Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1989-10-09 CPC PacketZoning Zone 1 a er • THE BIRTHPLACE OF MINNESOTA snww��� October 4, 1989 THE STILLWATER PLANNING COMMISSION WILL MEET ON MONDAY, OCTOBER 9, 1989 AT 7 00 P M IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS OF CITY HALL, 216 NORTH URTH R AGENDA Approval of Minutes - September 11, 1989 PUBLIC HEARINGS 1 Case No SUP/89-68 - Special Use Permit to conduct a retail craft business in a home at 404 West Churchill Street in the RB, Two Family Residential District Cneryl Larson and Gretchen Anderson, Applicants 2 Case No ZAT/89-8 - Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment for a new comprenensive • parking ordinance for the entire City of Stillwater, City of Stillwater, Applicant 3 Case No SUB/89-69 - Preliminary Plat approval for the subdivision of a 14 963 acre parcel (Outlot B, Parcel 3, Stillwater Industrial Park) into seven lots on the Northeast corner of Curve Crest Boulevard and Washington Avenue in the IP-I, Industrial Park Industrial District Prime Site, Incorporated, Applicant • 4 OTHER BUSINESS A Update and schedule on the Downtown Plan B Existing conditions of the West Stillwater Industrial Park CITY HALL 216 NORTH FOURTH STILLWATER MINNESOTA 55082 PHONE 612 439 6121 M • • • STILLWATER PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Date September 11, 1989 Time 7 00 p m Members Present Gerald Fontaine, Chairman Glenna Bealka Jean Jacobson Judy Curtis Jay Kimble Mark Ehlenz Nancy Putz Rob Hamlin Don Valsvik Steve Russell, Comm Dev Director Members Absent None Chairman Fontaine called the meeting to order APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion by Mark Ehlenz, seconded by Glenna Bealka to approve the minutes of the meeting of August 14, 1989 as submitted All in favor PUBLIC HEARINGS 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 Richard LaCasse, owner, presented the request He stated that no chemicals will be stored at the residence, and no trucks will be making deliveries He will be doing business by phone There are three conditions of approval which the applicant agrees with Neighbors who live across the street from Mr LaCasse were present, and stated that there are currently deliveries made to Mr LaCasse's residence Mr LaCasse stated that UPS makes deliveries to his house occasionally, but these are not business deliveries The applicant also stated that his business is seasonal, and the pool season is almost over and won't begin again until next April Mark Ehlenz suggested that, because of the neighbor's concern, another condition be added 4) The Planning Commission will review the permit upon complaint Motion by Mark Ehlenz to approve the Special Use Permit with four conditions as discussed Seconded by Nancy Putz Motion carried 9-0 Case No V/89-1 and 89-2 - Recommendation from the Heritage Preservation Commission that the Downtown Stillwater Commercial District be declared a Local Preservation District and recommended to the National Register of Historic Places 1 Stillwater Planning Commission • September 11, 1989 Assistant Planner Ann Pung-Terwedo gave background information and showed slides % of the downtown area Maurice Stenerson, chairman, and other members of the HPC were present to answer questions Motion by Don Valsvik to approve Case No 89-1 Seconded by Judy Curtis Motion carried 9-0 Motion by Don Valsvik to approve Case No 89-2 Seconded by Judy Curtis Motion carried 9-0 Case No SUP/89-60 - Special Use Permit for placement of a 12x48 ft temporary building to be used as office space behind a medical office building, at 232 North Main Street Marth Conway from Associated Eye Physicians was present to submit the request She explained that the building needs more office space, and this would be a temporary solution until the City determines what will be done with the property directly behind the building Steve Russell explained that the City is trying to purchase that property for a future parking structure There is one recommended condition of approval Mr Russell • suggested that the Commission add another condition 2) The structure shall be removed after a maximum of two years Motion by Judy Curtis to approve the Special Use Permit with two conditions as discussed Seconded by Mark Ehlenz Motion carried 9-0 Case No 89-43 - Reconsideration of rezoning from RB to RA for Lots 6 and 7, Dallager's Estates, located 3ust south of 1025 West Sycamore Street Edward Simonet of Washington County Abstract, owner of the two lots, presented the request He informed the Commission that he has a purchase agreement with a neighbor and will sell all of Lot 6 Mr Simonet plans to subdivide Lot 7 into two single family lots The neighbors who were present at the meeting are in favor of the rezoning request The Commission determined that the rezoning would be appropriate now because the request is by the owner of record Motion by Don Valsvik to approve the RA designation of Lots 6 and 7, Dallager's Estates Seconded by Judy Curtis Motion carried 9- 0 Case No. SUB/89-63 - Preliminary Plat approval for a minor subdivision of two lots into three lots on Old Stonebridge Trail (Lots 6 and 7, Dallager's Estates) S. • • • Planning Commission Minutes September 11, 1989 Mr Simonet's application has now been changed because of the purchase agreement with his neighbor to sell all of Lot 6, which will remain intact Lot 7 will be subdivided into two single family parcels The two lots will meet all lot size requirements Motion by Mark Ehlenz to approve the subdivision request Seconded by Jean Jacobson Motion carried 9-0 Case No. V/89-66 - Request to construct a fourteen stall parking garage below the regulated flood protection elevation (RFPE) in the Flood Plain District Mike McGuire, architect, and Mark Desch, owner, presented the request There are three recommended conditions of approval which the applicant is aware of Motion by Don Valsvik to approve the Variance request with three conditions Seconded by Glenna Bealka Motion carried 9-0 Case No V/89-67 - Variance to the maximum square footage allowed for an accessory structure (120 square feet allowed, 280 square feet proposed) for the construction of a storage building at 712 West Oak Street Thomas Gerson, owner, presented the request He explained that he currently owns the property next door on which there is a barn where he stores lumber for his hobby crafts The Gersons plan on selling the ad3oining property and he must move all lumber out of the barn and onto his property He requires more than 120 square feet to store this lumber His neighbor to the west has given verbal approval of the storage structure He also stated that it would be a hardship if the application was denied because it would deprive him of the opportunity to sell his other property Mr Russell stated that the applicant has a 22x22 ft garage which could be added on to The ordinance allows a 1000 square foot garage Mr Gerson does not want to add on to the garage for aesthetic reasons Mr Hamlin stated that he is not in favor of two large structures in the back of a small lot, and that the building would not be beneficial for subsequent owners Mr Kimble stated that he feels the application should be approved because the garage and storage building will be less than 800 square feet total, whereas the applicant could tear down his garage and build a 1000 square foot garage in its place without a variance Nancy Putz stated that she is not in favor of two buildings of this size on the lot Motion by Nancy Putz to deny the Variance request Seconded by Rob Hamlin Motion failed 2-6, with one abstention 3 Planning Commission Minutes September 11, 1989 Motion by Don Valsvik to approve the variance request Seconded by Mark Ehlenz Motion carried 6-2, with one abstention OTHER ITEMS Amendment to Park Dedication Reauirements - The Commission reviewed and discussed the proposed new Park Dedication Policy Motion by Rob Hamlin to approve the policy as submitted and recommend to the City Council Seconded by Judy Curtis Motion carried 9-0 Review of Amendment to the Parking Ordinance - The Commission reviewed and discussed the proposed modified Parking Ordinance for the Downtown and set a Public Hearing for the October meeting Modification to Development District #1, Tax Increment District #1 (Scattered Site) adding three areas - • Motion by Don Valsvik to approve the Resolution finding the City's modification of the development program for Development • District No 1 and the modified tax increment financing plan for Tax Increment Financing District No 1, located therein, to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan of the City Seconded by Judy Curtis Motion carried 9-0 ADJOURNMENT Motion by Jean Jacobson, seconded by Mark Ehlenz to ad3ourn the meeting at 10 00 p m All in favor Submitted by Shelly Schaubach Recording Secretary M1 PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW CASE NO SUP/89-68 Planning Commission Meeting October 9, 1989 Project Location 404 West Cnurchill Street Comprehensive Plan District Two Family ZONING DISTRICT RB SHORELAND/BLUFFLAND No Applicant's Name Cheryl Larson and Gretchen Anderson Type of Application Special Use Permit Project Description A Special Use Permit to conduct a retail craft business in a home Discussion The request is to conduct a small retail craft business by producing gift baskets for resale The applicants propose to pick up their raw materials at • various distributors in the area, or, on occasion, have materials delivered to the home They have stated that these deliveries will be no more than a few a month They will tnen produce gift items as ordered through their demonstrations in homes and businesses throughout the valley (on the order of Tupperware, Mary Kay, etc ) They will also De selling their merchandise on consignment in various shops or selling at bazaars There will be no direct sales from the nome at 404 West Churchill Street • CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1 No business sign shall be placed on premises 2 Deliveries shall be no more than twice a week 3 This use permit shall be reviewed upon complaint RECOMMENDATION FINDINGS Approval The proposed use will not be injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare and will be in harmony with the general purpose of the Zoning Ordinance ATTACHMENT Letter from Applicant pa z-rpu�J pl c? V"OWIC/12 Pyy s�o��afv/ accop� a[soc/�L 91-r07 C/7� r l/ �Z— � fo-- p ��crr/o� �/� ,fo- 72d -r.X/,7O —u7 sins/� 2f ��90U �vu/s- aq ,��_/a-z1�� - - - - acre y ��o - a/ Sri%1 -�� - P� /3� �/�/b--Ur.►,/� ai' b��- - -- /d%"�-� �/0�7 �w a 477,2/'ov o f P7-nu Avw «a{�zv rn s/a�Shn� rn0 ;i 75VyV_m y .97�, t1471 ro;ir «f,�' Sc u a{� 77'� ��/S� SRO ,�✓/� y pa17� Piro P;�.Jry -gyp a"0 T/O SS7J P7r r770 a,, v y �Ot/ ? 7-/Cv a-17 pern QZC1s O v 7pM away / _-�Yc•oy- - - rrrn0 -rr7c, 2I?r17 7(-.'/ �Idyv,-777V IT // / tr2-`r/O a0,+ /_ '" "' q s77Y 14'7t/ ux�,�a� ✓� �c �.ac rCo% -acu q 277:,r -0 Ur- / per-f yr/ /-I JO �6---*fctf'Sa11cr ?/_�? 1-2 S`s��s»q -� f.�,rs � �jT�a��� -�, /�au..�� �/,-�z� ' zzos'.•mf I• i 0 v) lur h owu she- 40Uu lc/ Uwa-e. �o aife/zc( ILL deina/�Sirr,�Or) 6Je- &)&Z-dCe GrUry &'a.//IAL2,5 oC ou � - - b66C 716 - CLyr q / ✓Z Gcn ..Zyp/a, 7 a/7 02) _ o� fin, /0 t/Le.. itosfess a"Id /Le"- %fie. yueSfS cocrLLY-d - place lhe/r Gra'ers �'or t ole a-o,/e.- Zo fhe AOSAf.55 Adn-k' aa.teai�c� .r�cu^�'e�i�q c�pro�Ch wvuGd 6� SF//� y =- beLskE/s ors en )slg�/r �_`lu� /oCc�� 0/ �jo�5 Tie -/h ir-c w�u sE/// �y Gm/n o f �� �Q�s G.,c . A ")a Lt r /� eo7) /a 7 y p mess / o"a.L o;9 ces ali oC czl-r h&5ke p"5 CZ6 y ! �f5 41 - -L/-he/ /- -G// e-n t3, c5AXCIG ay �� lord d f l)-e i r buFs-nes S_ This kocSuJc-1 a,1s o c ,� t lo/ k o de-/i&G,S/leJ�S 710_ Me-/r N/Gc,2-e. o' %ccV/Je-s.S /7g • yvu wed _ a /!u/ fler e,X� /c /� t-i o�� o� _ ozcr _ bu4tLix55✓ NSQ C�U�JfI� GtS aJ .4.3 D - O -77 Z ., _ Gt�7GaL _ GJe - y f • 1 � er THE BIRTHPLACE OF MINNESOTA • TO PLANNING COMMISSION FROM PLANNING DEPARTMENT DATE OCTOBER 3, 1989 SUBJECT PARKING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT The current parking provisions of the Zoning Ordinance are in need of revision Parking requirements are in two sections, one for the Industrial Park and another section for the residential and older portions of town The existing Ordinance has different standards for the same use Since the Ordinance was adopted, new uses have become popular, i e day care centers, convenience service stations, and drive-in food establishments The new Ordinance provides parking standards for the new uses and combines the two sections into one set of standards for the City Other provisions of the Ordinance allow shared parking credits, cooperation parking allowance, and an option for a parking district for the Downtown Parking lot standards, landscape requirements and loading are also included As background information, a PAS memo titled Parking Standards -Problems, Solutions, is attached as backgrou--ncT RECOMMENDATION Review, comment and recommend for approval to the City Council ATTACHMENT - Parking Ordinance CITY HALL 216 NORTH FOURTH STILLWATER MINNESOTA 55082 PHONE 612 439 6121 JULY 1989 • AMERICAN PLANNING IL'01 M 0 ASSOCIATION Parking Standards —Problems, Thomas P Smith Solutions, Examples y� By Marya Morris Each year the Planning Advisory Service receives more requests for information about parking standards than any other single topic The majority of the requests ask something like Do you have any examples of parking standards for gas stations that also have a mini mart and an air hose9 If we had been in business during the 1800s it s a good bet that requests for hitching post standards would have topped the list right ahead of those for blacksmith shop performance standards This Memo first looks at problems with existing parking standards and offers some suggestions for the proper use of sample standards Next there is an examination of the grow Ing trend toward reducing the number of required spaces and the criteria used by communities to determine when a reduction can be allowed On a related topic there follows a discussion of parking standards for mixed use developments and the use of shared parking as a means of accommodating • this type of development This Mento also provides examples of commonly requested parking standards for a -, ariety of conventional and unconventional land uses Most of the sample standards have been taken from recently updated ordinances When available data from the Institute for Transportation Engineers (ITE) Parking Generation manual (2d ed ) is shown with the local government standards so that the two can be compared The Problems With Existing Standards Parking consumes a great deal of space In fact it is sometimes the major component of an individual de%elopment project It is not surprising therefore that parking issues take up a great deal of planners time Attempts to establish appropriate off street parking standards can send planners into a state of temporary schizophrenia On the one hand they are concerned that setting parking standards in relation to peak - hour traffic volumes may run contrary to community traffic management objectives environmental protection goals and economic development policies On the other hand by setting ratios low (hoping that people will use other forms of transportation) planners set themselves up for a barrage of complaints about parking overflowing into residential areas land use incompatibility and a general inattention to traffic access and circulation concerns There are several reasons that parking standards may be on average excessive or inaccurate First few communities have the staff time or financial resources to conduct a comprehensive •review of local parking standards on a regular basis Many do not have the resources to even analyze standards for a few Marya Morris is an APA research associate Kirk Bishop a senior research associate and Steve Long a research intern assisted in the preparation of this Memo Standards based on parking demand during peak shopping hours and holiday seasons are bound to be excessive uses Because of these limitations standards are sometimes transferred from code to code without being adapted to a city s specific parking needs Second even when standards are established on the basis of studies of observed demand they may be overly rigid and inflexible when it comes to individual uses Finally many codes still do not reflect changes that have occurred in parking patterns over the last decade These changes include smaller average car size increased development of mixed use projects and changes in peak shopping hours because stores are open longer These difficulties in establishing realistic parking standards have in essence constituted a full employment act" for planning consultants According to Paul Box a transportation and parking consultant in Skokie Illinois when communities set unrealistically high parking standards in an effort to avoid unexpected parking crunches developers turn to consultants for parking occupancy surveys The developers often feel that their projects have been subjected to overly restrictive parking requirements that have no basis in fact They seek the survey to prove their point Frankly many planners agree Everyday standards that are based on parking demand during peak shopping hours in peak shopping seasons are excessive These planners also note that such standards simply encourage people to drive and thus contribute to an overabundance of asphalt and ultimately stormwater runoff But finding the balance between excessive and adequate standards is often very difficult Some Suggestions for Solving Parking Standard Problems Planners are likely to be confronted with conflicting data and a number of different opinions when it comes to devising off street parking standards particularly when the nature of the proposed project represents a locally unknown quantity The sample standards presented at the end of this Memo as well as the ones we send out in response to inquiries are intended to provide some guidance in those situations We suggest however that they be used as only one factor in the standard - setting equation Other factors to be considered in the process of developing or revising standards follow Ask the applicant to support parking assumptions If the proposed development is of significant size there is a good chance a parking study has been done for it before Ask the applicant to provide some data that supports the parking assumptions used in the development proposal Ideally the developer will have a certified traffic engineer prepare a brief study of similar projects and an overview of the traffic assumptions used in the project feasibility report Such a study will cost a developer a lot less than another acre of parking so it is likely that the developer will agree to provide such a study When national developers or franchise representatives come in to the office, ask them for copies of studies Evaluate these studies in light of what is known about parking demand in the community Are the proposed plans in line with those for similar projects'? Keep abreast of parking demand and transit -use patterns in the community When and if resources allow do a study of parking for various land uses in the community In the meantime look around While conducting field checks for rezoning cases take a look at accessory parking lots for office projects hospitals convenience stores etc Take notes and then ask active local developers and builders to explain the difference in parking patterns seen throughout the community Be sure to take public transportation alternatives into consideration Use these observations and findings to make an informed case for proposed standards When evaluating other communities' parking requirements, make a call When you receive parking standards from other places call the local planning department and ask them a few questions about how the standards are working Where did the standards come from9 What is the exact nature of the use and site? Be careful too when using the ITE Parking Generation manual While the ITE manual is the largest most comprehensive source for observed parking space occupancv ratios some of the data are based on as few as one parking occupancy survey and therefore do not necessarily represent the national average The Trend Toward Reducing Parking Requirements Parking requirements in local zoning ordinances have been developed over the years to ensure that adequate off street parking is provided These requirements reflect local goals of enhancing access improving traffic circulation and preventing neighborhood parking problems and other potential traffic related nuisances Although some minimum requirements will always be necessary a number of communities through options implemented in their zoning code allow a reduction in the amount of parking required These reductions can be applied to either individual land uses or special areas of the community Sometimes the reductions come in the form of incentives that encourage alternative forms of transportation such as public transit and ridesharing Parking reductions for specific land uses and zones • Flexible Parking Requirements (PAS Report No 377) cites several examples of uses and zones for which parking reduction formulas should be considered The report includes sample ordinance provisions from some cities that permit reductions under certain circumstances Housing for the elderly and low- or moderate income housing Many communities, including Kansas City Missouri and Miami Florida establish fairly low minimum parking ratios for housing for the elderly and low income housing projects based on the assumption that automobile ownership and use in these projects is lower than in many other residential developments The Kansas City code allows parking requirements for housing for the elderly to be modified in all but the most restrictive single family districts Developers may still be required to meet several conditions including providing open space in lieu of the reduced parking requirements in the event that the housing is converted to another use at some time in the future The city s Board of Zoning Appeals also considers the accessibility of bus transportation nearby shopping opportunities and the presence of area sidewalks in allowing modified standards for these projects Special redevelopment areas A reduction or modification of parking requirements may also be allowed in designated redevelopment districts such as Tax Increment Financing (TIF) districts and enterprise zones In Hampton Virginia for example parking requirements are set as a result of negotiations between the prospective developer and the city These requirements supersede the parking code and apply only to projects within the established boundaries of redevelopment areas Other provisions for parking reduction In addition to the strategies described here many cities have adopted parking programs that offer developers the option of contributing to parking trust funds in lieu of constructing off street parking spaces Under such fee -in -lieu programs typically used in central business districts fees are calculated on the basis of a predetermined amount per the usually required space Revenue from the fees is deposited into a trust fund which is then used to build off site parking facilities Cities that employ this technique include Mill Valley California and Lake Forest Illinois Other uses that are often allowed reductions usually through a special exception are those with infrequent high parking demand such as churches fairgrounds and seldom - used stadiums Group homes that house people who are unlikely to drive are also often granted reductions Transportation alternatives and parking reduction In 1983 the Federal Highway Administration published the Model Parking Code Provisions to Encourage Ridesharing and Transit Use The model code was written to encourage cities to incorporate parking requirement reductions into their parking code when developers or employers provided alternative transportation systems such as those mentioned below in the Bellevue Washington code The authors of the model code cite several potential public and private sector benefits of enacting these provisions These include reduced P U • cost for parking construction increased availability of open space reduced auto travel to participating sites and increased density without additional traffic impact A number of cities allow reductions of parking requirements if developers or employers provide transportation alternatives These alternatives may include employer sponsored ridesharing programs transit pass subsidies and employee busing among others In Bellevue for example the planning director is authorized to grant a reduction of up to 50 percent in the amount of parking required if developers demonstrate that feasible alternatives exist Sacramento and Dallas are two other examples of communities in which reductions may be granted for developer sponsored transit programs The Bellevue code also offers a list of alternative programs that may be considered under a transportation management provision These include private vanpool operations transit/vanpool fare subsidies flexible work hour schedules and bicycle parking facilities Parking and Mixed -Use Development Determining the appropriate amount of parking for mixed use developments creates the biggest parking related challenge for planners and parking consultants According to Will Van Dyke a parking consultant with Barton—Aschman Associates Inc , "Calculating demand for mixed uses is only going to get more complicated due to the wide range of combinations of uses that are being developed " The difficulty is that the most accurate method of doing a parking occupancy survey is to study each individual use in isolation This can be quite simple if the use is a free standing supermarket or an apartment building However this time - tested method is inadequate for determining parking demand for a mixed use development which may have offices a health club retail uses and even residential uses all under one roof Simply adding together the parking demands for each use within the mixed use development results in an unrealistically high parking requirement For this reason most communities with mixed use developments have adopted shared parking requirements In 1983 Barton—Aschman Associates and the Urban Land Institute published a report on shared parking in which they provide a methodology for determining shared parking requirements for mixed -use developments This report offers four basic steps for determining mixed use parking requirements Initial Project Review —The sizing and functional relationship of project land uses based upon market research site constraints etc are reviewed Peak Parking Factor Adjustments —Appropriate peak parking accumulation factors for each land use are determined and then adjusted to reflect site specific factors such as transit use and captive markets Hourly Accumulation Analysis —The hourly daily and seasonal parking accumulation for each component land use are estimated Shared Parking Estimation —Finally hourly daily and seasonal parking accumulation for the entire project are estimated The report contains detailed information on completing the four step process and has a chapter on the design operation and management of shared parking Sample Parking Standards Despite the shortcomings of many of the parking standards Determining parking demand for mixed use developments presents a unique challenge for planners because parking for individual uses cannot be evaluated in isolation being used today planners still need them As mentioned earlier financial and staff constraints limit the ability of planning departments to revise their parking codes on a - regular basis In part this is the reason the Planning Advisory Service receives so many requests for parking standards each year We chose the following sample parking standards because these are the types of standards that we are asked for most often The standards here come from recently revised ordinances and from the ITE Parking Generation manual In general the standards listed here progress from the least stringent to the most stringent COMMERCIAL USES Art Gallery One space per 300 square feet of floor area (Montgomery County Ohio) One space per 500 square feet of gross floor area (Arlington County Va ) One space per 600 square feet of gross floor area and one space per employee (Pleasanton Calif ) Beauty Parlor Three spaces per chair (St Louis County Mo ) One space per each 300 square feet of gross floor area except storage areas (Pleasanton Calif ) Six spaces per 1 000 square feet of gross floor area (Cedar Rapids Iowa) Bed and Breakfast Establishments One space per guest room (Baltimore Count) Md ) One space per guest room plus one space per owner (Carlsbad Calif ) One space per guest room plus two spaces per owner s unit (National City Calif) Convenience Store One space per 500 square feet of floor area plus one space per employee but never to exceed a total of six spaces (Fairfax County Va ) 3 3 spaces per 1 000 square feet of gross floor area (St Louis County Mo ) One space per 200 square feet of gross floor area (Omaha Nebr ) 1 41 spaces per 1,000 square feet of leasable area (ITE manual) Express Delivery Service One space per every two employees on the combined work shift plus one space per each vehicle maintained on the premises (Montgomery County Ohio) One space per two employees on maximum shift (Cedar Rapids Iowa) Fast -Food Restaurant with Drive -Through Facilities One space per four seats plus one space per two employees With drive -through facility, add 11 stacking spaces for the drive in window with a minimum of five such spaces designated for the ordering station (Fairfax County Va ) 4 9 95 spaces per 1 000 square feet of gross leasable area (ITE manual) One space per 100 square feet of gross floor area (Chino Calif) • Funeral Home One space per five seats (Bellevue Wash ) One space per four permanent seats or one space per 30 square feet of floor area (Riverside Calif) One space per three fixed seats plus one space per 24 square feet of assembly area without seating (Vista Calif ) Furniture Store One space per 600 square feet of gross floor area (Provo Utah) One space per 500 square feet of net floor area plus one per employee (Fairfax County Va ) One space per 400 square feet of floor area plus one space per every 6 000 square feet floor area over the first 6 000 square feet (Hopkins Minn ) Movie Theater One space per five seats (Ames Iowa) One space per four seats or 10 spaces per 1 000 net square feet (Bellevue Wash ) OFFICE USES Business or Professional Office One space per 250 square feet of gross floor area (Hopkins Minn ) One space per 200 square feet of gross floor area (Contra Costa County Calif) One space per 150 square feet of floor area (Carroll County Md) Government Office Building Four spaces per 1 000 square feet of gross floor area (Cedar Rapids Iowa) 3 84 spaces per 1 000 square feet of gross building area (ITE manual) One space per every 1 5 employees or one space per 200 square feet of floor area whichever is greater (Carroll County Md ) Medical or Dental Office 4 5 spaces per 1 000 square feet of gross floor area (St Louis County Mo ) One space per 175 square feet of gross floor area (Vista Calif ) Ten spaces per 1 000 square feet of gross floor area (Cedar Rapids Iowa) Research and Development Facility One space per 1 5 employees up to capacity plus one per each company vehicle (Fairfax County Va ) f One and one tenth (1 1) spaces per each employee on the maximum shift (Charlotte Mecklenburg County N C ) Four spaces per 1 000 square feet of gross floor area for • buildings up to three stories 3 5 spaces per 1 000 square feet of gross floor area for buildings four to nine stories tall three spaces per 1 000 square feet of gross floor area for buildings over 10 stories (Anaheim Calif ) Veterinarian Office Four spaces per 1 000 square feet of gross floor area (Cedar Rapids Iowa) One space per 400 square feet of floor space in office with a four space minimum (Loudoun County Va ) One space per 200 square feet of examining and operating areas plus one space per 400 square feet of additional floor area (Escondido Calif ) PUBLIC AND QUASI -PUBLIC USES Auditorium One space per six permanent seats or one space per each 100 square feet of gross floor area used for assembly (Provo Utah) One space per five fixed seats plus one space per 35 square feet of assembly area without seating (Vista Calif ) One space per four seats or one space per 50 square feet of gross floor area (St Louis County Mo ) • Day Care Center Two spaces per three employees plus a sufficient number of spaces to accommodate all persons who may be at the establishment at any one time under normal operating conditions (Fairfax County Va ) One space per 10 children plus one space per staff person (Riverside Calif ) One space per six children or two spaces plus one space per employee (St Louis County Mo ) Fraternity or Sorority One space per three occupants up to building capacity (Montgomery County Ohio) One space per sleeping room or one space per two beds whichever is greater (Ames Iowa) One space per 300 square feet of floor area (Iowa City Iowa) Group Home Two spaces per home (St Louis County Mo ) One space per staff person plus one space per two occupants (Ames Iowa) Two spaces per first six residents pluslone space per each additional six residents plus one space per two • nonresident employees (Clearwater Fla ) High School One space per six students plus one per faculty member (Chino Calif ) One space per four students in the 1 lth and 12th grades plus one per employee on largest shift (Omaha Nebr ) One space per 20 square feet of classroom floor area plus one per 200 square feet of office space and one per 300 square feet of common open area (Vista Calif ) Landfill Two spaces per employee on maximum shift (Cedar Rapids Iowa) Two spaces per every three employees on maximum shift plus one space per each company vehicle (St Louis County Mo ) Library and Museum One space per 400 square feet of gross floor area (Carroll County Md ) One space per 500 square feet of gross floor area (Arlington County Va ) One space per 2 5 patrons based on the occupancy load plus one space per employee on a major shift (Fairfax County Va ) Nursing Home, Rest Home, or Convalescent Center One space per four beds plus one space per two employees on the maximum shift (Omaha Nebr ) One space per three beds (Iowa City Iowa) One space per two beds (Clearwater Fla ) Post Office One space per 600 square feet of gross floor area and one space per employee (Pleasanton Calif ) Four spaces per each customer service station plus two spaces per each three employees and one space per company vehicle (St Louis County Mo ) One space per 200 square feet of gross floor area plus two spaces per three employees on the maximum shift (Newark Del ) Zoo or Zoological Gardens One space per 2 000 square feet of land area (Lake Forest Ill and Cedar Rapids Iowa) RECREATIONAL USES Amusement Park Ten spaces per ride or activity area ( Anne Arundel County Md) Six spaces per 1 000 square feet of gross floor area plus an additional six spaces per 1 000 square feet of gross land area directly used for outdoor recreation (Cedar Rapids Iowa) One square foot of parking area for each square foot of public activity (St Louis County Mo ) Golf Course Six spaces per hole (Chino Calif ) Fifty spaces per nine holes (Omaha Nebr ) Three spaces per hole (Iowa City Iowa) Health Club REFERENCES AND CONTACTS One space per 150 square feet of gross floor building or ground area devoted to such use (New Castle County Del ) Ten spaces per 1 000 square feet of gross floor area (Costa Mesa Calif ) One space per 100 square feet of floor area plus one space per two employees (Rockville Md ) Marina 26 spaces per berth (ITE manuao One half space per slip (Clearwater Fla and Baltimore County Md ) 7 spaces per each berth or mooring plus two spaces per each three employees on maximum shift and one space per company vehicle (St Louis County Mo ) Miniature Golf Twenty spaces per course plus one space per employee (Anaheim Calif ) Three spaces per hole (Chino Calif ) Ten spaces plus one space per every 200 square feet devoted to the use (Hopkins Minn ) 1 5 spaces per hole (Omaha Nebr ) Pool or Billiard Hall Two spaces per each billiard or pool table (Pleasanton Calif ) Four spaces per 1 000 square feet of gross floor area (Baltimore County Md ) One space per each 100 square feet of floor area (Arlington Tex ) Racquetball Courts Three spaces per court (St Louis County Mo and Chino Calif ) Four spaces per court plus one space per each additional 200 square feet of floor area (Ames Iowa) Two spaces per court (Raleigh N C ) Self -Service Storage Facilities One space per 5,000 square feet of gross floor area (Escondido Calif ) One space per 20 storage stalls plus one space per 250 square feet of managers quarters (Arlington Tex ) One space per 10 cubicles plus two spaces for the managers office plus one additional space per each 25 cubicles (York County Va ) Swimming Pool One space per 10 persons up to capacity (Provo Utah) One space per each 40 square feet of pool area (Arlington County Va ) One space per four persons up to capacity (Carroll County Md References Institute of Transportation Engineers Parking Generation 2d ed 1987 Available from Planners Bookstore $85 APA members and PAS subscribers $75 Model Parking Code Provisions to Encourage Rideshanng and Transit Use Washington D C Federal Highway Administration September 1983 Available from National Technical Information Services Springfield VA 22161 703-487-4600 $21 95 Ask for publication PB 85120871 Shared Parking Washington, D C ULI-The Urban Land Institute 1983 $52 Contacts City of Bellevue Permit Center Design and Development Department P O Box 90012 Bellevue WA 98009 206-462-2034 Kansas City Department of Planning and Development 701 N 7th St Municipal Office Building Kansas City MO 66101 816-274-1855 Call for Information The American Planning Association was recently awarded financial assistance from the George Gund Foundation for the purpose of conducting a one day workshop on land use • planning for wildlife habitat protection In preparation for this project, PAS is seeking examples of planning documents and regulatory ordinances that address habitat conservation practices in urban, suburban and rural areas A future Memo will relay the findings from this research to PAS subscribers Please send any habitat preservation studies plans, or ordinances to Kirk Bishop, American Planning Association 1313 E 60th St , Chicago IL 60637 The PAS Memo is a monthly publication for subscribers to the Planning Advisory Service a subscription research service of the American Planning Association Israel Stollman Executive Director Frank S So Deputy Executive Director The PAS Memo is produced at APA lames Hecimovich Editor Adele Rothblatt Assistant Editor Copyright 1989 by American Planning Association 1313 E 60th St Chicago IL 60637 The American Planning Association has headquarters offices at 1776 Massachusetts Ave N W Washington DC 20036 All rights reserved No pan of this publication may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means electronic or mechanical including photocopying recording or by any information storage and retrieval system without permission in writing from the American Planning Association r' • ORDINANCE NO AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE STILLWATER CITY CODE 31 01, SUBD 24, OFF STREET PARKING AND LOADING Subd 24 OFF STREET PARKING AND LOADING PARKING 1 Purpose The purpose of the regulations contained herein is to reduce street congestion and traffic hazards in the City of Stillwater and to add to the safety and convenience of its citizens, by incorporating adequate, attractively designed, and functional facilities for off-street parking as an integral part of every use of land in the City 2 General Provisions At the time any building or structure is constructed or erected or modified, there shall be provided, on the same site, for the use of the occupants, guests, clients, customers or visitors there of, off-street parking spaces for vehicles in accordance with the requirements herein 3 Number of Parking Spaces Required Where the computation or • required parking spaces produces a fractional result, fractions of one-half (1/2) or greater shall require one (1) full parking space Art Gallery 1 for each 500 square feet of floor area Automobile boat or machinery sales 1 for each (office and service bay areas shall 1,000 square feet provide parking at those rates) floor area Banks 1 for each 200 square feet of floor area Bed and Breakfasts 1 per guest room 2 for manager Beauty Parlor 3 spaces per chair Billiard parlors 2 spaces per table Boarding homes for the aged 1 for each 5 beds, plus 1 for each 54 At Bowling alleys Business and professional offices excluding medical and dental offices Children's homes Churches Convenient Stores Dance halls and assembly halls without fixed seats, exhibition halls Daycare Centers Drive -In food establishments Family day-care and Foster family homes 55 employee on the shift with maximum personnel 6 for each lane 1 for each 300 square feet of floor area 1 for each 5 beds, plus 1 for each employee 1 for each 3 seats in the main sanctuary 5 per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area 1 for each 3 persons of design occupancy load 1 space per 8 children plus 1 space per staff person 1 for each 100 square feet of gross floor area, with drive through facility add 10 stacking spaces for drive in window, with a minimum of 5 spaces designated for the ordering station 1 for every 5 guests plus 1 for each employee on the shift with the maximum number of personnel • I 0 6 • Funeral homes, mortuaries 1 for each 5 seats of the aggregate number of seats provided in all assembly rooms Furniture and appliance stores, 1 for each 400 household equipment square feet of sales floor area Health Club One space per 100 square feet of gross floor area Hospitals 1 for each 2 beds plus 1 for each employee on the shift with the maximum number of personnel Hotels, motels 1 for each unit, plus 1 for the resident owner or manager (plus 1/2 • of required parking for related activities such as restaurants, lounges and retail shops ) Institutions for the aged 1 for every 5 guests, plus one for each employee on the shift with the maximum number of personnel Manufacturing plants, research 1 for each 325 or or testing laboratories, bottling feet if floor area plants, furniture repairs or 1 for each employee, whichever is greater Marinas 1 space per 3 slips and additional parking • for launch ramps and dry storage 56 0 Medical and dental clinics and 1 for each 200 • offices square feet of gross floor area, but need not exceed an average of five spaces per practitioner Medical (or convalescent) hospitals 1 for each 5 beds, plus 1 for each employee on the shift with the maximum number of personnel Nursing homes 1 for every 5 guests, plus 1 for resident manager, plus 1 for each employee on the shift with the maximum number of personnel Private clubs Parking spaces equal in number to • not less than 30% of the membership thereof, plus one additional space for each two employees Residential uses Single Family/Duplex, townhouses 2 spaces per dwelling unit of which 1 is covered Multi -family, apartments 1 5 per unit, with 1 covered plus one space per 3 units for guest parking Restaurants, bars, or 1 for each 120 nightclubs which may square feet of include dancing as a secondary floor area use Retail stores, shops service 1 for each 200 establishments, other than feet of gross 40 57 e 0 furniture and appliance stores floor area Schools -elementary and Dunior 3 per classroom high, High schools, 1 for each four students based on design capacity plus 3 per classroom Colleges (business, beauty, etc ) 1 for each and universities employee plus 1 for each 3 students Self-service laundry and dry 1 for each 200 cleaning establishments feet of floor area Service stations 3 for each lubrication or service bay, plus 1 for each employee on the • day shift Sports arenas, auditoriums, 1 for each 3 seats assembly halls, and meeting of maximum seating rooms capacity Theaters 1 for each 3 seats for the first 350 seats, plus 1 for each 5 additional seats Wholesale establishments, ware- 1 for each 1,000 houses, service and maintenance square feet floor center, communications equipment area buildings Unspecified uses of buildings, Where the parking structures, or premises requirement for a particular use is not specifically established in this Section, the parking requirements for each use shall be • determined by the City Council 58 4 Such determination shall be based upon the requirements for similar uses Variations to Requirements a Alternative Provisions The off-street parking requirements of this Part shall be considered satisfied if 1 The property being occupied is a part of a parking district which has been duly formed under the provisions of the Municipal Code, and 2 A specific development plan for an area has been adopted and contains parking standards which supersede those contained in this section or 3 The required parking spaces and street access are permanently provided within three hundred (300) feet of the parcel, and a maintenance and management plan indication the useful functioning of such parking is submitted and approved by the Community Development Director Not more than sixty percent (60%) of the required parking may be provided off the site b Cooperative Parking Facilities The requirements for the provisions of parking facilities, with respect to two (2) or more property uses of the same or different types, may be satisfied by the permanent allocation of the requisite number of spaces for each use in a common parking facility, located within three hundred (300) feet of all such participating property uses and cooperatively established and operated In the case of a cooperative parking facility which is designed to satisfy the parking requirements of 1 From two to four (2 to 4) independent property uses, a reduction of not more than five percent (5%) of the total number of required spaces shall be allowed 2 From five to seven (5 to 7) independent 59 • • • property uses, a reduction of not more than ten percent (10%) of the total number of required spaces shall be allowed 3 Eight (8) or more independent property uses, a reduction of not more than twenty percent (20%) of the total number of required spaces shall be allowed c Shared Parking Facilities Parking facilities may be shared by two (2) or more commercial uses if their entrances are located within three hundred (300) feet of each other and if their hours of operation do not coincide, provided they 1 Receive special use and design permits so that design criteria are met and conditions of use may be established along with periodic review 2 Submit a written document guaranteeing maintenance, hours of operation, and specifying length of agreement 3 Demonstrate how the shared parking arrangement will fulfill the intent of this section d Parking Requirements for Nonconforming Structures of Uses In the case of structures in any district, which are reconstructed, enlarged, structurally altered, changed in occupancy to a more intensive use category, or otherwise increased in capacity, off-street parking shall be provided only for that portion of structures or use constituting the increase in capacity, except that no additional parking need be provided for non-residential uses, if the increased capacity results in an increase of four (4) or fewer off-street parking spaces 5 Miscellaneous Requirements a Parking Limit The City may establish a maximum parking limit where the development proposal exceeds City standards for the number of parking spaces required b Parking Use Parking areas shall be used for vehicle LI parking only with no sales, dead storage, repair work, • dismantling of any kind c Existing off-street parking spaces and loading spaces shall not be reduced in number unless said number exceeds the requirements set forth for the use d Facilities for the Handicapped Handicapped parking spaces shall be nineteen feet long by twelve feet wide ( 19' X 12') Parking facilities specifically designed, located, and reserved for vehicles licensed by the State for use by the handicapped, shall be provided in each parking facility of ten (10) or more spaces, according to the following table Max,mnm Number of Spaces Required Total Handicapped 1 to 50 1 51 to 100 2 101 to 150 3 151 to 200 4 200 + 1 per 50 or fraction thereof e Parking Lots in Residential Districts When in its • opinion the best interests of the community will be served thereby, the City Council may permit, temporarily or permanently, the use of land in a residential district, other and a One -Family District, for a parking lot where the land abuts or is across the street form a district other than a residential district, provided that 1 The lot is to be used only for parking of passenger automobiles of employees, customers or guests of the person or firm controlling and operating the lot, who shall be responsible for its maintenance 2 No charge is to be made for parking on the lot 3 The lot is not to be used for sales, repair work or servicing of any kind 4 Entrance to and exit from the lot are to be located on the lot 5 No advertising sign or material is to be located on the lot 6 All parking is to be kept back of the setback e 61 0 0 building line by barrier unless otherwise specifically authorized by the City Council 7 The parking lot and that portion of the driveway back or the setback line is to be adequately screened from the street and form adjoining property in a residential district by a hedge or sightly fence or wall not less than six feet high and not more than eight feet high located back of the setback line All lighting is to be arranged so that there will be no glare therefrom annoying to the occupants of adjoining property in a residential district and surfacing of the parking lot is to be smoothly graded, hard surfaced and adequately drained 8 Such other conditions as may be deemed necessary by the City Council to protect the character of the residential district 6 Design Requirements a Parking Space Each parking space shall be at least 9 feet in width and 18 feet in length exclusive of an adequately designed system of access drives Driveways for two way traffic shall be 24 feet b Parking Facility Layout There shall be no off-street parking spaces located within 15 feet of any street right of way or 10 feet of any property line exept in the Central Business District where it may be allowed with and approved design permit c Access to Spaces or Facilities a Driveway Design Standards 1 Driveways shall be designed to conform with existing contours to the maximum extent feasible 2 Driveways shall enter public/private streets in such a manner as to maintain adequate line of sight d Aisles Circulation aisles necessary for maneuvering within a parking facility shall be designed so that vehicles do not back out into a street, sidewalk or other public way, other than a residential alley In general, double -loaded aisles are preferred to single - loaded aisles e Curbing All commercial, industrial or multifamily residential parking lots with five (5) or more spaces Cf 11 shall have continuous concrete curbing around the entire parking lot f Border Barricades Every parking facility containing angled or 90 degree parking spaces adjacent to a street right-of-way shall, except at entrance and exit drives, be developed with a solid curb or barrier along such street right-of-way line, or shall be provided with a suitable concrete barrier at least six (6) inches in height and located not less than two (2) feet form such street right-of-way line Such wall, fence, curb, or barrier shall be securely installed and maintained g Surfacing All off-street parking facilities shall be surfaced with a minimum of five (5) inches of concrete, or one and one-half (1-1/2) inches of asphalt overlying four (4) inches of base rock except temporary off-street parking facilities, which may be surfaced by placement of a single bituminous surface treatment upon an aggregate base, which bituminous treatment and base shall be subject to the approval of the Director of Public Works All off-street parking shall be so graded and drained as to dispose of all surface water form within the area, in no case shall such drainage be allowed to cross sidewalks h Marking Parking spaces within a facility shall be clearly painted and delineated 1 Lighting Any lights provided to illuminate any parking facility permitted by this Title shall be arranged so as to reflect the light away from any adjacent properties, streets, or highways I Landscaping and Screening 1 Landscaping shall be provided in new parking -lot construction and reconstruction Landscaping is employed to diminish the visibility and impact of parked cars by screening and visually separating them from surrounding activities and the street, to provide shade and relief from paved areas, to channel the flow of traffic and generally contribute to good site design ,,, Trees, schrubs, ground cover and earth begrjing X shall be used for lot landscaping 2 Every parking facility abutting property located in residential districts shall be separated from such property by a wall, planter, or a view - obscuring fence, or a raised landscaped mound of 63 %1 • 0 earth, sand, stones, or the like, or by a permanently maintained compact evergreen hedge, or a combination of any of the preceding treatments Such screening devices shall be six (6) feet in height, measured from the grade of the finished surface of such parking facility, along the abutting residential property, except that such Subd 2 LOADING OFF-STREET LOADING FACILITIES 1 Purpose To reduce street congestion and traffic hazards and to add to the safety and convenience of the community, adequate, attractively designed, and functional facilities for off-street loading shall be incorporated as necessary in conjunction with new uses of land in the City 2 General Provisions For every building hereafter erected, which is to be occupied by manufacturing, storage, warehouse, retail and/or wholesale store, market, hotel, hospital, mortuary, laundry, dry cleaning or other uses similarly requiring the receipt or distribution by vehicles of material nd merchandise, off-street loading areas shall be provided in accordance with the requirements herein 3 Required Areas a Gross Floor Area Required Loading Spaces 10,000 to 24,999 sq ft 1 25,000 to 49,999 sq ft 2 For each additional 50,000 square feet or major fraction thereof 1 b Each loading space shall be not less than ten (10) feet in width, thirty (30) feet in length and with an overhead clearance of fourteen (14) feet c Such space may occupy all or nay part of any required yard or court space, except front and exterior side yards, and shall not be located closer than fifty (50) feet to any lot in an R-District, unless inside a structure or separated from such district by a wall not less than eight (8) feet in height, provided a conditional fence permit is approved 64 W-1 V • PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW CASE NO SUB/89-69 Planning Commission Meeting October 9, 1989 Project Location Northeast corner of Curve Crest Boulevard and Washington Avenue (Outlot B, Parcel C, IP-I, Stillwater Industrial Park Applicant's Name Prime Site, Inc COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DISTRICT Industrial Park -Industrial ZONING DISTRICT IP-I TYPE OF APPLICATION Subdivision Plan/Plat - Prime Site Addition Pro.iect Description A subdivision of a 14 963 acre parcel (Outlot B, Parcel C of the Stillwater Industrial Park) Discussion The request is to subdivide a 14 963 acre parcel into seven lots ranging in size from 1 88 acres to 3 89 acres This large lot is located on the Northeast corner of Curve Crest Boulevard and Washington Avenue Each lot proposed meets the minimum lot width and lot depth requirements for the Industrial Park Industrial District Six of the seven lots have access on either Washington Avenue or Curve Crest Boulevard with the exception of Lot One wnich has frontage on a street easement for the future extension of Orleans Street This parcel also does not have utility services at the present time The remaining six parcels have utility connections The subdivision plan has been distributed to the City Engineer, Public Works and Water Department for comment CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1 Modification to the subdivision plat, responding to comments from the City Engineer, regarding grading, drainage or utilities shall be made before Final Plat Approval 2 Lot #1 shall be combined with Lot #2 or road and utilities extended to Lot #1 3 Before construction on any lot occurs, a grading plan for the entire site shall be submitted and approved by the City Engineer • RECOMMENDATION Approval ATTACHMENT - App ication - Preliminary Plat n U Case Number'jg_h/%u _o Fee Paid���_ Data Filed PLANKING ADMINIS i RAi 1VF FORM Street Location or • PropertyWashington Avenue/Curve Crest Boulevard/Orleans Street --Be3ng'P'a�'t oP-fhe'1V8YtTitTe3'r'3t�vf-tize-Srnrteast 1/4 and Lec, .l Doscrip-ton of Property: Part of the Northeast 1/4 of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 32,T 30N,R 20W of the city o� Stil7wa�er---- Owner Nic ,e __XPrime_Site Incorporated_ --------------------------------- Addr ess _ P 0 _Box 171_Stillwater_ MN -_-_ Phone _439-0558 Aooiiccn; (if other t cn owner) Name _________________________________ Address------------------------------ Phone--------------- Type of Request ___ Rezoning _ x Approval of Preliminary Plat Special Use Permit ___ Approval of Final Plat --- Variance --- Other ------__ e4_11 Desc-ipt,on of Request ____ Preliminary Plat Approval 6 --------- -- - -- ------------------------------------------------------------------ Signc;vre or Applicant _ Prim Site Incorporated Datao-' Public Hearing --------------------------------------------- NO= S.cetc4 of proposed prone*' and structure to be drawn on bacx oz this form or at. taclea, showing tk a foilowine I North direction. 2 Location or proeosed structure on Iot. 3 Dimensions of front and side set -backs i r 4 Dimensions oz pronased structure z� �"" )fil 5 Street Hares = -A r''� 'fell rf cr 6 Location or. ad]acent evsting buildings , 7 Other imor—iatioa as may be reques`e(L Approved ___ Denied ___ by the Planning Commission on ___________ (date suojecj- to t„e o lowing conditions ----------------------------------- - Approved ___ Denied ___ by the Council on ________________ subleo: to tLe following conditions ____--------------------------- ---- --- Comments. (Use other side), _ STREET - ��x �' � ,'PRELIMINARY r PRIME SITE A I I s 1 ! BEING PART OF TH' NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THE /� ,/ / 1 l I OF THE NORTHEAS 1/4 0- THE SOUTHWEST 1 / 1 a R 20W OF THE Cl Y C— STILLWATER WASH INGT 1 1 PREPARED FOR PRIME SITE INC❑RP❑RATED P ❑ BOX 17 STILLWATER MN 4Y aC wv roa / 1 i •M1 M U �R \� pV�[ R 6 OIIx1L D[ YLS Ua ur 4OK 14 %sl 0 / DESIGNER CEDAR CORPORATION 604 WILSON AVENUEMENOMONIE. WI SURVEYOR LEE VILL7NEUVE P-LS 30462 WI RT 6 MENOMONIE vi OEM � SCALE 1 = 50 SEPT 29 198` CURVE CREST 0 r� u STILLWATER, MINNESOTA DOWNTOWN IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM MEETING OUTLINE FEASIBILITY PHASE (REVISED 9/28/89) Date Consultant Task 9/21/89 1 Review examples of C J Lilly design elements Mike Kraemer (ie pavers, lights) 2 Discuss Design Element Costs 3 Discuss Life Cycle Considerations 4 Discuss Streetscape 9/28/89 1 Updated schedule review Glen Van Wormer •C J Lilly Mike Kraemer 2 Review Water Street Concepts "Pedestrian Way vs Parking" 3 Begin Parking Ramp location/design discussions site pros/cons 10/5/89 1 Joint meetings with C J Lilly o Heritage Preservation Dick Moore /` Comm o Parks & Recreation o Public Works Staff 2 Discuss design concepts to date with visitors Committee Tasks 1 Offer input on material selection 2 Review material selection matrix 3 Make recommenda- tions on materials use 1 Offer input on Water Street Configuration 2 Review expecta- tions of Parking Ramp location and design 1 Share support for discussions reached 2 Solicit input on design elements 3 Determine how to handle input received 10/12/89 1 Parking Ramp Design Mike Kraemer Discussion Glen Van Wormer Bob Eaton 2 Parking Ramp location discussion 3 Parking Ramp Cost Consideration 4 Ramp Financing Options 10/19/89 1 Conclude street lighting Dick Moore discussion Mike Kraemer C J Lilly 2 NSP representative to discuss lighting maintenance agreement 3 NSP representative to discuss burying Water Street and Lowell Park overhead powerlines 10/26/89 1 Discuss results of sewer Dick Moore televising Barry Peters Mike Kraemer 2 Discuss impact of utility renovation (ie water, sanitary sewer, storm sewer) 3 Discuss levee wall design options 1 Be prepared to a* design or function relate questions 2 Identify needed information if any 3 Select location and design 1 Bring comments and concerns with respect to overhead wiring 1 Develop consensus of levee wall design • •11/2/89 C J Lilly Mike Kraemer 1 Review project scope 2 Select fountain style 3 Select #tail treatment option 4 Review and verify design elements approved to date so concept plans and costs can be developed for Lowell Park 5 Discuss and vote on • overhead wiring options 6 Discuss construction staging options 11/9/89 Mike Kraemer C J Lilly Dick Moore 11/16/89 Dick Moore Mike Kraemer City Staff 1 Present Preliminary Cost Estimates 1 Develop consensus on fountain selection 2 Vote on overhead wiring option o Lowell Park o Streetscope o Parking Lots o Mulberry Blvd o Lowell Inn Parking o Boat Plaza o Entrance Features o North & South Main o Water Street 1 Compile list of needed information or project scope changes as a result of review of cost estimates 2 Discuss report format (ie details, assessments) 3 Present Final Concept Renderings 1 City Financial Officer to present funding analysis 1 Review financing options 2 Select financing • option 11/23/89 1 Issue draft feasibility report 2 Issue draft financing plan concept 3 Issue draft parking management plan 11/30/89 1 Meet to discuss feasibility Mike Kraemer report comments Dick Moore Glen Van Wormer C J Lilly City Staff 12/5/89 1 Present draft feasibility Mike Kraemer report to Council Dick Moore Glen Van Wormer 12/19/89 1 Council accepts feasibility Mike Kraemer report Dick Moore Glen Van Wormer •I 1 Review and come prepared to discuss 2 Identify graphics needed to present at Council 12/5/89 and Public Meeting 1/3/90 3 Identify presenters to Council • 1 Committee presents report to Council with assistance of consultants 1 Council offers final comment on report 11 i • END FEASIBILITY PHASE 1/3/90 1 Hold Public Meeting 1 Committee makes Mike Kraemer Dick Moore Glen Van Wormer C J Lilly 1/2/90 4/l/90 5/l/90 6/l/90 11/30/90 0 Begin plans and specifications 1 Complete plans Plans submitted for committee, Council, and Mn/DOT review Receive bids Begin construction Complete construction presentation to public with assistance of consultant Committee reviews design for compliance with feasibility and acceptable quality 1 Committee review "test" sections to approve appearance and workmanship 0 1/3/90 1 Mike Kraemer Dick Moore Glen Van Wormer C J Lilly 1/2/90 4/l/90 5/l/90 • 6/l/90 11/30/90 C� END FEASIBILITY PHASE Hold Public Meeting 1 Committee makes presentation to public with assistance of consultant Begin plans and specifications 1 Complete plans Plans submitted for committee, Council, and Mn/DOT review Receive bids Begin construction Complete construction Committee reviews design for compliance with feasibility and acceptable quality 1 Committee review "test" sections to approve appearance and workmanship • 0 WEST STILLWATER BUSINESS PARR E4ISTING CONDITIONS PREPARED BY CITY OF STILLWATER COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT SEPTEMBER, 1989 • • TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 1 BACKGROUND 3 EXISTING CONDITIONS 5 GEOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION 5 ZONING 6 LAND USE 6 LAND USE/ZONING COMPARISON 7 UTILITIES 8 DESIGN 9 VACANT LAND 10 DEVELOPMENT TRENDS 10 SUMMARY OF BUSINESS PARK SURVEY 11 I* 0 0 INTRODUCTION The West Stillwater Business Park Plan 1989, is based on months of study of the Business Park area This study was prepared for the West Stillwater Business Park Planning Committee by the Community Development Department The first section os the report describes the existing conditions in the area in terms of land use, zoning, tralric, parking, utilities, design and appearance employment and development trends These conditions corm the basis for the recommendations contained in the secona section or the reoort which are desio_nee to address current needs and anticipated problems The West Stillwater Business Park has traditionally been defined as the area bounded by Highway 36 on the south County Road 5 on the west, Greeley Street on the east, and Orleans Street on the north For the purposes of the study we have also included Stillwater Township land to the west of County Road 5, the Benson Farm to the north of Orleans, and the commercial strip running east from Greeley along Highway 36 to the city limits Reasons for the Plan The West Stillwater Business Park was established to provide a large amount of vacant land for industrial development As the population and median income of the surrounding area continued to grow, it came under increasing pressure to support large scale retail development In 1986, a developer proposed a 42 million dollar retail mall/hotel/office project at the intersection of Highway 36 and County Road 5 The proposed mall, called Woodland Lakes, created a great deal of controversy Residents argued that land intended for industrial use should not be used for a retail mall which would serve people well beyond the Stillwater area Opponents replied that there was a bigger demand for retail in the area than for industrial develooment Other people questioned the viability of the project itself, claiming that there was enough retail in the Stillwater area If additional retail businesses were added to the market existing retailers would suffer, particularly those in downtown Stillwater Despite this opposition, the mall was approved In 1987, with site preparation already underway, the Woodland Lakes Mall collapsed due to financing problems, and the developer left the state one step ahead of many creditors Because the controversy had caused many new questions about the land use in the industrial park, the Stillwater City Council decided that a thorough study of the area was needed A citizen committee, made up of business owners, land owners, planning commissioners, realtors, and concerned citizens of the area, was established to oversee the planning of the area 1 Property owners in the Business Park were also concerned about the visual impact of development in the area Many of the new buildings in the park were attractive office buildings with an abundance of landscaping and buffered parking Those property owners were concerned about new development that was not compatible with the existing buildings They feared both for the general look of the area and for their property values There was nothing in the zoning for the business park which would regulate design Developers could put up a metal building if they wished Because oY this, an examination oY existing building design was included in the research for the plan 0 2 0 BACKGROUND • Stillwater is a beautiful city located in Washington County approximately 18 miles northeast of St Minneapolis Paul and 25 miles east of It borders the State of Wisconsin Its distinctive downtown architecture gives the visual impression of the 19th century city This, coupled with the scenic St Croix River Valley, makes Stillwater an attractive and well known city with a sizeable tourist trade Major transportation routes from the Twin Cities Metro Area which have direct access to Stillwate- are State Highway 36 and County Road 5 which intersects Interstate Highways 694 and a9s Tre=e major transportation routes make Stillwater an attractive place to live toi Twin Cities Metro Area commuters Stillwater was established in 1843 from a small camp of lumbermen from Maine who saw the St Croix River as a perfect place for the transportation of lumber Stillwater is located at a point where the bluffs swing back from the river and provide a level space of land Stillwater considers itself the birthplace of Minnesota because in February, 1851 the territorial legislature first meet there and designated It Paul as the territorial capital Stillwater received the second price, the site of the territorial penitentary The lumber industry was Stillwater s main economic base until the early 1900 s After the turn of the century, the lumber industry left the St Croix Valley, and Stillwater's population shrunk from 25,000 to 10,000 The population remained stable into the 1950 s and 1960 s The areas around Stillwater began to grow at this time, reflecting the general growth of the Twin Cities metropolitan area New commercial areas sprouted upon Highway 36 outside the city limits Between 1970-1980, population increased 36 8/ in Washington County versus a 20 G/ increase in Stillwater The reason that the county population is growing faster than the City of Stillwater is because of the accelerated growth of southern Washington County This area, which includes the rapidly growing cities of Woodbury, Oakdale and Cottage Grove is both closer to the metropolitan area and has better access along Interstate 94 During the same period, Washington County was continuing to maintain its position as the county with the highest median income in Minnesota During the period of 1980-86, County median Income growth outpaced that of the rest of the Twin Cities metro area These income and population growth rates, and the expectation of continued growth to come, have brought a lot of interest in major retail development to the Stillwater area 3 As the downtown businesses became more oriented to the tourist trade since the 1960 s, the commercial area along Highway 36 became the main shopping place for Stillwater area residents As commercial pressures have increased, people have have started to question the saving of vacant land in the Business Park area for industrial development The Woodland Lakes development might have collapsed, but other developers are interested in a major retail development in the Bus-ness Park area The site at the intersection of Highway 36 and County Fcad S has piewty or room access visibility and pro.im-t/ to mar'.et It is probable that there will be ma-, no-e major proposals put forth for the site With the completion of the West Stillwater Business Park Plan, the City of Stillwater will be able to manage the growth in this area with planned anne\ations, planned utility placements and an overall organized growth policy plan for Commercial Industrial and Residential districts i 0 • Geographic Description EXISTING CONDITIONS Long Lake and its drainage area form the western boundary of the study area The Stillwater Township land in this area is gently rolling and slopes west to Long Lake There are farms and some single family houses in this area, with no sewer/water lines The only access to this area is along 62nd Street a narrow two lane road Going east just ac~oss Count/ Road 5 is the largest vacant paiceI it the st.,d/ area Tris syte is apo_o.imatel/ 60 ac-es c aeeo and slopes to the west toward Long Lake It does not have sewer/water lines Access to this area would have to come from highway 5 or Orleans Street, or from the e\tension of Curve Crest Boulevard and/or Tower Drive From east of this site to Washington Street is a series of smaller parcels Most of the ones along Highway 36 have been developed while most of the ones further north have not This land is accessible from Washington Street, West Orleans Street, Tower Drive, and Curve Crest Boulevard Sewer/water lines run along the existing streets East of Washington Street to Greeley Street is the original Stillwater Industrial Parr, which has a variety of retail, commercial, and industrial development Washington Street, Northwestern Avenue, Industrial Boulevard, and Greeley Street all provide access to this area from Highway 36 Tower Drive runs East-West between Washington and Northwestern, while Curve Crest Boulevard is the only East-West street serving the entire area Sewer/water lines run along the existing streets North of the Industrial Park is the Benson farm The Benson farm is primarily flat land, and is currently used as a sod farm Access to this area could come either from the extension of Orleans Street or Pine Tree Trail, or from Curve Crest Boulevard next to Courage Center, where a road easement exists The farm has no sewer/water lines, and the nearest ones run along Curve Crest Boulevard East of Greeley Street is the Brick Pond area This area currently has residential and commercial development, a cemetary, a school, vacant land, and the Washington County Government Center Some of this land is in Stillwater, and some is in Oak Park Heights The land in this area slopes to the north Greeley and Osgood Streets provide access to Highway 36 There is no East-West road which runs through this area Sewer/water lines run along the existing streets n �J Zoning is With the exception of the Benson farm and the land west of County Road 5, the land in the study area is zoned Industrial This varies from IP-I (Industrial) to IP-C (Commercial) to IP-C1 (Commercial One) These zoning classifications have the same bulk, height, density, landscaping, and lot coverage requirements They differ only in regard to the permitted and conditionally permitted land uses The Benson farm and the land west of County Road 5 are Stillwater To4nsl­ip laid These area are zoned PA Thls 1S a Washington County zoning des-gnat,on Rat is single family resident -al .it, a minimum lot size of 10 400 .square feet per d elling unit "rne Township land west of Count/ Road 5 consists of single family residential, with some remaining agricultural land The uses of both of these prooerties are consistent with their current zoning This Stillwater Township land is not e,pected to be developed in the near future This means that the proper zoning is in place for those areas most likely to be developed, and there are no areas in immediate need of rezoning On the fringe of the Business park are some areas zoned RCM Tnis is Multi -Family Residential zoning Multi -family must contain a • minimum of three units The minimum lot size is 12,000 square feet with a minimum of 2,800 square feet per unit These districts are transition areas between the Business Park and sigle-family residential districts Land Use The Stillwater West Business Park contains approximately 450 acres of land, with III businesses located within its boundaries Over 2200 people are employed in 1,000,000 square feet of building space The total value of property in the Business Park area is over 45 million dollars Of the total acreage in the Business Park, 48/ is vacant land, 19/ is agricultural, II/ is office/service, 8/ is industrial, 7 5/ is retail 5/ is residential, and 1 5/ is restaurant Of the total property value of approximately $45 million dollars, 30/ of the value is office/service, 24/ is retail, 18 5/ is industrial, 14/ is vacant land, 9 5/ is residential, 3/ is restaurants, and 1/ is agricultural land Of the total employment of over 2200 people, 42/ are employed in industrial businesses, 38 5/ in office/service, 10/ in restaurants, and 9 5 in retail For industrial businesses, 98/ 02 their employees are full time • For office/service 73/, retail 52/, and restaurants 21/ Of the employees, 37 5/ live in Stillwater, 22 5/ live in Wisconsin, 20/ live in Washington County outside of 18 5/ live in Minneapolis - St Paul and its suburbsStillwater, , and 1 5/ live elsewhere In the restaurant and retail sectors over 50/ of the people employed are Stillwater residents In the o*rice/service sector 40/ of the employees are Stillwater residents while Industrial sector �0' of them aim in the It is estimated that 4-5/ of employees carpool to worms Land Use/Zoning Comparison A comparison of e.isting Land Use and Zoning indicates that e%isting uses are generally consistent with zoning regulations The three Industrial Park zoning classifications (Industrial Park -Industrial, Industrial Park -Commercial, and Industrial Park -Commercial One) are very similar They are exactly the same with regard to setbacks, landscaping, lot size requirements, ma,imum floor area and lot coverage, and other government regulation They are different with regard to the permitted and • conditionally permitted uses The most important difference in the permitted is that Industrial Park -Industrial, which comprises 80 percent of the Business Park area, dces not allow retail Most of the general retail in the Business Park has been established along the Highway 36 frontage road in the area designated for retail These are the areas zoned Industrial Park -Commercial, which is the area intended for retail These areas comprise 15/ of the Business Park The exceptions to this are some retail establishments along Washington Avenue and Tower Drive in the area designated industrial Office and service areas have been developed throughout the industrial park This is consistent with the fact that there is not a zoning classification specifically fcr office/service use In fact, it is permitted under all three industrial park zoning classifications Most of these are one or two story buildings with one tenant There has been some development of small multi -tenant office buildings There have been only a few instances of speculative office buildings being built which are not totally leased Most of the industrial development has been consistent with the Industrial Park -Industrial zoning classification These developments are basically light industrial with offices adjoined No heavy industrial is permitted in the Business Park 7 Multiple family housing has also been developed in the area zoned • Industrial Park -Industrial However, the location of these developments are on the fringe areas of the Industrial Park and are compatible uses with the surrounding areas outside of the park Whether they are compatible with the surrounding industrial and commercial uses is an issue that some have raised Some of the single-family neighborhoods have requested that adjoining areas of the Business Park be rezonea RCM for multi-iam,l/ housing Tzey want additicrzl baf_e --a between ttiem and the Busincs_= T-ie Stillwatei Township land is zoned R4 This is a Wasnincton Count/ zoning designation R4 is single family res-dential with a minimum lot size of 10,400 square feet per dwelling unit The township land _n the stud/ area consists of the Benson farm and the land west of County Road S The Township land west of County Road consists of single family residential, with some remaining agricultural land Toe uses of both of these properties are consistent with their current zoning Utilities Most of the study area has electric, gas, water and sewer • service It is the Cit./ of Stillwater s policy to build utility service on an "as needed" basis Therefore the service lines were built as the roads were constructed, and the roads vere constructed only as the area developed The only areas lacking utility service are those areas where roads have not yet been constructed Service extensions into undeveloped areas would occur in conjunction with the extension of streets as required by new development No problems are anticipated in providing services to new development Electrical service is provided by Northern States Power Company (NSP) Service lines are underground and were installed at the time streets were put into the area, and so they are considered to be in good condition 0 I Natural gas is also provided by HSP in underground pipes These pipes were also installed at the time streets were put into the area, and are considered to be in good condition Sewer/water and Storm Water Sewer service are provided by the City of Stillwater Sewer/water lines connect with the Lily Lake station just northeast of the Business Park Sewer/water lines are considered adequate in size to handle new development New development on the Woodland Lakes site at Count/ Road 5 and Hlghday 36 would require a pumping station to provide enough pressure to reach the Lil/ La'e statlon Storm Eeaer lines outlet into natural d,ainaae baLinz scattere:: arourd the business park area The storm sewe_ lines and drainage basing are capable of handling storm water from the equivalent of a 100 year storm The only major area in the Business Park that lacks utility services is the Woodland Lakes area along Highway 5 The nearest sewer/water and storm water service lines to this area are located along Washington Street There are gas and electric lines located along County Road 5 and at Orleans Street The bank located on the northeast intersection of Highway 36 and Highway 5 and the convience store located at County Road 5 and Orleans street both have on-s-te septic systems They will be 40 connected to sewer/water lines when they are brought into the area Outside the current Business Park area, the Stillwater Township land west of County Road 5 and the Benson farm both lack sewer/water and storm sewer service This is not a problem now When and if these lands are annexed for development, service will need to be provided by extension from existing areas Design Concerns Of the building facades in the Business Park, 44 5/ are primarily of brick, 28/ of cement or concrete, 17/ of wood, 5 5/ of metal, and 5/ other materials Slightly over 50/ of businesses indicate a concern with the design of new or existing buildings When just the businesses between Greeley St and County Road 5 are considered, the percentage of those concerned rises to over 65/ When River Heights Plaza Mall businesses are also excluded, the percentage concerned about design rises to over 75/ The area between County Road 5 and Greeley St where the design concerns are concentrated is the also the area where the brick • and wood buildings are concentrated It is also the area where buildings have the most landscaping 0 Vacant Land S A survey of vacant land conducted by the Stillwater Community Development Department in early 1989 identified 181 acres of vacant land available in the Stillwater Business Park between County Road 5 and Greeley Street This e`panded study has identified 297 acres of land for development Currently 97 acres have sewer/water service available and 200 acres would require that service be e,tended to them Dt- e-oo-^e"T' �nfc Based on the growth trends or 1980-198`, the Stillwater Community Development Department has projected that appro.imately 5 acres of land is needed annually to support commercial development in the Business Part, area Considering that growth trends have accelerated in 1987-1988, that figure may be low A survey of the current businesses in the Business Park area found that over SO/ of them have no plans for e,pansion in the ne,t five years Thirteen businesses plan to e{pand within two years, and nine more plan to expand within five years They estimate that these e%pansions will add approximately 70,000 square feet of space and 140-180 employees Since there are 297 acres of vacant land available for development, it is clear that is Stillwater has enough land available for commercial growth for the foreseeable future C] 10 L' WEST STILLWATER BUSINESS PARK SURVEY Summary of Business Park Survey A survey was conducted of all of the businesses in the Business Part. This survey, in combination with a walling surve/ of all businesses was intended to obtain information and attitudes from the area businesses Among the information obtained were employment levels - bot`i fall and part-time home locat-on of employee_ carpooling pa-'.ing soace coLnts e oancio^ plans scua~e tcotace of build -no::; with a subseizue^t bi eandown s.-ito office production, and warehouse square ioctage building facade materials, and design concerns Methodology The BuSiness Parl Survey was initially distributed on July 26, with follow-up distribution the ne,t day to all businesses that were closed the first time A week and a half later on August the businesses were visited again and the surveys picked up Subsequent trips were made to pick up surveys that were not filled out by August 4 • Initially ill surveys were distributed During the month of August four businesses failed, leaving 107 possible resoonses As o2 September 1, 1909, there were 101 responses out o! a possible 107, a response rate of 94/ Employees There were a total number of employees of 2356 Of this 1641 were f ulltime workers, and 715 were part time Of these employees, 990 were living in Stillwater, 458 were living in Washington County outside of Stillwater, 488 lived in Wisconsin, 385 lived in Minneaoolis-St Paul or the suburbs outside of Washington County, and 35 lived elsewhere There were an estimted 118 workers who carpooled, or 5/ of the total employed in the Business Park Design Concerned about design Yes 46 No 39 No Response 16 11 11 Expansion Plans In 2 Years 13 In 5 Years 9 Ho/Don t Know 78 Expanding by how much (estimated) Employees 143-178 Square Feet 70,000 Pat'.1^c The e were 43=2 total soacee Total Amount of Building Square Feet 1,091,8-0 Additional Information and it s Source •I Total Market Value of Land and Improvements in the Business park, $44,319 000 Source - Washington County Ta% Assessor Total Value of Tam Increment Financing in the Business Par'<, $342,917 75 Source - Washington County Ta, Assessor Total Acreage it the Business Park, 441 6 Source - Washington • County Ta, Assessor 12 A"I ... . ..... ..