor has been vacant for at least 3 years but was at one time rented as an apartment Access to the second floor is by an enclosed stair on the north side of the building 214 North Main Street is currently a parking area for 212 No landscaping exists on either site • • • 1 • 0 r MASTER PLAN �•s'8 CET J� o �C JCREEK" [ 1) COALERCIAL STREET f J 1 r ( 'lr 0 FUTURE DEVELOPEMENT • rtrff 7 M) I t. • MULBERRY POINT ST CROIX RIVER 212 NORTH MAIN STREET SuuwAIER r..aESOIA Mel STEFAN ASSOCIATES 4952 NEWTON AVE SO MSkS MN 55'09 M wt0t OM' MASTER PLAN KY 2 1 6 SERVICE 6 4 EASEMENT PARKING 3 2 MC SPACE 1 I L rr r` i I FIRST FLOOR PLAN • SHOP UP - F l KITC1EN STORAGE LFIRH OFT BASKETS WRAPS-SMP O • M et 0 z 212 NORTH MAIN STREET tI��SILLWATER N«ESOIA 1SOS1 f SIEfAN ASSOCIAtES 4952?awayAAVE SO M S MN 55:09 PHASE 1 rIRST F PLAN �. +C 3 ►4 b • • • SECOND FlOOf PLAN ROOF STORAGE DN OFFICE bit' o " 212 NORTH MAIN`S�nEET _ S�IMAtvq 1 ti� soI^ _s»erg \ N STEFAN ASSOCIATES 4952 NEWTON AVE 5O AA S AIN 41429 1 OFFICE ON+— i RECEPTION 1 OFFICE b CI a •••• w PHASE I SECOND FLOOn rum '° NV 1 B PL l/ 1I WW1 111/ !1 I4 n/l 141 1 NV v Poluk— 1149M4TIJE sLOYee Net Airrt. rfanT —1 C L11_f U^ 8 �1 �J CI why .1 VI MAIN STREET ELEVATION oreA ST T" WtDN EAIS'TIOD IF6(Te— arlielL] —ex" TIF1f� 9Nrco 1 1 F' fieMI11Tte ) iJ IIb-Y 1-` 4L 110-1 T�V nsu 109d STAIR SECTION Co), laict •TH ELEVATION • • 5 • • • FUTURE DEVELOPEMENT 214 North Main Street is currently undeveloped and used for parking by 212 Mainstream Developement is researching the feasibility of developing 214 as retail and commercial office space Vital to the developement of 214 is the idea of incorporating McKusick Creek in a public courtyard, as a natural amenity, unique to and historically typical in Stillwater McKusick Creek runs open from 3rd Street to 2nd Street, it then passes under 2nd and reappears for about 50 feet before disappearing below grade into a storm sewer As shown on the Master Plan Enlargement, we are proposing that the city expose McKusick Creek and redirect an overflow storm sewer line to make McKusick Creek available to developements in this area The exposed creek would allow pedestrian walkways to be created which emphasize the natural environment and direct you to the Main Street area and the St Croix River The exposing of McKusick Creek by the City of Stillwater could be incorporated in the feasibility study presently being prepared for the infrastructure in the downtown area 6 SECTION AT CREEK MARGRET IWERS PARK r — — — rIkoPOseO • SECOND STREET 0 0 %1 ENLARGED MASTER PLAN MCKUSICK CREEK (-LANDSCAPED PARKING / / / ('XISTING STORM SEWER VEHICLE BRIDO COMMERCIAL STREET • WALKWAY TO PARKING EXISTING TREES 4 EXISTING EASEMENT 212 NORTH MAI 51LLWAtER mtertsorA r .4 sto. STEFAN ASSOCIATES 49S2 NE1 LA 1 " ENRGED MASTLI, W O J PROPOSED STORM SEWER MAIN STREET N STREET \ ri .<r '" 1 1. 1T j 1 AVE SO AIP S MN 55409 6.4 .e 7 • • McKUSICK CREEK POSSIBLE LOCATION OF MILL PARKING H.0 SPACE PHASE B FIRST FLOOR PLAN FOOTBRIDGE COURT • EASEMENT 211 NORTH MAIN STREET n PASSAGE 212 NORTH MAIN STREET 212 NORTH MAIN STREET SIILLWAT[R SwalESOIA S5081 gis SIN ASSOCIATES 4952 NEWTON AVE SO A/viS MN 55409 MtiOr� PHASE 0 FIRST FLOOR PLAN 8 N �O f PHASE E SECOND FLOOR PLAN • (1 OFFICE OFFICE \1� • 212 NORTH MAIN STREET BILLM'�i v.Eso,a floe! STEFAN ASSOCIATES 4952NEWTON 50 Al S MN 5 409 11 PHASE tl SECOND F PLAN M �O — — .O 9 Eyo O Tor Q 0\1 ,0 0 *JT0r it.us 22 PHASE U MAIN STREET ELEVATION CFf1Lt 6FGF TV PATH 2I2 -� LiF1ElEl LJ PASSAGE 0 214 COSH PARKING 11 PHASE II NOfTTII ELEVATION ]0 Tor 4) r r OFFICE !DO I T ►tn7P 019 qA SMATT RETAIL PASSAGE C-J PHASE I1 SECTION • • 1 EASEMENT 0 JIHf1 ZQf 1' £ CYa - (dolt h ll / P+aa111MT 2 1 2 NORTH MAIN STGFET 51llwATTA waif5O11A 550l1 SrEFAN ASSOCUIES 4932 NOVIVE 00 MAYS IIV 55'0t PHASE II `rc 11 • • PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW CASE NO SUP/89-55 Planning Commission Meeting August 14, 1989 Project Location 313 West Churchill Street Comprehensive Plan District RB Applicant's Name Richard LaCasse Type of Application Special Use Permit Zoning District Two Family PROJECT DESCRIPTION A Special Use Permit request to conduct an over -the -phone sales and service company for pool supplies DISCUSSION The request is to conduct over -the -phone sales and service for pool supplies This business, according to the applicant, will be strictly over -the -phone Service request and supply orders will be placed by phone at 313 W Churchill Street The LaCasse's will then go to the distributor, pick up supplies, then deliver to the service call They have stated that, on occasion, deliveries will be made to their address Concerns about the chemicals being stored in the garage has been noted The Fire Department was notified and an inspection made of the type and storage of these chemicals A record of these products will be kept on file at the Fire Department CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1 No pool chemicals shall be stored in the home All storage and type of chemicals shall be inspected and a file kept by the Fire Department 2 Deliveries shall be no more than two per week 3 No business sign shall be placed on the premises RECOMMENDATION Approval with conditions FINDINGS The proposed use will not be injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare and will be in harmony with the general purpose of this ordinance ATTACHMENTS - Letter from Richard LaCasse - Statement of Fire inspection • July 24. 1989 Total Pool Company Richard W LaCasse 313 W Churchill St. Stillwater. MN 55082 612-439-5632 I, Richard W LaCasser am the owner of Total Fool Compan/ which is located at the above address The nature of my business is strictly service wort on swimming pools and free chemical & accessory delivery. All contact with customers is done over the telephone When a customer needs something for their swimmming pool, they call us at the above address to place their order or to schedule a service call The morning which the delivery is set up, we drive to our distributor to pick up the items and then we deliver the items to the customers that same day We do not have customers coming to our home to buy the items which does not cause any additional noise or traffic On occasion, we will get a delivery from a distributor\which is sent via U P S or Speedy Delivery The items which are delivered conbist of one or two small packages On an average, it happens once a weet The only other person who is involved in my business is my daughter Sherri LaCasse Sherri lives in this house so there are no additional cars parked in front of our home By operating my business out of my home will not effect the neighborhood because there is no additional noise or traffic, which I understand is a major concern If there are any other,questions, please call me anytime at the above telephone number Thant you. '7E7 6‘.5. •Richard W LaCasse Owner • • PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW CASE NO V/89-56 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING August 14, 1989 PROJECT LOCATION 1914 North First Street COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DISTRICT Single Family ZONING DISTRICT RA APPLICANT'S NAME Mitch Hurlburt TYPE OF APPLICATION Variance PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1 A variance to the lot size requirements (7,500 square ft proposed, 10,000 square ft required) for the construction of a new single family structure 2 City Council approval for on -site septic system and private well DISCUSSION The request is to construct a single family structure on a 7,500 square ft lot which does not meet the 10,000 square ft requirement for the RA District This proposed structure does meet all the setback requirements The property presently has a vacant house which will be removed The proposed project will greatly improve this neighborhood which has been in need of rehabilitation for a number of years The home will be approximately 24 ft by 38 ft A two car garage with living space will be at grade with the living quarters and a deck on the second level A septic system and private well will be installed for the property The Building Official has reviewed the soil reports and inspected the site He supports the on -site sewage system and private well CONDITION OF APPROVAL 1 The structure shall be a single family structure RECOMMENDATION 1 Approval for the variance to the lot size requirements 2 Approval for the on -site septic system and private well • Z. i.,.x. e/ _5 J/', i 3'7€c'..4-rc.c1 l ^ r /$ /Qiy /s r rrr,z if/ reN /4r,P(/s'a • 3 • • h s ae' 6 f4 Sekigi*bk • 36' r ---- /s- , framed Ant 81' • T 4 id i A%'3t St i(/ 5c,i /e_ lii o?el: :Z > • ZeFIQf a ,e/i6/T fy Camh' i- schulenbufp 1'AC 100 Case Number 1.7,k3"•C`: • • lid Fee Paid Data Filed PLANNING ADMINISTRATIVE FORM Street Location of Property rf / Legal Description of Property; of GoT' Z 44u ya 1os e Pff A6 e„, Owner Na D axv, 44 6,f r-,� «9 LA 4 e- d '1' -4 (/ /1% '( ' ?".- f — dT' lj%a3` Addr -1 6 7 4diee Ez wo cwv . ,,G ,44vPhong, »P ass-9 C em L ! f SG/i /,/L �d/6cl�P10 S r/o.V sTicc Gv.Tf,� Applicant (►f other than owner) Name ./Y/IZ.4' ilde G Z3a4T Ac-e4 4-toci,, ,e 4) � ) Address MO _/414f/Tv ew44,= Phone 'z' Type of Request ___ Rezoning ___ Approval of Preliminary Plat ___ Special Use Permit ___ Approval of Final Plat .,i�. Variance ___ Other Description of Request _211E _4e..4 �1r142'Z '"f1 4(,/4e)'3L'vCl`J l///t,fe- !? 31ri'+l L�� / S L lJ 2 2' -D /G:j GOO $ 75-0 0 s c7 AT _sa Al-t/•44 /A,vvr ,s ,,4Signature of Applicant 's do/-,-L-S' Date of Public Hearing i �•.,���� NOTE U S.cetc% of proposed property and structure to be drawn on back of orrn or at- tacned, showing the following ,„V a 1 North direction. 2. Location of proposed structure on lot. 3 Dimensions oz zront and s.de set -backs 4 Dimensions of proposed structure 5 Street names 6 Location or adjacent existing buildings 7 Other information as may be requested. Approved ___ Denied _ by tho Planning Commission on (date) sub1ect to the following conditions Approved ___ Denied ___ by the Council on subject to the following conditions Comments (Use other side), • July 27,1989 City of Stillwater Attn City Clerk 216 North Fourth Street Stillwater, MN 55082 Dear City Clerk, I understand that I need a variance to build a new house on the property at 1914 North 1st Street New home requirements are 10,000 square feet and this lot is 7500 square feet I wasn't aware of the need for the variance until I applied for a permit for the septic system This request for variance also includes the vanance for the septic system I would be removing the existing house Due to the concltion of the existing house I feel that this would be a great improvement to the neighborhood Attached are petrtons from neighbors that have aclacent property to the lot in question The new house does fit all the set back requrements The house was designed for the lot so that it works well on the property Please propose to August 4th Planning Commission meeting, and the City Council meeting on August 15th I would appreciate your immediate attention to this matter as I am already behind schedule because of this problem Sincerely, %? .4l AL Mitch Hurlburt 8707 Delwood Road North Mahtomedi, MN 55115 426-5352 • • July 20 1989 Mitch Hurlburt 8707 Dellwood Road North Mahtomedi MN 55115 426-5352 Dear Resident I am in the process of purchasing 1914 1st Street North Before I purchase I need to know that I can build a new house on this lot I plan to tear down the existing house and rebuild a new one I need to obtain a variance and your signed approval would help speed up the process I believe this would be a great improvement over what now exists on the property If you would please sign this form stating that you do approve and return it to me as soon as possible it will be helpful to me Sincerely Mitch Hurlburt i 11,4%.' I approve of Mr Hurlburts plan for the property at 1914 1st Street North &?‘ _ Y/,/g;at, L /7( 7, 24d' 5)/ Address 7- 2- Date • • July 20 1989 Mitch Hurlburt 8707 Deliwood Road North Mahtomedi MN 55115 426-5352 Dear Resident I am in the process of purchasing 1914 1st Street North Before I purchase I need to know that I can build a new house on this lot I plan to tear down the existing house and rebuild a new one I need to obtain a variance and your signed approval would help speed up the process I believe this would be a great improvement over what now exists on the property • If you would please sign this form stating that you do approve and return it to me as soon as possible it will be helpful to me Sincerely 7177,Aid Mitch Hurlburt I approve of Mr HurIburrs plan for the property at 1914 1st Street North i1/\ 61/+� Name/1 l , L1 Ad& Date • • July 20 1989 Mitch Hurlburt 8707 Del!wood Road North Mahtomedi MN 55115 426-5352 Dear Resident I am in the process of purchasing 1914 1st Street North Before I purchase I need to know that I can build a new house on this lot I plan to tear down the existing house and rebuild a new one I need to obtain a variance and your signed approval would help speed up the process I believe this would be a great improvement over what now exists on the property If you would please sign this form stating that you do approve and return it to me as soon as possible it will be helpful to me Sincerely 7,1/1 edti Mitch Hurlburt I approve of Mr Hurlburts plan for the property at 1914 1st Street North (11:-.L.sg-k:o. C-,-7. '''---\--..-......$).-----1 ck Name \ c\ 0, Li- \(ULD ' -,; L`IA__SrL-D .;- i Adcess Date • ...:7 1 • • • July 20 1989 Mitch Hurlburt 8707 Dellwood Road North Mahtomedi MN 55115 426-5352 Dear Resident I am in the process of purchasing 1914 1st Street North Before I purchase I need to know that I can build a new house on this lot I plan to tear down the existing house and rebuild a new one I need to obtain a variance and your signed approval would help speed up the process I believe this would be a great improvement over what now exists on the property If you would please sign this form stating that you do approve and return it to me as soon as possible it will be helpful to me Sincerely � �g`.� " (, /�� Mitch Hurlburt I approve of Mr Hurlburts plan for the property at 1914 1st Street North �nn Name ISOL Address Date (i o/,t //)/'b' • aingeov nv 79 —ti . // v 9.2 4? 42 cy g 2°' .../0 dc7-. 07° ,// w e2s h rvoil YA d 73 ci Q • • • XL$lt rj • ,c. I 1.,t io. D We lit- r / 6r v C - ' �ra't- mil, /yG ✓ / /5/ Ly-5F . e7—re : ausf 09 _7 . a5-1 //or • / • • tltwater THE BIRTHPLACE OF MINNESOTA MEMO TO STEVE RUSSELL, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR FROM VERNON RYLANDER DATE JULY 17, 1989 SUBJECT VERIFICATION OF REPORT ACCURACY I have examined the soil report and site plan submitted for Lot 2, Block 48 of Carli and Schulenberg's Addition I also visited the site to check the topography and the proposed sewage system layout The documents are accurate and the lot is adequate to support an on -site sewage system and private well Vernon Rylander U`'— Building Inspector CITY HALL 216 NORTH FOURTH STILLWATER MINNESOTA 55082 PHONE 612 439 6121 • • • Soils Evaluation Company 13481 60th Street North Stillwater, MN 55082 July 11, 1989 Mr Mitch Hurlburt, I have examined the soil on your lot described as Lot 2, Block 48, Carli & Schulenburg's Addition , The borings were done to a depth of six feet The soil on both holes consisted of a silty fine sand and a medium to course sand There was no presence of bedrock or seasonally saturated soil Before a system could be sized, a perculation rate will need to be established However, from the soil texture it is evident that the perculation rate will be quite rapid, therefore, using up very little yard area Soils of this type require very little trench bottom area It is necessary to concentrate the wastewater flow in a smaller area to form the biomat layer and effectively treat the wastewater As mentioned above, a perculation rate will need to be established to correctly size the system Because of the sandy conditions, there should be enough open yard space on the property to accomodate a septic system Enclosed you will find a rough site sketch and boring logs If you have any questions please feel free to contact me at 439-7800 Sincerel Gary 'A Vi nor, Jr MPCA Certification #560 Logs of Soil Borings Location or Project Lot 2 Block 48 Carli & Schulenbur''s Addition ilk Borings made• by T 6: 114 y i ,11 'V V ie/7O,1 416ZD Date 71/ Classification System: AASHO ...____• USDA-SCS !, Unified other Auger used (check two): Hand , or Power Flight , or Bucket other B-31 Depths in feat 0 6 8 Boring number Surface elevation A-A 7;/.0 5 i '/ Ned/UM 64nc/ /" 1 6 t an -to 4oa r►3 e .1ral /1 / / // /1 End of boring at Co feet Standing water table. Present at feet of depth, hours after boring Not present in boring hole _ Z. Depth, in feet 0 — Boring number a Surface elevation F� f fiedam /I f eci u sq la G'OR/?*L° 5a/fe1 /I End of boring at feet Standing water table Present at feet of depth, hours after boring Not present in boring hole Mottled soil Mottled soil Observed at feet of depth,,,, Observed at feet of depth Not present in boring hole ! Not present in boring hole L/ 410( Observationa and comments. Observations and comments 1 • et-'e. 0 Dee. k 1 0 / /» ✓' /i /5/ sr. 4-,7'.s't ,.J t // ; U Si vOU'O. 0.9 //d r. / X,2 410/02 68/ e' 4 Sap /ey3-ag/e.,/bu1.9 GIaiC/r floe, 1 o ,5.1, 41-'4 , ' Z e 6 1 -( c 45-07,-/( /0 , r# , , - 62‘/Y-cci/ fle /?i'4 r_ _ 5 42-- s'e et; C; r ! ivs 4, , /st: 6,0 fit, 0 waer liffaz' / X,p -z., 90 .-,46-' 1 , 1.,1,5.1-0,1 i14 '1 '')' / 17 \ . 1, . t ria/Arry s,nquainy-5 i ,i/�117 efgh _17/9o/y , e, 71071 4 --\- '6 s opS L I.P6-717-77- ---?/ bi 2c 45 •/ fd - - , A. ,P/ t Se • ,hP T ,rookir le 9 ,9£ P , o/ cl 1• qi • • z e e .e 9 1,4'.(1‘ e z e /J91/ 7'D _s 7--/‘ c z 2- is r--X 4 /7/ re/ /5e, ( - S' 4 eZ'O C �� OPTDN—Z ]I OG I , 9 //z f'i TcI� X S/l 2 SG'ISSO�Q TR!/SS _ • 266 B/ • t LLK .dkEvA i na ,te M ...kin tea. wdI 4141.4g4 iltd,I,,,,M yfjA IA/Llw-i1 / 44"41 .4.Ll. C 38' s' 10 S, l9 '6 " sETu1FFN RILA/-s- pe.D Ro0M 13FDROoM o[ 1a Kirct+EN 30v ementEr HAI I 6= • L.IN NFt4 ('.IASET MN, t- `- g OF131911111 .S£E GO/LICE, BERM tEr4/L No. 1 UVIW& Roof( 38. 18, 3/0 Cf 1 S 4/R oPnoN _t, I r I oA/E p/RgiArioiv I I I I p/goTN. I I I I I I I=1== ?: a4?AO UNDER 3,8yv �iP�A-TED p(zu/a4D i o1CN0,4770/V -r /D' /Z .2)e 6 ( PEA; JOC4L CODE foR Pi?ofT FTG> I I +- OGSTrfoinag._1_--1 L —1 ,4s P.Ere /o'qL soil 8' .STi411Z VP 44NO/NG 000R A5 PER F/RE CQPA ! 8 GARAGE siEEr WAus - GVzJtiG R'qv'Rk.9 Pze Fief eo�E 3 L ; " / r H .17-1t10/A/6 1 Jitt_PrisTsi. —3Er4M A5 iT.eQ �-oLS-rs ,45 PEA i 7 4L F $7" Yr P2 77M6 �s /s PROPER FoA; Woo42 �o/NDkizovil • sr L f rT7 tt i`1471 + r r e�t+ tp1 K s .t'1'1 �r 7rt i��} „ fjy� 14r. ju r 1 w_ h r 4� t ti r> 1 r �. (4i.f.c,:-:'s { 5t�3,t[yslSf d}-,;. t?,r`,1...Y i 4' ri i, M- 4d�;s3St r%'^-- L' } .C'jd a � ''ac .,',r rr/t�fr y ,_s.7Irji-vrYr y r l .. i t Y I,' r`Yt{r, r:91 i-'�� ' �k'fY rr'�lrly IA r l t F 11 ti �"{� Y r�M! y+Y� If-, sr i i{) f rat r i l �fa+k � }j f �Jt ✓ r I�f �jt �t jr(r �t r i r 1 r r y i ! 1 f' �J{7 ,r/ itp�t ,.+3.�d, ! r �i r/ �S �-r r2. r c) s i S ! 11 l �' {-Silf�if t +`�f,�,r l{r!(f t rid ptC� t t�4 rt r I1 "I 1 { F i ri j.S r 3 . ' 'E'' f T1t 4X'4•6, ,tyl ,, ..i 4>4 i ri 4t r rri ! t i Lr t' till'''i Ilt ��� )11 il��A r, 1 1 Y i r i rti i� t.'1. t t }' r x 1- F q`__1 �. i r f P t r t r ''''71y11tti tJ ri Jt' TM'i s .�1.� - F Ir 4 r t y`lY J t n6, r L+�f '^"'^7�`"_ .e,i<er tyr,.- r , r YY'ti L 1 ,, �� 4:„ �f t t i' (•, ^r , .,, = } , _. , {~_" z -f} L — F r Y;3 r i.r t 1� f ! �' r )/P r J. 0 _Q f t 71 LT ", y i _< . - 1 r ` ,if 1 ,, �w t7 r r,17 „! dtfi 4 i £. 1 L 1. .1 .- s i r n! 4 3} )i i1 /7l.f). rjl 66 ? ;i J r • i t { 4. 1 f — 4 r\i" — 66- ,t A/ 1—AY u 7_' .VOUIL/ ✓� ,D //1/Ti�2444-1-4- /LG /ter/Arro. S46/ Ghlf/AVEr'- S4 i / / 44E5 ye //Av.. ' CeO ' re ,F,A G',Q i../A' At!// ma d.CS Si64' 7 ,&t /ivfr,j sEra �,eo�.E,ery�irt✓,E- P 1 � -f @ i\` rr prirgi r3 I ��( �� (�F QUALITY FABRICATORS. INO. 969 LaBore Industrial Ct. St. Paul, Minnesota 55110 (612) 4835473 630 Fr- SroRe 1 • • • PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW CASE NO V/89-57 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING August 14, 1989 PROJECT LOCATION 1112 West Linden Street COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DISTRICT RA APPLICANT'S NAME Ronald Zaniewski TYPE OF APPLICATION Variance ZONING DISTRICT Single Family PROJECT DESCRIPTION A variance to the sideyard setback requirement (three feet proposed, five feet required) for a twenty four by ten foot garage addition DISCUSSION The request is to construct a garage addition to an existing single car attached garage The present garage is located on the west side of the home, as viewed in the attached pictures This garage was constructed when the home was built The location of the garage addition presently is used for an extra parking space The garage addition will be built in this location Two trees will have to be removed in order to build the garage However, the existing Evergreen in the frontyard will remain and no changes to the existing driveway will be made CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1 The slope of the roof shall match the existing garage and home so as to allow for run-off to the front and rear 2 The existing Evergreen shall remain RECOMMENDATION Approval FINDINGS The granting of this variance is necessary for reasonable use of the land and garage and that the same is the minimum variance that will accomplish such purpose ATTACHMENTS - Site Plan - Letter from the Zaniewski's - Letter from neighbor - Pictures • 04 OA?" 0 16O(1 1»el, W. c.� No6rd 5, r,G(,f 7 0 -Poobc,E a)NA GE • • fia) (« 2,49« 4/ i I ' )_ ) C ,.,) - s , ,4, c., &- r % t1‘.- niJ ry,-► 1 ENSK,( /1/1. N Lan,den, .'z 5=z/3- 55'r A i {fir. T3c = G.4 kAGAt 11 ,:' r J,,, i r' rii4i.l t LCJit, (.v v.. •:-; tc }eas,.1' F 1'AC 100 Case Number • • Fee Paid Data Filed k 3/ri- PLANNING ADMINISTRATIVE FORM Street Location of Property Legal Description of Property: Lois 7'�� �xc Vc o4 S P Leas__ Scab, 1 Ado - Owner Name Li . Len o Y, a_ ct /\ Za Y , e .s /L , Address __1 L1 < < Y1 ►'L Phone 475 9 - 3744- Z Applicant (if other than owner) Name Address Phone Type of Request Rezoning Special Use Permit Variance Approval Approval Other Description of Request __ ck_r-o rey c� ( r Y] c gCtl,r!& 4�. J/,f s Date of Public Hearing NOTE Signature of Applicant of Preliminary Plat of Final Plat /C, ceeied,.f c ,� Sketcui of proposed property and structure to be drawn on bi tacnec, showing the following 1 North direction. 2 Location of proposed structure on lot. 3 Dimensions of front and side set -backs 4 Dimensions of proposed structure 5 Street names 6 Location of adjacent existing buildings 7 Other uuormation as may be requestea. Approved ___ Denied ___ by the Planning Commission on subject to the following conditions Yin f e9P r at- n r� 4t:11,-›*' coz 4 ~ (date) Approved ___ Denied ___ by the Council on subject to the following conditions Comments (Use other side), • fe—tJ • ,&Q f; C L1- 3 / 9 8',9 r.)t__etr 6b_pc) A-4--/---LA e.P .C_ i cc u )l(i kY, 3' /0' 1aratct e. 141 iy l Pro pert y I- 11% Ro n a) d A Zay, PlAAS / // .Z. ln! e 5{ L 1 Yri ete y Si 83'x /5-D' Lot s 'i, 8, i £ xc E ac SD 23' ,4 j 6,0 a0 • \A) e s- L� ,�. e e • • • • August 3, 1989 TO Stillwater City Council FROM Brandon Crawford Mr Ron Zaniewski who is my next door neighbor wishes to construct a garage addition to his existing garage which will extend onto my property by several feet I have no objections to his going ahead with this project and, in fact, teel that, the addition wi11 not only enhance the appearance of his home but will be an added attraction to both our properties My home is to the west of Mr Zaniewski's home at 1118 W Linden St and my property will not be affected adversely by his construction proposal 10.014.4464..4.ftk Brandon Crawford • • • PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW CASE NO V/89-58 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING August 14, 1989 PROJECT LOCATION 14450 North 60th Street APPLICANT'S NAME Richard Fox, representing Crown Auto COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DISTRICT IP-C ZONING DISTRICT Industrial Park Commercial TYPE OF APPLICATION Variance PROJECT DESCRIPTION Variance to the Sign Ordinance for the placement of an 80 square ft free-standing sing approximately twenty feet in height at the Crown Auto Store DISCUSSION The request is to replace an existing twenty ft free-standing sing with a new eighty square foot sign in the same location The signage at this location exceeds the Sign Ordinance requirements Not only does Crown Auto have a free-standing sign, but they have a 300 square foot building wall sign However, these signs were placed before the City had a Sign Ordinance The new free-standing sign would not adversely affect the area The total sign area is decreased with a simpler design The sign will be brown with yellow lettering It will be internally illuminated RECOMMENDATION Approval FINDINGS The present sign is a non -conforming sign, by decreasing the square footage of the sign area with a new sign, it is improving the visual image of the signage in the area and generally following the purpose of the Sign Ordinance ATTACHMENTS 1 Application 2 Letter from Richard Fox 3 Sign plan/picture of present sign , 1'AC 100 • • • Case Number V iff_ 5 a Qv Fee Paid __ Date Filed _ _� Z PLANNING ADMINISTRATIVE FORM Street Location of Property _&e.f.e__AQTy _A Legal Description of Property: Owner Name Ceii.,iV Aura Address /yWC° 6aA4 $r/V Phone _VIE-efiTg.-- Applicant (i► other then owner) Name PLC_, Q a1.&° cgazico .v_6/44/m/c Address .4 1l!«✓_> f..G✓k ✓5VJV Phone Z 77YZ Type of Request ___ Rezoning ___ Approval of Preliminary Plat _ Special Use Permit ___ Approval of Final Plat ___ Variance ___ Other Descr ipt.on of Request __�.Ak-y-f- -r/S774/F'j60( /z 9214-1V ` e lygle1 t pz Lr 02/rry4.1YA-1' *' 2d'PY4a v sa.il0O429 l irearAf1il_a-X 22Zw G AC Signature of Applicant. Date of Public Hearing NOTE Sketch of proposed property and structure to be drawn on back of this fo tacnea, showing the following I Nor"- a r _ct.on. 2. Locat.ion of pr000sed structure on lot. 3 Dimensions of front and side set -backs 4 Dimensions or proposed structure 5 Street nares 6 Location or ad)acent existing buildings 7 Other iniormatlon as riay be requested Approved ___ Denied ___ by the Planning Commission on subject to the following conditions rm or at- - 1 Gj ^l y (date) W r o :is iN `? mr in 4 Approved ___ Denied ___ by the Council on subject to the following conditions Comments (Use other side), AG CENTRAL AVE N E S , MN 55434 • cueorrow N PLANNING COMMISSION/CITY C')UNCIL CITY ')F STI_LLWATER Cit-7 HZl 1 11E, North T' hur-`_h Stream,_ Stil1,Tatr-r I N 55nC2 Dear; Si r^ Cr'Z A t, Wnrl-s t a e15') 60t1-1 Stroe1 se' r Ln- r_s a1cl rena ,c2or' r cr a--,IZ i p 1n11 s30;n z,1 I a 1 -5 e �E l r _ 31 J r 111 - Phone (612) 784-7742 y I North rlclg all'=ono'-'x1es Du- re -,,Jes rpr 1 acc 2^,f I r 1ori re aln smaller l+en al ,'r a L ^ E Do La je -I g "la, le nn LIC prr pert, I al t i .-11r' 'arI,P 1nra Lt'n as : hp exi s , n,j r'l-,a ern raf F r c na I ter or earl. 1 1G z -3ac' ;e no, C gn Tj 110 7 7 1 1 e 4 Cr �F- thr, r AS] ness o [ a corporate Cries e rl.t1 nc ^Ices r_he c'lv1 1r C_ T11 Au La r'lai I` )t.11 a plz. o l sign artcr a u11cl ng crrl are - a 1 or'alf... , 7 T1ir ' ason TP reraesi L j1E' e r ^i (l l n l 1rii f, I 1, r 1 tt' r ('c 1f1r)a.i+ 7 ] O' C) -J la s'C9 a 21] 7t_1ir Crow-1 Auto ]ocatlrrls si ri l C1^S1r111 -J Si Deer] , R ch.rc F 9x Cress^i n'rp rt Sirs T11c Y • 1- , 4,s ,1' 9 S/6, ' LOGA'F/oA' 1 Xrsiirva- i vo s/6NLecsriaA/ DRY( .7 4: N 60 r`/ SMEG'T NdRIN PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW CASE NO SUP/89-59 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING August 14, 1989 PROJECT LOCATION 402 North Main Street COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DISTRICT Central Business District ZONING DISTRICT CBD APPLICANT'S NAME Terri Brine TYPE OF APPLICATION Special Use Permit PROJECT DESCRIPTION Special Use Permit for a concession stand in the Issac Staples Sawmill building DISCUSSION A request is to open a concession stand in the Issac Staples Sawmill Building This concession stand will be located inside the mill with a window for outdoor service facing Main Street A small platform has been constructed for service of the stand The concession stand will service beverages and snack items to patrons of the North Main Street Area There will be no tables set up at this location but a trash receptacle will be placed on site The stand will not draw extra vehicular traffic because it is designed to cater to the pedestrian The new Central Business District regulations require Special Use Permits for eating establishments CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1 No tables be set up without approval from the Planning Commission and City Council 2 Any increase in use will require another Special Use Permit 3 Any sign shall require a sign permit RECOMMENDATION Approval FINDINGS The proposed use will be in harmony with the general purpose of this Ordinance ATTACHMENTS - Planning Administrative Form • 1'AC.300 • • • Case Number Fee Paid _50-a° 8/7/89 Date Filed PLANNING ADMINISTRATIVE FORM Street Location of Property LogaI Description of Property: Isaac Staples Sawmill BldIg . 402 N Main ABS Company, (Monty Owner. Name 402 N Main, Box 13 Address Applicant (if other than owner). Name Address Type of Request Brine, Rick Schneider) Phone 439-8079 Terri Brine_, 10245 Perkins Ave N IMID MO IMP Description of Request Rezoning Special Use Permit Variance Phone 439-807.9 ___ Approval of Preliminary Plat ___ Approval of Final Plat ___ Other Operate a 12'x7' in the building Date of Public Hearing conce sgf1, 1I. Signature of Applicant JAJ NOTE. SAetc' of proposed property and structure to be drawn on back oz this fox �r5 at- P �/ tacnea, showing the following 1 /�- A UG 1989 � \ CITY OFS.TILLWATER J 1 i �. STILLW TER ` 7 1 North direction. 2. Locations ot prdbosed structure on lot. 3 Dimensions ot front and side set -backs 4 Dimensions ot proposed structure 5 Street pares 6 Location or adjacent existing builaings 7 Other inrormaton as may be requestea. ' Ml1blty e9� Approved ___ Denied ___ by the Planning Commission on (date) subject to the following conditions Approved ___ Denied ___ by the Council on sublet: to the following conditions Comments (Use other side). 14 h^A'A W E • - i► • • • • • • THE BIRTHPLACE OF MINNESOTA TO PLANNING COMMISSION FROM STEVE RUSSELL, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR DATE AUGUST 9, 1989 SUBJECT RECONSIDERATION OF REZONING FROM RB TO RA FOR LOTS 6 AND 7, DALLAGER'S ESTATES, LOCATED JUST SOUTH OF 1025 WEST SYCAMORE STREET The City Council reviewed the recommendation from the Planning Commission to rezone lots 6 and 7 of Dallager Estates on August 1, 1989 At the hearing the residents who submitted the request were present, also the title holders of the proposed rezoned property For the Planning Commission meeting they were not notified of the hearings because they were not listed as the owners on the Register of Deeds and were not at the Planning Commission meeting of July 10, 1989 The City Council felt that the Planning Commission should hear all sides, for or against the rezoning, before a reasonable decision could be made The Council has requested that the Planning Commission take into consideration the property owners comments on the rezoning DISCUSSION The City Council has requested reconsideration of the rezoning of two parcels, lots 6 and 7 of Dallager Estates, shown on the map, which are currently zoned RB Duplex, eight dwelling units per acre The adjacent property owner would like them considered for single family A notice for the hearing has been sent out to subject property and area property owners The lots are currently vacant and contain 31,418 square feet and 28,789 square feet each Land to the east of the two RB lots is zoned RB Lands to the west are zoned RA Single Family The Commission should consider the request, hear public comments and make recommendation on the rezoning to the City Council Either the RB or RA is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan The City Attorney's memo states some of the considerations and requirements for rezoning ATTACHMENTS Letter from Joanne Kubala and DeWayne Nelson Map of area Memo from City Attorney PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Approval CITY COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION Reconsideration by the Planning Commission CITY HALL 216 NORTH FOURTH STILLWATER MINNESOTA 55082 PHONE 612 439 6121 • • • MEMORANDUM TO !eve Russell, Community Development Director !eve Planning Commission FROM David T Magnuson, Stillwater City Attorney DATE• August 8, 1989 RE: Rezoning of Lots 4 and 5, Gallager's Estates In view of the confusion surrounding this rezoning request, I think it is important that the City be aware of the current Minnesota law with regard to rezoning First of all, Minnesota Statutes provide that a zoning ordinance can only be adopted or amended by two-thirds vote of all of the members of the governing body In our City, this translates to a four -fifths vote Next, amendments may only be initiated by the City Council, the Planning Commission or by petition of affected property owners. Many cases have gone to the Minnesota Supreme Court that involve rezoning Most often, it is a property owner who asks for the rezoning. However, a number of things have been quoted time after time by the Minnesota Supreme Court and they are as follows 1. There are two presumptions that must be overcome The first presumption is that the area is well planned, and the second presumption is that the current classification is more or less permanent. 2. The Courts have said it is necessary to show a. Some mistake in the original zoning, b That the character of the neighborhood has changed dramatically, and c. That the present zoning leaves the property with no reasonable use 3. Finally, they have said that the mere proximity of existing and proposed uses does not of itself require a rezoning, absent probative evidence that the present zoning leaves no reasonable use The Planning Commission should consider this rezoning case in light of these rules. DTM kn Cq kE 41, • 0 .4:0 9oce. ST ILL wATE R ... -....\, „v. q)A \\C\ .4,,. 4 „ • • 0 \ vo a� 9. Pi 4 • AMUNOSCN PL SrCK R 0 ►d • %+uNOSO1 CT '9 • If • ,T OALLAGER WAY A4.TUN050N 41 IN _ . , La WIV T . , a4`GA 1/ 2 �`, /T 6, I I \ •r•:A S • ri '� �- I �V _\ ` 6 Ir-_„ i". \� i -7- TAT t• I. 4 I, lJ 3cr S41 a la i „ 1 ' i 't 1 GOLF /6 -.. 1 -9 z 1•1 • ‘1,' la • L. r-- .1• 4et 1 1 II I .;{I 1t1 I ,I! 1 II? 11,' 11 uoC E r+uEL Sr HI I il11t,I II I!I ,II I i lam. 3 • . -. 1 I I I I $t CRCO( 1 I •-•T ,t,t' •. 4. 1 • WILKINS 1I` • I14+1- i I. , •UREL r1" r'-r HICXCRY' '1Iritii / 7,- I' 1 1 � � I � 1 COURSE ST I1� Illlllt! III `1� I t-� . I , I / I 1 III. ST 1 II'I 11I1 4 1 r ' I l I 1 1 1sr I 1 �, 11 .i I I 1 '1 f: l Ili ci i '1-1 L_ GLEN�� e/ L J -----�� -T -- i 4 \ 7 9's • x r 9,5 1 r-) r r-\ FA -it I x—, HINe LI E OF TH NE I/4 X / • AZNIMMNAll SOCIATES ATa DALLAGER ESTATES � % 1 L_ 4 .OJTN LING OF TNE NE V4 SE V4 SEC 20-. • 5E0e UNE OF me SE V4 SEC. 20��!�,.,ip�jfT���'� �uNL�1 \L sl 1 • 01-S: • r1 18948 ST% 42 83 8 o8 2. a- 12 555 S4Ft 0300 DALLAGER -143 00 - 88.48 37.E V 31 op. 0 2 2 1 2�( • N86°465YE MOO 80 03 S COURT 2902 I \ 1/1 ( V I1 ‘Jr ` r) N � IrL I `� �t I\ l AI V N 89447 48 I /60'' ao--' �) L-./ L - 82 00 a 3 14 279 Sc.F T^LI i i `I• 2 nL^i 1 1 S89°50031E - 279 86- 18 828 Sq.Ft 8 • 17 885 S%Ft --62SD0 - N6V4129 V r.. c'(1\A/ 8 31 418 Sg 33 v952a 16TON fl7RITT - -- - STONE MONUMENT AT 11E EV4 CM =20, T3ON R2OO 7 28 789 Sg Ft • • • June 21, 1989 Planning Commission City of Stillwater ATTN Steve Russell 216 N 4th Street Stillwater, I4IN 55082 Dear Sirs We are new owners of the property located at 1025 West Sycamore St , Lot 5, Dallagher Estates, in Stillwater On either side of our property are vacant lots, #4, 6 and 7 of Dallagher Estates These lots are currently tied up in foreclosure proceedings and have also been served final notice of delinquent taxes It is our understanding that the lots will be sold by the person who initiated the foreclosure as soon as the legal proceedings are complete We have contacted this person to make him aware that we and several of the neighbors are interested in buying these lots Most recently, however, he has indicated a disinterest in talking to the adjoining property owners about the future of these lots Rather, he has said he will most likely sell them to a contractor Additionally, there has been conversation that the plan is to build townhouses on those lots There has been some confusion about the zoning in this area Before we purchased our property, I spoke to Steve Russell and asked if those lots were single-family or duplex lots At that time, (Feb ,89), he stated that there were no duplex lots in the area After hearing about the possibility of townhouses neing built on those lots, I spoke to Steve again He then pointed out a zoning variance which was undated and approved two duplex lots in Dallagher Estates However, at the time, the lot lines were very different and the current #3, 4 and 5 lots were all one parcel, lot #3 The zoning variance names Lot 4 and 5, which today are the lots on wnich our house is located and the adjoining land, which already has a small structure on it When these lots were re -divided, the Surveyor erred in his determination of the South line of our property, with the result that the lot line cuts diagonally across the front yard and tnrough the middle of our driveway We are most anxious to negotiate with whoever becomes the owner of Lot 6, in an attempt to straighten out this mess • • • The neignboring property owners are interested in purchasing tnese lots with the intention of keeping the wooded areas in tact, thus preserving the wildlife whicn habitates this area To construct multiple family dwellings on these properties would destroy the natural ceauty of the neighborhood and produce a severely over -crowded situation We request that your committee review this matter and reconsider the zoning exception Dallagher Estates and the adjoining Oak Glen development is an area of fine upper -bracket, single-family homes, and it is evident that duplexes or townhouses would be an ill fit in this neighborhood We are confident that after review of the current situation, you will agree tnat multiple -family housing is not appropriate for those two lots Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter Sincerely, 1"ItC 1? /44.J Joanne P Kubala and • .i1twater THE BIRTHPLACE OF MINNESOTA TO PLANNING COMMISSION FROM TONY ZEULI DATE AUGUST 9, 1989 RE PARK DEDICATION POLICY BACKGROUND In an effort to create an effective Park Dedication Policy, the following measures were taken to provide adequate and up-to-date information regarding the park situation in the City of Stillwater An analysis of the outcome follows In 1987 Ann Pung-Terwedo studied the standards that should be established for park dedication in the City of Stillwater Her findings, including a need for a special park fund and a revised dedication policy, are included in this current park dedication policy Her methods of compiling data included contacting several cities comparable to Stillwater and a review of the State Statutes In July of this year I contacted the City of Eagan and had them send us a copy of their recently revised Park Dedication Policy After close review, and comparison with Ann's findings, I compiled the attached policy With a rough draft, I consulted the State Statutes to make sure all aspects of the policy were current Upon completion, the draft was revised by Steven Russell, Community Development Director, David Magnuson, City Attorney, and the policy has been referred to the Parks and Recreation Commission for comment DISCUSSION The policy itself consists of many important standards, but listed below are the key components that require particular attention 1 The formula is basic on ten (10) acres of dedicated land per 1,000 residents Seven (7) of the ten acres shall be for neighborhood parks 2 Based on this formula, the City of Stillwater is in need of thirty eight (38) acres of neighborhood parks 3 Cash dedication requires a special fund for Parks and Open Spaces The cash figures were computed using current Stillwater land values 4 Industrial and commercial land dedications are also covered completely in this policy RECOMMENDATION The City of Stillwater is in need of a solid comprehensive policy dealing with park dedication This draft should provide just that Please set September 11, 1989 as the date for a public hearing on the new policy CITY HALL 216 NORTH FOURTH STILLWATER MINNESOTA 55082 PHONE 612 439 6121 • • CITY OF STILLWATER PARK DEDICATION POLICY POLICY ADOPTING STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES FOR DETERMINING THAT PORTION OF LAND BEING PLATTED, SUBDIVIDED OR DEVELOPED WHICH IS TO BE CONVEYED OR DEDICATED TO THE PUBLIC FOR PARK OR RECREATION PURPOSES OR WITH RESPECT TO WHICH CASH IS TO BE CONTRIBUTED TO THE CITY IN LIEU OF SUCH CONVEYANCE OF DEDICATION 1 PURPOSE The City Council recognizes that preservation of land for park, playground and public open space purposes as it relates to the use and development of land for residential, commercial/industrial purposes is essential to the maintaining of a healthful and desireable environment The City must not only provide these necessary amenities for our citizens today, but also be insightful to the needs of the future It is recognized by the City Council that the demand for park, playground and public open space within a municipality is directly related to the density and intensity of development permitted and allowed within any given area Urban development mean greater numbers of people and higher demands for park, playground and public open space To disregard this principle over -tax existing facilities and diminish the quality of the environment The City's Park System Plan Standards has established minimum community criteria for meeting the needs of the residents of Stillwater In order to meet the community needs for parks and open space, ten (10) acres of park shall be required for each 1,000 residents of which seven (7) acres shall be designated as neighborhood parks This shall be the standard upon which the City shall establish its parkland and parks cash dedication It is the policy of Stillwater that the following guidelines for the dedication of land for park, playground and public open space purposes (or cash contributions in lieu of such dedication) in the subdividing and developing of land are appropriate 2 RESIDENTIAL PARKLAND DEDICATION The amount of land to be dedicated shall be based on the gross area of the proposed subdivision, proposed type of dwelling unit and density Census data for 1987 of 3 2 residents for single family, 2 0 for townhouse/quad and 1 5 for apartments has been used as density standards for formulating calculations in meeting the criteria of park needs of Stillwater residents 1 • • The formula foi land dedication The greater of 1) proposed units per acre or 2) zoned density Dwelling Unit Density Land to be Dedicated 0 - 1 9 units per acre 7% 2 0 - 3 5 units per acre 8% 3 6 - 5 9 units per acre 9% 6 - 10 units per acre 10% 10 + units per acre Additional 5% for each unit over 10 3 GUIDELINES FOR ACCEPTING DEDICATION OF LAND FOR PUBLIC PARK PURPOSES A Land proposed to be dedicated for public purposes shall meet identified needs of the City as contained in the Comprehenss.ve Guide Plan B Prior to dedication, the subdivider shall deliver to the City Attorney, an abstract of title or registered property abstract evidencing good and marketable title, free and clear of any mortgages, liens, encumbrances, assessments and taxes The conveyance documents shall be in such form acceptable to the City C The required dedication and/or payment of fees -in -lieu of land dedication shall be made at time of final plat approval D The removal of trees, topsoil, storage of construction equipment, burying of construction debris or stockpiling of surplus soil on dedicated land is strictly forbidden without the written approval of the Community Development Director E Grading and utility plans, which may effect or impact the proposed park dedication, shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director prior to dedication or at such time as is reasonably determined F To be eligible for park dedication credit, land dedication is to be located outside of drainways, flood plains or ponding areas after the site has been developed Grades exceeding 12 percent or are unsuitable for parks development may be considered for partial dedication Where ponding has been determined to have a park function, credit will be given at a rate of 50 percent of the pond and adjoining land areas below the high water level, a minimum of 70 percent of land above the high water mark shall be dedicated before pond credit is granted Other City dedication policies relating to pond dedication must also be compiled with 2 • • In those cases where subdividers and developers of land provide significant amenities such as, but not limited to swimming pools, tennis courts, handball courts, ball fields, etc within the development for the benefit of those residing or working therein, and where, in the judgement of the Director of Parks and Recreation, such amenities significantly reduce the demands for public recreational facilities to serve the development, the Director may recommend to the Parks and Recreation Commission that the amount of land to be dedicated for park, playground and public open space (or cash contribution in lieu of such dedication ) be reduced by an amount not to exceed 25 percent of the amount calculated under paragraph 2 above G The City, upon review, may determine that the developer shall create and maintain some form of on -site recreation use by the site residents such as tot lots and open play space This requirement may be in addition to the land or cash dedication requirement 4 CASH PAYMENT IN LIEU OF DEDICATION, RESIDENTIAL If, at the option of the City, it is determined that a cash payment in lieu of land dedication shall be made, the cash shall be placed in a special fund for Parks and Recreation use and deposited by the developer with the City prior to final plat approval The City Council, upon review and recommendation of the Park and Recreation Commission, shall annually determine by resolution the park cash dedication fee per residential unit The fee shall be determined by the average market value of undeveloped residential property by zoning classification, served by major City utilities, divided by the number of units per acre, which shall provide the equivalency of twelve acres per thousand population The cash dedication, effective January 1, 1988 shall be Housing Density Cash Eq Per Dwelling Unit 0 - 4 Units Per Acre $400 5 - 8 Units Per Acre $250 9 - 15 Units Per Acre $200 16+ Units Per Acre $150 Cash dedication shall be determined/computed at the rate in effect at the time of final plat 5 INDUSTRIAL/COMMERCIAL DEDICATION REQUIREMENTS Subdividers and developers of commercial/industrial land, including commercial/industrial portions of Planned Developments, shall be required at the time the site plan is approved and building permits are issued to dedicate to the City for park, playground and public open space purposes, an amount of land up to 7 5 percent of the net land area within the 3 • • • development as determined by the City according to the guidelines set forth in Section 3 of this policy 6 CASH PAYMENT IN LIEU OF DEDICATION, COMMERICAL AND INDUSTRIAL In those cases where the City does not require park or open space within a development, the City shall require payment of fees in lieu of such land dedication in an amount equal to $ 046 per square foot of net land area, or such amount as determined by the City Council based on the value of the payments Cash shall be contributed at the time of approval of each final plat or at the time of site plan or building permit approval as determined by the City A credit of up to 25 percent of the required dedication may be allowed by the City Council for on -site stormsewer, water, ponding and settling basins provided that such improvements benefit identifiable park and recreation water resources The City Council, upon review and recommendation of the Parks and Recreation Commission, may annually review and determine by resolution an adjustment to the industrial/commercial fee based upon the City's estimate of the average value of undeveloped commercial/industrial land in the City 7 REQUIRED IMPROVEMENTS Developers shall be responsible for making certain improvements to their developments for park, playground and public open space purposes as follows A Provide finished grading and ground cover for all park, playground, trail and public open spaces within their development as part of their development contract or site plan approval responsibilities Landscape screening, shall be in accordance with City policy B Establish park boundary corners for the purpose of erecting park limit signs The developer shall contact the appropriate Parks and Recreation Department personnel for the purpose of identifying park property corners C Provide sufficient public road access of no less than 300 feet for neighborhood parks and additional frontage for community parks 8 AUTHORITY The state of Minnesota has recognized the importance of providing for parks and open space in M S A 462 358, subdivision 2(b) which gives the right to Cities in its subdivisions regulations to require reasonable portions for public use The City of Stillwater has, by this dedication policy, chosen to exercise this right in establishing minimum requirements for meeting the public needs 4 • -3 Z • Si1�11�1AT�� MAP I9E14HBoRH000 PARKS MCK� tic n\7e < Cld Stonendge Trl Arnnso Oailager _ Moore St �ca, ernunasoson y ° yeam«err t+CiCr � �rir�a S t � Cron:w5n v' Stillwaer • ▪ II st O. _ c% i =A St 4' s Ai �:. S vs Elm cnl St I will.•• St Poplar Stl w River Hts • ►nekory .I St St, Mamie r N St Laurel Or N yIVncen I NuibeRY I h c7Rle N«tn Long La*./G� S. Deer 4 - ' • S C NI yrtle NI Intertachen fit. Pat - Pamsestl ut 1 Y E I IS s���,_ c� r�\ 5tiive yl vrJ' i c �WnSt �c Oaort Sg© h °i " 6'131 421 � 2 �� on ... �L Jr Cak Pire �• n j^tin _- —4-ik4 s• tir., . a `�..- Y ©�?� °i t :. U i ►a Laxe Hudson dice a' H!T. •/u� 9 m c., r. • s at -Clurerdl ©�� t ?. tee\-11 SQn N _ r^ Anderson '� A al due • nr/T lay w U v ^ Haneock St ; Y1� c� '� 5' -1 I a• ngt na St a �t� _ r I - c� ^.. o _ Narsn " Sf m �l.Y .. .. u r _ St leu9 f Wild rleans St S ' • - ' Orleans `v " St e �� •r 2 • _c U Everett 6a_r St Morning Or a', rave Cr: 91vd Side Rd Ai. ',p Q Upper 63rd St 3 rd St c 66 Q�c arl`at62M St 3( T. Or W m m m Ot 4 r� N < X OC 16E a LL++ 2 a T z _ o d rwta. Moo Coos not fond to roe Y WNIL t State Park 2 t.&+seum 9. Pioneer Park 0. Ctty Hall nlritylga mzp Ales Legend 9 Ramsey Grove Park 10. Meadow Lark Park ri Parks 12. Lily Lake Recreation Area -Ice Arena se- • • • • ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT LIFE OF SPECIAL USE PERMITS AND VARIANCES 1 EXPIRATION a Each approved permit shall expire and become null and void after twenty-four (24) months from the date on which it is approved, unless exercised, a lesser lime period may be specified b An approved Special Use or Variance applied to the subject property and runs with the land, unless ownership is specified as a condition of approval Once exercised, an approved permit remains effective unless terminated or modified and remains effective even if the subject property is rezoned c An approved permit is transferable to future owners of the subject property unless prohibited in the conditions of permit approval d Any use permit which has been exercised shall expire and became void where the use has ceased for a period of twelve (12) consecutive months, whether or not it is the intent to abandon said use 2 EXTENSION OF PERMITS Any permit may be extended for an additional period not to exceed one (1) year by the City Council A public hearing shall be held 3 REVOCATION OF PERMITS In any case where the conditions to the granting of a permit have not been met or are not complied with, the City Council shall give notice thereof to the permittee, which notice shall specify a reasonable period of time within which to perform said conditions and correct said violation If the permittee fails to comply with said conditions, or correct said violation within the time allowed, notice shall be given to the permittee of intention to revoke such permit at a hearing to be held not less than ten (10) calendar days after the date of such notice Following such hearing and, if good cause exists therefore, the City Council may revoke such permit RESUBMITTAL OF DENIED OR WITHDRAWN APPLICATIONS 1 Whenever any permit is denied or withdrawn, no new application for the same or substantially the same project, may be filed for a period of one (1) year from date of said denial or withdrawal Where an application has been denied without prejudice, application for the same or substantially the same project may be filed within said period of one (1) year