03-396, �)
G�NAL
Council File # a3 -'S 1(�
r o., el,POr � �1An � q
3
Presented By
Referred To
Whereas, the City's zoning administrator pursuant to legislarive code § 64300(h)(2),
2 notified the planning commission that Nicollet Restoration was not in compliance with
3 conditions imposed in a special condition use permit granted to Nicollet Restorarion by the
4 planning commission on April 12, 2002 for four single boat docks and one group dock, with
5 provision of propane gas and electricity for property located at 436 Sheppard Road; and
6
7
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
Whereas, in response to the zoning administrator's notification, the planning
commission's zoning committee conducted a public hearing on November 26, 2002, after having
provided notice to the permit holder and submitted its recommendation to the Comxnission. The
Commission, in its Resolution No. 02-96, based upon all the testimony, file and the report of
staff, deternrined to revoke Nicollet Restoration's special condition use pernut based upon the
following findings and conclusions:
1. On April 12, 2002, the Planning Commission approved a Special Condition Use Pernut
for four single boat docks and one group dock, with provision of propane gas and
electricity for boats using the docks, at 436 Shepard Road, with the following conditions:
"(1) The applicant/property owner shall provide sanitary service to the "live
aboazd" boats in accardance with the 5tate Building Code. Plans for sanitary
service shall be submitted to LIEP within 60 days of the approval of this permit.
Once approved by the Building Official, the installation shall be installed within
30 days of the issuance of appropriate pernuts. The marina shall also be provided
with a potable water service via a connection to the existing water main available
in "Old" Shepazd Road. Time allotted for plan approval and installation of water
service shall be the same as required for sanitary service.
(2) The applicant shall provide plans to the Office of Licensing, Inspections and
Environmental Protection showing:
(a) How the installations described in Condition #1 aze protected in a
flood event.
(b) A permanent dock sttucture that can adjust to fluctuafions in the river
elevation, pmvide safe year round access for boat owners and support
utility connections to the boats. Plans must also show the number of
mooring spaces at each dock, not to exceed nine a total of nine in
conformance with the Coips of Engineers permit.
1 � ORIGI�AL
2 (3) There is to be no casual mooring of watercraft at this facility; watercraft are to
3 be docked only at specified mooring spaces. No more than nine total watercraft
4 are to be docked at this facility at one time.
6 (4) Within 60 days of this approval, the applicant must provide a detailed
7 emergency management plan to the Office of Licensing, Inspections, and
8 Environmental Protecrion which addresses how watercraft and all associated
9 materials aze removed in a flood event, and how utilities are disconnected.
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
(5) If the applicant's Corps of Engineers permit expired on December 31, 2001,
the applicant shall obtain a new Corps of Engineers permit.
(6) This permit shall be void if the terms of Conditions #1, #2 and #4 are not met
within the specified time period.
(7) Unused propane tanks and miscellaneous debris shall be removed from the
shore and water at the site, and shall not be permitted to accumulate.
03-�a4
2. On September 20, 2002, LIEP project facilitator wrote a memo to LIEP site plan review
staff regarding the site plan for the boat docks at Island Station, 436 Shepazd Road. The
conclusion of this memo was that the site plan does not provide enough detail to ensure
that there aze reasonable precautions in place to ensure safe handling of sewage and
adequate accommodation to provide a potable water supply to the marina residents and
unless a plan can be submitted to address these issues the site plan should be denied.
3. On October 4, 2002 L.I.E.P. site plan review staff sent a letter to the pernut holder, John
Kerwin, regarding the boat docks at Island Station. This letter states that L.I.E.P. has
determined that under condition # 6 of the River Corridor Conditional Use Pernut, the
Special Condiuon Use Permit is void because the terms of condition # 1 were not met
within the specified time, and the use covered by the pemrit is not in compliance with
conditions 2& 3 of the permit.
4. Condition # 1 states that the property owner shall provide sanitary sewer to the "live
aboazd" boats in accordance with the State Building Code within 60 days of approval of
the pemut. Also the marina shall be provided with potable water within the same 60 day
period. L1EP's Determination: The plans for sanitary sewer and water service do not
provide sufficient detail about how the service will be provided to the boats. It is not
clear how the service would be provided consistent with the intent of the permiYs
conditions. At an August 2002 meeting with LIEP staff, 7ohn Drucker indicated that half
or more of the boats moored at this marina have no on-board sanitary facilities and would
continue to need an on-shore portable toilet for sanitation. The sanitary pumping facilities
proposed by Mr Kerwin would only be used for those boats that have facilities on board.
The pump as proposed is located on a floating dock. Boats requiring pumping of there
holding tanks would either need to maneuver the craft to this dock or the dock would
need to be towed to the boat. LIEP staff expressed concern how this would be done
under cold weather circumstances since the boats are scattered on separate dock structures
over the entire 400+ feet of shoreline along Mr Kerwin's property. The staff
recommendation regarding the condition on providing proper handling of sanitary for this
marina was with the understanding that all live-aboard boats had toilet rooms and holding
tanks. The intent of the condition was to ensure that residents of the marina had a safe and
convenient way to properly dispose of their waste and to provide reasonable assurance to
l.ri �7 v��ul
03 -3q`
2 the community that the residents of the marina are protected from unsafe handling of the
3 waste and avoid potential pollution problems to the river.
4
5 5. Condition # 2 states that applicant shall provide plans to LIEP showing how the
6 installarions in Condition # 1 aze protected in a flood event. Plans must show the
7 number of mooring spaces at each dock, not to exceed a total of nine in conformance with
8 the Corps of Engineers permit. LIEP's Determination: The plans show the docks but do
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
not show the number of mooring spaces. John Drucker, the permit holder's representative
provided a verbal explanation to L1EP how the dock structures would adjust to
fluctuations in river elevation but failed to provide written plans to show how this would
be accomplished.
6. Condition # 3 states that there is to be no casual mooring of watercraft at this facility;
watercraft are to be docked only at specified mooring spaces. No more than nine total
watercraft are to be docked at this facility at one time. LIEP's Deternunation: There are
at least 10 boats moored along the shoreline at this rime (this rime is on or about October
4, 2002).
7. PED staff visited the site and did not find the proposed machine and pump to store
sewage from the boats. Regarding the source of potable water noted on the plan the
building containing the water is at least 250 to 300 feet up hill from the boat dock. The
ramp to the boats from the shoreline is poorly constructed and does not have a hand rail
and appeazs unsafe for pedestrians. There were 5 boats at the group dock, and two boats
appeared to have wood stoves burning (smoke that smelled like a wood fire and lazge
piles of firewood on the shore). There were no portable toilets on the shore or visible
around the site. There were no electrical wires or water lines visible along the shore or
to the boats.
8. A key finding in the Zoning Committee Staff Report dated March 28, 2002 was:
No use shall be pernutted which is likely to cause pollution of waters, as
definedin Minnesota Statutes, Section 115.Ol,unless adequate safeguards,
approved by the state pollution-control agency, are provided [ZC Sec.
65.214(10)].
The applicant states that all watercraft using this property will meet a11 applicable Coast
Guard requirements (including all on-board sanitary facilities). There is also a portable
toilet located upland, above the 100-year flood elevation, but no on-site pump-out facility.
Harriet Island marina is served by city sewer and water; Watergate Marina (because of its
elevation relative to Shepard Road) uses a pump-out facility to serve houseboats.
Staff are very concerned that this condition cannot be met with the current provisions far
sanitary facilities. Given the relative proximity and availability of city sewer and water
service, staff recommend that this facility connect to city sewer and water.
Staff's concern in the above referenced report is reinforced by LIEP's findings regazding
the inadequacy of sanitary sewer and potable water at the Isiand Station Docks. There is
no evidence of or acceptable plans proposed for ensuring adequate safeguazds have been
or will be implemented that will ensure protection of Mississippi waters from pollution
due to improper disposal of untreated effluent."
0 � �� I�r�6�� a3-3q4
2 Whereas, pursuant to the provisions of I.eg. Code . 0 i 1 estoraUon duly
3 filed an appeal &om the determination made by the planning commission and requested a hearing
4 before the City Council for the purpose of considering the actions taken by the planning
5
6
7
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
couunission; and
Whereas, acting pursuant to I.eg. Code §§ 64.206 -.208, and upon norice to affected
parties, a public hearing was scheduled before the City Council on 7anuary 8, 2003 but at the
written request of Nicollet Restoration the public hearing was further continued to February 5,
2003; and
Whereas, on Febmary 5, 2003,the City Council duly conducted the public hearing on the
appeal by Nicollet Restoration and, having heard the statements made, and having considered the
application, the report of staff, the record, minutes and resolution of the zoning committee and
the planning commission, does hereby
Resolve, that the Council of the City of Saint Paul does hereby affirm the decision of the
planning commission in this matter there being no showing by the appellant that the planning
commission erred in its facts, finding or procedures when it deternuned to revoke the special
condition use pernut; and, be it
Further Resolved, That the appeal of Nicollet Restorarion is hereby denied; and, be it
Finally Resolved, That the City Clerk shall mail a copy of this resolution to Nicollet
Restoration, the Zoning Administrator and the Planning Commission.
Requested by Department of:
By:
Form Appro d by City Attorney
s -Y,vl�..G✓�a'✓.`<--� ? Z?-op
Adoption
by Council Secretary
Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council
� � —�-
Approved by
�� �
Adopted by Council: Date �_� ,�� a��3
City Attorney
266-8710
TOTAL # OF SIGNATURE PAGES
DATE�NRIATED
3/27/-03
GREEN SHEET
�.M,��,�
01-3g(,
No 200579
mrewe�
❑ C11Y4iiORIEY ❑ fMCIiRK
❑AIM1IlC1I11.tER111LF10R ❑pM11C111L1FR1If1CGT6
❑ WvOR1oRYmbT4Nf) ❑
(CUP ALL LOCATIONS FOR SIGNATURE)
Memorializing City Council acfion taken Februuy 5, 2003, denying the appeal of Nicollet Restoration to a decision of
the Planning Commission to revoke a River Corridor Conditional Use Permit to allow foiar single boat docks and one
group dock, with provision for propane gas and electricity for boats using the dock, at 436 Shepard Road.
PL4NNIIJG CAMMiSSION
CIB COMMITTEE
CIVIL SERVICE CAMMISSION
AMOUNi OF TRANSACTION
S�URCE
Has mis ce�oNfirm erx. »nrlced u�der a cono-aa to.mis aeaartmerila
YES ND
Fies fhis Oe�aoMrtn eMer heen a aF! emWoYy�7
YES NO
Daes this peisorJfirtn possess a siull not normalrypossessed by airy curteM ciry employee7
VES NO
Is Nis persaMrm e fargetetl ve�doY7 ,
YES NO
COST/REVENUE BUDGETED (CIRCLE ON� Y6S NO
ACTIVI7YNUMBEit -
1'
CITY OF SAINT PALTL
Randy C. KeRy, Mayor
March 27, 2003
Nancy Anderson
Council Secretary
310 City Hall
15 West Kellogg Blvd.
St. Paul, MN 55102
?i �.�,;��
r y { �
P � f, �:p
�`� .
n x ���
I�
Re: Resolution memorializing the decision of the City Council to revoke a Special Condition
Use Permit previously issued to Nicollet Restoration for properry commonly known as
436 Sheppazd Road.
City Council Action Date: February 5, 2003.
Dear Nancy:
Attached please find the signed original Resolution memorializing the CiTy Council's decision to
deny an appeal by Nicollet Restoration from a decision of the Planning Commission to revoke a
Special Condition Use Permit issued to Nicollet Restoration far property located at 436 Sheppard
Road. Please place this Resolution on the consent agenda for adoption by the Council at your
earliest possible convenience.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Very truly yours,
� �h/uvv�—�
eter" W. Warner
Assistant City Attorney
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY
Manuel J. Cervarttes, City Attorney Q�.,31 `
civil Division
400CiryHa(i Teiephone:65126b8710
ISWestKelloggBlvd Facsirrsile:651298-5679
Saint P¢u[, Minnesota 55102
Hand Delivered
PWW/rmb
Enclosure