HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007 [05] May 16
CITY Of ST. JOSEPH
www.cityofstj()seph.com
Administrdtor
Judy Weyrens
St. Joseph Economic Development Authority
Meeting Notice
Wednesday May 16, 2007
3:00 p.m. City Hall
MdYor
Richdrd Cdrlbom
1. Call to Order.
Councilors
Steve Frdnk
AI Rdssier
Renee Symdnietz
Ddle Wick
2. Approval of Agenda.
3. Approval of Minutes.
a. April 18, 2007
4. Accounts Payable and Financial Report.
a. Approval of Accounts Payable
b. Approval of Financial Report
5. Business.
a. Urban Environs Downtown Design Guidelines Report.
b. Update - Collegeville Development Group.
c. Advertisement - Visitor's Guide.
d. Update - Audit.
6. Board Member Announcements.
7. FYI.
8. Adjournment.
2.') College Avenue North. PO Box 66s . Sdint. joseph, Minnesotd ~6jJ4
Phone ,2.0.,6,.]2.01 FdX ,2.0.,6,.0,42.
CITY OF ST. JOSEPH
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AlJRTHORITY
Meeting Minutes - Wednesday, April 18, 2007
Present: EDA Board Members Richard Carlbom (tardy), Ken Jacobson, Tom Skahen, Dale Wick
and Carolyn Yaggie-Heinen.
Also present: Cynthia Smith - Strack of Municipal Development Group.
Vice Chairperson Jacobson called the April 18, 2007 meeting of the St. Joseph EDA to order at
3:04 p.m.
Agenda.
Vice Chairperson Jacobson introduced the agenda. Moved by Skahen seconded by Wick to
approve the agenda as presented. Motion carried 4-0.
Approval of Minutes.
Vice Chairperson Jacobson introduced the minutes from the March 21, 2007 meeting. Carlbom
joined the meeting. Motion Wick, Seconded Heinen to approve minutes from the previous
meeting. Motion carried 5-0.
EDA Accounts Payable.
Carlbom introduced the topic. Strack noted the correct invoice amount was $2,333.13 and that
accounts payable for the month totaled $2,471.88.
Motion by Wick, second by Skahen to approve the EDA accounts payable for the month of March
2007 in the amount of $2,471.88. Motion carried 5-0.
Financial Report.
Carlbom introduced the agenda item. Strack noted the March financial reports were contained in
the packet. Reports presented included: revenue, expense, check register and fund balance.
Jacobson inquired about the revolving loan fund balance. Strack noted audit was being
completed by City Auditor but had not yet been presented to the City Council. Strack to find out
when audit presentation likely and report back at the May meeting.
Motion by Heinen, second by Wick to approve the March financial report as presented. Motion
carried 5-0.
Industrial Park Update.
Carlbom introduced the agenda item. Strack noted that at the March meeting the EDA requested
information regarding: (a) cost estimates/price points for new industrial lots within the area; (b)
potential use of TIF to assist with installation of utilities; and, (c) existing prospects regarding
development schedules. Strack stated that industrial land prices as pulled from public
advertisements, postings and qualified land sales ranged from $2.75 (Cold Spring) to $1.25 &
$1.75 in Airport Industrial Park and the Opportunity Drive area both in St. Cloud. The most recent
sale of industrial land in St. Joseph was $0.90 per square foot.
Strack noted she spoke with a TIF consultant who noted a common approach is for the EDA to
plat the land. The City bonded for and installed the infrastructure, the EDA market the property
and, 100% of the increment is then used to pay administrative costs and retire the debt. This
involves little, if any direct TIF assistance to qevelopers, instead TIF is used to reduce
assessment costs. The big risk to the City is that if the park doesn't build out to the extent that
increments cover the bond payments, the City will need to levy for the shortfall. If need be, the
City could stack local abatement on the back end of the issue to provide additional business
incentives. JOBZ can't be used with this scenario.
EDA Minutes - April 18, 2007
~
In addition, follow up with active development leads reveals three have potential to move forward
this year, perhaps in St. Joseph.
The EDA discussed the information provided and reached consensus in deciding to delay further
action on the concept of the EDA developing industrial lots until the fall of this year.
Economic Development Plan (Comprehensive Plan) Update:
Carlbom introduced the agenda item. Strack noted that one of the EDA's goals for 2007 was to
update the Economic Development Plan included in the 2002 Comprehensive Plan. At the March
meeting the Board reviewed statistical information and trend data related to the local economy.
Board members requested an opportunity to reflect on the data prior to reviewing specific
comprehensive initiatives, goals and strategies. The packet including potential comprehensive
initiatives, goals and strategies for EDA review and discussion.
The EDA discussed potential initiatives, goals and strategies as presented and then reached
consensus in forwarding the draft economic development update to the Planning Commission for
consideration.
Communications Committee and Televising of Meetings:
Carlbom reviewed the details of the formation of a Communications Committee for the City of St.
Joseph. The purpose of the committee is to help provide information to the public and to manage
the gathering and distribution of information. Carlbom noted he invited an EDA Board Member to
be a part of the committee at the previous meeting and wished to do so again today. Carlbom
also stated that no further discussion had occurred regarding televising meetings and the
communications committee had not yet met.
The EDA discussed potential interest in serving on the committee. The interest level was tepid
with some Board Members requesting more time to consider.
Significant Estimated Market Value Increases:
Carlbom introduced the topic noting that the City Council was recently informed by Stearns
County that following a citywide market value assessment some property owners especially
commercial property owners will soon be informed of significant valuation increases. In an
attempt to be proactive the City has ordered the County to mail notices to affected property
owners prior to mailing estimated valuation statements. The notices were recently mailed soon.
The notice invites property owners to meet one-on-one with County officials regarding estimated
market values prior to the Board of Adjustment/Review meeting hosted by the County. Carlbom
noted this agenda item was for Board Member information as they will likely either be personally
impacted or hear from someone who is.
Jacobson and Heinen noted receipt of mailed notice and significant increase in estimated market
value.
Board Member Announcements.
Mayor Carlbom introduced the topic. Strack noted Urban Enviorns Work Group had just about
completed draft of design guidelines for the Downtown. The EDA would be reviewing at their May
meeting. In addition Strack rerninded Board Members to complete their surveys and return to
McComb Group as soon as practical. Finally Strack noted public hearing on Mill Stream Shops
and Lofts would be held on May 3rd. Ground-breaking expected shortly thereafter.
Carlbom announced the Sauk River Watershed District delayed action on the new school's site
plan. In addition Carlbom noted the St. Cloud Area Economic Development Partnership was
opening an opportunity for an intern.
Wick noted the Promotions Work Group had recently met and was actively completing a
promotions plan.
EDA Minutes - April 18, 2007
--3
Wick noted ground-breaking for new school was scheduled for May 3rd.
Adjournment.
Meeting adjourned by consensus at 4:20 PM
EDA Minutes - April 18. 2007
~
CITY Of ST. JOSEPH
www.cityofstjoseph.com
DATE:
May 9, 2007
Administrdtor
Judy Weyrens
MEMO TO:
S1. Joseph Economic Development Authority
FROM:
Cynthia Smith-Strack, Municipal Development Group
MdYor
RE:
Richdrd Cdrlbom
Accounts Payable - May 2007
May Financial Reports
Councilors
Steve Frdnk
AI Rdssier
Renee Symdnietz
Ddle Wick
A. Accounts Payable:
Following are Accounts Payable for the EDA's Consideration.
Payable To For Fund
MDG, Inc. April Econ. Dev. Service 150-46500-300
Owest Metrocom Telephone 150-46500-000
S1. Joseph Newsleader Publication (TIF 2-1) TIF 2-1 not EDA
St. Joseph Newsleader Pub. Update Comp Plan TIF 2-1 not EDA
Total
Amount
$ 2,242.43
$ 136.02
$ 84.50
$ 29.25
$ 2,492.20
Action:
A MOTION is in order to approve the Accounts Payable.
B. Financial Report:
May financial reports for the EDA are following. The reports consist of:
1. EDA revenue to date.
2. EDA expenditures to date.
3. Check Register.
4. Fund Balances (Econ Dev. 150, TIF 1-3155, TIF 1-4 156 and RLF 250).
Action:
A MOTION is in order to approve the financial reports.
b
2" College Avenue North' PO Box 668 . Sdint. Joseph, Minnesotd ,,6)74
Phone )20.)6).7201 FdX )20.)6).0)42
~.
INVOICE
MUNICIPAL DEVELOPMENT GROUP, INC.
25562 WILLOW LANE
NEW PRAGUE, MN 56071
952-758-7399
FAX: 952-758-3711
mdg@bevcomm.net
City of St. Joseph
Attn: Judy Weyrens
City Administrator
PO 668
St. Joseph, MN 56374
Invoice Date 05-10-07 I Payment Terms: 30 days I Customer 10 #: ST J06ED
Project April Economic Development Services
See attached detail
Amount: $1,925.00 Monthly contract fee - 33.00 hrs.
$ 317.43 654.5 miles x .485
$2,242.43
Code to: 150-46500-300 for general EDA
Remit To: Municipal Development Group, Inc.
25562 Willow Lane
New Prague, MN 56071
Dates-EDA
April 4, 2007 EDA Office Hours 8.50 hrs. C. Strack
April 11, 2007 EDA Office Hours 9.00 hrs. C. Strack
April 18, 2007 EDA Office Hours 8.00 hrs. C. Strack
April 25, 2007 EDA Office Hours 7.50 hrs. C. Strack
Total April, 2007 33.00 hours
Total MDG, Inc. 2007 Hours through April, 2007 = 163
Thank you! We appreciated the opportunity to work with you!
I Check No.
Date:
/ /Lzi/ 1
~. [ .,~~
tf.j>1"4' VI:
Principal
rt
City of St. Joseph
EDA Report
April 30, 2007
2007 YTD April 2007
Account Oeser Budget 2007 Amt YTD Amt Balance
FUND 150 Economic Development
E 150-46500-103 Legislative Bodies $750.00 $0.00 $0.00 $750.00
E 150-46500-151 Workers Compo $150.00 $0.00 $0.00 $150.00
E 150-46500-200 Office Supplies $500.00 $0.00 $0.00 $500.00
E 150-46500-300 Professional $24,100.00 $2,333.13 $7,103.87 $16,996.13
E 150-46500-303 Engineering Fee $2,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $2,000.00
E 150-46500-304 Legal Fees $1,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $1,000.00
E 150-46500-321 Telephone $600.00 $136.20 $272.55 $327.45
E 150-46500-322 Postage $250.00 $0.00 $0.00 $250.00
E 150-46500-327 Tax Increment $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
E 150-46500-331 Travel & $500.00 $0.00 $0.00 $500.00
E 150-46500-340 Advertising $500.00 $29.25 $29.25 $470.75
E 150-46500-433 Dues & $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
E 150-46500-510 Land $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
E 150-46500-582 Computer Software $300.00 $0.00 $0.00 $300.00
E 150-46500-587 Special Projects $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
E 150-46500-700 Misc $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
FUND 150 Economic Development $30,650.00 $2,498.58 $7,405.67 $23,244.33
FUND 155 TIF 1-3 Borgert (SKN)
E 155-46500-300 Professional $935.00 $0.00 $0.00 $935.00
E 155-46500-327 Tax Increment $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
E 155-46500-340 Advertising $50.00 $0.00 $0.00 $50.00
E 155-46500-600 Debt Service _ $8,307.00 $0.00 $0.00 $8,307.00
E 155-46500-611 Bond Interest $10,413.00 $0.00 $0.00 $10,413.00
E 155-46500-620 Agent Fees $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
FUND 155 TIF 1-3 Borgert (SKN) $19,705.00 $0.00 $0.00 $19,705.00
FUND 156 TIF 1-4 St. Joe Development
E 156-46500-300 Professional $4,700.00 $0.00 $0.00 $4,700.00
E 156-46500-304 Legal Fees $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
E 156-46500-327 Tax Increment $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
E 156-46500-340 Advertising $50.00 $0.00 $0.00 $50.00
E 156-46500-600 Debt Service _ $14,996.00 $0.00 $0.00 $14,996.00
E 156-46500-611 Bond Interest $32,196.00 $0.00 $0.00 $32,196.00
E 156-46500-620 Agent Fees $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
FUND 156 TIF 1-4 St. Joe Development $51,942.00 $0.00 $0.00 $51,942.00
FUND 157 TIF 2-1 Millstream
E 157-46500-340 Advertising $0.00 $84.50 $84.50 -$84.50
FUND 157 TIF 2-1 Millstream $0.00 $84.50 $84.50 -$84.50
FUND 250 Revolving Loan Fund
E 250-46500-304 Legal Fees $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
E 250-46500-490 Revolving Loan $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
FUND 250 Revolving Loan Fund $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
$102,297.00 $2,583.08 $7,490.17 $94,806.83
cz
City of St. Joseph
EDA Revenues
April 30, 2007
YTD %
SOURCE SOURCE Descr Budget Rev Revenue Balance of Budget
FUND 150 Economic Development
34150 TIF/MIF Deposit $0.00 $17,000.00 -$17,000.00 0.00%
36210 Interest Earnings $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0.00%
36300 Reimbursement $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0.00%
39201 Transfers from Other $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0.00%
FUND 150 Economic Development $0.00 $17,000.00 -$17,000.00 0.00%
FUND 155 TIF 1-3 Borgert (8KN)
31050 Tax Increment $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0.00%
FUND 155 TIF 1-3 Borgert (8KN) $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0.00%
FUND 156 TIF 1-4 81. Joe Development
31050 Tax Increment $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0.00%
FUND 156 TIF 1-4 81. Joe Development $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0.00%
FUND 250 Revolving Loan Fund
36210 Interest Earnings $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0.00%
36212 CDAP Loan Interest $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0.00%
39312 CDAP Loan Proceeds $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0.00%
FUND 250 Revolving Loan Fund $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0.00%
$0.00 $17,000.00 -$17,000.00 0.00%
Gf'
City of St. Joseph
EDA Expenditures
April 30, 2007
YTD %
OBJ OBJ Descr Budget Exp Expense Balance of Budget
FUND 150 Economic Development
DEPART 46500 Economic Development Authority
103 Legislative Bodies $750.00 $0.00 $750.00 0.00%
151 Workers Compo Insur. Premo $150.00 $0.00 $150.00 0.00%
200 Office Supplies $500.00 $0.00 $500.00 0.00%
300 Professional Services $24,100.00 $7,103.87 $16,996.13 29.48%
303 Engineering Fee $2,000.00 $0.00 $2,000.00 0.00%
304 Legal Fees $1,000.00 $0.00 $1,000.00 0.00%
321 Telephone $600.00 $272.55 $327.45 45.43%
322 Postage $250.00 $0.00 $250.00 0.00%
327 Tax Increment Certification $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0.00%
331 Travel & Conference $500.00 $0.00 $500.00 0.00%
340 Advertising $500.00 $29.25 $470.75 5.85%
433 Dues & SUbscriptions $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0.00%
510 Land $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0.00%
582 Computer Software $300.00 $0.00 $300.00 0.00%
587 Special Projects $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0.00%
700 Misc $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0.00%
DEPART 46500 Economic Development $30,650.00 $7,405.67 $23,244.33 24.16%
FUND 150 Economic Development $30,650.00 $7,405.67 $23,244.33 24.16%
FUND 155 TIF 1-3 Borgert (SKN)
DEPART 46500 Economic Development Authority
300 Professional Services $935.00 $0.00 $935.00 0.00%
327 Tax Increment Certification $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0.00%
340 Advertising $50.00 $0.00 $50.00 0.00%
600 Debt Service - Principal $8,307.00 $0.00 $8,307.00 0.00%
611 Bond Interest $10,413.00 $0.00 $10,413.00 0.00%
620 Agent Fees $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0.00%
DEPART 46500 Economic Development $19,705.00 $0.00 $19,705.00 0.00%
DEPART 49301 Transfer to other Funds
700 Misc $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0.00%
DEPART 49301 Transfer to other Funds $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0.00%
FUND 155 TIF 1-3 Borgert (SKN) $19,705.00 $0.00 $19,705.00 0.00%
FUND 156 TIF 1-4 St. Joe Development
DEPART 46500 Economic Development Authority
300 Professional Services $4,700.00 $0.00 $4,700.00 0.00%
304 Legal Fees $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0.00%
327 Tax Increment Certification $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0.00%
340 Advertising $50.00 $0.00 $50.00 0.00%
600 Debt Service - Principal $14,996.00 $0.00 $14,996.00 0.00%
611 Bond Interest $32,196.00 $0.00 $32,196.00 0.00%
620 Agent Fees $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0.00%
DEPART 46500 Economic Development $51,942.00 $0.00 $51,942.00 0.00%
FUND 156 TIF 1-4 St. Joe Development $51,942.00 $0.00 $51,942.00 0.00%
FUND 250 Revolving Loan Fund
DEPART 46500 Economic Development Authority
304 Legal Fees $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0.00%
490 Revolving Loan $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0.00%
DEPART 46500 Economic Development $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0.00%
FUND 250 Revolving Loan Fund $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0.00%
$102,297.00 $7,405.67 $94,891.33 7.24%
10
City of St. Joseph
EDA Check Register
April 30, 2007
Search Name CHECK # Comments FUND DEPART Amount
aWEST -TELEPHONE 038680 telephone service- 150 46500 $131.08
MUNICIPAL DEVELOPMENT CORP 038719 eda contract 150 46500 $2,333.13
QWEST-TELEPHONE 038785 telephone service- 150 46500 $5.12
ST. JOSEPH NEWS LEADER 038794 Development 157 46500 $84.50
ST. JOSEPH NEWSLEADER 038814 Amendment to 150 46500 $29.25
$2,583.08
J I
Administrdtor
/udy Weyrens
MdYor
Richdrd Cdrlbom
Councilors
Steve Frdnk
AI Rdssier
Renee Symdnietz
Ddle Wick
www.cityofstjoseph.com
CITY OF ST. JOSEPH
DATE:
May 9, 2007
MEMO TO:
Economic Development Authority
FROM:
Cynthia Smith-Strack Municipal Development Group
RE:
Report: Design Guidelines and Goals - Downtown Urban Environs Work
Group
Background:
As you may recall as a result of the 1995 visit by the Minnesota Design Team and the 2002
Comprehensive Plan update Mayor Carlbom convened a Downtown Study Committee in June
of 2005. The Study Committee met on a monthly basis from June 2005 through March of 2006
with the purpose of determining whether or not a comprehensive revitalization effort for the
downtown was feasible, how it could be achieved and if enough public support for such a
project existed.
In April of 2006 the Downtown Study Group presented its findings to the EDA, Planning
Commission and City Council. The Study Group formally recommended the City Council
proceed with a revitalization effort with the knowledge/understanding that while the City may
convene the process, it must quickly be led by the private entities whose time and money will
ultimately determine the effort's success.
The Downtown Study Committee concluded that a healthy, sustained partnership was crucial
to getting a revitalization process off the ground and building the critical mass needed to spur
a cycle of sustainable development over a period of several years. As you will recall the
Downtown Study Committee formulated a Strategic Revitalization Plan following a review
process which is also outlined in the plan.
The Downtown Revitalization Plan hinged on the formation of four work groups operating
simultaneously in distinct spheres Le. resource development, promotions, urban environs and
grass roots organization. The four work groups have been active since July of 2006. The
Urban Environs Work Group was tasked with developing design guidelines, standards and
goals addressing the urban space development/redevelopment and streetscape design
elements. Attached is a report from the UE Work Group which is a culmination of several
months of work. It includes eight sections and several attachments.
Request
It is important to understand the report is being initially released to the PC at this time.
The document is in DRAFT form and the purpose of this agenda item is:
1. To summarize different sections of the report;
2. To highlight potential impact on the existing zoning ordinance; and,
3. To establish what entity will solicit public input (Le. joint representation from PC, UE
Committee, EDA, CC).
To those ends following is a brief summary of each section of the report:
)2-
u; College Avenue North. PO Box 668 . Sdint. joseph, Minnesotd )6)74
Phone ,20.,6"7201 FdX ,20.,6,.0,42
SECTION
Section 1.
Section 2.
Section 3.
Section 4.
Section 5.
CONTENT
Introduction & Purpose
COMMENT
Describes task with which the UE was charged
Description of Design Guidelines Description of Design Guidelines and Standards
and Standards
Description of Issue
Addresses why revitalization in downtown is being investigated
Steps to developing design Step One: Define Downtown Corridor (NOTE: recommend updating zoning
standards/guidelines. ordinance to reflect expanded area.) Design standards applicable to
'downtown' but not greater downtown area (Le. rest of CBD).
Design Guidelines
Standards
Step Two: Examine what had previously transpired.
Step Three: Research and brainstorm re: design elements which could make
Downtown more attractive as related to: unbalanced streetscape, heavy
volume of automobile traffic and subdued 'sense of place.'
Step Four: Incorporate design elements into a systematic set of design
guidelines and standards.
and GOALS: preserve small-town, unique character of St. Joseph; complement
what is existing especially historic architecture; enhance pedestrian
experience downtown; help ensure design standards coincide with
community 'vision' for downtown; consider sustainable design; and protect
property values.
APPliCABILITY: Proposed to apply to new building construction, exterior
building improvements & signage that require a building permit and
construction of paoong lots greater than 5 space. UE Work Group made a
conscious and deliberate decision to pursue guidelines to provide a
framework for building architect/designer to operate within and not to
propose the City prescribe additional standards within zoning
ordinance.
SPECIFIC STANDARDS: Proposed guidelines offered for: store front building
materials; windowsffloors; building setbacks; parking; utility screening;
landscaping; signs; lighting; building maintenance; rear entry/egress;
awnings; building height; fencing; roofs; color; franchise architecture and
sidewalkslstreetscapes.
ZONING CODE ISSUES:
Front yard setback. Recommend a maximum of five feet in downtown area
but keep 10 ft. in 'greater' CBD.
PaoonQ: Recommend PC dsallow par1dng in front yard in 'downtown' area.
Ok in 'greater' CBD. Recommend 5' green buffer adjacent to parking lots in
downtown.
Utilitv screenina: Recommend allowing vegetative screening along with
specified wallslfences.
13
Awninas: Consider disallowing metal, shingled wood, plastic, fiberglass and
roof type awnings in downtown in favor of canvas or materials that are
compatible with original structures.
Fences: Consider disallowing chain link, cement block and split rail fencing in
downtown.
Section 6. Recommended Steps This Section lists in no particular order recommended short and long term
projects for the City and the community to consider. This section does not
apply to PC review at this time.
Section 7. Developing Greater Downtown Encourage higher density and greater infill and blending of downtown and
Area highway commercial through the 'greater downtown' area.
Section 8. Conclusion
Attachments
Action:
After reviewing the UE report and highlighting potential impacts on the existing zoning
ordinance, discussion and direction as to who should and how to solicit publiC input (i.e. joint
representation from PC, UE Committee, EDA, CC) is kindly requested.
IY
St. Joseph Downtown Revitalization
':'.:-'_:~::::---.~":':,:'<_:::::::::::::::_-:'"
- -""""-,-;,,,"::-:,,:_::,:-,,,,-,.,,
-:::_<_<C'-t:_...:_'
"-<...:...,.'.,......:..:,.
Design Sta,n.c:tard$~Committee
Urban EnvitoJ~!5'VVork Group
Ernie Diedri~,pommittee Chair
Maureen Forsythe
Michael Gohman
David Hunger
Amy Kluesner
MattLin"
S,teye Paa .
Colleen petters
Kurt Schneider
CynttliaSmith-"Strack
Ellen Wahlstrom
Dale Wick
Final Dr~ft
5-1-200'7
Ib
I. Introduction and Purpose of this Report
.,--::..,..:<-.._.;'"".-:';......: ,.-,',:'-<-
~>-<-;,/}_:-:<_:. .:. "=, ::: :::':;':.';;:.:: '; _-i
,_."'," '0.- _'__
What Are'~lgIlStandards?
.-~_ ..__.;.... ',--'", ", .... .. -', - .. " .. "_' .0 .. _," -- " " '. _,,' _. '_',' .,0 ,00_' ,',' _"_,,, ~__.'."
"-,-'-- '..-,-',-,- -, -' - ,'.. "'--"-.. --
....-........"....'.....'.--..-......-..'....... ........... ........,. .....................:.-...;. .................--:'.-.'....
To bettef:~~fi~e"~eSign standard~;~wem~an these t~,ipClude both
guidelinft~~nd de.t(ff!!Qpment $tandards..(~~ Mankato!~JJesign
Standards) . .
1. DesiQn Quidelines. Design guidelines are strongly recommended yet
discretionary policies that guide more subjective considerations, such as
district character, design details, or arChitectural style. They serve as
design criteria for review by City Staff,.an architectural review board, the
Planning Commission, and City Council.
2. Development Standards: Development standards address those aspects
of site development and building design that are essential to maintain and
reinforce the character of each district. They include permitted uses,
building height, facade treatment, setbacks, and parking, sign, and
landscaping specifications. These standards should be legally defensible
and implemented through the City's development reQulations.
The design guidelines and development standards should be defined with
illustrative prototypes in order to provide the potential developer with a graphic
illustration of the standards and intent ofthe guidelines.
2
17
III. What's the Problem in Saint Joseph's Downtown?
As indicated in the IntroductJ~' he;~"~~ntown is seen to need
revitalization. Saint Joseph's dow. n, as ,-,' hotographs in Appendix A
readily show, is a collection of mix es a Minnesota Street and College
Avenue. The downtown is oriente", ede . ns but challenged by heavy
through traffic, a subdued "sense Qt, . )d a non-uniform streetscape.
During the Comprehensive Plan 9 Process, survey respondents and
neighborhood meeting participants stated a number of challenges and
opportunities facing the city over the next few years. Among these challenges
were retaining locally-owned businesses, creating an attractive downtown area,
optimizing the use of downtown sp~~;~i(CC ". ping downtown lively with a range
of activities. When asked what on~~~j vement would make living in St.
Joseph better for them, almost 70o/~:~'the notion of an economically and
socially viable and vibrant downto - ' preserve downtown "Americana."
This committee spent one ..............., ,...a Strengths Weaknesses
Opportunities Threats (SWOT) analysis (su marized in Appendix B) that
confirmed for the committee that downtown Saint Joseph needs revitalization.
IV. Steps to Design Standards
A.
,.....'..~,._,.....':. ".".--,-. .....-,- -.-
D~fi~inathe.' Downtown.
" t Ai.;/: Our first;$t~p~~.~~to establish thes!:Qpepf our task b~"(~ifirlin~ what we
',- ..".<x~~~erstand to q~:~Dow~t<>;\Yfl' " We q.idthisbyq~fining the qq~ Downtown and
:;~tne- Greater Do~lJtown arE!~~ (see gr~Ptlic on ti~~page). W~,;~n,igmented the
city's definition of the Corebowntown to include the following: Both sides of
Minnesota Street between College Avenue and First Avenue and bounded by
Ash Street with extensions on College Avenue to Ash Street and to just a little
beyond Kennedy School.
The Greater Downtown Area expands'to Birch Street on the north and to
Kennedy School on the South. _.
The Urban Environs Committee\NiIUocus on establishing design
standards primarily for the Core Downtown Area and will not deal with ways to
further develop the Greater Downtown Area.
B. What Has Been Done Alreadv?
Our second task was to examine what has already been done by the
1995 visit of the Minnesota Design Tearn and more recently (2005), the adoption
of the Comprehensive Plan by the City of Saint Joseph. The Minnesota Design
Team held a community visioning process and their design charette resulted in a
report that provided a vision for "A great Good Place" which summarized rules of
thumb for a "great good place":
1. convenience with nearby parking
2. locally owned businesses
3
I~
3. Compact and walkable
4. Recognized as th~2C:;E(Bt~"
To that end, the renewed vi~(g~ theC:i~~jgn Team gave us included:
· Compact ~~t~rtha Minnesota St. to Hwy 75
· New inves'f11~pt d'//d to the Center
· Shared paf.l5iI':l91q,. d center businesses
· Walkways link college, Church and the Center
The Urban Environs Commiq~~~pi!; {feet, adopts similar ideas about the
Downtown area in its deliberations ;~~Qut; 'r. n standards.
>::\~,~,
,.:c.,.......,.,.,...-'. ,_,',',"",,".<_
C. What Would Make th~iiG:brre';f)~~ntown Look Better?
._,C_,","" , "
The third step was to diSCU~~'deSigl~rnents that coincided with the
Design Team drawings and could improve the downtown significantly. These are
listed in Appendix D and are woven in with the short-term and long-term
recommendations.
Our final step was to incorporate these design elements into a systematic
~t.of design g~~.~~lrn~I,~!1d standards. I:"f!~r'looking at num,~/: on
. ..... t and in~$tigatifJg{~hat other citi~$h~,,~ adopted as ~~r and
st....a..........f;ld........ ards (see:.~.... .....p....erldix. E), we develo~.. .'. a.'tblend" of guideUnes;alld standards
frproiother citie~/tJ'iEitlcJll. ow.' in part V." .... '.' .. . Co. .../ '.;.'.",
'.-,'- .' -'---'-' ->.
"_'"n .'.... .'
.~i/"':,)_~_:.\-'_,
""",.,-.."..," ':..,
- - .'.'.' .' .'
';V~ Design Guklelines and Standards: A Synthesis
A. Goals
1. Preserve the small town, unique character of St. Joseph
2. Complement the existing historic architecture
3. Enhance the pedestrian experience of downtown and encourage
streetscapes that are inviting
4. Ensure that the design standards articulate the community's
vision for a main street area
5. Consider "sustainable design" in all changes. (see Appendix C
for an explanation of sustainable design)
6. Protect property values by listing and specifying desirable
attributes of characteristics that define a building's quality.
Finally, the design standards should apply to the following:
4
If(
a. All new building,pons!QJction
C.>,,__,_,._ _.c......._..-....,
,:;<.;:':._-'--:.',':'-:-:'",.;:-.:.:,-
'-, -.' :,.:>..c-....._...._"><..';.~.::;'
b. All extetior buil~i~'g imp~~~~ments and signage changes that
require a build~1'l91sign P~OOit
c. All new or reco~~J~@(ii~'parking areas with 5 or more
spaces
B. Specific Standards
1. Store Front Buif,9ilJJlLM~t~rials
The historic character of a prope~:<
removal of historic materials or alt
property should be avoided. The ~
,retained and preserved. The
" atures that characterize the
ii}:o
Irig1'm~terials are recommended:
a.
b.
c.
..,d"
Btick or brick veneer
Decorative Concrete block
Stone
" Wood - minimum amount and is
",,'.. maintained ",
Stucco
Maintained clapboard
Large windows-- ' , , ,",
,Historic Plaque showil'lg the historY.of the building
e.
, f:'
g., ,
h.
The following building matetials are not recommended:
a. Standard concrete block
b. VinyV steer siding
c. Unfinished wood
d. Painted or panelized brick
e. Masonite
2. Windows and Floors
a. Large open views into the commercial spaces are
encouraged to enhance the pedestrian experience by
providing a visual connection to the use inside the
building.
b. Restorationorrenovation of a storefront should be
mindful of its original character.
c. I nstalling window air conditioners is inappropriate.
d. Windows and doors are recommended in the rear
facade for use of rear area.
5
20
and
3. Building Setba~f(~< ...
/'"."',.><": ;,.,....,:.',
'<.....~-.'7-> _,.,_'.,......c
) -:::~:;,>:;:>
A store front is recommend~~;~o be a~'~~~ property line or even with the
adjacent property and the store froJ\lt;$hou!9J~~;iless than five feet from the
property line. ......
4. Parking
a.
b.
Off streI~~~~ not allowed in the front of store.
Parkin W~~};~t the rear of store and on shared
city 10tsrcCi;/",'
The cityi~iJra./;.... that ample on-street and off street
par1<ing;i.~;..~vail~~I~JhroU9hout the downtown area
Green parking bUffers such as hedges and berms are
encouraged. The buffer area on parking lots should
be a minimum of 5' wide to provide adequate space
for the trees, railing or wall and snow storage. The
street wall shoul~be maintained ~.~;t~~
street fron~gE)~by using ove~Jg.; .s,
omamentalf~ncing andlo1"$~FlJ~Yr~1 screens.
c.
d.
Utility Screening
Ground-mounted mechanical equipment and dumpsters should be
screened with plants, walls or fencing.
6. Landscaping
a. Hanging basl<~ts.~nd planters are encouraged along
store fronts.
b. The city of St. Joseph should develop a plan to
provide trees and planters as part of the streetscape
along the downtown district.
7. Signs
a. Busine~ sigrlswillconform to the established city
sign ordinance;
b. Symbolic and historic 3 dimensional signage is
encouraged.
c. Downtown area informational signage (e.g.
business location) is encouraged. Maybe construct a
colorful informational kiosk?
6
2. f
d. Historic plaques showing the history of the building
are enC<?ur~g~q,
8. Ughting
a.
. .....>....,,':....::_"..:'.
BUilding,~~~ Si~~~~~ lighting to be indirect, with the
light SOHf"~~J~I~gen from direct pedestrian and
motorist VieW.. Lighting should serve to illuminate
facades, entrances and signage and provide an
adequate level of personal safety while enhancing the
aesthetic appeal of the building.
The CitY............Js.............h...........'...:.i.ulia.....:.......Q.....'ro.....................vide light fixtures that reflect the
historic :~iradij~;@nd continuity of downtown.
b.
~.;.:o::,~~_-r,:._
9. Maintenance
.:..-.....'.....'...-..'.:-..'..... .'.--..:.'.....'....'....
,.,...........':'...'. .'.-.:::...:.:<:....:.....
....'-.....'.: ->....'-..........'................
C:'_,,';,',',_:,.'. _." .....
:,.".,'-:, ..
p"-, "', ,.-.' ,
.,-...-..... ", "...,....:.
:>::.....:.:<.:. .....,....:..,.
Buildings in the downtown a~a'shoula:be well maintained and kept in
good repair. Painted surfaces are to be maintained.
a. Deteriorated historic features should be
restored/repai,.edrather than repl.~~p.:~en the
. severity of thed~teriorating requi.U:~~replgcement
. > distinctive feature,the new featu~~~n~~;1~7rnatch the
old in design,C<?lof",texture, and vi~paljqualities and
... where possible,.materials. :.::<
b. . .ChemicalorphysicaIJreatments,$uch as
sandblasting, that cause damage to historic materials
should not be used. The surface cleaning of
structures should be undertaken using the gentlest
and environmentally responsible means possible.
c. If masonry has deteriorated, re-pointing or
replacementm~y be required. All work and
replacement should match the existing masonry as
closely as possible in style, color, type, bond pattern
and size. When re-pointing, a mortar appropriate for
the brick type should be used and match the existing
mortar color.
d. Masonry should not be painted or covered with false
facades.
10. Rear Entry/Egress
a. Access at rear of building from parking areas is
encouraged.
b. The back of buildings ought to be maintained.
7
AA
11. Awnings
a.
C,,--;_'-':_"-,':.:_:___;:.:.:,,-::-._>'
AwninQiqisi9~~~~m~ to be historically appropriate
and co~Rlement~~to the building and to surrounding
building~'iL .......<.;;!.
AwninQ~.~~.gl[l~project a minimum of 3' from the
building. .'
Awnings should not extend across multiple store
fronts unless consistent or complimentary with
buildingg~l:jigJ'l'
Back Ii" awning is discouraged.
Awning,;!. tructed of durable, protective, and
water r~~~U~ erials.
Awnin9~;g,,?9<ibe made of canvas or materials that
are COrTl~~!ible;~j!~.the original structure. Metal,
shingles;plastic,ifiberglass or shed roofs are
discouraged.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
12. Building Height
.... b....
13. Fencing
14. Roofs
15. Color
a.
.... '., Building bulk~ndsCale ought to
:arrangement. ......
Buildings ou~hltohave a height
buildings. .
a.
Chain link, split rail or standard concrete block fences
are stronglydiscc>uraged.
Acceptable fencelWall materials are brick, cut or
carved stone,gegJrative or split face block and
wrought iron. Green fenceslhedges are encouraged.
b.
a. Material and color of roofs ought to be consistent with
the rest of the structure and adjacent properties.
b. Green roofs are encouraged, if they are structurally
feasibleal1ddon'fcreate additional problems such as
drainage.
Colors should be from a "historic color" selection and should compliment
the age and style of the structure. Property owners should limit the number of
8
),3
colors on a single structure. Loud and highly contrasting colors are discouraged;
subtle, neutral or earth tones color;~",!.i!~dg'!l',reflectance are preferred.
16. Franchise
.~: -'.- -,- : ,: ',',.:- ,-
, :':,/
Franchises or national chai~~'~re t~;[t~1l9w these standards to create
buildings compatible with the downtowl'l~~r;~a:
17. Sidewalks/Streetscape
a.
Sidewa.I.R................b........l:iinp.-.yo.'.... :u.'..t......s. ' planters and distinct paving at
interse~i~~s ari~~~OSSwalks is encouraged.
Bike ra~!9~H~!)lS ought to be provided.
The us~~~ypa~~~ and other texture materials are
encour~~~d. .)
Wider sidewalks if possible are encouraged.
The City should adopt standards for streetscape
elements to provide uniformity throughout the
downtown area. This would include benches,
directional sigl'l.age, trash recept~p1~s,'f~l'l~ng,
planters, anctparking lot buffers.' .' '. .,.'
b.
c.
d.
e.
Taking the design considerations listed in parts IV and V into account, the
Urban Environs Committee proposes the following short-term and longer-term
steps in the revitalization of the downtown area. All these recommendations
should incorporate sustainable design to ensure energy savings and the
conservation of resources.
A. Short- Term Projects
For the purposes of this report, the short-term is judged to be 1-2 years
and the projects on this list are not in order of priority, though we suggest the city
create a streetscape plan as soon as possible to prioritize and implement this
suggested list of projects.
Adopt a downtown logo and slogan to connect with signage, banners, etc.
in the downtown area (to gibe the downtown a "brand").
1. Install historical plaques showing the history of buildings along
main street. The plaques provide a pedestrian with a reason to
stop in downtown and take an interest in the building and the
activities going on inside.
9
~t/
2. Adopt a consistent awning design on Minnesota and College
streets. This prC)~i<::tc:t~~~,"i\lTlmediate visual connection between
buildings in the d..' . low~~~~a. This committee chose not to
dictate materialsg\>.\ ors Ol1c~~~igns. Whafs most important is
that there is an i?~~r;it to vi~,~~l'y link awnings in some way.
3. Attach banners (~!~t~~/. "\lltl'ltown brand) on decorative
lampposts along i'Mi.o!;i~Street.
4. Install directional signage (with the Downtown brand) coming
from Highway 94 as well as Hwy 75.
5. Install planters, benches and trees on both sides of the
downtown streets
B. Longer-Term Steps'
f,'--_;.~- :::-:(-,:' ' .~'-:;:<:-_:_>~:-:: /,/:~, .
1. Bury or relocate tD~Powij'f~e.I~Phone cables and if poles or
support structuresal1e needed, ,choose the most visually
interesting type.
2. Address vehicle and pedestrian separation downtown... perhaps
with wider sidewalks or planters or bushes.
3.,IQ~t~ILt~~ffic-calming bump-outs in the coni~~~~~~en the
.... rehUrct1~nd the alley andnl~rI< with plantersQr ape-Bestrian
Gf"Q~sin~(paint stripesontheroad)"i .......... '..',. ..........i.....i..
4:~eqlJire facades behin~main ,street building~:afl(f dress up
parkil1gspaces with planters and some unifYing element in the
Saint J()~ph "backyard" such.as benches,'afountain or a
flagpole. See the Minnesota Design Team suggestions for
further ideas.
5. Buffer the Parish parking lot with bushesltrees, benches or a
fountain or an information kiosk.
6. Install a connection between both sides of Main Street with an
arch over the alleybetweenLoso's and the old First State Bank
Building and a corresponding feature/arch across the street.
Part of this was envisioned by the Minnesota Design Team's
visit many years ago.
7. Investigate diagonal parking on Minnesota Street to see if trade-
ofts can be found (e.g., less parking on the Church side and
more parking on the commercial side)
VII. Developing the Greater Downtown Area
Our committee spent most of our time on the Core Downtown area so this
section has not been developed. What we suggest is that the Greater Downtown
area, as defined in the graphic on the title page, be subject to greater infill in
order to provide for a better transition to the commercial area adjacent to Hwy 75
and to those areas immediately surrounding the Core downtown area.
10
Zs
VIII. Conclusion
;-....',- .-,'
.,'-"........:._c ,.....:'.
\,,':i-::>, ~\::. -<,-
,.c,,_,.:,, ........._.,....,
Given the rapid commercial!;~~~elo~~~mt on Highway 75, the housing
development to the north of Hwy. ~~'(0m~rlc~pending development near the
College of St. Benedict, the new, "green" elementary school and the low level of
investment in the Downtown area, Saint Joseph is in danger of losing its
identified center unless downtown revitalization takes place.
Our committee was charged with developing design standards for the
downtown so that the overall effect~~r0;~~i' ..~stment in old buildings as well as
investment in new buildings leaveSt'~~~ do ., n looking better than it currently
does. These standards, developeq;;!~'"~,, 'ighlight the historical center of
Saint Joseph and embrace the ide~i;ttJflt~ ntown should encourage a sense
of place by facilitating citizen interaCtl<msa .' ~II as providing an attractive and
welcoming place for visitors. ' .
Finally, we also have added a list of short-term and long-term
recommendations that are consistent with the design standards and would help
keep the small town character of Saint Joseph as well as make it a more
city fOf'o.~"VCOrJ'lers, for our regularguests (CSB and:,~dl,.Jf?!~dents),
casual vis,itotsl()Oking for an attractive.place to visit fqf,awhile;
11
zb
IX. Appendices
Appendix A.. .Pictures indicating the problem
12
27
13
Zf
Appendix B...A summary of the Strengths Weaknesses Opportunities and
;~<<"\:""?
CI"rlti~~f ST. J~i~pH
DOWNTQW~ REV';'JZATION
URBAN ,.' Q. T GROUP
Meeting Minute$ iff , October 19, 2006
. Chair person Diedrich called the October 19, 2006 meeting of Urban Environment to order by
5:05PM.
SWOT ANALYSIS EXCERCISE
Diedrich introduced the topic and suggest
Yang asked the group to divide into two g
Weakness, Opportunities and Threats in
to complete. The following are what gath
strengths:
. College
. Monastery
. Post office
Parking '<..f..,<'
Walkable ~i~~neet<r<
Focus on ~VYntoWl'),ef{orts
RedeveIOR~n~n7
Trees~:i'/'
Meat Mar~~t
Back lot pdtehtial
. New light poles
. Architecture
Weakness:
. "lingering Deficit"
. Lack of consistence of awning
. Lack of visual interest
. Cable lines
. Telephone wires
. Set back- constancy
. Empty lots
. lack of visual interest
. Telephone Poles (tall one)
. Insufficient pedestrian vehicle separation
. Narrow sidewalk
. Bike rack
. Raggedy
. Imbalance of church and downtown store.'
. Number of bars
. store hours of operation
. Empty lots
. Unattractive building
. Different roof alignment
Opportunities:
lain the process of SWOT Analysis.
nerate some ideas of Strengths,
h topic should take about three minutes
groups:
14
11
. CSB Investment
. Development
. Cooperation
. Old Kennedy school
. Fagade standers
. Green space
. More retail
. Growth-new business and more
. Mix housing
. Fagade standards
. Streetscapes
. Link Lake Wobegon and downtown
. Tours attraction- combined with ~II
. Anchor- Library or community Ce '.
. Walkable entrance into the
Threats:
. Limit Activities
. Cost/money
. Fear of college
. Lack of Density towards HWY 75
. Transportation
. No incentives for improvements
. Competitions with S1. Cloud and surround cities
lack of pa~~~",i>. c',i
Town-Go~~o-per,~!gn in revitalizationeff9rt,
Tour of Sai~t~-ot~~,t3~~reation efforts.
Field Stre~1;.~Qi:i~!?th~rtransportation i!?sOes
Car traffic" ' .. '
Misperception of HWV;,?5 as Downtown.
Industrial park deter people from coming into town c,
. Lack of interest
OTHER DISCUSSIONS
Came out from the SWOT analyses are some!;)hortterms and long terms project that can be
worked on. Short-term projects are projectsthatdon'ttake too much time or efforts to get it done
,and long-term projects are projects that consist of more planning.
Short-term Project:
. Adding Window boxes
. Putting on Awnings
. Planters, flowers, and trees
. Adding Bike racks
. Store hours and operation
. Cooperation from business owners, school, and city
. Tours attraction- combined with College Events.
. Color palette for store fronts
. CSB Investment
Long-term Projects:
(Projects that will take more time and more planning)
. Taking out the ugly brown Telephone poles
. Doing infill development to empty lots
15
30
. Set Back-consistency -Getting set back approved by the Planning Commission and doing
the project. .
. Narrow Sidewalk- this will also n' ,.... &Xg~f;~pproved by the Planning Commission.
. Bump out and Boulevard (consu>< proJe~.j~~ the county and the city).
. New Development will take a long~n~ime to RI~.pi;PUt.
. New use for old Kennedy schoolfcw~.have tq,~~ until the new school is done.
. Green Space " . '
. More Retails rq;;;'(;~),.j:{ ,
. link Downtown and Lake Wobegon Trair .'
. Walkable entrance into the College.
. Mix Housing
. Fa~de standards
. Anchor- Library or Community
. Streetscapes
. Building a sense of place.
Homework:
. Think about the rear of the store
. What can we do with the
. How can we make this astatically pleasing?
. Do you agree or disagree with having the back Irear to be the storefront?
"<i"_-c'l\.pPendix C...Sl.tStaitta.~1e Design
,>-.'.' '-':,-"..-,::'-, '-:. " -.
!.:~~._':,:_-,,_:,_:. ':~C- '_> :,,,',..::_-'::- <~,::-.: --:- - "
SustainaBle design (also refetreci to as ,igreen applied to
buildings is the art of designing buildings that comply with the principles of
economic, social, and ecological sustainability. The essential aim of sustainable
design is to produce buildings in a way that reduces the use of non-renewable
resources, minimize environmental impa;ct,a;n~ relates people to the natural
environment. It involves using tools $lJctfaslife cycle assessment and life cycle
energy analysis to judge or rate the~nViropl1lental impact of various design
choices. Green design is considered. a means of reducing or eliminating the
impact on the environment while maintaining quality of life by using careful
assessment to substitute less harmful'products and processes for conventional
ones.
Sustainable design attempts to reduce the collective environmental
impacts during the construction process, as well as during the lifecycle of the
building (heating, electricity use, carpet cleaning, etc.). This design practice
emphasizes efficiency of heating andcoolihgsystems, alternative energy
sources such as passive solar, building siting, reused or recycled materials, on-
site power generation (solar technologY,ground source heat pumps, wind
power), rainwater harvesting for gardening and washing and on-site waste
management such as green roofs that filter and control storm water runoff.
16
3/
Appendix D...Desired Design Elements
. Wider sidewalks
. Historical brass plaques
. Consistent canopy design..
new building site (Laundro
. A traffic calming bump-out
planters
. Burying the power/telephone cables
· Assuring a consistent fagade with dapboard and colors
· A wrought-iron arch over th~alle tween Loso's and the old bank
building
. Consistent facades behind
element in Saint. Joseph's
. In fill park, sitting area by G
· In all changes, a focus on gli.,.
pry of buildings along main street
towards Bo Diddley's and the
alking out of the church flanked by
uildings as well as some unifying
aza" (e.g., a flagpole planters, etc.)
Appendix E...Common Design Elements from Several Cities
a
...... Walla, W~~t1fM1t~~
,,,,,,,c\{I;'I.> den, Idaho'}> . .
:Normal, Illinois'"
Mankato, Minnesota
Hopkins, Minnesota
Livermore, California
Conway, Arkansas
Burien, Washington
· All buildings should be oriented to the street with commercial activities
occupying the ground level.
· Housing will be encouraged as needed to undertake redevelopment of
parcels.
· An ample supply of on and off-street parking will be located throughout the
Core.
· Public spaces will be used to provide beauty and places to gather.
· Buildings with more than one story.
· Large storefront windows that allow people to see activity within a building.
· Shop doors that add character to each building.
· Use facades, awnings and windows for business signs in a manner that
supports the overall character of the setting.
17
32
· A setting that supports both automobile and pedestrian movement.
· Maintain and enhance build' cter and facades.
· Require any new developm' "''''',at street front. (Do not allow
traditional suburban site de 'ng between street and building)
. Make improvements to par ',. back" side.
· Work with property owners ..... . cou ............fa improvements to rear facades
and the creation of rear entrram jllcent to parking areas.
· The retail functions of the postal service should be kept in Downtown.
· Establish pedestrian crossings with supporting sidewalkltrail .connections
· Use the Comprehensive Plan and land use .controls to establish strong
edges that prevent the incr~~3~~I.;~~~'Version of property to non-
residential uses. ,.;:i> ....gs;.,
· Use regulations and financi~l~rcentr\Ze.~ to promote property maintenance
and to prevent undesired u rty.
· Make streetscape improve street as corridor to
Downtown.
. Enhance opportunity for pedestrian and bicycle use.
. Curb "bump outs" at street intersections aid with pedestrian crossing and
help to calm traffic.
· parkingt~;,~.~;;t~g,2~ant ingredientofasu.ccessful DO~r;ltg~~.'W.flrking
the Dowm~~~nQ\l~~~ be available,'ilfe.11ejistributed and~f~~r;i;'Sj"t~~,i
Parking tl;l~st ~e.~i~:wed as an a~set QftMe entire DO'Al(!~~~rh",H9t of
individuatipt<ijj~rties.' .' ..," ,
Downto~;~h61.1(d~~rCOUrage cust9me.rsfg,visit multi~t~.rbusinesses, not
just a siq~t.~ stop,:;:." ',. . ...... ,'.' ,'. : ",
· InformatIonal signs'nilated tothe use of theparking area.
· The Downtown Special Service District is the best means for funding the
public parking system. The calculation of the service charge is based on
the annual budget for the Servi~pistrict. Operating .costs would include
the recapture of land .costs, maintenanCe, snow removal and capital
improvements. These costs are c()n.y~rted to a .cost per space. This .cost
factor is assigned to properties according to the total spaces required by
ordinance minus any spaces provided directly by the parcel.
· The service charge applies solely to non-residential property. State law
limits the application of a service charge only to property that is classified
for property taxation and used for commercial, industrial, or public utility
purposes, or is vacant land zoned or designated on a land use plan for
.commercial or industrial use.
· Add other improvements that enhance the experience of visiting
Downtown, such as benches, waste.containers and bicycle racks.
· The design for a way finding system should be established for both
Downtown and applications outside of the Downtown.
· A higher standard of cleaning and snow removal may be expected in
Downtown.
18
33
www.cityofstjoseph.com
CITY OF ST. JOSEPH
DATE:
May 9, 2007
Administrdtor
Judy Weyrens
MEMO TO:
S1. Joseph Economic Development Authority
FROM:
MdYor
Richdrd Cdrlbom RE:
Cynthia Smith-Strack, Municipal Development Group
Update Collegeville Development Group - Millstream Shops/Lofts
Councilors
Steve Frdnk
AI Rdssier
Renee Symdnietz
Ddle Wick
Background
The City Council held a public hearing on the TIF Plan for this project on May 3rd. The TIF Plan
was UNANIMOUSLY approved. The PUD plan/plat (including site plan) were also approved at
the May 3rd meeting.
The Developers are wrapping up final steps prior to breaking ground by the close of the month.
In addition, staff has been meeting with another Developer who has entered into a purchase
agreement for an existing lot within the Central Business District. Representatives from the
project attended a staff meeting at City Hall on May 9th regarding conceptual mixed
office/professional and retail facility. The site is within the development district created for the
Collegeville Development Group project (see attached map). The second developer is currently
completing a preliminary application for TIF assistance. The preliminary application is expected
to be on the June EDA agenda.
Action
This item is for your information.
60/
21; College Avenue North' PO Box 66s . Sdint. Joseph, Minnesotd )"6)74
Phone ,2.0.,6,.7201 FdX ,2.0.,6,.0'42.
EXHIBIT I - Development District No.2
TIF District No. 2-1
(Redevelopment)
3S
www.cityo!stjoseph.com
CITY Of ST. JOSEPH
DATE:
May 9, 2007
Administrdtor
/udy Weyrens
MEMO TO:
Sf. Joseph Economic Development Authority
FROM:
Mdyor
RE'
Richdrd Cdrlbom .
Cynthia Smith-Strack, Municipal Development Group
Advertisement in Sf. Joseph Visitor's Guide
Councilors
Steve Frdnk
AI Rdssier
Renee Symdnietz
Ddle Wick
Background
The EDA has received an inquiry from the Sf. Joseph Newsleader regarding a 1/8 page
advertisement in the annual Visitor's Guide. In the previous issue the EDA placed a 1/8 page
advertisement consisting of a business card (generic). Rates for 2007-08 Visitor's Guide are
$71 for an eighth of a page. The Visitor's Guide will be distributed to 3,600 homes and
businesses in the Sf. Joseph area. This could be an opportunity to get information about the
EDA to the public.
The letter and previous advertisement are attached for your information.
Action
Discussion and comment are kindly requested. If the EDA wishes to place an advertisement a
MOTION to do so is in order.
~3b
~'l College Avenue North, PO Box bb8 . Sdint. /oseph. Minnesotd 'lb,74
Phone Fo.)b).7~OI FdX Fo.)b).OH~
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
~7
05/03/2007 13:31
3203634195
THE NEWSLEADERS
PAGE 01/02
," Avenue NW
St Joseph, MN 58374
320-363-7741
32~'95
The Newsleaders
Fax
TD.~ --. L
. Of' 4- CJ l.).5o T
.._~ 3~3-03Y 2..
FIomI Troy GunClerson
Phone;
Page&: 2
Dnt= 51212007
He: SaIf8ll and Sl.loseph Visitor's Guides 2007.08
1:1 Urgent .,s.Far RevIew 0 PIHse CoIIIInent JlPI.... Repry 0 ...... '-ecryeIe
~
Dear ~'OG.."''''' I
It's time again for the Annual Sartell and St. Joseph's Visitors Guides for 2007-08!l AttaChed ~u will
find 1!I copy Of your ad from last year. Your ad last year was a black end white ed that was 1irf' of a
page In size plus free business dit'aetory listing. Prices for this year 1181h of 8 page ad are:
Sartell: $99 (Goes to over 7,500 homes arid businesses in the Sarte" ArecI)
St. Joseph: $71 (Goes to over 3,800 homes and bU$ine8$9S in the St. Joseph Area)
. Please call mysel, Troy Gunderson, at the New....,.... otrfce to inform me if you would or
would not like to be In the upcoming edition of one or both of the guide.. Also, if you would like
infonnation en other size$ of ads plesse ask about that 8$ well and I will be glad to help.
Guida will be mailed out tho 1st week of July
Thank you far your time and ooosideration of this wonclerfuland inexpensive publication.
Sincerely,
Troy Gunderson
Office: 363-7741
Cell: 291-0799
E-mail: Vova(cilthenewsludlll.S.com
3'9
~r
~11
1 &.
~1'"'
\M
~N'
f"'L
::r
p
05/03/2007 13:31
3203634195
THE NEWSLEADERS
PAGE 02/02
;1
www.cityofstjoseph.com
CITY Of ST. JOSEPH
DATE:
May 9, 2007
Administrdtor
/udy Weyrens
MEMO TO:
St. Joseph Economic Development Authority
FROM:
MdYor
Richdrd Cdrlbom RE:
Cynthia Smith-Strack, Municipal Development Group
St. Joseph Audit
Councilors
Steve Frdnk
AI Rdssier
Renee Symdnietz
Ddle Wick
Background
At the previous EDA meeting the Board requested information on when the 2006 City of St.
Joseph audit would be complete. The Board was interested in obtaining information regarding
the EDA fund balance and balance within the revolving loan fund. The audit has not yet been
completed and/or released to the city. Completion is expected by the end of the month.
Applicable sections of the audit will be provided for review upon receipt.
This item is for your information only.
tt7
2.., College Avenue North, PO Box 668 . Sdint. joseph, Minnesotd .,6)74
Phone ,2.0.,6"72.01 FdX Fo.,6,.0'42.
THIS PAGE INTENTIONAllY lEFT BLANK
if