Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2020-07-22 CPC Packet. Water T H E 6 1 fl T H P L A C E �NESQTA PLEASE NOTE: Planning Commission meetings are streamed live on the city website and available to view on Channel 16. Public can participate by logging into zoom.us/join or by calling 1-312-626-6799 and enter the meeting ID number: 674 129 610 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING July 22nd, 2020 REGULAR MEETING 7:00 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Possible approval of minutes of June 20, 2020 regular meeting minutes IV. OPEN FORUM - The Open Forum is a portion of the Commission meeting to address subjects which are not a part of the meeting agenda. The Chairperson may reply at the time of the statement or may give direction to staff regarding investigation of the concerns expressed. Out of respect for others in attendance, please limit your comments to 5 minutes or less. V. PUBLIC HEARINGS - The Chairperson opens the hearing and will ask city staff to provide background on the proposed item. The Chairperson will ask for comments from the applicant, after which the Chairperson will then ask if there is anyone else who wishes to comment. Members of the public who wish to speak will be given 5 minutes and will be requested to step forward to the podium and must state their name and address. At the conclusion of all public testimony the Commission will close the public hearing and will deliberate and take action on the proposed item. 2. Case No. 2020-24: Consideration of Variances associated with a home remodel and addition. Property located at 1001 4th Ave S in the RB district. Brett Ellingson, property owner. 3. Case No. 2020-25: Consideration of a Special Use Permit and associated Variances to allow an accessory dwelling unit. Property located at 1030 4th Ave S in the RB district. Christopher Charlsen, property owner. 4. Case No. 2020-27: Consideration of a Zoning Map Amendment and Variances associated with a home addition. Property located at 501 Greeley Street South in the RB and PROS districts. Jon and Julianne Summers, property owners. John Comb of Custom Craft Builders, representative. 5. Case No. 2020-28: Consideration of a Variance to the lot coverage to replace an existing garage to have a larger footprint. Property located at 506 Laurel St W in the RB district. Tim and Julia Schmolke, property owners and Sussell Builders, representative. 6. Case No. 2020-29: Consideration of a Special Use Permit/Conditional Use Permit for a mural on the building. Property located at 14130 60th St N in the BP-C district. Olaf Rustad, property owner, and Matthew Anderson, representative. 7. Case No. 2020-23: Consideration of a Zoning Text Amendment to modify code relating to setback measurement. City of Stillwater, applicant. VI. FYI — STAFF UPDATES — (NO PACKET MATERIALS) VII. ADJOURNMENT tr. CiL•Hall l Still star - CCnneilm h_r F.an Callins CominnedonerSneStein all I� N '!ii MEE a� .4l 7 _ammissaner Mike Kamn hatlV TimSchmalls -Commissioner Eric Hansen i L - . � ✓� � lon's iFhone 1 M' Commissioner Todd Meyhoff 11now� py X Cpm missmner John Di Julia and Chris Charlsen a Tom Program ROBERT Thomas Tom Jonathon Summ... " � B SS is ^ * © m0 0 Lai SWVkm smrtM P iid:ipaMs CM Sh r'Sa'rsn Pads/Stop rameii,y rear.ii John Comb End 11 �Vvater THE 7INTNYLA CE OF MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 24, 2020 REGULAR MEETING 7:00 P.M. Chairman Lauer called the meeting to order via Zoom at 7:00 p.m. Present: Chairman Lauer, Commissioners Dybvig, Hansen, Kocon, Steinwall, Councilmember Collins Absent: Commissioner Meyhoff Staff: City Planner Wittman, Community Development Director Turnblad APPROVAL OF MINUTES Possible approval of minutes of May 27, 2020 regular meeting Motion by Commissioner Kocon, seconded by Commissioner Dybvig, to approve the minutes of the May 27, 2020 meeting. All in favor. OPEN FORUM There were no public comments. CONSENT AGENDA There were no items on the Consent Agenda. PUBLIC HEARINGS Case No. 2020-20: Consideration of a Special Use Permit for outside sales on the property located at 2001 Washington Ave S in the BPC district. Michael Givens representing Mikden of Stillwater LLC, property owner and Bruce McLean, applicant. City Planner Wittman explained the application. Bruce McLean would like to display and sell portable sheds in the parking lot of 2001 Washington Avenue, the former Herberger's site. The sheds would be placed in the southern and eastern edges of the parking lot, on the north side of the storm pond. The total number of sheds has not been indicated; one of the sheds is proposed to be used as a business office. Staff believes that while activating a vacant property is desirable, doing so with outside sales on a permanent basis may not be a good solution. Currently there is no lot lighting. Staff questions if this could increase the public safety call volume to the site. Historically, the City has allowed outdoor sales that are incidental to the primary use of the property. Staff does not think the request conforms to the requirements of the zoning code. Therefore, staff recommends denial. Commissioner Hansen asked for confirmation that Special Use Permits run with the property. City Planner Wittman replied yes. If there were a public nuisance, there could be a public hearing on the SUP. Outdoor sales have generally been restricted to businesses like garden centers that sell seasonal items. The applicant stated this is intended to be a permanent and year-round use. Chairman Lauer opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. Chairman Lauer closed the public hearing. Planning Commission June 24, 2020 Commissioner Dybvig pointed out this site was the catalyst for planning the highway mixed use designation which combines commercial, retail and residential. The requested type of use would probably move further away from those goals, toward more industrial use. He feels this would not be the best use of this site. Commissioner Hansen agreed. He feels it would be essentially summer sales with winter storage as there would not be much business in the winter. The use could carry into the future with a Special Use Permit. He is not comfortable with this use in the parking lot of an unoccupied building. Commissioner Kocon agreed. A temporary permit would be more appropriate. Commissioner Steinwall agreed this would be considered outdoor storage which is prohibited in this zoning district. Councilmember Collins agreed. He added that the site has been a hangout at night and police have had to shoo people away. Motion by Commissioner Dybvig, seconded by Commissioner Steinwall, to deny Case No. 2020-20, Special Use Permit for outside sales on the property located at 2001 Washington Ave S. All in favor. Case No. 2020-21: Consideration of a Comprehensive Plan Amendment for the SE corner of Manning Ave and Highway 36. City of Stillwater, applicant. Community Development Director Tumblad reviewed the case. The City of Stillwater's 2040 Comprehensive Plan identifies the 35.3 acres of property owned by Central Commons, LLC adjacent to the southwest corner of the City as a potential annexation site. It is referred to as Site G and is guided for Highway Mixed Use Development. Central Common's plans are generally consistent with that guidance. However, now that annexation of the site is imminent, there are several related elements of the 2040 Plan that will need to be updated. The related updates include adding the 35.3 acres to the Future Land Use Map; revising growth assumptions for the City's vacant and underdeveloped properties; extending the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) to include the property; and revising the Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ) map and table to show the expected changes in population and employment. He explained the updates in detail. The Metropolitan Council staff is comfortable with this Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Staff recommends approval. Commissioner Steinwall asked about the triangular portion that is in Stillwater Township: does the City expect that will also be annexed? She also pointed out that the Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) is still in process and she is concerned about taking action on a Comp Plan Amendment that anticipates certain growth that seems to be entirely based on a plan that has not yet finished environmental review. She asked if it is possible to delay this action until the EAW is approved. Mr. Tumblad replied that the reason that the Comp Plan Amendment addresses only the 35.3 acres is that the Met Council will not approve Comp Plan Amendments for property that is not in the bounds of the City. The triangular piece cannot be addressed until there are more details because the amendment is property -specific. The City will have to go through this process for that piece when its petition for annexation has been filed. Regarding the timing, in order to get all this through City review and comply with statutory requirements for taking action on applications, some actions must be done piecemeal. When this particular Comp Plan Amendment goes to the City Council, approval will be contingent on annexation occurring and upon final approval of Central Commons. Commissioner Steinwall referred to an EAW requirement stating that there will be no action until the EAW is complete. Page 2 of 4 Planning Commission June 24, 2020 Mr. Turnblad explained that is why, if the Council approves, it will be contingent on completion of the EAW and any findings that are attached to it. Final action cannot be taken on the Comp Plan Amendment until the EAW has cleared its cycle and the Council is sensitive to that. Chairman Lauer opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. Chairman Lauer closed the public hearing. Motion by Commissioner Hansen, seconded by Commissioner Kocon, to recommend approval of Case No. 2020-21, Comprehensive Plan Amendment for the SE corner of Manning Ave and Highway 36. Commissioner Steinwall said she would like to emphasize that the recommendation from the Planning Commission is contingent upon completion of the EAW. All in favor. Case No. 2020-22: Consideration of Variances associated with the construction of a single family dwelling. Property located at 595 Marquee Ct in the RA district. Keith Hermanson, property owner. Ms. Wittman stated that Keith Hermanson has designed a single family dwelling proposed to be located at 595 Marquee Court in the Preserves of Stillwater platted neighborhood. The properties on the north side of Marquee Court in this neighborhood back wetland areas. Each of these properties has significant wetland buffers and setbacks. To help ensure natural resource protection, the Planning Commission granted 5' variances to the 30' front yard setback at the time of preliminary plat approval; each of these homes, including 595 Marquee Court, was permitted to have a 25' front yard setback. The applicant is proposing the home to have a 20' front yard setback which would require a 5' variance. Staff recommends approval of the request with three conditions. Keith and Gretchen Hermanson, applicants, said they thoroughly reviewed the documents and saw no reference to the setback restriction. Chairman Lauer opened and closed the public hearing. There were no public comments. Ms. Wittman pointed out that the City has a joint powers agreement with the Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization to uphold their requirements for wetlands which involve wetland buffers and structural setbacks from buffers. It is easy to miss because there is no recording of the required setback from a buffer. Commissioner Steinwall suggested that the City somehow make the information more known. Mr. Hermanson noted that he shared information on the setback with the realtor who representing the rest of the properties and suggested she make sure to explain that to any other potential buyers. Ms. Wittman noted that updating wetland regulations is on the to do list. Motion by Commissioner Hansen, seconded by Commissioner Steinwall, to approve Case No. 2020-22, Variances associated with the construction of a single family dwelling at 595 Marquee Ct with the three staff -recommended conditions. Commissioner Dybvig stated that the Commission should keep in mind when platting in the future to make sure the buildable area is large enough to build a reasonably sized house. All in favor. UNFINISHED BUSINESS There was no unfinished business. NEW BUSINESS There was no new business. Page 3 of 4 Planning Commission June 24, 2020 OTHER ITEMS OF DISCUSSION City Planner Wittman alerted the Commission to a Chestnut Street Plaza visioning meeting tomorrow night. A public input survey is also available. Commissioner Hansen asked when in -person meetings might resume. Ms. Wittman said staff is working on a plan to reopen City Hall but it is uncertain when that will be able to occur. FYI STAFF UPDATES There were no staff updates. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Commissioner Hansen, seconded by Commissioner Kocon, to adjourn the meeting at 7:54 p.m. All in favor. ATTEST: Abbi Wittman, City Planner Chris Lauer, Chair Page 4 of 4 (s,11111water 0�_] - 11 E g I R f H P I A C E ❑ E M! N N E S© I A PLANNING REPORT TO: Planning Commission CASE NO.: 2020-20 REPORT DATE: June 18, 2020 MEETING DATE: June 24, 2020 APPLICANT: Brett Ellingson LAND OWNER: Brett and Alison Ellingson REQUEST: Variances associated with the construction of a home remodel and addition project LOCATION: 1001 4th Avenue South ZONING: RB — Two Family Residential PREPARED BY: Abbi Wittman, City Planner REVIEWED BY: Bill Turnblad, Community Development Director INTRODUCTION Brett and Alison Ellingson have purchased the property at 1001 4th Avenue South. They intend to remodel the home and add an enlarged rear addition and deck as well as an attached two -car garage on the front of the home. SPECIFIC REQUEST Consideration of: 1. A 6' variance to the 20' (exterior) Side Yard Setback for an addition Street View - (August 2013 , Google) Case no. 2020-24 Page 2 of enclosed living area and deck to be located 14' from the north property line; 2. A 4' variance to the 20' Front Yard Setback for a covered porch/stoop to be 16' from the property line; and 3. A 14' variance to the 30' Front Yard Setback for garage to be located 16' from the property line. ANALYSIS The purpose of the variance is to "...allow variation from the strict application of the terms of the zoning code where the literal enforcement ... would cause practical difficulties for the landowner." In addition to the requirements, below, Section 31-208 indicates "[n]onconforming uses or neighboring lands, structures or buildings in the same district or other districts may not be considered grounds for issuance of a variance" and "...a previous variance must not be considered to have set a precedent for the granting of further variances. Each case must be considered on its merits." Section 31-208 further indicates: ■ Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. ■ A previous variance must not be considered to have set a precedent for the granting of further variances. Each case must be considered on its merits. 1. No variance maybe granted that would allow any use that is prohibited in the zoning district in which the subject property is located. Single family homes with attached garages are permitted in the RB — Two Family Residential zoning district. 2. The variance must be in harmony with the Zoning Code and the Comprehensive Plan. Case no. 2020-24 Page 3 a. What is the purpose of the regulation for which the variance is being requested? The Front and (exterior) Side Yard setbacks are required for uniform neighborhood development pattern and to allow for onsite drainage. b. If granted, would the proposed variance be out of harmony with the Zoning Code? The proposed home would still allow for these things. The home would be situated back from both roadways, maintaining similar setback distance as nearby properties. Furthermore, the property owner is proposing to install drain tile on the front of the garage and home to appropriately direct water away from this structure and the neighboring property to the south. c. If granted, would the proposed variance be out of harmony with the Comprehensive Plan? No, it would not be out of harmony with the Comprehensive Plan. 3. A variance may be granted when the applicant establishes that there are `practical difficulties " in complying with the Zoning Code. A practical difficulty means that the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the Zoning Code; the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; and the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Economic considerations alone do not constitute a 'practical difficulty ". a. Is the property proposed to be used in a reasonable manner? The use of the property a single family home with attached garage is reasonable. b. Is the plight of the landowner due to circumstances unique to the property? The home was constructed in 1898, on the high side of the property. Are the circumstances created by the landowner? The placement on the home on the high side of the lot was not done by the property owner. While additions to the structure could be placed out of the setbacks, the owner has designed additions to the home which do not encroach into the setback any greater than the existing footprint. d. If granted, would the variance alter the essential character of the locality? The additions will not extend closed to the lot line than the existing structure and will be adequately distanced from the roadway, given the excess right-of-way adjacent to the subject property. The property owner is proposing an attached garage to face the 41h Avenue North right- of-way. The garage -forward design is not encourage in the Neighborhood Conservation District; Stillwater's design principles encourage the garage to be set back behind the front line of the home. While the garage will be flush with the front of the home, this is not an uncommon design along the east side of this street as accommodating garages in the rear of properties is difficult due to the sloping grade. e. Have practical difficulties been established independent of economic considerations? Yes. POSSIBLE ACTIONS Case no. 2020-24 Page 4 The Planning Commission has the following options: A. Approve the requested variances with the following conditions: 1. Plans shall be substantially similar to those found on file with CPC Case No. 2020-4, except as modified by the conditions herein. 2. Plans and the use will need to be approved by the engineering, fire and building officials before the issuance of a building permit. 3. All changes to the approved plans will need to be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director. Any major changes will need to go to the Planning Commission for review and approval. B. Deny the requested variances. With a denial, findings of fact supporting the decision must be provided. C. Table the request for additional information. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION Staff finds the request conforms to the zoning code, is not in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan and has established practical difficulties for the issuance of the variance. Therefore, staff recommends approval of the request with the conditions outlined in Alternative A, above. Attachments: Site Location Map Narrative Request (2 pages) Proposed Site Plan cc: Brett Ellingson C S i 10 F 1006 �/ J 1006 ' 7..- {� 1011�5 _ c L) A-ru - d . `o c�Y" �cicc-'t,4 �aL �` /loet5,p-- C27X p+� • s Il°� �C� i�lJ t'txc,,,)Ia /')``per 3 , 3 /4 a 14 c 14 &/1 h P re- !`S Gz 4 u y e 7�� r— ,(�]�`r7��e ky,�er 'tAN 7``l °e- der �- [ 0 e- -F/o,v r5, �f �,9 '�`'�- 7-0 '1-A e. sot,, 7" 4 q)q, • µ a e Floe) ! r-7 V •j '+ � ��� �1 VT/ J F 7 V r wy f i Y14 0- LI J s e.d u ��jmine``�� ,_ P Lt1[ R ' ne h J1 C1 y14 / C-cmi-on-ao- C9 C Q V yS r /,4 Na as wile . ;,Xj YlleW 9A, 7 k ro t * 5fl % In Wotulk ga �r--�� e-ko QS61 io 411It -7— C/o coare�ela roc) e wtg-5 -ULO r It eT-I,^ ../ 7 �r Y ra m k6 yse 5 r 0 1IeJ' � uc / ems. r 40 -JC) of a pe-,�Oole &F77 e sv� rye Avqve enovoA, tAxle-0 60 ,-�-o � o `¢--�ti�s c� n ��ss � � f s �► 1I'n4Gu rt9 SAYS... lciq-,,-es &F`�e ro bleln i& P. 1, 4 �� � .,� �. ..� __ i rater wjj�A T 11 7:67 ft i ;11P;:L;:A;:C�E �FM SN E S 0 i A PLANNING REPORT TO: Planning Commission CASE NO.: 2020-25 REPORT DATE: July 15, 2020 MEETING DATE: July 22, 2020 APPLICANT: Christopher Charlsen LANDOWNER: Christopher Charlsen REQUEST: Consideration of a Special Use Permit and associated Variances to allow for an accessory dwelling unit LOCATION: 1030 41h Avenue South ZONING: RB, Two -Family Residential REPORT BY: Abbi Jo Wittman, City Planner INTRODUCTION Chris Charlsen owns the property at 1030 41h Avenue South. He intends to convert the existing accessory structure into an Accessory Dwelling Unit. The 16.4' by 36.7' accessory structure construction date is unknown though the style suggests it was constructed around the same time as the primary residence, in 1877. The structure is constructed approximately 4' over the property line. The building has been used for Street View (August, 2013 — Google) business and storage purposes. The owner would like to retain the structure, repurposing it as a second dwelling on the property. Proposed improvements include adding a 28 square foot foyer to the front of the structure and a second story deck to the north side of the structure. SPECIFIC REQUEST 1. A Special Use Permit to convert an accessory structure into an Accessory Dwelling Unit; CPC Case 2020-25 Page 2 of 6 2. A 158 square foot variance to the 1,000 square foot maximum allowable accessory structure coverage; 3. A 432 square foot variance to the 800 square foot maximum allowable Accessory Dwelling unit size; 4. A 25' variance to the 25' rear yard setback; and 5. A 2.5' variance to the 5' side yard setback ANALYSIS City Code Section 31-207, Special Use Permits, identifies the city may grant a Special Use Permit or amendments when the following findings are made: The proposed structure or use conforms to the requirements and the intent of this chapter, and of the comprehensive plan, relevant area plans and other lawful regulations. The proposal is consistent with the comprehensive plan and relevant area plans. With regard to conformance to the requirements and intent of the Zoning Code, City Code Section 31-501, Accessory Dwellings, identifies the following performance standards for review: • Lot size must be at least 10, 000 square feet. The lot is 13,494 square feet. • The accessory dwelling may be located on the second floor above the garage. The owner is proposing the entire accessory structure, not currently used as a garage, be converted to living space. • The accessory dwelling unit must abide by the primary structure setbacks for side and rear setbacks. The structure's placement on the property, 4' over the west property line and 2.5' from of the southern property line, does not abide by the setbacks. Variances to the customary setbacks have been requested and are addressed in a subsequent section of this report. • The accessory dwelling must be located in the rear yard of the primary residence or be set back from the front of the lot beyond the midpoint of the primary i rr S ¢ 5f%�+lIC L �� ` rG'i ' f s, rf.6 Re, g o — IX at9— residence. This proposal Certificate of Survey (2020) conforms to this standard. CPC Case 2020-25 Page 3 of 6 • Off-street parking requirements (four spaces) must be provided. Two parking spaces are proposed to be located within the separately detached garage; this meets the requirements for two covered parking spaces. The driveway proposed to be located in front of the garage will accommodate the additional parking spaces required. • Maximum size of the garage and ADU is 800 square feet. This standard is not being met. Variances have been requested and are addressed in a subsequent section of this report. • The application requires design review for consistency with the primary unit in design, detailing and materials. The garage's design shows four-sided, design with details and materials that match the exterior facade of the primary residence. • The height may not exceed that of the primary residence. The existing structure's 1.5 story height does not exceed that of the primary residence's two story height. The owner is proposing to create a 4' foundation though, this will not cause an increase in height greater than the primary residence. • Both the primary and accessory dwelling units must be connected to municipal sewer and water services and be located on an improved public street. This will be a condition of approval. 2. Any additional conditions necessary for the public interest have been imposed. As the structure sits over the property line, the owner will need to obtain an easement to this area or will need to make formal request for a lot line adjustment with the City; the final determination of this will depend on building code requirements for the change of use. The owner is aware of this requirement and indicated his neighbors are aware as well. The City has not received any comments of concern. Certain conditions of approved, listed in the subsequent section, are recommended to help protect the public interest. 3. The use or structure will not constitute a nuisance or be detrimental to the public welfare of the community. Conditionally permitted ADUs in the RB — Two Family Residential district have not been a nuisance or are detrimental to the public. The State of Minnesota enables a City to grant variances when they meet the review criteria below. 1. No variance may be granted that would allow any use that is prohibited in the zoning district in which the subject property is located. The property is zoned RB, Two -Family Residential. Accessory Dwelling Units are permitted in the RB district. 2. The variance must be in harmony with the Zoning Code and the Comprehensive Plan. a. What is the purpose of the regulation for which the variance is being requested? Limiting the size of accessory structures and dwellings help reduce accessory structure CPC Case 2020-25 Page 4 of 6 mass on a property. Additionally, requiring these structures to abide by setbacks reduces potential infringement on adjacent neighbors. b. If granted, would the proposed variance be out of harmony with the Zoning Code? While a new structure of this size and in this location would not be in harmony, the preexisting structure's nonconformities exist and are permitted by zoning code. The preexisting accessory structure's footprint is 602 square feet. While the total livable area will exceed the 800 square foot requirement, the structure's footprint conforms to the general intent of this standard. The applicant is proposing to add 131 square foot, second story deck. The floor area of the second story and deck will not exceed the 800 square foot requirement. However, the addition of the deck in the rear yard area and over the property line could infringe on the neighbor's enjoyment of their rear year. c. If granted, would the proposed variance be out of harmony with the Comprehensive Plan? No, it would not be out of harmony with the Comprehensive Plan. In fact, the code discusses increasing density in Stillwater; construction of ADUs on properties that can accommodate them are one way the City can help achieve greater densities. 3. A variance may be granted when the applicant establishes that there are "practical difficulties" in complying with the Zoning Code. A practical difficulty means that the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the Zoning Code; the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; and the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Economic considerations alone do not constitute a "practical difficulty". a. Is the property proposed to be used in a reasonable manner? A single family residence with accessory dwelling unit is a reasonable use for the property. b. Is the plight of the landowner due to circumstances unique to the property? The structure has existed on the property since prior to the current owner's purchase. c. Are the circumstances created by the landowner? The property owner did not construct any of this accessory structure. However, the expansion of the structure by adding a second story deck is created by the landowner. d. If granted, would the variance alter the essential character of the locality? With the exception of the second story deck the character of the property will not be altered. e. Have practical difficulties been established independent of economic considerations? Yes. POSSIBLE ACTIONS The Planning Commission has the following options: CPC Case 2020-25 Page 5 of 6 A. Approve: If the Planning Commission finds the Special Use Permit amendment proposal and associated Variance is consistent with the provisions of the SUP process and the standards set forth for the establishment of practical difficulty, the Commission could move to approve the SUP and associated Variance with or without conditions. At a minimum, staff would recommend the following conditions of approval: 1. This Special Use Permit is in all ways a Conditional Use Permit as the term is used in Minnesota Statue Section 462.3595. 2. Plans shall be substantially similar to those found on file with CPC Case No. 2020-25, except as modified by the conditions herein. 3. The second story deck shall not be permitted. 4. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the property owner will: i. Amend the lot line to encompass the improvement and required life, health and safety codes: or ii. Submit a copy of a recorded 10' access, maintenance and stormwater easement on 506 Burlington Street East. 5. A building permit shall be obtained prior to the construction of the residence. The building permit shall clearly show design consistency with the primary residence including but not limited to: i. The pitch on the foyer gable shall match the pitch of gables on the primary residence. ii. Windows shall be consistently sized around the home and window grids should either be used on all windows of the garage and ADU or not used at all. Windows shall have the same level of detail and trim as the primary residence. 6. At the time of building permitting, the applicant shall be required to pay WAC/SAC charges for the new unit. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the ADU shall be connected to municipal sewer and water. 7. All changes to the approved plans will need to be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director. Any major changes will need to go to the Planning Commission for review and approval. B. Approve in part. C. Deny. If the CPC finds that the proposal is not consistent with the approved Special Use Permit guidelines or the standards set forth for the granting of variances, then the Commission could deny the request in whole or in part. With a denial, the basis of the action is required to be given. Furthermore, a denial without prejudice would prohibit the applicant from resubmittal of a substantially similar application within one year. D. Table. If the CPC needs additional information to make a decision, the request could be tabled. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION The City has established standards for the construction of ADUs to ensure they are accessory to properties and that they do not dominate a property. While the applicant is proposing to exceed the 800 square foot limitation and setbacks for ADUs, the reason is to adaptively reuse the CPC Case 2020-25 Page 6 of 6 historic resource. However, the expansion of the structure with the addition of a second -story deck could infringe on the neighboring property's privacy. Staff finds that, with the exception of the deck addition, the proposed ADU meets the Special Use Permit provisions and the standards set forth for the issuance of a variance. Therefore, staff recommends approval of Special Use Permit and associated variance for CPC Case No. 2020-54 with the conditions identified in Alternative A, above. Attachments: Site Location Map Narrative Request & Easement Statement (3 pages) Floor Plans Elevations cc: Chris Charlsen w 11 11 `111 IY 11. 11• fY' Ili 11• v 1 6" 1 • 1 ". 1 1 I f 1 1 r • Site Location 1General oil IN , INN r iI.RIF sm Elm 11IF a� 1 ` :MN,. _ .,, m June 18, 2020 Chris and Julia Charlsen 1030 4th Avenue South Stillwater, MN 55082 City of Stillwater Planning Commission 216 4th Street North Stillwater, MN 55082 Dear Planning Commission, Enclosed please find a completed application for a Special/Conditional Use Permit for the Carriage House located at 1030 4th Avenue South, Lots 7 and 8, Block 14 Herseys Staples Addition. The proposed project will stabilize the structure with a new foundation, and bring city water and sewer to the building so that it can be used as a studio and guest house. Bids have been solicited for the cost and scope of raising of the building from Semple Building Movers, Inc., see attached. Once lifted the original foundation will be replaced and in floor heat will be added. No alterations by way of adding a basement are proposed. The interior will be finished with kitchen, half bath and open living space downstairs. Upstairs will be divided into bedroom/office and 114 bath. The property on which the structure is located has been owned by the Charlsen family since 1944. The structure has been used as an antique store upstairs and office for Charlsen Trucking Service,lnc downstairs. The original purpose for the building was as a barn to house the horses and carriage for the home owner. It currently has two stories accessed by an exterior stairway. If the project is not undertaken, the structure is in danger of collapse. Given the unique times we find ourselves in, with Coronovirus Covid-19, and the state of our economy, our primary goal is to stabilize the structure with a new foundation. However, we have funds and are fully prepared, barring any unforeseen circumstances, to complete the interior renovation at this time. Practical Difficulty: The property owner proposes to use the land in a reasonable manner for a use permitted in the zone where the land is located, but the proposal is not permitted by other official controls The land is permitted residential and the proposed use would be for the home/land owner. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property and that are not created by the landowner. The carriage house was built in the 1800's for horses, over time the use has evolved. As it stands, the structure adds very little value to the property. It is classified as a 2 story shed for appraisal purposes. The Charlsen Trucking office has been moved inside the main dwelling, and livestock are not permitted within the city limits. The logical next step for the building would be to prevent its collapse, save its historical significance, and add livable space to increase the value. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. We propose to maintain the same general footprint, and to maintain the barn -like exterior appearance of the building. It is not our intention to build another "house" on our property. We want to create a place for our adult children and our aging parents to stay when they visit. Other uses of the space would include an art studio, or home office. Thank you for your review of our project. Contact Chris Charlsen at ccharlsen(a_aol.com or 651-439-2115 with any questions. Sincerely, Chris and Julia Charlsen June 18, 2020 Chris and Julia Charlsen 1030 4th Avenue South Stillwater, MN 55082 City of Stillwater Planning Commission 216 4th Street North Stillwater, MN 55082 RE: Easement for Carriage House located at 1030 4th Avenue South, Lots 7 and 8, Block 14 Herseys Staples Addition Dear Planning Commission, We have spoken to our neighbors, Chris and Virginia Kelly, at 506 Burlington Street East regarding the easement required to complete our carriage house project. Situation: Per mistakes made with surveys in the past, the carriage house at 1030 4th Avenue South, Lots 7 and 8, Block 14 Herseys Staples Addition is over the lot line to the west approximately four feet (see enclosed survey). Solution: The Kelly's have verbally agreed to provide a 10 foot easement to the Charlsen's to provide the necessary setbacks for the carriage house project. Upon approval of the plans, proper legal action will be taken. Thank you for your review of our project, please contact Chris Charlsen at ccharlsen(aD-aol.com or 651-439-2115. Sincerely, Chris and Julia Charlsen zo ED 9'-011 7' MAIN FLOOR PLAN 1 /4" = V-0" UPPER FLOOR PLAN 1 /4" = 1'-0" 36'-811 I. 8'-01' 20'-8" CAULFIELD ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN 9388 ERIN COURT WOODBURY, MINNESOTA 55129 Tel: 651.497.7685 email: brucecaulfield@msn.com CONSULTANT CERTIFICATION I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY REGISTERED ARCHITECT OR ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. DATE REG. NO. 16327 COMMISSION NO.: 2020-12 DRAWN BY: BAC CHECKED BY: BAC DATE: BID ISSUE DATE: REVISION DATES: PROJECT TITLE CHARLSEN CARRIAGE HOUSE OWNER CHRIS AND JULIA CHARLSEN 1030 FOURTH AVENUE SOUTH STILLWATER, MN 55082 SHEET TITLE MAIN FLOOR PLAN AND UPPER FLOOR PLAN Al SHEET NO. SHEET 1 OF 1 SIDE (NORTH) ELEVATION 1 /4" = 1'-0" REAR (WEST) ELEVATION 1 /4" = V-0" FRONT (EAST) ELEVATION 1 /4" = 1'-0" SIDE (SOUTH) ELEVATION 1 /4" = V-0" CAULFIELD ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN 9388 ERIN COURT WOODBURY, MINNESOTA 55129 Tel: 651.497.7685 email: brucecaulfield@msn.com CONSULTANT CERTIFICATION I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY REGISTERED ARCHITECT OR ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. DATE REG. NO. 16327 COMMISSION NO.: 2020-12 DRAWN BY: BAC CHECKED BY: BAC DATE: BID ISSUE DATE: REVISION DATES: PROJECT TITLE CHARLSEN CARRIAGE HOUSE OWNER CHRIS AND JULIA CHARLSEN 1030 FOURTH AVENUE SOUTH STILLWATER, MN 55082 SHEET TITLE EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS A2 SHEET NO. SHEET 2 OF 1 SECTION A 1 /2" = 1'-0" CAULFIELD ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN 9388 ERIN COURT WOODBURY, MINNESOTA 55129 Tel: 651.497.7685 email: brucecaulfield@msn.com CONSULTANT CERTIFICATION I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY REGISTERED ARCHITECT OR ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. DATE REG. NO. 16327 COMMISSION NO.: 2020-12 DRAWN BY: BAC CHECKED BY: BAC DATE: BID ISSUE DATE: REVISION DATES: PROJECT TITLE CHARLSEN CARRIAGE HOUSE OWNER CHRIS AND JULIA CHARLSEN 1030 FOURTH AVENUE SOUTH STILLWATER, MN 55082 SHEET TITLE SECTION A SHEET NO. SHEET 3 OF 1 Ater THE BIRTHPLACE OF MI N N E S O T A PLANNING REPORT DATE: July 15, 2020 CASE NO.: 2020-27 TO: Planning Commissioners APPLICANT: Custom Craft Builders LAND OWNER: Julianne and Jon Summers REQUEST: 1) A front setback variance to allow the expansion of a legal non- conforming house. 2) A front yard setback variance for an attached garage. 3) Rezoning of Lot 17, Block 11, Sabins Addition from PROS - Park, Recreation & Open Space to RB - Two Family Residential. LOCATION: 501 N. Greeley Street ZONING: RB - Two Family Residential PROS - Park, Recreation & Open Space REPORT BY: Bill Turnblad, Community Development Director BACKGROUND Julianne and Jon Summers recently purchased the three parcels of land with house and accessory buildings at 501 North Greeley Street. They plan to demolish the existing detached garage, remodel the house and build an addition that includes an attached garage. Given the steep slopes of the McKusick Ravine located on the north side of the property, the front lot line setback for the existing house is only 18.3 feet and 14.4 feet for the detached garage. The current required front setback in the subject RB Zoning District is 20 feet for the house and 30 feet for the garage. Further complicating the situation is the mixed zoning of the property. As seen on the map on the next page, Parcels 1 and 2 are zoned PROS - Park, Recreation and Open Space and Parcel 3 is Planning Case 2020-27 July 15, 2020 Page 2 zoned RB - Two Family Residential. In order to expand the house onto Parcel 2, it must be rezoned at least in part to RB. -, Parcel 2 Sabi sFdddion `\���\y `•��\ Lat 17. Block 11 �SaNnsMddian 20.7 18.3' Parcel 3 SPECIFIC REQUEST Parcel 1 - Sumrners' property oulined in heavy black line- - Existing buildings in crosshatch- - Proposed building in blue. - Green is PROS zoned property- -Yellow is RB zoned property. In order to complete the remodeling project, the building contractor for the Summers has requested: 1) A 1.7 foot variance to allow the expansion of the house, since its front yard setback is only 18.3 feet, and the minimum required in the RB Zoning District is 20 feet. 2) A 9.3 foot variance to allow the attached garage to be located 20.7 feet from the front lot line instead of the required 30 feet. 3) Rezoning of Lot 17, Block 11, Sabins Addition (south half of Parcel 2) from PROS - Park, Recreation & Open Space to RB - Two Family Residential. ANALYSIS Based upon the certificate of survey with its verified contour lines (see attachment), staff has determined that even though the property contains steep slopes, no bluff line setback is required. For ravines such as the McKusick Ravine, a setback is required from the top of the slope only if the slope has more than a 24% grade over a run (horizontal distance) of at least 50 feet. In this case, there are slopes that exceed 24%, but the maximum run in the area of the proposed addition is about 30 feet. So, no setback is required from the top of the slope. Planning Case 2020-27 July 15, 2020 Page 3 I. VARIANCES As already mentioned, the planned home remodeling and addition would need two variances. Since the grandfathered 18.3 foot front lot line setback does not meet the 20 foot minimum requirement, the house cannot be expanded without a 1.7 foot variance. That variance has been requested. It is appropriate to note that the addition itself will exceed the 20 foot setback standard. The second variance is for the attached garage. According to the Zoning Code, it needs a 30 foot setback. A 20.7 foot setback is requested. As seen in the attached survey and building plans, the new garage would be 6.3 feet further away from the street than the existing detached garage. And, because of the location of the steep slopes on the property, it is impractical and undesirable to force the new garage to meet the 30 foot setback standard. It would also totally destroy the proposed symmetry meant to respect the historic elements of the house. So, the property owners and architect propose to push the front of the garage three feet further back than the front of the existing house, while still mirroring the existing home's basic L shape. Staff finds the planned approach to be reasonable and further finds that it satisfies the variance review criteria iterated in the Zoning Code. II. REZONING Most of the McKusick Ravine, with its bituminous trail, is owned by the City. And it is zoned PROS - Park, Recreation and Open space. In addition, privately owned properties that abut the ravine were rezoned to PROS in about 2010 if they were deemed unbuildable due to steep slopes and bluffline setback requirements. At the time these private properties were zoned to PROS, the City used Washington County elevation contours to estimate whether steep slopes would prevent a property from being built upon. The County elevation contours were based upon aerial photography rather than ground survey work. In this case, a licensed surveyor shot spot elevations on the ground and established more accurate contours. The result of this work is that the slopes near the Summers' home were verified to have a horizontal run of much less than the minimally required 50 feet to be considered protected. This means that be definition they are allowed to be built upon. Furthermore, since the ravine slope does not meet the minimum run requirement, no bluffline setback is required either. Consequently, Lot 17, Block 11, Sabins Addition does not meet the original criteria for rezoning to PROS. Therefore, it is reasonable to rezone the parcel back to RB as it was previously zoned. ALTERNATIVES A. Approval. If the Planning Commission finds the requests satisfactory, approve the variances and recommend that the City Council approve the rezoning, with the following conditions: 1. Lot 17, Block 11, Sabins Addition must be combined with Parcel 3 as a single tax parcel before the rezoning becomes effective. Planning Case 2020-27 July 15, 2020 Page 4 2. Lot 17, Block 11, Sabins Addition must be combined with Parcel 3 as a single tax parcel prior to issuance of a building permit for the addition. B. Table If the Planning Commission finds that additional materials are needed to come to a decision, table the case. C. Denial If the Planning Commission finds the requests to be inconsistent with the intents of the Zoning Code or incompatible with the neighborhood, deny the variances and recommend that the City Council deny the rezoning. RECOMMENDATION Staff finds the variances and rezoning requests to be reasonable, consistent with review criteria established in the Zoning Code and appropriate for their setting. We therefore recommend approval. Attachments: Location & Zoning Map Survey Applicant Letter Application materials cc: Custom Craft Builders Julianne and Jon Summers Planning Case 2020-27 July 15, 2020 Page 5 Location and Zoning Map Planning Case 2020-27 July 15, 2020 Page 6 LU a LL. O t; WRIAI . ` W ro s Z 3 z Wao" ea"yc" a+O A 6 Y A dti �;a wm aa�M,c �°maw a%a9u ci � b�cw �'ooHu€sa o mn o.. an= �_ y 3 41�:'�9ay�yWAt w v W i. geg�ti •a•w ....eac� / m„I,S9Ga UEMH M s' ug - wy°'a:§$'o BH nm'a9 / Y / ��% / /� / % �Y �.�, V A•' 8 ly NJ s / I,X, Al- h` / + ��% // I R ° r /tiM y • or •sNe7 o s< ^ 1 �✓ ,i Cs s, 4 fit! �s ,ram y3�a�J oN r r q VU f* 3nidp'- .[ice 1 z/ 7e j?a �gf 3a'wed t� , - --id •OS G✓ 3FO.LS.ON-- i EST I"\ 1985 CUSTOM CRAFT BUILDERS DESIGN • BUILD • REMODEL Custom Craft Builders, Inc. 305 Greeley St S Ste 204 Stillwater, MN 55082 June 22Ind, 2020 Re: 501 Greeley Street North addition Abbi Wittman VIA EMAIL: awittman@ci.stillwater.mn.us City Planner City of Stillwater 2164t'StN. Stillwater, MN 55082 Greetings - On behalf of property owners Julianne and Jon Summers, the attached variance application is being submitted for your review and approval. The Summers recently purchased a property commonly known as 501 Greeley Street North. This property abuts the south end of the ravine and consists of three separate parcels. The property is located at the end of a suburban road with no turn around. It is the desire of the homeowners to renovate and expand the property to reasonably accommodate the needs of a 21s' century family. The Summers wish to provide space for their family, provide modern access and accommodation should they chose to age in place and during such a process, provide for the mechanical, structural, and thermal updates to the existing structure. The homeowners are proposing to remove the existing detached two car garage and replace with an attached garage that is set back further from the street than the existing garage. A two story connection to the new garage is also part of the proposal. The existing neighborhood is generally consistent with the current structure, but much of the neighborhood has undergone additions, new garages and general updates. Thematically the existing structure is consistent with the majority of the neighborhood with the exception of the multiplex across Greeley St. The proposed expansion and renovations are consistent with the neighborhood architecture and the architecture of the existing structure. We are proposing to remove multiple components of the existing structures that are not true to the architectural styles of the neighborhood including a 1950' porch addition and a detached garage built in the early 1900's. In order to accomplish the proposed expansion and renovation a front yard setback variance and the rezoning of lot 17 will be required. We feel that the proximity of the proposed garage to the street is reasonable and necessary due to the steep slope terrain of the lot as you traverse easterly and is consistent with the neighborhood as it is already set back from the average of the neighborhood. The homeowners have been and will continue to be amenable to the desires of the City staff and their Planning Commission and City Council, this is demonstrated through multiple modifications to the original plan that was informally proposed to the City staff about a month ago. After careful consideration of balancing the desires of the City to maintain the character of the neighborhood and the protection of the steep slope and the visual impact to the ravine trail, we modified the garage setback and moved it slightly over three feet further back than the original proposal. Considering the uniqueness of the neighborhood, the property owners willingness and desire to update the house while keeping it consistent with the neighborhood and true to its heritage, we feel the attached applications for a front yard variance and re -zoning of lot 17 are reasonable, necessary and practical and therefore should be granted as proposed. Respectfully subpnitted, John Comb Julianne and Jon l5ummers Residence Expansion Scope of work: -Add garage and living space addition -replace entire roof -Siding and window replacement throughout -Minor landscaping i LAYOUT PAGE TABLE LABEL TITLE DESCRIPTION 1 COVER PAGE A1.1 DEMOLITION EST. I'e 1985 CUSTOM CRAFT BUILDERS DESIGN • BUILD • REMODEL Designer: Jordan Oliveira Custom Craft Builders, Inc. 651.329.4156 Jordan@CUstomCraftBldrs.com 305 Greeley St S Ste 204 Stillwater, MN 55082 MN Lic. BC006638 Drawn For: Julianne and Jon Summers 501 Greeley St N Stillwater, Stillwater 55082 Project: Residence Expansion Revision Table Date By I Descri tion 5 8 2020 JO 1 Initial Draft 6 22 2020 IC City Revisions These plans are the property of Custom Craft Builders, Inc. ("Builder") and are protected by the U.S. Architectural Works Copyright Act, The property owner(s) listed above are given the rights to use these plans at the location specified above for the express purpose of constructing the project contained in these drawings only if a valid design agreement has been executed, otherwise the plans remain the property of the Builder. These plans shall not be reproduced for any reason without the express consent of the Builder. Local government agencies and building departments are allowed to reproduce these plans solely for building code enforcement and zoning code enforcement purposes and shall not duplicate distribute or duplicate the plans except as authorized or required by data practices laws. The Contractor assumes no responsibility for the design, code compliance or integrity of these drawings if not built by the Contractor. @ Custom Craft Builders 2020 Sheet Name: Cover Page NO SCALE Sheet: 1 0 0 m -Remove north wall of house where new addition will be connected -strip all steel siding from original house -strip roofing from original house -Remove south wall of 1 g50's porch addition -Remove foundation under south wall of porch addition -Asbestos and lead are present on property and shall be removed and mitigated by licensed/ certified persons in compliance with industry standards Walls ra be removed ® Walls to remain 0 New walls N EST. I"\ 1985 CUSTOM CRAFT BUILDERS DESIGN • BUILD • REMODEL Designer: Jordan Oliveira Custom Craft Builders, Inc. 651.329.4156 Jordan@CUstomCraftBldrs.com 305 Greeley St S Ste 204 Stillwater, MN 55082 MN Lic. BC006638 Drawn For: Julianne and Jon Summers 501 Greeley St N Stillwater, Stillwater 55082 Project: Residence Expansion Revision Table Date Bv I Descri tion These plans are the property of Custom Craft Builders, Inc. ("Builder") and are protected by the U.S. Architectural Works Copyright Act, The property owner(s) listed above are given the rights to use these plans at the location specified above for the express purpose of constructing the project contained in these drawings only if a valid design agreement has been executed, otherwise the plans remain the property of the Builder. These plans shall not be reproduced for any reason without the express consent of the Builder. Local government agencies and building departments are allowed to reproduce these plans solely for building code enforcement and zoning code enforcement purposes and shall not duplicate distribute or duplicate the plans except as authorized or required by data practices laws. The Contractor assumes no responsibility for the design, code compliance or integrity of these drawings if not built by the Contractor. © Custom Craft Builders 2020 Sheet Name: Demolition i/s" = i' Sheet: A 1 n 1 01 66'-7 1 /2"100 Custom Craft Builders, Inc. 15, b'-1 1 /2" 1 i'-10" 22'-b" ry N �D ry N 0 0 m (V in 7 3'-b" V 6 Walls W be removed ® Wells to remain 0 New walls N 3'-6" 26'-4 1 /2" 40.3" loe 10'-1 1/2" EST. I"\ 1985 CUSTOM CRAFT BUILDERS DESIGN BUILD REMODEL Designer: Jordan Oliveira Custom Craft Builders, Inc. 651.329.4156 Jordan@CustomCraftBldls.com 305 Greeley St S Ste 204 Stillwater, MN 55082 MN Lic. BC006638 Drawn For: Julianne and Jon Summers 501 Greeley St N Stillwater, Stillwater 55082 Project: Residence Expansion Revision Table Date B Descri lion These plans are the property of Custom Craft Builders, Inc. ("Builder") and are protected by the U.S. Architectural Works Copyright Act, The property owner(s) listed above are given the rights to use these plans at the location specified above for the express purpose of constructing the project contained in these drawings only if a valid design agreement has been executed, otherwise the plans remain the property of the Builder. These plans shall not be reproduced for any reason without the express consent of the Builder. Local government agencies and building departments are allowed to reproduce these plans solely for building code enforcement and zoning code enforcement purposes and shall not duplicate distribute or duplicate the plans except as authorized or required by data practices laws. The Contractor assumes no responsibility for the design, code compliance or integrity of these drawings if not built by the Contractor. © Custom Craft Builders 2020 Sheet Name: Main Floor Plans Sheet: A13 66'-10" Exterior notes: -All siding to be LF 5mart5ide lap or shake or equivalent -Final exterior colors TBD -New garage to share similar grade as existing garage -fill exterior finishes to remain consistent with the historical theme of the original house and the neighborhood EST. I'e 1985 CUSTOM CRAFT BUILDERS DESIGN • BUILD • REMODEL Designer: Jordan Oliveira Custom Craft Builders, Inc. 651.329.4156 Jordan@CUstomCraftBldrs.com 305 Greeley St S Ste 204 Stillwater, MN 55082 MN Lic. BC006638 Drawn For: Julianne and Jon Summers 501 Greeley St N Stillwater, Stillwater 55082 Project: Residence Expansion Revision Table Date Bv I Descri tion These plans are the property of Custom Craft Builders, Inc. ("Builder") and are protected by the U.S. Architectural Works Copyright Act, The property owner(s) listed above are given the rights to use these plans at the location specified above for the express purpose of constructing the project contained in these drawings only if a valid design agreement has been executed, otherwise the plans remain the property of the Builder. These plans shall not be reproduced for any reason without the express consent of the Builder. Local government agencies and building departments are allowed to reproduce these plans solely for building code enforcement and zoning code enforcement purposes and shall not duplicate distribute or duplicate the plans except as authorized or required by data practices laws. The Contractor assumes no responsibility for the design, code compliance or integrity of these drawings if not built by the Contractor. @ Custom Craft Builders 2020 Sheet Name: Front Elevation 1/8" =1' Sheet: A2n1 TO: REPORT DATE: 1 Water T H E B I R T H P L A C E O F M 1 N N E S 0! A PLANNING REPORT Planning Commission July 8, 2020 MEETING DATE: July 22, 2020 APPLICANT: Sussel Builders LANDOWNER: REQUEST: LOCATION: ZONING: REPORT BY: REVIEWED BY: INTRODUCTION CASE NO.: 2020-28 Tim and Julia Schmolk Variance to the maximum structural lot coverage. 506 Laurel St West RB, Two -Family Residential Graham Tait, City Zoning Administrator Bill Turnblad, Community Development Director Tim and Julia Schmolke own the property at 506 Laurel Street West. The house was built in 1885, and there is also a garage, which is estimated to be built in the 1960's. The existing garage is a 400 SF detached garage in the north east corner of the property and is accessed by a driveway easement off of Everett Street North, that runs behind the neighboring property to the east. The current layout of the driveway and garage render the garage impracticle for parking vehicles, due to the garage door is located on the west face of the garage, despite the driveway entering from the east. The property owner is proposing to replace the 400SF garage with a 870SF garage, installing a door that faces the east, so cars can enter the garage thm the driveway easement on the east side. The larger garage will bring the property's structural surface coverage over the maximum allowed. SPECIFIC REQUEST The applicants are requesting: A variance to City Code Section 31-308. (b). (1). to allow the structural lot coverage to be 29.3%, whereas the maximum allowed structural lot coverage is 25%. ANALYSIS CPC Case 2020-28 Page 2 of 4 The State of Minnesota enables a City to grant variances when they meet the review criteria below. 1. No variance may be granted that would allow any use that is prohibited in the zoning district in which the subject property is located. The property is zoned RB, Two -Family Residential. An 870SF garage is permitted in this zoning district, provided that the total accessory structure coverage remains below 1,000SF; in this case the property has one other small accessory structures, but does remain below the threshold allowed. 2. The variance must be in harmony with the Zoning Code and the Comprehensive Plan. a. What is the purpose of the regulation for which the variance is being requested? Structural coverage The specific purpose of the maximum lot coverage is to maintain open, unencumbered space to regulate massing proportionality and to provide for adequate storm water infiltration. b. If granted, would the proposed variance be out of harmony with the Zoning Code? Structural coverage If granted, the variance would not be out of harmony with the zoning code. While the proposed updates will put the structural surface coverage over the limit, the impervious surface coverage is almost nonexistent. So even with the larger garage factored in, the overall impervious coverage for this property is only 30.5%, which is far below the 50% allowed. Additionally, it is important to note that the total lot coverage for accessory buildings would remain under the 1,000sf maximum allowed accessory structure coverage. c. If granted, would the proposed variance be out of harmony with the Comprehensive Plan? No, it would not be out of harmony with the Comprehensive Plan. 3. A variance may be granted when the applicant establishes that there are "practical difficulties" in complying with the Zoning Code. A practical difficulty means that the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the Zoning Code; the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; and the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Economic considerations alone do not constitute a "practical difficulty". a. Is the property proposed to be used in a reasonable manner? An 11,475SF property with single family residence would be proposing to use their property in a reasonable manner by adding an 870SF garage. b. Is the plight of the landowner due to circumstances unique to the property? This property is unique in the way that the driveway enters the rear of the property from the east via an easement from a perpendicular side street. To further add to the CPC Case 2020-28 Page 3 of 4 uniqueness, is the fact that the garage door doesn't even face the side the driveway is entering from. The driveway enters from the east; whereas, the garage door is on the opposite side of the driveway, on the west side of the garage. c. Are the circumstances created by the landowner? The property owner did not create these circumstances. d. If granted, would the variances alter the essential character of the locality? Currently this property has the smallest garage of the four houses on the street on this block. When looking at the general neighborhood, an 870SF garage would not be uncharacteristic. Additionally, the garage is tucked into the rear corner of the property, not very visible from the street. e. Have practical difficulties been established independent of economic considerations? The applicant's desire is for the variances are for the personal enjoyment of their property, and does not reflect economic considerations. POSSIBLE ACTIONS The Planning Commission has the following options: A. Approve the requested variances with the following conditions: 1. Plans shall be substantially similar to those found on file with CPC Case No. 2020- 28, except as modified by the conditions herein. 2. The attic area may be no taller than 6'6", except where required by building code to be 6' 8". 3. A recorded easement agreement will be submitted prior to the issuance of the building permit. 4. Plans and the use will need to be approved by the engineering, fire and building officials before the issuance of a building permit. 5. All changes to the approved plans will need to be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director. Any major changes will need to go to the Planning Commission for review and approval. 6. A possible condition of approval, to help reduce the overall structural coverage, would be the removal of the tool shed. B. Deny the requested variances. With a denial, findings of fact supporting the decision must be provided. With a denial, the basis of the action is required to be given. Furthermore, a denial without prejudice would prohibit the applicant from resubmittal of a substantially similar application within one year. C. Table the request for additional information. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION CPC Case 2020-28 Page 4 of 4 Staff finds the proposed garage meets the standards set forth for the issuance of a variance. Therefore, staff recommends approval of the variances for CPC Case No. 2020-28 with the conditions identified in Alternative A (condition six is worth discussing). Attachments: Site Location Map Applicant Narrative Site Plan Floor plans (four pgs.) cc: Sussel Builders Tim and Julia Schmolk If •� 010 k., 014 OIV {DUO =1 �� IF - M-4�X�� C �� 4 r 742� oww Garage Project located at 506 Laurel Street West We estimate that the existing garage was built by the previous owners sometime in the 1960s. We purchased the house in 1983, buying it from the estate of the son of the man who built the house in 1885. We are only the second family to ever own this house! The new garage we have planned will replace the existing garage in the same general location, in the northeast corner of the property. The existing garage is impossible to use as a space for parking a car, as the garage door entrance faces west, and the existing driveway easement comes in from the east. Over the years we have used the garage only for storage. The existing garage foundation and framing are in poor condition, with many cracks in the cement slab, and signs of age/wear in the wall studs, roof trusses, and siding. We would like to invest in a new garage that will be easier to enter from the driveway, and will offer more storage for power tools, landscaping tools, and other items that need to be stored indoors. We have invested in and made several improvements to the existing house over the years, maintaining the historical look similar to other houses in the city of Stillwater. Building a new garage with the same character and style of our house will give the property added value and will blend in with all the other improved garages built in adjacent properties. Since we purchased the home in 1983, the other three properties on the north side of Laurel St., between Everett St. N. and William St. N., have all received approvals to build newer, larger garages. All have done an excellent job in designing structures that maintain the character of the neighborhood, and we wish to maintain the same character. The new garage will have the same siding, door style, window style, metal roofing, and truss style to match the existing house. The new design will allow us to enter the garage directly from the driveway, providing excellent off-street parking, while also offering extra square footage to store gardening tools and supplies, and provide space for wood working tools that we continue to regularly use on projects/improvements/maintenance for the existing house. We wish to apply for and receive approval for the additional square footage required by the new garage plan footprint. The approx. 870 sq ft garage footprint will replace the existing approx. 400 sq footprint of the old garage. The calculation for this project for allowable structural square footage is limited to 500 sq ft for new additions to the property, after the old garage is removed. We seek approval for approx. 370 sq ft of additional structural lot coverage. The Laurel St. neighbors to the east and west have garages with similar or larger footprints, and with less property square footage than 506 Laurel St. We thank you for your consideration. Tim and Julia Schmolke 506 Laurel St. W. Stillwater, MN 55082 H 651-439-8652 Tim's Cell 651-491-4948 tubatimothy@comcast.net Plot Plan Job# EstabUsh"LuI918 MNLIC 1934 Customer: Tim and Julie Schmolke SUSSEL GARAGES 654 Transfer Road STE Jab Address: 506 Laurel St W 16B Saint Paul, MN City/SVZip: Stillwater, MN 35 Hones 9 Additions . Garages 0 Exteriors 55114 Home # 651-439-8652 work # Cell# 651-491-4948 E-Mail tubatimothy@comcast.net Job Description: 35'-0" x 23'-6" wl 48 SF Adjust Detached Rev Gable Attic Trusses 10/12 Pitch 86' Rear Property Line 31 23 6 -- -- - - - -- - - . - - - - - - - -------- ... _... � 35'-0" a J g New Gar ae ......... ...... .. 50' ; ... 13 _ _... ...._... -. _ . .. 1 30' 135' CO __......._._._._._._.._.... . _ ._._..�-------_. --- ----- ----_._._ -o c 38 - 135'. CO .......... --- - - - CL --- .. -. - House v -- - - o 60' __.-.-. - -. 26' - -- -- - - - - - - _ - House.. - 56, 16' Direction , Front;Prope 86�. rty L n 1, a ---- '- Laurel Ave -ef a 1NJA RM1 . .uv m+r tt 1zv vr<ine�'. cf. wma�svcwoe wenr I PNRf RNW Re I I � I I I I I I I I I . nl_vrt L'LLL Il fa:a!`.ncn, Ivnnl ll III �O !nl 11 r III III — I III I � I Y,. 7r ' I -III III III .III III Y III If FFT01 III I �� Yeoae rLnnl __annals eVDCRAI 1 GRKEOWPlI LPES(602.10) Y,. 7r ' I -III III III .III III Y III If FFT01 III I �� Yeoae rLnnl __annals eVDCRAI 1 GRKEOWPlI LPES(602.10) �� Yeoae rLnnl __annals eVDCRAI 1 GRKEOWPlI LPES(602.10) . mKsvwNJ. NxW4R I ne+leo. esiwv ceKl'l Nxl NfFRX ] ferw era-vr�. lbfYSJQn) A ecrmlw NIVKC veM,n. cs+•- 56U%Jnn> ursv wra NNir: V )ewc: ¢+rr (riUalr��l 1]5' IN 2018 IPC I'IZE5CPIP1IVE F602.10 WALL PPACING alSPIA 5AMI'LE OF 6��ry_ rr f%K VwHI ur .vx wKrow f Y/.vFl ven cv,e rHeeaa Jo - rrn mTtanf rTnnEv vrcxv slnc mL rrxl. WALL I-AYOUI- - .Ni "`tt'..11 V :MHiY/J.0 YnNL V.4.LN :PNl!'RLVLn p..1p CGRlJJS T` :-e'Nu+ew•Lxvxalt _. wHfrv,NLrorePu rorcscrcxafnrwHLwae uaTnrre:efw cu r_ u'r-zr�.. veoxlo.a PmA pW&I,mV =-als'rn>,+aasfeeun0n :<fn wHL rwi orrice wvelro'a'nnaiKnfwa .o nlrtale. nH.eL [Rtit Y!lEufW. :Tt'Yf VMtLItaNGr 4TnRV IMN aO'-0"'X MFty FAKtn w/IL I'HtL;.rn vryVllU.tl f.LM1pJ�SWY`1N��nYM:S LY'RXf) +44:1£/.)13f2)Jf's tv f+[1t /%Tl1tJ�(N TrAdFL)YAJ (NPINITp [�M. 'i nxM r/0.f W01.'R •r!/biLllIXfF '-••.WR. YC WALL V^K PGLIS>LYg2TJp:IlM'IW r�1fNa-foconcaa ✓uu..rcJ'+/x ecw^.v v/nL rrxw.-•-- KPG- EWES YiM)aN)!s Tir14'NHIr.Nl.n.1C W.1N IS'ib-0 n/'.•1'�S'WHL:eI'/rtt WYKYI fM. (21gYA1-'Ef IYIRbCPJU.a .. '>.Krufaw(semf LY/beI-:r',.nlw Lrw.nf f�rvwaefHu.eccwtrcw qE� eEve� u9a_ 4 y r •� Wye C W VIM9— _ uyOm O ...w-�as•u Drawn By: Was W. Date 6A.3030 6.19.2020 Sheet A-1 'iWV!ll k. `.t.111 Vf fN. tDOt ".. Far I.t AW WAtir /" rr�sr,Xa� yfAntv(, o" /u f"M r KIA F: N.'GLl' -�FFIs 2� 5{ltx IS" O.C. I' d Crl' A-A"'Y. .l�J/E': tVFLl: rti. J. •P' t-U'rr+l1' 2. , 11SAtr V ALL ri-AR `AL `ikX "I" FUlI�lIA1K7J N`/.LAIKJV G" CGfxt'.fl, N-OCK v/. y" 44irWKA'V(A t5 S' C. /NV 121, F FIVM EFL 4OCY) r5l cON1P f: 5EN' vAr" IS" . I:!,, ry RIw v w ra.)iw. A5 NOfEO N F(AWAWN, R./N a <2) aq Fzv.V'IN WfiAti 1EVNVO � 5 ALA:: th" O.'U:// 11fYA.F41 FYSf OF FLOGS (.r*cl? 1�ry a i,sf1G se.»Ly \ r' \ \ IN \ w IN. k \ r ��rccvnal-rtL — — � la 17 QI HN I FYll VIN t- ".1 5nt%`t 16" OL. Y." ""', <I I � �I I I GI II I LL - - --UI C - _ _ -- - - li+PKL V/N LS L'E- = - J-- �Q r oNln koojl fk°'f. PLA�t3 MV FTN15 F.y. VAN Rf: EXCI-U`M' COr.1-IC; NM, I1'OI2FV Cf ar>.4. aPAA+E4:IrLovv(mv.-,f;tLersms-Cil13'vt'TuVWN.LVNM(XI&V:W-lr lL. u camlcFrEV cOetm OP. rsr Mx"..' Or AN/ r0MON IS fCAP xr, HIM �nr.e�cv�nov rx5 Wxsa: F!Vl: A: rLA 9AC"f 41 1 0-M .LVAE5Wi2L TflM ot :ddo C3 � 10 w O d N d 0 d z 0 E G L V O 4-4 'O � G 0 L G Ct: +„ d o a :. �' L Customer AP M %'il p er.ry...r..a... p .�.,.a....a ... p" — signature [late Drawn By: LORI w. Date 6A.2020 6.18.2020 Sheet A-2 ; $ 6 a 6 a d -121- O y u �a 1% Z o 10► E�w � yU ` Cr r. G 7rM7JlJC. 71-A11 � it.•" (%�f% (.L4`J.ti; r'AA. �. Q„ 1, ��. � u .r re O VP. M CCXif tY. :a Y[L T ® aci e�i C Y.t-MlJVJAR:R 1�'•rY' Z p, y � u %" tt (vim slr r arc a0 oa �a 6FFT FLEVAIION W, f1.-A'JC W XXFIr N, h � e 2r6 5RU51e" O,C. h h PIC$11T:,ne� vusx-� � V A S E aB I1TAITV 5LL M Afr a x !" FC.tIJVA1YA 1 ttALh110`I •� ^ O 6' OC. fN/ IT' YfUS �� ,0 C ^I�OC7 P51 C(:f`Y�S` C-: : `A A.V YAM tC t iO Ifi"xi2"(TK'tAYtil'Y(X)11Na AS � Gh 6J NOT-1 D IN FGIMATION N /N AW (2) a.1{JL'M'INFEFT1tft!1'Mp 1 �. 7 fRAG= :'J'G2 rA L u OIL bU0. GII Yr SCG11� ON OIL p1 a"If EI.EVATM ' r 7. •. i { L�-L U — rid'4'L' 1'J�l..''I'f.f-UY tl � .l T II ql r I II �1� S) III AfTY. 111r1(, f>, ki :r II Cq II rrvx �i'/ft II Iq II r. N V�rW ON—� n11V Cmtolsn Approt�l ftN F VYlt Vial 1. �.�} `.TIT`: ts••' (: i. l II O r'•�erev+»mow Ym n'ea& 1 S, DaX w I = Drawn By: `I LORI W. .i1VJT4 i Iq Iq Wit: r1 ux �h�rt '� I I a C:s'ti-tst ;I Il Iq I .t.WE5 Wf1.� 11'1M Date — — awx�-vrAtLstLLaA' — J I + ntr 6.4.2020 �j c✓v'nct wJ� Ls I�:Lcnv _'r 6.IR.2020 �' fSON115 KOOAIt<� TN:%- Rf. M'1.0 ANMARV"NT5MMAII,1161VT. CONT119:Nft W011Y.TYcf 5U`,91. -. --- - Sheet A7.17 J.wv ve I><xn Uv cmti1,5 (�1.v fr�T T-1 ITT!'G:1: �urY./a.Lv rvm(rtzt=n iv �r,�:rL. FPOW FI.FVATION A�2 U�WITFiCf1ZEVCOr'11NG01 f'�R'(JVIYTYJN (T IJJ(PORTKJNISFOc14VfiN w Lt G � •1" 1T IV (>:*x; rcfr_t, TL rL(xs- — — C � �■rtrii■ WL1 u PI I I � I .?C4£2 RIXI I nu.x. I ENIR AmPI[r �/ I N[�>L•• II :R?Y 4II LLW. I•.e. r;.�'/. n!'I�(•. /A`I' I I � I I � (TCLf ICI.YG/F V G m Is �w 3 ��'CT;NpAt �PLIJJ YLII (TVW.1V •,EVIYJN V/h I.lTA Y(XF lsgq.�wYG>NL yJNLrP1.11Vi4[iRMNI? ri Y I Farm - "N rw' nm fNTE v.1i�r 1111, 11r iaxxo.larxe.rvrr af•oNa rcr a !fAA� Nr'ICMN XVJ41) N.I IX J6 M'. sA51fNWnINWa'OIFµ14'W.MBI (()MIIq. 2 L- \W> N r\ p" O9YAIRMJ M>`tTMJ MD>" 04.NA.L r4'A\WLi[i(pi/tD YI•a .M',� n ✓2'LN lGzt'U I': ^w4"JttYA(q Inwvmnurx emcevveN(Ns�]"+r' H'IVNL N:4'H' �'F/IL"'tAIf N'n4[I' rw nnr rorvcn Lncw A W\EFOW WN LTRAMING MNnoW/ poor" 5GHEr LE I iwvw,v�a.nn'A nr n>xu uuv.wJwm-racalc v Iro Lerrev sm.' cal n/L ,Foes 2A59 ILAVEF WvwXo n xL Na N - M1V/fV 1-20 • nvKV 2. / 'x{VE NIA Ill lVGi11 N/A wfY /' NJ IA LS NW.[ N!G rI •In•/' Y NIA 1 wxv I'.1 IlfVre 11N1 AI.WNN' 1.11IAnlTn- GD[AAMl Me CEV WALL LM5 (602.10) '.YiY LTA2%A'N.L INXFV IVNI RXf4 WM.t -Y.I Nuxr:] rweeen vW:u,o L vb �.i .:.Wy 121 W:C w:F/n is MA.[N' KnU1 [•l'W/' 2018 IPC PP,ESaIPTIVE K60-LA0 WALL iN�M CMSRIA YA "" L5AMPLeyIV��VII Jf- I�2.i IVWI W,W. ll2'KGKpIL'Jw IW L wWIOJ?LZLla�;'o^..,,: �vv:xLLrL vine:� ..L URKfO WYI FM[L(O L4 iLLt rtYlO!fCli.'Ns11Ni'IW.I IYA! DYl aP W/.11 MY )GNYIf]L CR!q.^R.R.Y (PhXf M VAO11 O.] N'I.LV /W✓N• + !+ n.xr.url/Avlz r¢exurcn �y,Lycy CLAMgpVWFMV 9.) FI.Y'Kff'.YAL PNSL �Iw.Ll±x1lN IO-d'EPOAI [1gEW /A VIXN>14L.IIA•n.I hV1 M1 WKtLLPt YNGI CR:WvIMN YJ't�"C¢MftV tlPXkV WIII. P,`EI.Sw2]21 [LTbf. YMFL ItNLrvI NI MINA-~LYV/V 16M�AM5 ('Y-RAU) CPKff11MSIRIII>plh'1t iRYlH)9(I) I.LnKC.IYN (.RIekNPpP Y¢CrM(5tivNE I/LL¢PGOJA S)F+iL11 [M1V �•-•LGrt: YP WttL UV[l•G LAs51LWIL42LnIKM'(CT (K+2KP•�CC [N,CII.n1Yx1lF (F!N?.l V/ht Wl11N'�.... x, &.) LWt6lY1.1Op.,11wMLTb. LfWaN 11•'P[Lo eswr.e'o'•Mwaue.lum<uw:ee) ¢wccwrGN-�fe rf2s oo]1LLv tD'AV.MNI L9Wi(4PKl VOA')-T/"nv VNY I.t IJG111 (�r£It AV i[M Fh PiW COADI'A%; Sipume P.le Drawn By: LORI W. Date 6A.2020 6.18.2020 Sheet A-1 TO: REPORT DATE: . ova ter �l 7 H E B I R T H P L A C E O F h1 1 N N F ti 0 1 A PLANNING REPORT Planning Commission July 14, 2020 MEETING DATE: July 22, 2020 APPLICANT: Mathew Anderson Consulting LLC LAND OWNER: Dr. Olaf Rustad CASE NO.: 2020-29 REQUEST: Special Use Permit to put a 375 square foot graphic sign (mural) on the side of the building. LOCATION: 14130 60th Street North ZONING: BP-C: Business Park - Commercial PREPARED BY: Graham Tait, City Zoning Administrator REVIEWED BY: Abbi Wittman, City Planner INTRODUCTION The City sign code puts forth that murals require a Special Use permit. Specifically, City Code states, in Sec. 31-509. Subd. 3. (m)., that "Graphic designsigns require a special use permit." Furthermore, Chapter 31 defines graphic signs as "[... ] any mural or pictorial scene or graphic design painted on the side of a wall or building or painted on a sign board affixed to a wall and in which a mural or scene has its purpose artistic effect." Therefore, within the City of Stillwater, a Special Use Permit is required for a mural. REQUEST The company at 14130 60th Street North, which is a Dermatology Care Center, would like to put a 25' X 15' mural on the west side of their building, facing Greeley St South. The reason for this mural, as stated by the owner, is not to advertise the medical office, but rather to create a community space for people to take photographs and to simply enjoy visually. The company proclaims that their mission is to make our community members look and feel better about themselves. ANALYSIS Case no. 2020-29 Page 2 City Code Section 31-207, Special Use Permits, identifies the city may grant a Special Use Permit or amendments when the following findings are made: The proposed structure or use conforms to the requirements and the intent of this [Zoning] chapter, and of the comprehensive plan, relevant area plans and other lawful regulations. Any additional conditions necessary for the public interest have been imposed or use and/or structure will not constitute a nuisance or be detrimental to the public welfare of the community. Conformance to the Zoning Code generally surrounds around whether or not the proposed use will be compatible with its surrounding uses. The site is along highway 36 and is a commercial district with relatively spaced out properties. The building in question is on the corner of Greeley St and 60th Street. The mural would be on the west side of the building, facing to the west towards Greeley Street and to some extent along Route 36 when travelling eastbound. The building is situated at least 180' from Greeley Street, so it would not be overly loud and noticeable. Staff does not believe this will constitute a public nuisance and will not have adverse impacts on the neighborhood. Nor does request contradict the visions for this district that are put forth in the comprehensive plan. In the attached renderings, you will notice there is also a URL and a phone number, in the bottom portion of the mural. The City is viewing this as a separate sign, and will be considered wall signage, that will require a separate sign permit if this request is approved. View travelling east down 36 Case no. 2020-29 Page 3 POSSIBLE ACTIONS The Planning Commission has the following options: A. Approve the requested Special Use Permit with the following conditions: 1. This Special Use Permit is in all ways a Conditional Use Permit as the term is used in Minnesota Statue Section 462.3595. 2. Plans shall be substantially similar to those found on file with CPC Case No. 2020-29, except as modified by the conditions herein. 3. All changes to the approved plans will need to be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director. Any major changes will need to go to the Planning Commission for review and approval. B. Deny the requested Special Use Permit. With a denial, findings of fact supporting the decision must be provided. With a denial, the basis of the action is required to be given. Furthermore, a denial without prejudice would prohibit the applicant from resubmittal of a substantially similar application within one year. C. Table the request for additional information. D. Refer to the request to City Council, per "Sec.31-207. (c). (1). [... ] However, on the rare occasion when accountability is an issue, the planning commission may refer a conditional use permit or special use permit to the city council." STAFF RECOMENDATION Staff recommends the approval of a Special Use Permit for a 375SF graphic sign at 14130 601h St North. It is the City's belief that this mural would not have any detrimental impacts to the individual location or the neighborhood as a whole. Attachments: Site Location Map Applicant Narrative (two pgs.) Renderings (two pgs.) t'- ADVANCED -•MOM NW• •- Advanced Dermatology Care 14130 60th St N Stillwater, MN 55082 (651) 484-2724 June 26, 2020 Stillwater Planning Department 216 4th Street North Stillwater MN 55082 651-430-8800 Dear Stillwater Planning Department, Advanced Dermatology Care, located at 14130 60th St N Stillwater, MN 55082, is requesting a variance due to Practical Difficulties of our wall signage allowance, to create a decorative, community -engaging mural to be painted on the west side of the exterior of the building. Our mission is to make our community members look and feel better about themselves, and their communities. One of our company mottos is, "Looking Good," inspiring a positive state of mind, and a positive self-esteem benchmark in people to live better, and look better. The purpose of the mural is not primarily for the use of advertisement, but to create a community space where people may take photographs in front of this mural, and advertise to friends, family, and community a message of "Looking Good" to all who experience the mural as they pass by. We estimate people would associate this "Looking Good" mural with the Stillwater community at -large, and encourage a positive experience when coming to Stillwater. It would be a landmark where people would want to take special event photographs in Stillwater, drawing commerce to the area. Advanced Dermatology Care is allowed 160 square feet of wall signage on our building, and the proposed mural will be larger than the authorized size allowance. The size of the mural will be approximately 25' long, and approximately 15' tall, giving us an approximate total of 375 square feet maximum needed to make the mural fit esthetically proper on the side of the building. It would be painted in the color palette of the existing building colors, which will not be loud or inappropriate, and will blend into the building's current color scheme. This, in turn, will not affect the character of our neighborhood, and add to the positive experience in and of the community. , O.J. Rustad, M.D. Board Certified Dermatologist, 1989 Certified Mohs Surgeon Medical Director Ruth A. Rustad, M.D. Cosmetic Medical Director Heather Kill, PA-C Certified Physician Assistant Shelly Larson, PA-C Certified Physician Assistant Chelsea Domeier, PAW C Certified Physician Assistant Emily Bose, PA-C Certified Physician Assistant Medical Dermatology,,' In office and e-visits Advanced Acne Treatments Birthmark Evaluation & Treatment Hair loss Mole Evaluation Mole Removal Laser Treatments Laser Nail Treatment - Pharos Laser Psoriasis Blue Light Therapy Rash/Dermatitis Wart Removal Surgical Mohs Surgery ; Skin Cancer Surgery & Reconstruction Ear Lobe Repair Dermabrasion Scar Revision Advanced Esthetics Botox Liposuction Chemical Peels Cautery Dermal Fillers Microdermabrasion Face & Leg Vein Therapy__ Kybella Micropen Miradry Laser Hair Removal Pharos Laser Photodynamic Therapy Age Spot Removal ' Tattoo Removal Face Lifts Laser/IPL Skin Rejuvenation Spray Tan Cosrneceutical Proven Skin Care Products for Each Skin Type Advanced Dermatology Care is a proud sponsor of public events and initiatives in the city of Stillwater, and the state of Minnesota. Stairs of Stillwater is an event we publicize and participate in annually. We are proud to have installed and maintain a solar field on the roof of our Stillwater location, and use geothermal energy to create our power needs there. We encourage and positive and healthy lifestyle. We are asking to have a variance granted for the size of the mural to be approximately 375 square feet, and for this mural variance to not be included in the count of "wall signage" for the property's allowance total. Sincerely, Matthew Anderson Advanced Dermatology Care 612 432 0213 Ativanced Dermatology Care Stillwater Mural Praposal Northeast View Slide 1 kinLy 155 Good i ADCder .c m - M _ (651) 484-2724 fl Lm w (� I I 25' Ativanced Dermatology Care Stillwater Mural Proposal East View Slide 2 I 259 TO: REPORT DATE: MEETING DATE: APPLICANT: LANDOWNER: REQUEST: LOCATION: ZONING: REPORT BY: INTRODUCTION r water I H E B I R i H P I A L E Q F M I N N E S a 1 A PLANNING REPORT Planning Commission July 14, 2020 July 22, 2020 City of Stillwater City of Stillwater CASE NO.2020-23 Zoning Amendment — Text (ZAT) to clarify setback measurement requirements Citywide Citywide Abbi Wittman, City Planner The City of Stillwater's definition for Setback, building line "means a line back of the lot line that defines the setback area in all yards". The measurement of a setback from the lot line is concerning. In some cases a right-of-way (ROW) easement line, the area which the City is permitted to build a road on private land, also exists. Where this occurs, the City would want to impose a setback, building line to be from the ROW easement or for whichever is more restrictive to maintain sufficient distance between structures and roadways. It is common zoning practice to measure the setback from the lot line or ROW easement line, whichever is more restrictive. SPECIFIC REQUEST Consideration of a Zoning Amendment — Text (ZAT) to clarify setback measurement requirements. ANALYSIS Prior to making a recommendation for approval or modified approval of a proposed amendment to the city council, the commission must first find: 1. The public necessity, and the general community welfare are furthered; and The City needs sufficient land area to put in public improvements. Most commonly, public ROW is platted for the purposes of building roads, pedestrian ways and installing utility infrastructure. Where land has not been platted or where the platted land is not sufficient in area, easements are needed to Case 2020-23 Page 2 allow for public access, development, and maintenance of public improvements on private land. Generally speaking, an easement will restrict a private property owner's ability to make permanent improvements in the easement area. No matter if improvements are constructed on platted land or easement, their existence shape neighborhood development. If the City only measured the building setback line to the lot line, there are circumstances where a residence could be placed directly adjacent to the roadway. Having a uniform measuring tool is paramount to maintain sufficient private land area for neighborhood compatibility, water infiltration, and private recreational needs. 2. The proposed amendment is in general conformance with the principles, policies and land use designations set forth in the comprehensive plan. The Comprehensive Plan (the Plan) is an overarching document, guiding the City's growth and development for the next 20 years. Nothing about this ZAT is in conflict with the general principles, policies and land use designations in the Plan. The Plan calls for the development and expansion of public infrastructure, especially in the former Stillwater Township areas were lands have not been previously been subdivided. Obtaining easements may be necessary to build out infrastructure systems. Changing the definition to require setbacks to be measured from lot or ROW easement will help ensure that, at the time of infrastructure expansion and development, Plan goals, policies and objectives around orderly, planned and harmonious development and natural resource (ground water and stormwater) protection. POSSIBLE ACTIONS The Planning Commission has the following options: A. Find the proposed ZAT conforms to the City Code and make recommendation to approve the ordinance amendment. B. Find the proposed ZAT does not conform to the City Code and make recommendation to deny the ordinance amendment. C. Table the request for additional information. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION City staff fmds that the general community welfare is furthered by updating the City's zoning code to reflect how setbacks should be measured when a ROW easement encumbers private property. Additionally, the proposed amendment is in general conformance with the principles, policies and land use designations set forth in the comprehensive plan. Therefore, staff recommends the Commission recommend adoption of ordinance amendment. Attachments: Draft ordinance Copy: City Attorney Kori Land ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE STILLWATER CITY CODE CHAPTER 31-101, ENTITLED DEFINITIONS BY AMENDING THE DEFINITION FOR SETBACK, BUILDING LINE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF STILLWATER DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: 1. Amend City Code Section 31-101, Subsection (140) to read: 140. Setback building line means a line back of the lot line or right-of-way easement line, whichever is more restrictive, that defines the setback area in all yards. 2. Savings. In all other ways City Code Chapter 31 shall remain in full force and effect. 3. Effective Date. This Ordinance will be in full force and effect from and after its passage and publication according to law. Enacted by the City Council of the City of Stillwater this day of August 18 , 2020. CITY OF STILLWATER Ted Kozlowski, Mayor ATTEST: Beth Wolf, City Clerk