Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-04-08. ~ CITY OF ST. OS~PH 1 WwW.cityof stjoseph.com St. Joseph Planning Commission August 4, 2008 7:00 PM Administrator ~udy Weyrens 1. Call to Order 2. Approve Agenda Mayor AI Rassier 3. Approve Minutes -July 7, 2008 Councilors 4. 7:00 PM Keith Eisenschenk, Reconsideration of Interim Use Permit Steve Frank Owner Occupied Rental, 1306 Iris Lane Rick Schultz 5. 7:10 PM Public Hearing, Ryan Pekareck,114 -15t Avenue SE Renee Symanietz St. Joseph Ordinance 52.27 Subd. 5 Dale Wick Interim Use Permit -Owner Occupied Rental 6. 7:20 PM Public Hearing, Katherine Halquist, 510 Fir Street St. Joseph Ordinance 52.27 Subd. 5 Interim Use Permit -Owner Occupied Rental 7. 7:30 PM Public Hearing Annual Review of Interim Use Permits Owner Occupied Rental 8. 7:45 PM Public Hearing-S & H Partnership a. PURD Amendment - 2002 Graceview Estates r i c. PUD/Special Use Permit-Construction of amulti-family units. 9. Adjourn Note: * After reviewing the original PURD approval of the City in 2002, the applicant is not required to rezone the property to R3. The Ordinance in affect at the time of approval in 2002 serve as the governing regulations. zS College Avenue North PO Box bb8 Saint ~oseph, Minnesota 56374 Phone 3zo.363.7zoi Fax 3zo.363.o34z ST. JOSEPH PLANNING COMMISSION August 4, 2008 FOR THE OFFICIAL RECORD PLEASE SIGN YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS NAME 2. ~`~~ 3 . ~ ~ ~ W1 h ~ ~r~ .~ 4. ~u ~i'~ .F 7. ~~!`~ ~A -~ 8. 54~~ /\t c (ems vt 9. lo. 11. 12. 13. 14. ls. 16. 1~p. 1 S. 19. 20. 21. ~--~~~~~ ~~~ ~ s ~C ~~ ~s~~ ADDRESS ~~ Z-^7 ~ ~ v~ s ~ 7 ~ ~~~ l~ i~~ .~ .~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~e ~- ~-i~ ~ ~L~~ ~r i~ X11 ~ ~ G~--. ~-i ~~a ~I~~~ci Ic~~ ti~~ ~e~ ~~~ ~~~~~w ~~~ ~ ~, rf,;~ ~lcn~~.l~~~. ~r y rrh~~ r`-~. L%a ~ ~i.~~,C,, ~ ~~~ ~~~~ ~~~ ~1.~, 4~~~ ~~ Josh ~, ~~ ST. JOSEPH PLANNING COMMISSION August 4, 2008 FOR THE OFFICIAL RECORD PLEASE SIGN YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS NAME 4. s. 6. ~. s. 9. lo. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 1~. ls. 19. 20. 21. c~a ~ C~.~~~~_ ~~.(AN ~ l~(Cc.r~S ~~,~ ~ - ADDRESS 3~3 '~'~~~ ~~ ~~ Sic G `~ ~? ~ ,/~-~ S I(y Ise` ~~ S~ x'10 Fi ~ ~ ~- IV ~' Ital y~5'r~N ,5...~c~l X37/ ~ a ~3'~`~ S-~ ~ . S~ C!d 'w ~~ yes- ~~~~~/i. ~~ ~~ ~ w ~ :~ ~ S'~ ~ 2-( C~ Pre SS ~,._ ~~5 ~~F ~i si ~ EI I ~~ ~' ~~ /7'1.x. ~~ S (~' "~ l~rtct 1 ~ ~• ~ 1~~~`~ G~ "T'--~ 3C~ ~~ ~~ L~, . ~ ~ ~ ~~~ ST. JOSEPH PLANNING COMMISSION August 4, 2008 FOR THE OFFICIAL RECORD PLEASE SIGN YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS NAME 1. 2. 3. 4. s. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. ADDRESS ~ 7 ~1~~ ~. ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ S~j ,~,'~~~,r~-t-,e,~~ ~, ~/~ ~,,~lG Cam; rr~~ o~ !+r. ~r~±rtt MEETING DATE: AGENDA ITEM: SUBMITTED BY: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: August 4, 2008 Council Agenda Item 3 Minutes-July 7, 2008 PREVIOUS PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: BACKGROUND INFORMATION: ATTACHMENTS: Draft Minutes REQUESTED PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Approve the minutes of the July 7, 2008 Planning Commission meeting. ~~G~~ July 7, 2008 Page 1 of 3 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the Planning Commission for the City of St. Joseph met in regular session on Monday, July 7, 2008 at 7:00 PM in the St. Joseph City Hall. Members Present: Chair Kathleen Kalinowski, Commissioners Ross Rieke, Mike McDonald, Mark Andersen and Dale Wick, City Administrator Judy Weyrens Others Present: None Agenda: Meyer made a motion to approve the agenda as presented. The motion was seconded by Wick and passed unanimously. Minutes: Wick made a motion to approve the minutes of June 2, 2008. The motion was seconded by Rieke and passed unanimously. Public Hearin4 -Interim Use Permit, 1306 Iris Lane: Weyrens stated that the purpose of the hearing is to consider an lnterim Use permit to allow an owner occupied rental in an R-1 Single-Family zoning district. The property is legally described as Lot 2 Block 5, Northland Heights. St. Joseph Code of Ordinances 52.27 subd. 5 allows for an Interim Use Permit as follows: Residential rental provided the unit is owner occupied and provided the room(s) rented does not contain separate kitchen facilities and is not intended for use as an independent residence. For purposes of establishing if the property is owner occupied, the owner must be a natural person, and all owners must occupy the property as their principal residence. The owners may not exceed two in number. For purposes of determining ownership, the owner/owners must provide a copy of a recorded deed or recorded contract for deed. A purchase agreement will not be accepted as evidence of ownership. Keith Eisenschenk, 1306 Iris Lane NE, St. Joseph, MN 56374 has submitted the request for Interim Use. The Public Hearing was opened and closed as there was no one present to speak. Weyrens advised the Commissioners that this property was one which the City received a complaint and, after following up on the complaint, it was determined that this was indeed being used as rental property. She added that, recently, this property received a weed notice as the grass exceeded the maximum height of 10 inches. In addition to the weed violation the property has vehicles parked on the grass, which is prohibited in R1 Zoning Districts. Weyrens presented the Planning Commission with pictures of the property. McDonald stated that he would have liked to have Eisenschenk present at the meeting as he had a few questions: • He questioned whether or not there are currently renters in the home? • He questioned how many people are living in the home as he saw a play set in the backyard. • McDonald then questioned how the City defines renters. He questioned whether alive-in boyfriend/girlfriend situation is a rental situation or whether they are considered family. In response, Weyrens stated that she was told that he was renting to a family who was interested in purchasing the home and that he does currently live in the home as well. She stated that he may have been renting for approximately a year since that is when he purchased the home. Kalinowski questioned whether Mr. Eisenschenk is the sole owner to which Weyrens stated he is. Meyer questioned several of the answers to the questions on Mr. Eisenschenk's application. • #6: Q. Will the proposed use depreciate the area in which it is proposed? A. "No, I take care of my property as if I was the only one living there." Meyer stated that he is not taking care of the property, which is why he received a weed notice. `~~~ -~ July 7, 2008 Page 2 of 3 • #8: Q. Are local streets capable of handling traffic which is generated by the proposed use? A. "Yes, All vehicles stay in the driveway." According to Meyer, vehicles are not only parked in the driveway, but in the road as well. Based on the answers to those questions, Kalinowski stated that there is some falsification on the application and without him present clarification is not possible. Wick questioned the process for the approval, denial or tabling of this matter since the public hearing has already been closed. Weyrens advised the Commissioners that if the matter is denied, a letter would be sent to Mr. Eisenschenk notifying him of the denial as well as the need for eviction of the tenants. If he wishes, he can appeal the denial to the Council and the Council can request that it be reviewed again by the Planning Commission. McDonald made a motion to deny the request for Interim Use based on the following: • Failure to comply with the required yard maintenance. • Failure to be present at the meeting. • Discrepancies with the answers on the application to what is seen when looking at the site. The motion was seconded by Andersen. Discussion: Rieke then questioned the process as well. He questioned whether or not it should have been tabled until the first meeting in August rather than denied. According to Weyrens, there is enough support for the denial. She did add that they need to determine the length of time to allow for the eviction of the tenants. McDonald questioned if he could re-apply for the Interim Use Permit at a later date. Meyer stated that he would like to see them given at least 30-45 days to correct the deficiencies before they would be forced to re-apply. According to McDonald, his problem is that it is an unfortunate situation for the family. Meyer added that he hates to approve or deny the permit due to the fact that Eisenschenk was not present. With regard to the outdoor storage items, they belong to the tenant of the property at 1306 Iris Lane. The motion passed unanimously. Meyer made a motion to give the property owner until August 31 to comply with the Ordinances before requiring an new application for Interim Use. Weyrens stated that the property owner could not make application for the Interim Use Permit until they are in compliance with current Ordinances. The motion was seconded by McDonald. Discussion: Rieke questioned whether Meyer would be acceptable to amending the motion to have tenants evicted no later than August 31. Meyer stated that that was not his intent and he withdrew his motion with McDonald withdrawing the second. Rieke questioned whether there would be another application fee required if they were to re-apply. Weyrens stated that they would be responsible for the $400 for the re-application. McDonald made a motion to allow the renters 4 months to vacate the property. Wick made a friendly amendment to require them to vacate the property prior to September 1. The motion was seconded by Wick. Kalinowski suggested that the tenants be notified of the violations with the yard. Rieke stated that they would not be notified as the property owners are notified of violations rather than tenants. Wick stated that Eisenschenk would be allowed to have two other unrelated persons besides him living in the home, if the permit we approved. He questioned whether the family would be considered unrelated bra F-f- July 7, 2008 Page 3 of 3 individuals or if they would count as one. Weyrens stated that the family would be considered one based on the definition of a "family". Anderson questioned the motion on the table. Weyrens replied that the tenants would need to be vacated prior to September 1 or the property would need to be in compliance with the R1 Ordinance requirements. Ayes: Kalinowski, McDonald, Wick, Andersen, Meyer Nays: Rieke Motion Carried: 5:1:0 Ordinance Amendment -Non Conforming Use: Weyrens presented the Council with the final amendment to Ordinance 52.08, Non Conforming Uses. McDonald made a motion to recommend the City Council accept the amendment to Ordinance 52.08, Non Conforming Uses, causing the same to be published and effective upon publication. The motion was seconded by Andersen and passed unanimously. Conservation Training: Weyrens stated that she has recently been contacted by the SJU Land Manager, Tom Kroll. He is requesting that the City consider accepting an offer to provide conservation planning as it relates to the Comprehensive Plan and Ordinances. They received legislative funding to promote conservation in the Avon Hills Landscape Area and they are offering to use part of the funding to sponsor a workshop focusing on St. Joseph. Meyer questioned what the costs would be to the City. Weyrens stated that there may be a small fee for each participant. Meyer stated that it may be too late to get their input on the Comprehensive Plan as they are almost done reviewing the proposed updates. Kalinowski questioned if a deadline has been set for the completion of the Comprehensive Plan to which Weyrens advised her that it must be done by the end of the year. Wick added that some of the City's Ordinances may need to change based on changes in the Comprehensive Plan. Meyer made a motion to accept the grant opportunity and attend the conservation training provided the training is focused on St. Joseph and decline the offer at this time to have the Comprehensive Plan and Ordinances reviewed. The motion was seconded by Rieke and passed unanimously. Comprehensive Plan: Weyrens stated that the Park Board will be meeting on July 9 for a presentation by the firm hired to prepare the Master Park Pan. The consultant will present an overview of the existing parks and the results of the City park survey. They would like to have the Planning Commission present as well as this presentation will lead into the next portion of the Comprehensive Plan dealing with Parks that will be discussed on July 23. McDonald stated that he is having a hard time picturing certain areas that are being discussed during the meetings on the Comprehensive Plan. He would like to have a tour showing him exactly where some of these areas are located. Adjourn: The meeting was adjourned at 7:55 PM by consensus. Judy Weyrens Administrator rrrv oR c, r.~t~hrH Planning Commission Agenda Item 4 MEETING DATE: AGENDA ITEM: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: August 4, 2008 Keith Eisenschenk, Reconsideration of Interim Use Permit. Owner Occupied Rental, 13061ris Lane PREVIOUS PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: The Planning Commission recommended denial of the Interim Use Permit to Keith Eisenschenk to operate an owner occupied rental. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: See comments from Council request form, sub heading, Actions since Planning Commission Meeting. For your convenience I have included the packet information from the July Planning Commission meeting. There is still some question as to whether or not the applicant is residing at the house. Eisenschenk appealed the recommendation of the Planning Commission on July 17 and requested the Council reconsider the recommendation. So that the Planning Commission could ask the questions need to clarify the application, the Council referred the matter back to the Planning Commission. As many of you are aware, Cities are required to action within 60 days of accepting a completed application for certain land use matters. An Interim Use Permit is a land use matter where the action requirement applies. If a City does not act within the time frame, the application is automatically approved. Municipalities do the authority to extend the 60 days by motion if additional information is needed. Since the Council referred the applicant back to the Planning Commission for additional information the motion included a 30 day extension of the 60 day land use rule. ATTACHMENTS: Council request form -July 17 Council Meeting, Draft Extract of Council minutes, Planning Commission material from July. REQUESTED PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: CITY UR r+ r. Jc~krH Council Agenda Item MEETING DATE: July 17, 2008 AGENDA ITEM: Interim Use Permit, Keith Eisenschenk SUBMITTED BY: Administration BOARD/COMMISSION/COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: Unanimously voted to recommend the Council deny the request for an Interim Use Permit to allow an owner occupied rental at 1306 Iris lane. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Planning Commission has recommended denial as the property owner was not present to answer questions and clarify the contents of the application. The application indicated that cars for the tenants would not be parked on the street and pictures of the property indicated the opposite. In addition some of the Planning Commission members have seen the property and view the same. The property also is in violation of the outdoor storage and weed Ordinances. Pictures of the property illustrated that a boat is parked on the front yard on the grass. The Ordinance requires boats that are parked in the front yard to be on a hard surface, of which grass is not. The pictures also illustrate that a snow mobile is parking on the side yard, not a trailer, which is required by Ordinance. The property is also in violation of the weed Ordinance as the grass exceeds the maximum height allowed. A notice was mailed to the property owner. The Planning Commission has also expressed concern as to whether or not the property owner was residing at the residence. Without the property present the questions could not be answered, therefore, the Planning Commission recommended denial. The motion included a provision that would require the tenants to be removed no later than September 1, 2008. The Planning Commission discussed whether or not to table the matter or deny based on the absence of the property owner. Two factors were involved, first the property owner did take the initiative on his own behalf to secure an Interim Use Permit and when he did complete the paperwork he did not show up for the public hearing. Secondly, the Planning Commission is a recommending body to the Council and the property owner has the right to request reconsideration. Therefore, the if extenuating circumstances existed as to why the applicant could not attend the meeting or he requested reconsideration the Council could send the matter back to the Planning Commission. ACTIONS SINCE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: The morning after the Planning Commission meeting the father of Keith called me to make arrangements to meet with me. Please see the phone log for details. As of this memo, the property has been cleaned up considerable. The grass has been cut, the boat, snowmobile and basketball device have all been moved. The Police Chief has verified that property has changed significantly to the positive since July 7. Eisenschenk has also indicated that he will be re-landscaping the yard within the next three weeks. BUDGET/FISCAL IMPACT: ATTACHMENTS: Notice to Keith Eisenschenk, Planning Commission RPA, Application for Interim Use, Hearing Notice, Vicinity Map, Proof of Ownership, Weed Notice, Phone logs (3), July 7 pictures of property. REQUESTED COUNCIL ACTION: The Council has the following options: 1) Accept the recommendation and deny the application for Interim Use based on the findings of the Planning Commission. If the applicant wished to secure a rental license he would have to make a new application including paying the fees. 2) Since the property owner has cleaned up the property and realized that he should have been at the Planning Commission meeting, the Council could refer the matter back to the Planning Commission. 3) The Council could approve the Interim Use Permit. Draft -Extract of City Council Minutes July 17, 2008 Keith Eisenschenk, Interim Use Permit Interim Use Permit. Keith Eisenschenk: Weyrens stated that the Planning Commission held a Public Hearing on July 7 to consider an Interim Use Permit for Keith Eisenschenk, 1306 Iris Lane. As the he was not present at the public hearing and Commissioners requested clarification on the submitted application, the Planning Commission recommended that the Council deny the request for Interim Use. Weyrens stated that one of the concerning items to the Planning Commission was the management of the property. The City has had to mail notice of violation of the weed and outdoor storage Ordinances. Since the Planning Commission meeting the outdoor concerns have been resolved. Frank questioned what the options would be if the Council was to deny the request. Weyrens stated that if the request were denied, the applicant could begin the appeal process or they could re-apply for the permit. When questioned if residents were present at the public hearing, Weyrens responded that no one appeared. Wick stated that he would like to see this issue sent back to the Planning Commission for additional consideration. Rassier stated that he is concerned about the tenants that are currently living in the home. As a result, Frank stated he would like to see the request sent back to the Planning Commission with a timeline. Weyrens stated that the City is bound by State Statute to act on the matter within 60 days of accepting a completed action, unless the Council extends the timeline. The timeline can be extended for a specific purpose, such as clarifying the information on the application. Weyrens requested the Council extend the 60 day land use requirement 15 days, allowing the matter to be referred to the Planning Commission on August 4 and brought back to the Council on August 11. Rassier made a motion to refer the Interim Use Permit Application of Keith Eisenschenck, 1306 Iris Lane back to the Planning Commission and extend the 60-day land use requirement 15 days. The motion was seconded by Symanietz. Discussion: Schultz questioned Weyrens to the types of questions, besides proof of residency, that were raised by the Commissioners. Wick stated that they also questioned the number of cars and the fact that they were not parked in the driveway. They also questioned his response to the following question on the application: 6. Will the property use depreciate the area in which it is proposed? "No, I take care of my property as if I was the only one living there. " They questioned how he will ensure that this is taken care of. Schultz questioned whether proof of residency has been established to which Weyrens stated that we have proof of ownership. Jansky added that the parking is an issue during winter parking restrictions. Eisenschenk spoke to the Councilors and stated that the vehicles were parked in the road as they are finishing the basement and the garage was full of building materials. Once the project is completed, the cars will be parked in the garage. The motion passed unanimously. ~~~~ ~~~~ ~! OJ~~~~ APPLICATION FOR INTERIM USE PERMIT CITY OF ST. JOSEPH 2S CoNege Avenue NW P. O. Box 668 St. Joseph, MN 563?4 (32063-7201 or Fax (320)363-0342 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )q Fx S raid Reoeipl M Date COUNTY OF 37EARNS) r I ,! NAME: ~t. ~-h C,~~i:.VIS"~ ~K PHONE: __~~ ~ G `7 7 ~'Lf ~ ~i ADDRFSS•_ ~ ~ 1 ~ ~~ L .I~) ~ L t/Wo. dle uadeuipled, hsleby arks the followip rppliatiw w dle City Council sad Pteuiaa Coaraiwge of the C' of k Miasewla (Apptialla acre dle rapmeibilny of ehectilla all eppieehk ordineoca w veil ~ foK~' $10rOe Couaq. w9u). P;~,,,, ~'~100 e1ld m^4MWt lrilll VI ontiwwoe I. Appliesaion g made f« Inerim Ux to olraaan ale following: .f-oC1 1~ ~~ f{ Ile.•~.r~l •-k~`• *(~ i A MV Hr`s' o ~.t:i. 1~ ~ •y_Z • ~l ems'--~ 2. Legal description of land to be alTeped by a_ n, includi acra~e ar epy~e toola~e of Isnd involved, and'sueet addre~ if n-Y (attach additional when if neceasal)r): - 1 C]~'JC ~ ~~•~ 'r.1 3. Pleaela inning of the above dexribad property is: ~~ 1\,.{- 1. Nomeanq~addrt:ss of t/h~e~prexnMt owner of the above described pnopnty ir. 1 ~=~0 1~ iS L.N K` S. le the use cotllpatibk wish present and fuWrc lend wes of the areal Pkne explain: y~ 5 1 1~•-~'k i l~ ' ~(- h (iY 1 4 7-_ 6. Will (lleprop0]ed Ipe depr~eyte the gra~,tp which II 13 propoxdT Phxtise 7. Call 1110 propog<d tlse be 8. Arc local atreeq capable f handling oaflic Icll n generated by die proposed used Please explain: ~ Apatlad a VY oquotiu and monde • rt t\ereof ars offer ntoteriel orYtriwioo daa ngrlre~wu, u iodiated. r i //~~ yy i + ~ ~;, _ ~l - V G AglfenN Si~.oarr. + Dntt: 7 1~ Omer Sl~uwre: ~ r Datr: FOR OFFICE USE ONLY DAns APPUCwnoN sus~a~D: DAn: APP<.icAnoN coMP~ere: Phnnity Commission Aaioo: Recamnend Approvol _ Recaamettd Disepprovd Due of Action Due ApplipmlPropeny Owns notified of Plsnniry~ Commission Anion: City Camcil Agioo: ~ Approved Diapproved DMe of Action Due ApplianVProprtty Owner notified of City Caumal Agion~ CITY OF ST. JOSEPH 25 College Avenue North, St. Joseph MN 56374 (320) 363-7201 AFFIDAVIT OF RESIDENCY Applicant Name ~ ~'Sev~SC.!-~..v~, Address ~ ~t;p j ~ 15 ~N N Zoning iD'Ftt, Single Family (" 61, Central Business (' 62, Highway Business Print Form Number of Tenants 3 Ownership Copy of deed showing Requirement Requirement ~ 5U ~ ~ 10096 interest must be attached fulfilled ~ Yes r No r' N/a I ~~.~7,c~d~GM~~v~. being of legal age, do hereby by attest and affirm the following: 1. My primary esidence is I'3hCo ; :-t s LN fJ ~ and that 1 am the owner of record of the same. 2. The Interim Use Permit is only valid while said property is your primary residence and you are living at the same. ft will be your responsiblity to notify the Gty of any change of residency. 3. I make this Affidavit for no improper purpose. 4. 1 understand that deliberates falsification and/or omission pertaining to this affidavit will in result in revokation of the interim Use Permit and the Gty wilt pursue civil andjor legal action. Signature ~ ~-} ~ ~~~~~~, Date ~~ _ ~ ~ - (~j g State of MN County of Stearns I' c On this ~L day,of - 20~ before me ~ ~ /P!'i ~ _, a notary public, personally appeared ~'.~, ~-- ~c /-c,~-.h.~.3 k proved on the sis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name (s) is (are) subscribed to this instrument, and acknowledged (he/she/they) exectuted the same. Witness my hand and official seal. Notary 4~~ JUDY ANN WEYRENS (SEA ~ N01~ARY PUBLIC -MINNESOTA :; +~~ My Commission Expires Jan. 31, 2010 Phone Log date Jun 3, 2008 Time 1:30:00 PM Inftlals Last Name Eisenschenk First Name Keith Phone Number Call Back Number Otherr em ail address !Address 1306 Iris Lane " City/Zip St. Joseph 5637 (';Return Call (';Complaint (.~ Following up on call (~: Inquiry (~ Other Summary ~ Keith called inquiring about renting his home wfth a reM to own agreement I informed him that the only Conversatbn way that will work is through a recorded contract for deed. he did not want to do that questkmed why. 1 told him that the City has experienced problems in the past as the homes tum into rental units. I informed Keith that someone has called regarding his property and that is was being used as a rental license. Fle informed that he was rer-ting to three other aduhs but thought h was okay since he lured their.. I told him that he cannot. Phone Log Date un 4.2008 7 ime 10:45:00 AM Initials ~! Last Name Eisenschenk First Name Keith Phone Number Call Back Number - -_ .__ ... Otherr em ail address ~ ~ Address 1306 Iris Lane City/Zip (;;: lietum Call (" •Complaint (' Following up on call (1 Inquiry (` Other Summary of Left a message returning fiis call. Conversation fkturned his call again at 11:10 AM -Left message to call back Returned call and discussed the rental house. The mortgage company wiU not allow contract for deed. He is willing to come by and pay and penahies including last years permit. He has someone that is kwking at purchasing the home but cannot get a mortgage until next year. That person wants to rent the home with rent to purchase. I informed him that would not work as the property must be owner occupied. He stated that he would be living in the home as well. He also stated that he will pay for the permit for finishing the basement Keith will come in and take care of any paperwork today at 4:30. Phone Log Date ul 8, 2008 Time 9A0:00 AM Initials jNr last Name Eisenschenk ~ First Name Keith ~ Waly (Father) Phone Number Call Bads Number Other ~- email address i Address ~~ Iris lane CityRip St. Joseph Company M'ncetlaneous ('~; Retum Call r Complaint (' Following up on call (` Inqu'uy (: Other Office appointment Summary of Keith and Wally Eisenschenk came to the offKe to discuss the actions of the Planning Commission last Conversation night. Wally stated that he is just an observer. Keith stated that he came into the office and submitted the paperwork for a permit and he remembers me telling him that their would be a hearing arxJ the date. Fie also stated that he remembers me telling him he should be present ;eith stated that previously he rented to two other individuals but when he was told he couldn't do that he put an ad on Craig's List to sell the house C4D. A family responded and he has been forced to live with ~ family he does not know. He talked to me about a C4D but was told it had to be recorded and since he gas the home financed the bank will not agree. So he is living with the famiy until they can purdrase the came. The tenant is putting equity into the house by finishing the basemem. At this point 1 asked again if'. ie was living their to which he stated he is. ie stated that he came today as his current tenant saw the meeting and does not want to be evicted as he ws invested money in the house. He stated that when he found out last night (830 PM) the Planning :ommission was meeting he got in his truck and came to the Crty hall but no one was there. questioned him as to why he did not cut the grass when he received the notice to which he responded hat he did not see it He then proceeded to tell me that the property needs to be re-landscaped and he ws hired someone to help but it will take 2 to 3 weeks. told him that the Planning Commission questbned the management of the property versus the application, specifically where it states that the cars will be parked on the driveway, not the street. Wally iuestioned if the cars are prohibited from parking on the street I stated the in winter months they are, iut the application stated that the cars would not be parked on the street, so the use is inconsistent with he plan. also informed him that he has other violations on the property -the boat parked in the front yard, nowmobile on the side and the basketball device in the front yard which is placed on the sweet from ime to time. He admitted that they played basketball on the street but it is broke right now. He agreed ~ resolve these issues before the Council meeting. 0 File Location Phone Log Date u18, 2008 Time 9:000 AM Initials jw Last Name Eisenschenk First Name Keith & Wally (Father) Phone Number Call Back Number ', Other email address Address 1306 Iris Lane ,City/tip St. Joseph Company Miscellaneous (',Return Call (' Complaint (" Following up on call (' Inquiry (: Other OfFice appointment Summary of PAGE -2- Conversatbn They asked what the next steps are as they do not want to evict the current tenant as they have put a bt of money into the house. 1 informed them that the PC is a recommending body to the qty Council and they could appeal the decision to the City Council. They clarified that the meeting date is July 17 and they need to be present. 1 told them that the boat must be removed by noon today and they should bring the property in compliance the best they can before July 17, 1 also informed than that i would have infomnation available by tomorrow rooming regarding the actions of the Planning Commission. File Location Resolution of finding The request of Keith Eisenschenk for an Interim Use Permit request came before the Planning Commission at a public hearing held on July 7, 2008. The purpose of the hearing was to consider issuance of an Interim Use Permit to allow an owner occupied rental unit in a Ri Zoning District. The property is legally described as Lot 2 Block 5 Northland Heights Addition according to the plat and survey thereof on file and of record in the Office of the County Recorder in and for the County of Stearns and State of Minnesota located at 1306 Iris Lane. St. Joseph Code of Ordinances 52.27 Subd. 5: Interim Uses. The following are Interim Uses allowed by permit based upon the procedures and criteria set forth in Section 52.07.04 of this Code. a) Residential rental, provided the unit is owner-occupied and provided the roomis) rented does not contain separate kitchen facilities and is not intended for use as an independent residence. For purposes of establishing if the property is owner occupied, the owner must be a natural person, and all owners must occupy the property as their principal residence. The owners may not exceed two in number. For purposes of determining ownership, the owner/owners must provide a copy of a recorded deed or recorded contract for deed. A purchase agreement will not be accepted as evidence of ownership. The request for Interim Use has been submitted by Keith Eisenschnenk, 1306 Iris Lane, St. Joseph MN 56374. Notice of this matter was duly served and published. Due to insufficient information, the Planning Commission recommended the City Council deny the Interim Use Permit allowing an owner occupied rental unit. The City Council considered the recommendation of the Planning Commission on July 17 at which time the applicant requested reconsideration. The City Council referred the matter back to the Planning Commission for reconsideration on August 4, 2008. In consideration of the information presented to the Planning Commission and its application to the Comprehensive Plan and Ordinances of the City of St. Joseph, the Planning Commission makes the following findings: The proposed use is consistent with the standards for granting an Interim Use Permit, st. Joseph Code of Ordinances 52.07.04 Therefore, based on the above findings, the Planning Commission makes the following recommendation: Approval of the Interim Use Permit to allow an owner occupied rental unit in a R1 Zoning District with the following contingencies: 1. The rental license in non-transferable . 2. Approval of the Rental Housing Inspector 3. The Planning Commission will review the license annually and revoke the license if the property is in violation of the St. Joseph Code of Ordinances. 4. The City Office will place a notice in the St. Joseph Newsleader when the owner occupied rental licenses are reviewed and will accept public comments. ATTEST Sr. Kathleen Kalinowski, Planning Commission Chair Judy Weyrens, Administrator Resolution of >~nding The request of Keith Eisenschenk for an Interim Use Permit request came before the Planning Commission at a public hearing held on July 7, 2008. The purpose of the hearing was to consider issuance of an Interim Use Permit to allow an owner occupied rental unit in a R1 Zoning District. The property is legally described as Lot 2 Block 5 Northland Heights Addition according to the plat and survey thereof on file and of record in the Office of the County Recorder in and for the County of Stearns and State of Minnesota located at 1306 Iris Lane. St. Joseph Code of Ordinances 52.27 Subd. 5: Interim Uses. The following are Interim Uses allowed by permit based upon the procedures and criteria set forth in Section 52.07.04 of this Code. a) Residential rental, provided the unit isowner-occupied and provided the room(s) rented does not contain separate kitchen facilities and is not intended for use as an independent residence. For purposes of establishing if the property is owner occupied, the owner must be a natural person, and all owners must occupy the property as their principal residence. The owners may not exceed two in number. For purposes of determining ownership, the owner/owners must provide a copy of a recorded deed or recorded contract for deed. A purchase agreement will not be accepted as evidence of ownership. The request for Interim Use has been submitted by Keith Eisenschnenk, 1306 Iris Lane, St. Joseph MN 56374. Notice of this matter was duly served and published. In consideration of the information presented to the Planning Commission and its application to the Comprehensive Plan and Ordinances of the City of St. Joseph, the Planning Commission makes the following findings: St. Joseph Code of Ordinances 52.07.04 provides for rental units in a Ri Zoning District provided the property owner submits an application and meets the qualifications. Therefore, based on the above findings, the Planning Commission makes the following recommendation: Denial of the Interim Use Permit to allow an owner occupied rental unit at 13061ris Lane. Oenial is based on the following: 1. Discrepancies with the answers on the application to what is seen when looking at the site. Without the property owner being present the intent of the application could not be determined. 2. The Property Owner is currently in violation of the Rental License, Weed and Outdoor Storage Ordinance. The Planning Commission further resolved that the tenants must be evicted within four months of the Council action denying the request. ATTEST Sr. Kathleen Kalinowski, Planning Commission Chair Judy Weyrens, Administrator r.~rv of sr ~c~wrH Planning Commission Agenda Item 5 MEETING DATE: August 4, 2008 AGENDA ITEM: Public Hearing, Interim Use Permit Ryan Pekarek STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Recommend the Council adopt the Resolution of Findings granting an Interim Use Permit to Ryan Pekarek allowing an owner occupied rental unit at 114 -1n Avenue SE with a maximum density of two tenants. PREVIOUS PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The City Office has been working since May 1 to resolve the rental issues at 114 -15` Avenue SE. We were made aware of the rental status by a phone call to office. We had contact with the property owner and discovered that the owner at the time, Jason Pakarek, was renting rooms to two students and his brother. We discussed on the phone the 1009'0 owner requirement and the issuance of an Interim Use Permit. The City Office staff was told they would get back to the office for resolution. We never heard back from Mr. Pekarek, so the matter was turned over to the Police Chief. The Police Chief made contact with the property owner and he was told to contact the City Offices ASAP to secure the required licenses. Pekarek again called the office and stated that he would not be living their but his brother would and they jointly would own the home. We again discussed why this would not work. Time again passed and nothing was done. We were getting ready to prosecute Pekarek both civilly and criminally when he submitted an application for Interim Use. The property ownership has been transferred to Ryan Pekarek and the office has evidence of the transfer. At this time Pekarek is seeking approval for an Interim Use Permit to allow for an owner occupied rental with a maximum density of two. ATTACHMENTS: Hearing Notice; Application; Recorded Deed, Resolution of Findings; Vicinity Map; Phone Log REQUESTED PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Authorize the Planning Commission Chair and Administrator to execute the Resolution recommending the Council issue an Interim Use Permit to Ryan Pekarek to operate an owner occupied rental unit at 114 -1St Avenue SE. ~.. CITY OF ST. OS~PH 1 WWW. Cltyof stjoseph.com Public Hearing City of St. Joseph Administrator The St. Joseph Planning Commission shall conduct a public hearing on Monday, August 4, 2008 at ~udy ~eyrens 7:10 PM. The purpose of the hearing is to consider an Interim Use permit to allow an owner occupied rental in an R-1 Single-Family zoning district. The property is legally described as Lot 4 Block 3, Loso's 2"d Additon. Mayor St. Joseph Code of Ordinances 52.27 subd. 5 allows for an Interim Use Permit as follows: Residential AI Rassier rental provided the unit is owner occupied and provided the room(s) rented does not contain separate kitchen facilities and is not intended for use as an independent residence. For purposes of establishing Councilors if the property is owner occupied, the owner must be a natural person, and all owners must occupy the Steve Frank property as their principal residence. The owners may not exceed two in number. For purposes of determining ownership, the owner/owners must provide a copy of a recorded deed or recorded contract Rick Schultz for deed. A purchase agreement will not be accepted as evidence of ownership. Renee Symanietz Dale V(~ick Ryan Pekarek, 114 15t Avenue SE, St. Joseph, MN 56374 has submitted the request for Interim Use. Judy Weyrens Administrator Publish: July 25, 2008 to _1......._J ~ ._.-- 25 ~ 111- 115..,_1_.31. ~, 29 + ~~ ~~ ~ ~. ~34 ~ ~ ~~ , ___... ~..._. ._.p,81€ S~ ~ ~11U, ;118• 102.11 tf r~ ~~__ ~ 100 i09 ..t~ 1Q~ ~~ 111 m 1oa , 117 ^~,' iti~ ~.r_..-.--•- 116 ~~ 119 114 1 S` Avenue SE ZS College Avenue North PO Box 668 Saint )oseph, Minnesota 56374 phone 3zo.363.7zoi Fax 3zo.363.o34z APPLICATION FOR INTERIM USE PERMIT STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ss COUNTY OF STEARNS ) NAME: ADDRESS: ~~~ / S r ~~~ 5 City of St. Joseph 25 College Avenue N PO Box 668 St. Joseph, MN 56374 Phone (320)363-7201 or Fax (320)363-034 .~C~S I/We, the undersigned, hereby make the following application to the City Council and Planning Commission of the City of St. Joseph, Stearns County, Minnesota. (Applicants have the responsibility of checking all applicable ordinances pertaining to their application and complying with the ordinance requirements.) 1. Application is hereby made for an Interim Use Permit to conduc[ the following: Lo~aS ~,~~, ~4ddit-~ pa~s2 2 ~t~c~1 r~ M $ J~ b 2, S ~r~.~ 1'~ ~ Z.~l~Jl s 2. Legal description of land to be affected by application, including acreage or square footage of land involved, and street address, if any (attach additional sheet if necessary): Fee $ l~~ Paid ~,~,~'IZ,~~ Date '~ ~ _v PHONE: ~~~ aa3"3 S ~ 9 ~. i~~~s~-~v~ s~ s~ -~~-t-~~ //88'c~ 3. Present zoning of the above described property is: 4. Name and address of the present owner of the above described land: ~,~ ~,~, ~ek~~~,l~ rl~` ~~ Avr= sr: 5. Is the proposed use compatible with the future and present land uses of the area? Please explain: '~(' Yes ~, No ~V~a vv ~2~ ~'~' ~oy~A,Q,,c>w•ti2,r~ (>~ P ~S~ to s Q. I S c a vK ~~i 10 (e. W t-Mn ~ r2 S.e~^ ~-- a n ~~-y~v~e., ~a~d n~~-e,S o ~- -~'lne_ a~,v`~c~ ., _'! 11 a w.,~.rw v~st~ ; n ~-c.vid~S ~-o Mr~c ~ ~ ~~ ~ "~ o~ v~ d~ ~~ n,,Preu~ "}'~Q_ Il R~ v~ d Y ~ v K~ {Jr0 1 ~ QV G~ V~.2,i ~]1/l~ c'7~° Lt oD~ . 6. Will the proposed use depreciate [he area in which it is proposed? Please explain: r" Yes ~' No Qfc~~,r c>~~ ~f't~4~ I rrv~ ~G2..'~ Ccn2.iZ, ~ ~~iIV1-R'T~~ n -'t h~~1 -i'~ ,~ ~' ~ J ~ n v~~, 6 u~r~J~ ~S , 7. Can the proposed use be accomodated with existing City service without overburdening the system? Please explain: ~ Yes r No N e.,-~ Gr 5~.~.~~.~ ~- ~s-'~~.1v ~ ~~~- zee c:e )~ 8. Are local streets capable of handling traffic which is generated by the proposed use? Please explain: Yes r No C ~~, c~c~a. -- ca,~1 ~ i` rl`ta~r~4CfZ -~'~ ~ 1 ~ ~u ~. ~ .5 ttJl , a,n (~oJ.~~~+~~ vJ ~ 1~ b e ...~ ~~\ -}-c~ `' ,~•- o ~ ~ ~ tea- °`~o . ~ ~~ ,-~5 CD~~.~es~ ~ Attached to this application, and made a part thereof, are other material submission data requirements, as indicated. Applicant Signature: Applicant Signature: Date: ~' ~ .. ~ c, Date: Date application submitted: ~ ~~ °~ FOR OFFICE USE ONLY Date application completed: Wing Commission Action: (~ Recommend Approval r' Recommend Disapproval Date of Action: '~ City Council Action: r Approved r Disapproved Date of Action: Date Applicant/Property owner notified of City Council Action: t` ~~ v ~~-vv ~ ~~ ~~ 4 ~~ OFFICE OF COUNTY RECORDER ~~ ~"~ f ' ~ STEARNS COUNTY, MINNESOTA ~- ~~ ,- ~ NO DELiNOUENT TAXES AND Document # 1262604 --- TR SFER ENTERED ~~O ~ _ Certified, Filed, and/or Recorded on ~ ~ --' ~ DATE o p 07-03-2008 at 12:27 PM _ - ~' AUDITOR DIANE GRUNDHOEFER ~~~ DEPUTY STEARNS COUNTY RECORDER '~~ ~`~• ~31~ ~~ . a~~ CONTRACT FOR DEED MORTGAGE REGIS Y TAX DUE HEREON: Dated as of: ~] 3 6 ~ ~ S ~9 I ~ THIS CO / CT FOR DEED is made as of the above date by Jason Pekazek * (whether one or more) Purchaser: Ryan Pekarek Sellers and Purchaser agree to the following terms: 1. PROPERTY DESCRIl'TION. Sellers hereby sell, and Purchaser hereby buays, real property in Stearns County, Minnesota, described as follows:Lot ~~4 Block 3, Loso's 2" Addition „-- 'S-~ The Sellers hereby certify that the Sellers do not know of any wells on the described real property. together with all hereditaments and appurtenances belonging thereto (the Property). 2. TITLE: Seller warrants that title to the Property is, on the date of this contract, subject only to the following exceptions: (a) Covenants, conditions, restrictions, declarations and easements of records, if any; (b) Reservations of minerals or mineral rights by the State of Minnesota, if any; (c) Building, zoning, and subdivision laws and regulations; (d) The lien of real estate taxes and installments of special assessments which are payable by the Purchase~~pursuant to paragraph 6 of this contract; and (e) The following liens or encumbrances: Encumbrances of record, if any. 3. DELIVERY OF DEED AND EVIDENCE OF TITLE. Upon Purchaser's prompt and full Performance of this contract, Seller shall: ,~ l2 ~ cvt ~~ k arc.IC. 1 ~~~t ls~ ~~s~ Resolution of finding The request of Ryan Pekarek for an Interim Use Permit request came before the Planning Commission at a public hearing held on August 4, 2008. The purpose of the hearing was to consider issuance of an Interim Use Permit to allow an owner occupied rental unit in a Rl Zoning District. The property is legally described as Lot 4 Block 3 Loso's 2"d Addition according to the plat and survey thereof on file and of record in the Office of the County Recorder in and for the County of Stearns and State of Minnesota located at 11415` Avenue SE. St. Joseph Code of Ordinances 52.27 Subd. 5: Interim Uses. The following are Interim Uses allowed by permit based upon the procedures and criteria set forth in Section 52.07.04 of this Code. a) Residential rental, provided the unit is owner-occupied and provided the room(s) rented does not contain separate kitchen facilities and is not intended for use as an independent residence. For purposes of establishing if the property is owner occupied, the owner must be a natural person, and all owners must occupy the property as their principal residence. The owners may not exceed two in number. For purposes of determining ownership, the owner/owners must provide a copy of a recorded deed or recorded contract for deed. A purchase agreement will not be accepted as evidence of ownership. The request for Interim Use has been submitted by Ryan Pekarek, 114 15` Avenue SE; St. Joseph MN 56374. Notice of this matter was duly served and published. In consideration of the information presented to the Planning Commission and its application to the Comprehensive Plan and Ordinances of the City of St. Joseph, the Planning Commission makes the following findings: The proposed use is consistent with the standards for granting an Interim Use Permit, St.loseph Code of Ordinances 52.07.04 Therefore, based on the above findings, the Planning Commission makes the following recommendation: Approval of the Interim Use Permit to allow an owner occupied rental unit in a R1 Zoning District with the following contingencies: 1. The rental license in non-transferable . ATTEST 2. Approval of the Rental Housing Inspector 3. The Planning Commission will review the license annually and revoke the license if the property is in violation of the St. Joseph Code of Ordinances. 4. The City Office will place a notice in the St. Joseph Newsleader when the owner occupied rental licenses are reviewed and will accept public comments. Sr. Kathleen Kalinowski, Chair Judy Weyrens, Administrator DataViewOriline Map Page I of 1 Location Map ~ ~ I i - ~ ,. " to -~ ' ~I._ ' = r ~-.:~ i _-~ ~ ~. - - I ~ ~ i ~ - FtiL i _ _ _( tit ~_~ - r- - --- ~ i ~ ~. -~I 4' , ~~ 11 I - _~ i I -; .I-T 1T I i -•- ~ ~ I ~1. 5 Lam. T _ _ ~ r ~,-. J , _ , p , I i ~~ r- L i r I ~ I I I i. ( r I~ ~ '- ~ I I -T _ _ r _J .a ~ v. _ i' _~ .` ~+. A~': ~ J I r i .. _ z~ ~. "~. ~ ~ ~ ~ u r- . r r ~'Q,~ S-'~ ~ _ , --j i ~ iii ~~'~ t- 1 r'ti ~ ~, ~ ~ I .~ i fir.. ---' i ~.~_~~ ~~ L l i~ f' -ir~ r L I j~ - -._--- ~ - --~ - ~ tom,' _ _.~ ~~~ i ~ `M. ~ C r f ~~ ~ ~~ S~ I`l ., ,, ~ - I _ - -- - - ~- ---'-' 1_--'~--- r , 1 --- _ ; I _ .._ . r , -- r ~- ~ ' - - -- -- I ~'` :'~ I e; ~ s~: ~1 rc i •"~ , .~.. r I ~ ~'~ ,~ ~I ~ >• f I I , ~ ~'_ '` ~ t~ _ 7 I _ ~ , I __ , ~ , ~ _ -- _ _ ,< Disclaimer: This map is neither a legally recorded map nor a survey and is not intended to be used as one. This map is a compilation of records, information and data from city, county, state and federal offices, and is to be used for reference purposes only. https://portal. sehinc. com/sehsvc/Irtrr3l/dvo/mapLayout.htrn 7/9/2008 Print Form Phone Log Date Jun 16, 2008 Time 10:00:00 AM Initials jw Last Name Pekarak ~ First Name Jason Phone Number ~ Call Back Number ~ Otherr ~~ email address ~~ ~ Address 114 -1st Avenue SE City/Zip (` Return Call (`.Complaint (: Following up on call (` Inquiry (` Other Summary of A young man come into the office inquiring about owner occupied rental. Sarah provided him with the Conversation copies of the Interim Use Permit and asked me to talk to him. I recognized him as the owner of 114 - 1st Avenue SE and asked him if he was in fact the owner. He stated he was. He questioned the 100% ownership and asked when that changed. I told him April of 2008. 1 asked him if was going to be living their and he stated his brother would. I told him he had to be 100% fee owner in order to qualify for a rental license. He stated that his brother would be listed on the deed. I again told him that 100% of the owners must reside at the residence. I also told him that we have already turned this matter over to the Police Department and he needs to take care of this. He said okay and left t:rrv o~ ~,~r..Ic~trct Planning Commission Agenda Item 6 MEETING DATE: August 4, 2008 AGENDA ITEM: Public Hearing, Interim Use Permit Katherine Halquist STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Recommend the Council adopt the Resolution of Findings granting an Interim Use Permit to Katherine Halquist allowing an owner occupied rental unit at 510 Fir Street with a maximum density of two tenants. PREVIOUS PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Katherine Halquist requested information on securing a rental license in a R1 Zoning District. City Staff provided the packet of information on Owner Occupied Rental and she submitted a completed application meeting the qualifications. The City does not have any past actions on this property. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: ATTACHMENTS: Hearing Notice; Application; Recorded Deed, Resolution of Findings; Vicinity Map; REQUESTED PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Authorize the Planning Commission Chair and Administrator to execute the Resolution recommending the Council issue an Interim Use Permit to Katherine Halquist to operate an owner occupied rental unit at 510 Fir Street. ~. CITY OF ST. OS~PH 1 WWw.cityof stjoseph.com Public Hearing City of St. Joseph Administrator The St. Joseph Planning Commission shall conduct a public hearing on Monday, August 4, 2008 at ~ucly ~1Ueyrens 7:20 PM. The purpose of the hearing is to consider an Interim Use permit to allow an owner occupied rental in an R-1 Single-Family zoning district. The property is legally described as Lot 7 Block 1, Northland Plat 4. Mayor St. Joseph Code of Ordinances 52 27 subd 5 allows for an Interim Use Permit as follows: Residential AI Rassier rental provided the unit is owner occupied and provided the room(s) rented does not contain separate kitchen facilities and is not intended for use as an independent residence. For purposes of establishing Councilors if the property is owner occupied, the owner must be a natural person, and all owners must occupy the Steve Frank property as their principal residence. The owners may not exceed two in number. For purposes of determining ownership, the owner/owners must provide a copy of a recorded deed or recorded contract Rick Schultz for deed. A purchase agreement will not be accepted as evidence of ownership. Renee Symanietz Dale ~ick Katherine Hultquist, 510 Fir Street, St. Joseph, MN 56374 has submitted the request for Interim Use. Judy Weyrens Administrator Publish: July 25, 2008 H L'39 '.,~' Cl ~ . ~~ S€ ~ ~ -_ - ~UMtR aa~ i ~"~ _ ~'~- s~ r ~ .. t z .,uK 502 50A 508 617 :,~ ~ 506; ^-~ 8~ _ _ S 813 ~, M $ 7 +4 _613 809 r f _ 615 i _ ~ a~ 5t19 ; ~~, L 801 s.. _ r t~z ~1 ~ . _ . _ ~',{ `~~~ 506'. ~ 1.6 ( ~ r 5 l 0 Fir Street x_.510' 535 z ZS College Avenue North pO Box 6bg Saint ~oseph, Minnesota 56374 phone 3zo.363.~z.oi Fax 3zo.363.o34z APPLICATION FOR INTERIM USE PERMIT City of St. Joseph 25 College Avenue N PO Box 668 St. Joseph, MN 56374 Phone (320)363-7201 or Fax (320)363-0342 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ss COUNTY OF STEARNS ) NAME: Katherine E Hultquist ADDRESS: 510 Fir Street NE Saint Joseph MN 56374 Fee 5 ~pp'~~,~ Paid G ~• JZ2 Date ~-~1~Or~ PHONE: 7632389241 I/We, the undersigned, hereby make the following application to the City Council and Planning Commission of the City of St. Joseph, Stearns County, Minnesota. (Applicants have the responsibility of checking all applicable ordinances pertaining to their application and complying with the ordinance requirements.) 1. Application is hereby made for an Interim Use Permit io conduc[ the following: To rent rooms at the above address with the owner also residing at the property. 2. Legal description of land to be affected by application, including acreage or square footage of land invol ved, and street address, if any (attach additional shee[ if necessary): Single family home. Location 510 Fir Street Saint Joseph MN 56374. Lot #7. Block #1. Subdivision: Northland Plat 4. 3. Presen[zoning of the above described property is: R1 -Single-Family 4. Name and address of the present owner of [he above described land: Katherine E Huhquist 510 Fir Street NE Saint Joseph MN 56374 5. Is the proposed use compatible with the future and present land uses of the area? Please explain: Yes ~ No No changes will be made to the property. Rooms will be rented. 3 car garage and plenty of driveway parking available to renters. 6. Will the proposed use depreciate the area in which it is proposed? Please explain: r' Yes r No property will be maintained by the owner, Katherine E Hultquist. No changes will be made to the property. 7. Can the proposed use be accomodared with existing City service without overburdening the system? Please explain: ~ Yes (""` No Renters will park their cars in the provided garage or in the driveway of residence. As a results city streets will not have parked cars on them. 8. Are local streets capable of handling traffic which is generated by the proposed use? Please explain: r Yes (`~ No will park their cars in the provided garage or in the driveway of residence. As a result city streets will not have parked cars on Attached to this application, and made a part thereof, are other material submission data requirements, as indicated. Applicant Signature: Applicant Signature: Date: 6' ~ ~ ~ Date: FOR OFFICE USE ONLY Date application submitted: ~ ~ ~ . O ~ Date application completed: ng Commission Action: ~-- Recommend Approval r Recommend Disapproval Date of Action: Council Action: r Approved (-` Disapproved Date of Action: Date Applicant/Property owner notified of City Council Action: DEED TAX DUE: $1.65 (Total Consideration less than $500) Date: )une 27, 2008 Form No. 27-M -QUIT CLAIM DEED Individual(s) to Individual(s) FOR VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, Katherine E Hultquist, a single person, and Laura K Hultquist, a single person, Grantor(s), hereby convey(s) and quitclaim(s) to Katherine E Hultquist, a single person, Grantee(s), real property in Stearns County, Minnesota, described as follows: Legal Description attached hereto as Exhibit A and by this reference incorporated herein. together with all hereditaments and appurtenances. Check Box if applicable: The Seller certifies that the seller does not know of any wells on the described real property. A well disclosure certificate accompanies this document. I am familiar with the property described in this instrument and I certify that the status and number of wells on the described real property have not changed since the last previously filed well disclosure certificate. U.S._Minnesota _Quit Claim Deed-Individual_Rev.(7/12/04) File No.. 1203-750568-08 Resolution of finding The request of Katherine Hultquist for an Interim Use Permit request came before the Planning Commission at a public hearing held on August 4, 2008. The purpose of the hearing was to consider issuance of an Interim Use Permit to allow an owner occupied rental unit in a R1 Zoning District. The property is legally described as Lot 7 Block 1 Northland Plat 4 according to the plat and survey thereof on file and of record in the Office of the County Recorder in and for the County of Stearns and State of Minnesota located at 510 Fir Street NE. St. Joseph Code of Ordinances 5227 Subd. 5: Interim Uses. The following are Interim Uses allowed by permit based upon the procedures and criteria set forth in Section 52.07.04 of this Code. a) Residential rental, provided the unit is owner-occupied and provided the rooms} rented does not contain separate kitchen facilities and is not intended for use as an independent residence. For purposes of establishing if the property is owner occupied, the owner must be a natural person, and all owners must occupy the property as their principal residence. The owners may not exceed two in number. For purposes of determining ownership, the owner/owners must provide a copy of a recorded deed or recorded contract for deed. A purchase agreement will not be accepted as evidence of ownership. The request for Interim Use has been submitted by Katherine Hultquist, 510 Fir Street NE; St. Joseph MN 56374. Notice of this matter was duly served and published. In consideration of the information presented to the Planning Commission and its application to the Comprehensive Plan and Ordinances of the City of St. Joseph, the Planning Commission makes the following findings: The proposed use is consistent with the standards for granting an Interim Use Permit, St.loseah Code of Ordinances 52.07.04 Therefore, based on the above findings, the Planning Commission makes the following recommendation: Approval of the Interim Use Permit to allow an owner occupied rental unit in a R1 Zoning District with the following contingencies: 1. The rental license in non-transferable . 2. Approval of the Rental Housing inspector 3. The Planning Commission will review the license annually and revoke the license if the property is in violation of the St. Joseph Code of Ordinances. 4. The City Office will place a notice in the St. Joseph Newsleader when the owner occupied rental licenses are reviewed and will accept public comments. ATTEST Sr. Kathleen Kalinowski, Chair Judy Weyrens, Administrator llataViewOnline Map Page I of 1 Location Map ~ ~~i:i E15 -: 10f 2;~2~ 30a 51a ~ 510 6'2~ ~.i~ia ~ c, r r ', ~ E~14 .2121216 223 - 518 ! r.1:; I 518 v28 . ~ -~ ~ -- r - ~- 20Q i ~ -- _ _ _ - -- - - ~ 614 514 ~ , _ - ~ ii-'~r' ~5`1~. 128205 3111 'sG7 304' ~ 505 ~ 61762362 72 i ~+1£ ~~ - I ~ 209 3.35 - _ '~, j - - .;29 ' F~11 ~;_ - 1 311 ' •,:.-. `r' - - 30925 ' 711 i ~ ~ ' - ~ 732 614 516 626 ~ - 1 708 I '09 ! 708 I ' ~ 7 04~ ~ i ~ '~ 10 , r{ _.610 ~' 622 ~ _ 71L , X08 ~ I ~'07 '~ r j 7G4 _ 70 2 706 :n - i~_ - 603 ~ . 61 1...:6 tag ' ' ' 7 r i 304{i2 i 704 705 704 i ~_.n_ ~+' ~ 0., I _ ` r05 ~ - 4 ~ ~ - '. _ _ _ __ 42G 709 n ~. - 308~~ 702!'706 ~s02 305 40^T - - ,- ~~ `; 608 616 522,... 0., 633 ;. ,' 307' 405' 40Q501 505:~r - ~ 617 524' T;s2 700 204 70U 3087b ~ , 01 ----- ~ _ 1 _ L .407 150 "` +,71 n~ ~ CJ+1' kr_t ~'' :- C'Ut, ~ - 50~ 7 511 623 t ,.. 513 ~ i:F~tt s• F _ 30844 ~ E 1 1 i j 610 611 ~ , 61 1 404 ~ ~ . f f t Gu41 r ..`~~ ' . -- i 610 ; .. 408 i 506 III ~~ E " r r - - _ 502~F ~ i rr - 626 . 3082E ~ 6,14 ; n 608 ~ 604 608 -,~ 604 ... t 610 t 6/' 1'7l - 504 J48 '. 604 618 622 ( `I - - - 820 - ' 507 s ' 606 607 ?~ 606 ~ 607 ?' ~ 60E 613 j ~ ~1 c ~! fi 13 3612615_ _ l y~ I, _ - _ 16 'x0785 __. ~ - -t _ 6 -, ._ may! 805 ~ F604 6v5 ~=. 6 J4 ~ 605 .`: 606 r 0~ 608 .,OQS~~ ~. 605 61 1 621 I ~ ~ -..810 _ 524 '_603 ~ 602603 ~ '602 ~ 603 - ~6a4 ~ ~ _ _~ _- G - 520- .601 j 600 601 I ~ 600 601 ~ t "~/~ ~ I I -- ~ 606 r„r3 5'~2 510 522 ~ 606 612 622 b2fi 602 ~'_. t Itt .i r Iii 4:; c ~ ... c06 ~ 516 ~"u~+' r 616 -.- _.._.__~-___ 200 i -- - 304 '' ~ ~` .:, ., 20 . zo4zo6zo$3oo ~ Y ~,~ ~~ ~G~ ~ w;. k„, a 5a r,~ _ -_ I - -- ao~,: ;; 209 j - - ~__ a zo7 ",i - 123 ' ' 11ff 20306 207 ~ 218 10~d ~.,_.___._. GEC'AP ST ~ --- -._ ~_ __ ~~ I i .-~.-__ _ ' ~ ~~ - 9 ht~i ~ 1 , . , , , 1 17 - ~ H~ r 1 fi .108 ~ 115 1114 12+3 v i ~_~ j 710 710 _ .. i s I , 7 1 U 133 . 41 ~' 107, 117 X105 i is j 209 215 221'"• ~_~ I ~ _ --- -- I 10a' 111 121 i 203 i ~ - ~ -- ~ ~~ ~ -~~ z j i 409 I. _. ~ - ---- ~ _1 { _ l i C~ ~ _ I _-.- - _:.. _. r- 302 ; ¢ _ ; - ...--- i - ~ - _.1~ ~ r 120 ~. ? - 212 220 ~ i ~ " i ,,j i 34 . 1 10 I 31 30 24b ~ 216 j i 619 ~ ~- Evpyrighl ~I, 5EH 2OQ3 i ~~ ~ 2b 27 ' ,r ~~ I ~ I ~ ~ I 5 ~ rJ ~ `= 71 414 Disclaimer: This map is neither a legally recorded map nor a survey and is not intended to used as one. This map is a compilation of records, information and data from city, county, and federal offices, and is to be used for reference purposes only. be state https://portal.sehinc.com/sehsvc/html/dvo/mapL,ayout.htm 7/9/2008 ~1 ; ~_ ~` wit' ~~.,.--~1..1~,~ -~' Ul~~., Cr'I'Y r)F !;'J: JtY.SH:YFI MEETING DATE: AGEh'IDA ITEM: SU61~11TTED BY: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Council Agenda Item 7 August 4, 2008 Annual Interim Use Permit Review Owner Occupied Rental Units Administration Recommend renewal of the Interim Use Permits as listed on the published notice. PREVIOUS PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: The table listed in the background information is a summary of current Interim Use Permits have been issued by the City of St. Joseph. All the Interim Use Permits include a provision that requires annual review assuring compliance with the St. Joseph Code of Ordinances. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: With the City staff being more aggressive on rental licenses, particularly those not licensed or violating terms of Interim Use Permits, I decided to create an application form that must be completed annually. The form would require a notarized signature that they are meeting the rriinirrrum requirements of the Ordinance and if it is determined later they are not we have a mechanism for legal remedy. In the past property owners have not acknowledged that they would like to continue the Interim Use Permit. The table below illustrates the Interim Use Permits that are eligible for renewal provided they still met the Ordinance requirements. The yellow highlighted properties have not returned the form as of the writing of this memo. I will be sending them a letter that their IUP is be revoked as the renewal is one of the conditions. They would still have the opportunity to come before the Planning Commission in September or even to the meeting on Monday night. PROPERTY OWNER PROPERTY ADDRESS IU APPLICATION RENTAL FEES CO ISSUED ' _ PAID 08-09 08-09 Mike Bader (2003) _ 101 5th Avenue NW Y ~ __ 7-23-OS Y 6-25-08 Y 6-24-08 Brian Shields (200_4)___ ___ 321 Cypress Drive ___ _ _ _ Y 7-29-08 __ _ Y 6-10-08 Y 6-19-08 Linda Hutchinson (2005) _ 133 5th Avenue SE Y _ 7-24-08 ___ Y 6-30-OS ____ Y 6-26-08 Patrick Conway (2006) 35 2rd Avenue SE _ N N N j Timothy Ortmann (2006) 308 10th Avenue SE N Y 7-16-08 Y 7-2-08 Ryan Lieser (2006)_ 403 15` Av_enu_e NE N N Y 7-7-08 Dale Schneider (2007) _ 409 College Avenue N Y 7-25-08 N _ N William Capecchi (2007) 209 Minnesota Street E _ N _ Y 7-10-08 Y 7-8-08 Bryce Deter (2007) 106 Jasmine Lane Y 7-25-08 Y 6-19-08 Y 6- 16-08 _ Student Housing (200.7)____ __ 30 Birch Street E _ _ Y _ __ 7-21-08 _ _ _ Y _ 6-11-08 _ N _ _ _ Jake Rorabeek {2007) 221 Birch Street W Y 7-24-08 ___ Y 5-30-08 N Tom Dullinger (2008) _ 34 College Avenue N_ Y 7-28-08 __ Y 6-5-08 Y 6-12-08 Student Housing (2008) 119 College Avenue N _ Y 7-21-08 --- Y 6-11-OS N You can see on the form that we also added a space where staff review complaint records and identified any Ordinance violations for each property. Two properties have had violations: 1. Jake Rorabeck - A weed notice was sent to the property owner and after they received the notice they took care of the issue. This same property the City Office has received concerns that Jake is not living at the house during the summer as that is what they have been told be one of the tenants. 2. Dale Schneider -Received two weed notices for the property located 409 College Avenue North. The City did not have to cut the weeks but twice he was in violation. The Planning Commission needs to determine how they will handle violations of Ordinances and how many will be tolerated before suspending or revoking the Interim Use Permit. All Interim Use Permits are issued with the contingency that there are no Ordinance Violations. One of the outstanding applications for renew is Patrick Conway. We had been informed that he was renting to a family and was actually living in the Twin Cities. The Police Department confirmed this to be true and he was not living there at the time the IUP was renewed in 2007. This is one of the reasons for a form. I have included the phone logs to illustrate the types of phones I have had with the property owners parents. Since this form went out and they cannot rent with an absentee landlord I have been called by the Deans of Resident Life from both the College of St. Benedict and St. John's University as five students have been displaced. The parents of the future tenants also called and wanted to know why we revoked their license. On the list you will notice that some of the 2008 Interim Use Permits are not listed for renew. Andy Rose and Vern Harris have just recently completed the license process so we will add them next year. ATTACHMENTS: Publication for hearing, 15` page of Deed, Phone Log REQUESTED PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: The Planning Commission can take different actions on different properties. It does not matter if all are approved with one motion or the motion is mixed. ~ CITY O~ ST. OSI/PH 1 avu ~ it~~~~,tjusc~~h ccm~ MEETING NOTICE Annual Review of Interim Use Permits Administrator ~udy Weyrens ~~layor AI Rassier Councilors Steve ~ran~ Rick Schultz enee _ ymanietz ~~ale ~UU ick Please be advised that the Planning Commission for the City of St. Joseph will be reviewing the following Interim Use Permits on Monday, August 4, 2008 at 7:30 PM at the St. Joseph City Hall, 25 College Avenue N. INTERIM USE PROPERTY ADDRESS PROPERTY OWNER Owner Occupied Rental 101 5`h Avenue NW Mike Bader Owner Occupied Rental 321 Cypress Drive Brian Shields Owner Occupied Rental 133 5"' Avenue SE Linda Hutchinson Owner Occupied Rental 35 2"d Avenue SE Patrick Conway Owner Occupied Rental 308 10"' Avenue SE Timothy Ortmann Owner Occupied Rental 403 15` Avenue NE Ryan Lieser Non Owner Occupied Rental 409 College Avenue N Dale Schneider Owner Occupied Rental 209 Minnesota Street E William Capecchi Owner Occupied Rental 1061asmine Lane Bryce Deter Non Owner Occupied Rental 30 Birch Street E Student Housing Owner Occupied Rental 221 Birch Street W Jake Rorabeck Non Owner Occupied Rental 34 College Avenue N Tom Dullinger Non Owner Occupied Rental 119 College Avenue N Student Housing Persons wishing to comment on the effect of Interim Use Permits during the past 12 months will have the opportunity to do so with oral comments limited to 5 minutes. Written comments may be submitted to the City Administrator, PO Box 668, St. Joseph, MN 56374. Judy Weyrens Administrator Publish:July 25, 2008 ZS College Avenue North PQ Box 668 Phone 3zo 363 7zoi ' Saint ~oseph, Minnesota 56374 Fax 3zo 363-o3gz __ __ _. -~ i:~ofe,°f.verr_++~Norirr,S. '~se>"r;Pf'~i `ti_~i4 -__e____....... RECEIVED ~~~'~'i ~1:~°~'l~f~:f~~ r~,~r ~~~~:~~:~~%,~~_ ~~~i )~r'1 ~~ 1~~~~ ~±~~~~ ~~ ~~:~~'~~ JUL 2 3 2008 Appl,cant Name !~~ike Fsader Address i 01 Sth Avenue N+>•i Loniny R-I, 5ingie rarn'ly B"~, Central Busir~~ess B7,'~ighway ~3usiress Dare of Issuance Jul i %, 7003 Expiration Cate N/A CITY ~F ST JOSEPH Numbe-of fer,ants O Extension Date N/A Conditions '..The rental I!cerse is non-transferable and if the property is sold or the ownership changes so that *,he zforementioned no longer onwr,s a 50% oY greater interest in the property, the In*,erim Use Permit is nuli and voir. ~. Approval of the Rental i-ious~ng Inspector. Rental Regisr~atier: Fees Paid (7007 ZGGB Rental Period) Certificate of CornpGance Issued (2007-2008 Rental Period) 3 the Planning Commission will review the license annually and revoke tr,e license if the property is in violation of the St..Jeseah Code of Ordinances. 4 The City C`fice wii! place a notice in the St. !eseoh Newsieader when the owner occupied rental licenses are reviewed and will accept public comrnents. Yes ~ Nc -" N/A r" Yes ~~ No I- N/A ;j< Yes r- No ~- N/A r" Yes r- No (X N/A iX `les ~~ No ; - N/A The follow~r~g Ordinance Violations cr complaints have beer. received by the City Offices er Police [Department: No Violations ?007-2008 Rental Period Ownership Ccpy of deed showing Reauirernent Requ~rernent r 50 % ~"-" 1000/ interest must be attached fulfilled ~ Yes N'c (--" N/a ! hereby affirm that my prirr;ary residence is _______ and that I am the owner of record e# the property subject to the Interim Ilse Permit which is being renewed by this application, I understand tha# the Interim Use Permit may be revoked if any in#ormation on the renewal application is #alse. Signature ,,%~~~ '~~ Cate ~~o~ 7/~~ . ~ . Mate of MN Co.!nty of Stearns On this Y d y o,' , 20~ ~ before me ~~~M ~W I ~~L . r.~'' o notary public, personally appeared ~ ~ ~ r proveiJ o~~~ the bass c`r satisfactory evidence ro be the person(s) whose name (s) is (are) subscribed to this ~nst;ument, and acknowledged (~e/she/they) exect~.~ted the sa-~~e ~s.~~tness c,y hand znd official seal. - ~, t Nctary Signature ~ SEAL y~a,A'~; BIALKE ~~~- - - --- _ NOIgFtY PUBLIC; MINNESOTA `~ My Commission Expires Jan. 31, 2010 4, V, ; P t"1lrt~ef erttQr~ . ,. ~~ .. ~ ~~~ ~ ~~ ~~- ~ 375~~-CUU 1065202 o~ ..It.,~~~~ i s F,i iz~ ~~ 1..~k13:.-1 J.....~i/i~iG~. ~~ ~1 ~/ FORl1~1 No. 27-M QUIT CLA1Ni DEED-INDIVIDUAL(S) TO 1ND1V1DUAL(S) DEED TAX DUE HEREON: $1.65 DATE: ~ - ~ ~ - , 2003. FOR VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, Michael J. Bader and Kathleen A. Bader husband and wife as ioint tenants ,Grantors, hereby convey and quitclaim to Michael Paul Bader , Grantee, real property in Stearns County, Minnesota, described as follows: An undivided 1/2 interest in the following: Lot Thirteen (13), Park Terrace, according to the plat and survey thereof on file and of record in the Office of the County Recorder in and for the County of Stearns and State of Minnesota, being part of the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter (SE 1/4 NE 1/4) and the Northeast Quarter ~ of the Southeast Quarter (NE 1/4 of SE 1/4) of Section Nine (9), Township One Hundred Twenty-four (124), Range Twenty-nine (29), Lot Eight (8) of Auditor's Subdivision Number Four (4) and Lots One (1) Two (2) and Three (3) in Block Six (6) of the Original Townsite of St. Joseph, Steams County, Minnesota. y And that part of Outlot A, Clinton Village Addition, which lies between the westerly extension of the north and south lines of Lot 13, Park Terrace, said Clinton Village Addition and Park Terrace being duly recorded plats on file in the office of the County Recorder in and for Stearns County, Minnesota. together with all hereditaments and appurtenances. Check box if applicable: ^ The Seller certifies that the seller does not know of any wells on the described property. ^ A well disclosure certificate accompanies this document. ^ I am familiar with the property described in this instrument and I certify that the status and number of wells on the described real property have not changed since the last previously filed well disclosure certificate. L` lilrG~" .4C:!U. ~~~ir:i, ;I ~O~P~"i~"r;~/'h~i `;hS/G - ---j Fnnt Form , RECEIVED JUI 2 9 2008 ,~}'~'J..11:.A'1 1t:);~~~ }~))~ }~1~:~T~ L1%,>~L ~ti lei^I ~,:{~J~9 1~~'l' ~'.i:}~;~1Tr; ~,17Y OF ST. JOSEPH Appl'car'~° 'Jame ~.rian Shields Add: ess 321 Cypress Dave 7_on~ng R1, Single Family (-~ 51, Cent~a+ 3us~~ness ,, B2, H~ghway Bus~~iess Date of issuance Aug 5, 200 Exp ration Date N/P. Number of i enants Emersion Cate N/A Conditions. 1 _f he rental is consistent with current zoning rules for owner occupied rentals: ~ Yes ' - No r~ N/A St. Joseph Code of Ordina tees Si 27 subd 5 allows for an Interm Use Ferrnit as follows: Resident~a' cotta' provided the un t is owner occupied and provir,'ed the room(s) rentee CiCeS r1Ct COr~tail"i separaie kitchen faCilitieS and It not Intended fcr we as or'~ I!ldeperldent residP_nCe. 2. i nP_ t)nii Is OW11er OCCUpied: ~~ YPS ~ NO N/A St. Jcs~h Code of Ordinances 52.27 subd. 5 states that for purposes of establishing if the property is owner occupied; the owner rrlust be a natural person and the owner ocwpying the property as his er her principal residence and must own a fifty percent (50%} or greater interest in the property. ? Approva, of the Rental Housing Inspector, -Rental Registration Fees Paio (2007-2008 Renta~ Period) - Renta~ Registration Fees Paid (2007-2008 Rental Period) (X Yes r- No '" N/A ry, Yes ~ - No ~ N/A The following Ordinance Violations or complaints haver,een received by the City Offices or Re!ice Departrr,ent. No Violations - 2007-2008 Rental Period O~n~nership Copy of deed showing Reo,uiren-~ent Req~:~reme-,t ~X 50% r.. 100% ~ Yes '-- No N/a interest must. be attached fulfilled ~ ~ 1 I hereby affirm that my primary residence is .~~' ~;~~~ aj' ~~. ~~ ~ N., ~v and that I am the owner of record of the property subiect to the Interim Use Permit whietl is being renewed by this application. I understand that the Interim Use Perr-nit may be revoked if any information on the renewal application is f/alse. / Sigma., _ Date . ~ , . . . State of M N County of Stearns On this 'J~~ _ day of ~.~ `'\ , 2~' ~' ,before me _ ~.J~ ~.Q~"''`.:~ ~~x-~~•' , a notary public, perscnal!y appeared ~" ~ e. ~ Sc.1~+ ~t 1 ~, proved on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name (s) s (are) subscribed to this instrument, and acknowledged (he/she/they) exect,;ted the same. VV,;ness my hand and cfflcial seal. ~. ~ ~ , ..•\ C ,+I a"=" s+csv ~w.fss..w4v.re~fstpK'M'4~NbK~!~Fad~M,rree Noiar Sicr,ature t ~' + .~ .~~-;~~ `\ C Y ~ \~ )~~~'\~C(;~'\_ ~ wf° `.' ~ •/LCEEIV.I.ISDER ~~. y^,tar>n~ Publtc-N(rnnssc~i~: ~.~~ r taly "ar"m. Expires JBr,, 3;, ~'atG ~,..~...~,...,t.. " -,- ..,,.,, ,~..~.,~.,~t ~ ~~ ~O. r V ~:^v ~'=! E^~QUENT TAXES AND .._ .. DEPUTY ` ~'~ 53S 37r~vv i 101324 q~ ~ 23 Afi f l= l 8 STE~F~ S COUfITY~NN DIAhE GRUtiDNOEFER 9 Y DEPUT Y DEED TAX DUE: #1.65 Form No. 27-M -QUIT CLAIM DEED Individual(s) to Individual(s) Date: February 20, 2004 FOR VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, Dennis Shields and loan Shields, husband and wife, Grantor(s), hereby convey(s) and quitclaim{s) to Dennis Shields and Brian Shields, Grantee(s), real property in Steams County, Minnesota, described as follows: Lot 4, Block i, Mollow Park Addition, Stearns County, Minnesota. The consideration on this deed is for X500.00 or less. together with all hereditaments and appurtenances. Check Box if applicable: The Seller certifies that the seller does not know of any wells on the described real property, A well disclosure Certificate accompanies this document. I am familiar with the properly described in this instrument and I certify that the status and number of wells on the described real property have not changed since the last previously filed well disclosure certificate. 1`ege 1 of 2 3D 910005183 2/23/2004 1Rf545 DEED TX f 11:14:40 - PAID 11.65 SCR~of~ ~.~~"~~~1~ ~~q.,f~)~~-1~~e I };riniForrr~ [~ ~.~il1C~(it'i"IVC:i°1(.?C'. r~GYt~1, ~~ ~:i~(?~'~"~!"1~~~'~ i~7.j/~+ r~~o)_35s /~%~ EE'~EIVED CITY OF ST. JOSEPH App!i,ant Name linda Hutchinson Address ~ 33 Sth Avenue SE Zor~~ng ~: R', Sirgie Far~~!!y ~ B1; Centra~ Business 82, Highway B.~sin~ss N,.~rnber cf 1 enants ' Cate of issuance May 19, 2pp~ Expiation Date N/A Extension Cate N/A Conditions. .. l he renta~~ license is r~~on-transferable and if the property is scid or the ownership 1~ Yes ~~ Nc ~ N/A changes se that the aforementioned no longer onwns a 50% or greater interest in the property, the Irterirn Use Fermit is null and void. 2. Approva, cfthe Rental Housing inspector. - Rental Registration gees Faid 0001-2008 Renta! Feriod) (X Yes ~- No r` N/A - Rental Reg!stration Fees pad (2007-2008 Renta Period) ~X Yes {~ No r N/A 3 The Planning Commission- will review the license anr,ualiy and evoke the license if the ~ Yes r" No ~ N/A property is in violation of the St. Joseph Code of Ordinances 4. The City Office will place a notice in the St. Joseph Newsieader when the owner r Yes ; ~ No ~ N/A occupied rental licenses are reviewed and wi!I accept public cernments The following Ordinance Violations or complaints have been received by the City Offices er Foiice Cepartment: Ne Violations 2007-2008 Rental Feriod Ownership _ Copy of deed showing Requirement Requirement {X SC % (~ 100% interest must Abe attached fulfilled ~ "es j - No ~" N/a 1 hereby affirm that my primary residence is _~ ~ ~ ~~ v`,J~ ~y~ ~~~, and that i am the owner of record of the property subject to the Interim Use Fermit which is being renewed by this application. I understand that the Interim Use Permit may bc, revoked if any information an the renewal application is false. Signat~..re /' Date /~ ~~/ • • • • • ^ • • ^ • 1 • • • • • • • • ^ • • • • • • • ^ • • ^ • • • • ^ • • • • • • • • • • f • ^ • • • • • State of M N County of Stearns Cn tnis '~j,~-4'Ylday o>~~') `i~"~f~ , 20 It , L~•~:. before me ! .`y!~-~~4'~. ~j 1..~ ~'~'` , a r,Gtary public, personally appeared~~ ~rA ; ; i-;;;-'~--.'r, t,; t /°°~ proved on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the persons} whose name (s} is (are) suoscr;bed to this nstr.;men,t, and acknowledged (he/she/they) execrated the same. 'w~,tness ~,y hand and offclal seal } Notary Signature . '~~~'~ ~ (;,~;,._ ~' ~ l } <` r~''" /' SEAS. ~'~~ ~ 1~ ~~'~Lt,r~N J 15gEF~ ~"""? .--- f i~tvtar; Pudic-i~4irtnesutc ~ ~~ jc; ~;~ ~,c3m,,.,. Expirec.~ar. 31, 2{~70 :~°4a_~.• '1M t57t.@s*n=6~4' ~:.~ n.:ah~r n.s*-r. +: a..,~,. +.n.~aao~ ~P4) Yq ~ ,~1~ transfer entered Date ~ `~' it County Auditor By ~~ 1!40340 05 JAN t 4 PM 3~ 09 CCL•~;TY Ri';,r,~~~R DIAItiE ~-RUI~i~;ioEFER ~Y__.__. _.._._ ~ spur >r g~. ~350~. d0U DEED TAX DUE: $ ~j13.r7• (~ Date: December 01, 2004 Form No. 1-M-WARRANTY DEED Individual(s) >p Individual(s) FOR VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, Corey C. Shouse and Christina M. Tourino, husband and wife Grantor, hereby conveys and warrants to Unda D. Hutchinson Grantee, real property in Stearns County, Minnesota, described as follows: Lot 5, Block 3, Eastern Park Addition, Steams County, MN. together with all hereditaments and appurtenances belonging thereto, subject to the following exceptions: Check box if applicable: The Seller certifies that the seller does not know of any wells on the described real property. n A well disclosure certificate accompanies this document. n I am familiar with the property described in this instrument and I certify that the status and number of wells on the described real property have not changed since the last previously filed well disclosure certificate. lj~,/~o '3gs /fJniversAl Titfe 7235 Ohms Lane r~linll, MN 55439 A'1'i~~t: ltocurtlinb Dcpt. 19 050001330 1/14/P005 TRES06 D® TX z 1:17:53 PAID ><~35.60 U.S._Minnesota Warranty Deed (]ndividual)_Rev.(7/12/04) Page 1 of 2 Pages SCR ~~ of ~! t' o' ~'1 "^'. ~~~tl!`l~ ~ Frint"orm j /.~~(ii; riJ~~i Veri;e F?f~; :~;"t;~, .`, i. "'(~j2~irr ill ~~~ .~~~/n (~rj.s6 i~ l i ~aF~;EtVED :~:r>~>~.~r ~~~~~r.--~ ~=t~l~ ~~~;~~.~-~%.~~: r~~ ~~~~r:~~~~~~ use, r~~~.h~~a7'~~~ JUL 2 5 2008 Apalican! Name tale Schneider /address 40S College Avenue N Zcni^g ,- R~, Srgie I a~:~~lv ~- B"~, Central B~~siness ;. 92, Highway Busness irate or' Issuance 08 ~ 6 C7 `r.xp~ratior bete 08 "~6 "!0 CITY OF ST. JOSEPH Number o`?enants _.~- Ex;ersion Date N/A Conditions. 1 1 he Planning Comm ssior w; ~ review i~e ~~: ease annually and evoke the .~cerse if the Yes No !X N/A, property !s ~n vio'aton cf the S_~..osecr. Cone or Ordinances 2. "he piann nq Commission will rev!eW the license annually to determine if the area ~ Yes - No ~X N/A s,:rroundirg this property is ready for conversion to :he b+:siness r'istnc.t.'When the neighborhood is ready for convers~cn, th s permit. shah become null and void. 3 !f after three years, the area ~s not yet ready for conversion, the appl:carrt can recuest an r Yes f No ;y N/A extension for an aaditicnal three years, with the same review prOCP.SS. 4 Approval of tie Rental riousine Inspector - Rental Regisraticn Fees Paid 0007-2008 Rents' Ner~od) Certificate cf Compliance Issues (2007 Z0C8 Rental Period) Yes ;- No ~ N/A ~ Yep i_. Nc (._. N/A The to'ucw~ng Ordinance Violations or cc...plaints have been Weed Notices 05/24/07 and 06/23/08 received by the City Offices er Police Department: 7"hey Took care of weeds thernse!ves Ownership Copy cf deed showing Reouirement R2G;Uir2men' ~ 5C % ~ 100% interest mUS; be aii2Ched fuliilied r des ,~ NO X N/a I hereby afiirrn that my primary residence is _____________________ and that I am the owner of record of the property subject to the Interim Use Permit which is being renewed by this applitatiori. I understand that the Interim Use Per-nit mayrbe revoked if any informs ion n the ter wal application is false. S~gc~t~~~re ~ ~-- !~ ~-~-~ ~ Date ~ ~ ~-"Z, ~D . , (~ n (\~\ /fir State o` N1N ~_~ xS~. `°"~ l~Q. ~ ~ `~ ' \. ) .-~ County cf~jS~t'~elarns ~ t` Q ` On this -i' ~ ay of V11 , 20 O V ,before ~Y,e 1 ~ ~ , a notary Public, personally appeared proved on the basis c` sari factory evidence to be the person(s) whose name (s) is (are) subscribed to this insr.ir~^ent, and acknow'edged (he/she/they) executed the same. Witness try hand and official seal. ._ ~ ~~ ems' PJIt;ilE MEYER NotarySignat,.~re ~~•,'~10-~D,RYPUBI.IC MiNNESGT.A ~ ~ ~.~Y C0MM'SSiON EXPIRE:: `l ~ ---- ~ yY°~~;.~~ ,1ANt!ARY 3 ~, 2013 2: '.ri~~~J(_ i'lVPIiU~ 1~1~G?I!"I, ;! I(i~°prr -`IAIV tifj{/~+ ~.1(,j ,~65 7l ~]'I'1-l~_i~'~'l~)?'~~ fit)}~ ~tl~.?~JI'VL'~j~, t.~] l~"~ ~;1~11i'~ 11Si~ J-'1~.~~I~1~7 App'ican- 'vame Bryce Ceter Address 105 Jasmine l ane F Zoning ~'.' R', Single Farn~!y (' Bi, Contra' Business B2, l iighway Business Cate of issuance Sep 2G, 2007 Exp•ration Date N/A Print Forma RECEIVED JUl 2 5 2008 CI? `• OF ST JOSEPH Number of i enants (~- ~1~, Erter.s~cn Cate N/A Conditicns 1. 1 he renta'~ !icense is non-transferable and if the property Is scld or the ownership changes so !hat the aforementioned nc lonoer onwns a 70% or greater interest in the property, the Irter~m iJse Permit is null and void, 2 Approva efthe Rental 1!ousing Inspector. - Registration Fees Paid (2007-2008 Rental Period) -Certificate of Compliance Issued (2007-2008 Rental Period) 3 The Planning Commission wil; review the license znnually and revoke the license if the property ~s in violation c` the St. Joseph Code of Orcinances. 4. The City Office wil; place a notice in the St. Joseph News':eader when the owner occupied yenta! licenses are reviewed and w~li accept public r_orr~~ments ~ - Yes F~- Ne ~7 N/A ~X Yes ~ No '~- N/A IX Yes j _ No ~-" N/A t- Yes ~-- Ne ~X N/A r Yes ; - No ~ N/A The following Ordinance Violations or colr~plaints have been received by the City Offices or Police Department: No Violations 2007-2008 Rental Period Ownership Copy of deed showing Requirement Requirement ~ SO °~ 100% interest must be attached fulfilled ~ Yes ;" Nc f N/a I hereby affirm that my primary residence i~ '.(''t. '~1L~.e?_~~~'~_'`-__.__.~____-and that I am the owner of record of the property subject io the Interim Usee permit which is being renewed by this application. I understand that the Interim Use Permit may be revoked if any informatian on the renewal application is false. Sigr,at~±re - Uate "1 ~ O~ State cf MN County of Stearns On this ~~day of ~V`~ 2C'~ ;before me 1"]YYI~d, -rOP/~ ~ n , a notary public, personally appeared ~~~~~,~ ~~ proved on the b sis of satisfact , evidence to be the person(s) Vrhose name (s) is (are) subscribed to t-~is instrumen*.; ane ocknowedged (he/she/they) exectuted the same. Witness my hand and official seal Notar Si ratu~e SFA,i ~` y g ~,~ AMY A. f~N+-i~+GEN ; N9~ltiitl' P1JI~rC > M:NtJ>A~C?A '' {~~ '.,,,:>; kh Cr~rra~+s3o! ~zp~ J;~r,. ~;. 2Jti~ ;~ ~l~lY NO DELINQUENT TAXES ANO °~~ of ~r REOORDER TRIWSfI.A ENTEFigD s~nRws coun~T~r, tiarin~sorn ~j ~,.~ ~ ~i 3~d 6 ~~~ 1200172 N CertMied, FNed, aurdlar Recorded on ~ o ~'~~ AtlDIT~OR 07-~3-zoos ~c o2:ao P~ =~ a~Y - a~ - . .. sm=aR+as counrn RecoRnaz ~ S 3 ~ 3~r. a °~ Above Space Reserved for Recording (Ii required by your jurisdiction, list above the name & address of; t) where b return this form; ~ preparer, 3) party requesting recording.) C~~i#cl~ir~ De~d~l~linr~~~ot~ {~~~~ ~,x X1.65 Da a this Document: 6/2/2006 Reference Number of Any Related Documents: 0 Grantor. Name Street Address CitylState2ip Grantee: Name Street Address City/State2ip Michael Hommerding 106 Jasmine Lane St. Joseph, MN 56374 PAID 1.65 Bryce Deter ~t~~ ~ Abbreviated Legal Description (i.e., lot, block, plat or section, township, range, quarter/quarter or unit, building and condo name): Lot one, Block three, Northland Plat 7, ,~i$gf~,ICounty, MN / Stearns Assessor's Property Tax Parcel/Account Number{s): 84-53734-289 Michael Hommerding, Grantor, whose post office address is 106 Jasmine Lane, St. Joseph, MN 56374, for the consideration of less than $500, conveys and uitclaims to Bryce Deter, Grantee, whose post office address is all interest in the following described real estate in the county of ~ygryh~ in the State of Minneso a1~ ~ b J, Q"ra~,~., L any, j err C~ose,~ Stearns ~~ S€~,1j~1 Description of Real Estate: Lot one, Block three, Northland Plat 7, 8~r~y6 County, MN Stearns Dated this 2"~ day of June, 2006.__ Signature of Grantor. ~-~~ ~7/1312~6 13:51:53 ~1t331a5 PEED TX x w+w.aocMes.can Page 1 of 3 tFZSS+yrr • Rev. W10S SCR ~ of 3 i`, C:;liec e ~' wen~re No;°ihS~ ire;eUi~ Mfv 567 ~SLGj 6 %L l April!cart tJame Stude';t Housing I I C Address 30 Blrch Street E Lor~~ing ,- R1, Single ' arn~iy - B1, Central Business ;: B2, Iiignway B~,asiness Date Gf Issuan:e 10 ~ 8-07 Expiration, Date 10 18 "l0 r-- - - - - - _ _. print FGrm RECEIVED JUL 2 12008 wiTY GF aT JOSEPH Number cf ?enants ~, Extension mate N/A Ccnd~t~ons 1 the Planning Commission well rev,ew the Ilcense annually and revoke the Incense if the property is in vio,ation Gf the St_Joseph C.oce or Ordinances 2 The P'anr'nq ~ OIYI!";?isSiC!"I W:I re`/ eW the iiCP_nSe annually i0 deter!Y'ir!e If file area SUrrOUriding in~5 p"CJe'ty i5 ready for COnVP_rsiCn t0 the b:asines5 d~striCt W~~en the netghbOrhCCO IS ready `oi ccnvers~Gn, th'~s permit Shall become null and void 3 If after three years, the area Is not yet ready for conversion, the applicant can request ar extension for ar additional three years, with the same review process. 4 f+pp~cval c'the Rental Housing !r,sgector Renta; Registrt~cr =ees Paid (2007 ZC08 Renta~ Period) - Cerr~`!cate of Compliance Issued (2007-2008 Renta! Period) " Yes ! Nc X N/A f- Yes 1- No X N/A j 'es ? No X N/A X Yes ~_ No ~_ N/A l he foLow ng Ordinance Violateens or complaints have been No ViOlaticns - 2007-2008 Rental Period received by the City Offices Cr Follce Departmen*, UU/ne-sh~p Copy of deed show ng Requirement Requirerr;ert 5C % r " 'CO% interest roust {be attached fu~If~lled Y"e- ~ No !X N/a I hereby affirm tha# my primary residence i.=: _ -_~~ `~ _~~_1"~~.~'~T ,.1 A ~'~'L wr_+~"~i: and that I am the owner of record of ihc~ property s~at''jt;c:t tc~ the Interirr~ Use Permit whit#~ is being renewed by this application. i understand that the Interim Use Permit may be revoked if any ir~formation~n the renewal application is false. r7 ~" r'- ~ ~ s, a ~ .a:+.'~ S~gnat~..re ,r ._._ t~ - ~)a,e ~ ,~ ~~ ~~ > ~ y` State of MtvI ou~r•,ty of Stearns ~ ,' ._,~ i ~ `~ d I On this ~ da of ~ c. ~ , 20 ~! b ,before me ?~_/-t' "d=' T i,-L-~; ~ C('r'7C'~ :~ , a notary publ -, personally appeared ~/~~ ~~- 7',~ ``~"- proved on t`Ie basis of sat~sfac*.ory evidence tc be the person}(.,) whose name (s) 's (are) subscr cod tG this ir~~str~ment, and acknowledged (he/she/,rey) exectuted the same. Witness my hard and official seal ~ ; fi ~~ J / / i / ~ titilb ,.~~..~~nn v~.,T.n,~ T, v-~v~w -av~n..~ R NGta ;nature ~ /~~;`.~>r ~c~ ,r ~ Gr,-~-=`--- ~ ~~,'"~~ PP~T~{~IA,A, fCF_~~KE~ ° - ra ~' ~ '°_ -~ ~~Gtaty ~ a3iSG-~~i~inE5Ci3 ;`...-~~~~$~ ;,Ay Ccruniss~~an F_>;nl*es,la;~ 3', 2310 ~_:oy ~1.~~iYL'WF~VW'J~.^.^JYVN~'1N'JyVY+/Y~~~+.NJ - C 13 1' (.1¢ c ~. _1C~SE~1~"~~ ~ Frint Form j ~; ,. oli'eJe; venue IVr.rfr;, ~, %cre~h N'U Sb<7q ~__ (1t'vj ~5~ /!v'1 '~~~~ JUL 2 4 2008 ,"'~ P 1' 1: l f , r~, "! i (- ti 1 ~ U ] ~ )~ ~~~ ?',? ~: lA' l~ l_ +() ~' l i~d'I ~. T~ i J~!1 U ~~ ~ ~ ~ (_ [ ~,~ i .~-. CI I y OF ST. JOSEPH Applicant Name ;ake Rerabec!c Address 771 Birch Street W Zon~ng ,: Ri, Sincle Family B1, Central Business ;~' 82, Highway Business Date of issuance Nov 1 ~, 7007 Conaa~or!s: '. i he rental license is non-transferable and if the property is sold or the ownership changes sc that the aforementioned nc longer onwns a 50% cr greater interest in the property; the Interim Use Permit is null and void. Expiration Date N/A -°_., Number G[ Tenants +:d~ Extension Date N/A 7 Q.pprova~ of the Renta~ Housing Inspector, - Rental Registraticr Fees Paid ;2007-7008 Rental Period) - Certificate of Compliance ;2007-2008 Rental Period; 3. ?he Punning Commission will review the license annually and revoke the license if the property is in violation of the St. Joseph Code of Ordinance a-The City Office will place a notice in the St Joseph Newsleader when the owner occupied rental licenses are reviewed and wilt accept public comments. "i~Z~ Yes No ;~ R!/A (" Yes ~ No ;j~ N/A X Yes ~ - Nc ~ N/A Yes r' Nc >`j< N/A IX Yes f-- No r N/A r----~---------- -_~- _-___-.__ __..~_p__ _._e ------- The following Ordinance Violations or ccmpiaints have been iWeed notices 9/24/08 and 6/11/08 receives by the City Gffices or Police Department ~l hey took care of the weeds themselves i Ownership Copy of deed showing Requirement Requirement ~ 50 % ~ 00% interest. must be attached fulfilled °~ Yes i - No ;~ N/a hereb affirm that m rimar residence is ,-r °~ ± 1`~"f ~~~~t' u~'` ~~~ Y Y p Y _~_________ __-__ and that I am the owner of reeord a! the property subject to the Interim lJse Permit v~~hicf~r is being renewed by this ap plication, i understand that the interim Ilse Permit may be revo~Ced if any information on the renewal application is false ~ . . ~/ N J ~~. _. Signature '` ~ ~'d [~'aie =may ~~I) ~ ~ ___. __ J _- I • ! • a ,-' ~~ ; ~ '.~ £•-. -_ ~. ^ • • • •j a • • • s • ^ • • • • ^ • • • ^ • • ^ • • ^ • • r • State of NIN • ^ • • • • • • • • • • • • ^ • • l ) • ^ County of Stearns J G r~ -y-~ / ]" C)n this LZ day of ~/L~ t ~ 20 ~e ;before me ~~/ / / ~(~ `~ nn ,\ c~Z`~'t ey a notary public, personally appeared ~_ ~f . ; ~ _ proved on the basis of satis ~actory evidence to be the person~srwhese name (~} is ire) subscribed to this instrument, ~ acknowledged (he/str~/tl~y} execrated the same V~/fitness rr,y hand and official seal. ~ ~ f`_ ~ ----- ,at~~. PATS ~ J PQONEY ~ NOtar' Si ctiire 1 ~L ~ SE Y 9r'~ ~ '~ AL ;r? 0` t•I'.1TAriY F'UB~IC =5 t49tNNESOTA r ~~~~..~,,.~° My Commission Expires Jan. 37, 2011 NO DRAIJO ~R £f1T'FFiE AWD QAi.E - J13'UT1~ ~`~• 531~a. boo OFFICE OF COUfJi Y RECORDER STEARNS rCUCJTti', dAIrJNESOTP -.~~ Document to 1242747 '- ... Certitied Filed; andlrir Recarded on ,. , .., _'-" e ~.,~ r 11-02-200 ~ at 11:50 A M T' r uIANE GRUNDHOEFI:R STEARNS COUNTi RECORDER QUIT CLAIM DEED: IND]VIDUAL TO JOINT TENANTS STATE DEED TAX DUE HEREON: S~Itf" ~ (~ j DATE: August 18, 2007 FOR VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, DANNY B. RORABECK and KATHLEEN RORABECK I-Iusband and Wife, and LAKE DANIEL RORABECK, a single person, Grantors, hereby convey and Quit claim to, DANNY B. RORABECK and KATHLEEN RORABECK, as joins tenants between themselves an undivided one half interest and to JAKE DANIEL RORABECK as a tenant in common, an undivided one half interest Grantees; real property in STEARNS County, Minrresota, described as follows: / Lot 1, Park Terrace, Stearns County, Minnesota. The Consideration given for this instrument is less than 5500.00. The sellers certify that they do not know f any wells located on the within real estate. `~ d~ DA Y $~RORABECK. KATHLEEN R(aRA~BFsE1C !~ 3 ANI)/L RORABECK 19 T8fS14 11/82/607 11:21:31 e7ea~ssl DEm Tz x STATE OF MINNESOTA P p 1 D 1.65 COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ~~ ~~~~ The foregoing 'nstnunent was acknowledged before me this day ofll~tgtlst, 2007 by Danny B. ora and Kathleen Rorabeck, husband and wife and Jake Daniel Rorabeck, a singl er THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY: David L. Scattarella Attorney at Law .1350 Xmces Avenue North Minneapolis, MN 55412 ,34,<~a^rw~-PATRICK J R70i~EY ice' NOTARY Fil:~'_iC 3 ~ ~ 12N13NI~s~r`L _ `'4+„~,.,w,".~._YyC°mdMSIOIiE:piros~sr..91,ZOt1 ?AX ST.4TEtvtITt75 FOR T}Ib REAL PROPERTY DESCTtIDED IN 7H1S If STRL7.SEh7 SHOULD aE SENr TO' barmy Ei. Rorabeck / %Alternative Mortgage Options 625 Commerce Dr., Rtn 215 Nudson, WI 54016-3278 SCR 1 of~ .{~' - ~3~ rao a4s_tt~o~~T T: x>=s twa 7P.ANSFER~ ENTERED ~Y~ 1 - 020~'l At?J17DFi ' / ' ~ R. , YG: V 1 1 OFFICE OF COUI'JTY RECORDER ~~ STEARPJS GOUPlTY, MlrJriESUTA ~,..~ Document# 1242748 ---- ~P CertRied, Filetl, and/o~ ReCO/tled on ~~, ~. 'v 11-02-2007 at 11:50 AM JrANE GRUNDNOEFER ^~ STEARPJS CCI:NTY RECORDER ~~` ~~ CONTRACT FOR DE)EA INDIVIDUAL SELLER TH)(S CON'J<')EtACT FOR DEED is made on the Twenty~igth day of October, 2007, by Danny B. Rorabeck and Kathleen Rorabeck, husband and wife, Sellers, and Christopher Morgal, Purchaser. Sellers and Purchaser agree to the following tams: 1. PROPERTY DESCRIP770N, Sellers hereby sell, and Purchaser hereby buys, real property in Stearns County, Minnesota, described as follows: An undivided one-half interest in and to Lot 1, Park Terrace, Stearns County, Minnesota. Sel]ers certify that they do not know of any rJells located on Property Together with all hereditaments and appurtcnarrccs belonging thereto. 2. TITLE. Sellers warrant that the title to the Property is, on the date of this contract, subject only to the following exceptions: ~ - - (a) Covenants, conditions, restrictions, declarations and easements of record, if any; (b) Reservations of minerals or mincrJtl rights by the State of Minnesota, if ~Y: (c) Building, zoning and subdivision laws and regulations; (d) The lien of real estate taxes and installments of special assessments which are payable by Purchaser pursuant to pazagraph 6 of this contract; and (c) The following liens or encumbrances: ANY OF RECORD. 3. DELIVERY OF DEED AND EVIDENCE OF TITLE. Upon Purchaser's prompt and full performance of this contract, Sellers shall: (a) Execute, acknowledge and deliver to Puuchaser a GENERAL WARRANTY deed, in recordable form, conveying mazketable title to the Property to Purchaser, subject only to the following exceptions: (i) Those exceptions referred to in paragraph 2 (a), (b), (c) and (d) of this contract; n Liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters which Purchaser has created, suffered or permitted w accrue after the date of this contract; and (iii) The following liens or encumbrances: (b) Deliver to Purchaser the abstract of title to the Property or, if the title is registered, the owner's duplicate certificate of titic. 0 SCF..~of_~_._ S ! ~~IIFUE /'V~pug l~;;Ci~-, S? ,'GSC';~Y;, lei\~ cF~] .n T~ 1.1 ~ , ~ t '.~ 7' 1(~ ~; f ~ O1~ ~~ ~ :~' I- t~~~ A 1_ l) f~ 1 ?~l ~ f I i ~ l'~9 Ll ~;~ l ~, l' )~ I~ ~~ ] 'T Applicant Name Tom Dullinger Address 3u Ccllege A.ver~ue N 1or''ing !, R"~, Sir~gieram,ily t".' B ~, Central Busness B2, I ig~wzy Business Date of issuance Mar 2C, 2008 CcnCitions '. Aporcval of the Renta i lousing Inspector Expiration Date Mar 3, 20t "i Rental Registration Pees Paid (2007-2008 Rental Fericd) rjr Yes No i~l/A - Certificate of Corr.p!ian; e Issued ;2061-2008 Genta! Period] jX Yes r - No + N/.A 2 1 he Planning Commission will review the !icense annually assuring the property ~s iX Yes -" Nc !~!/A maintained accorcrnq to tree St, Jeser~h Code of Ordinances. The license will be renewed cn compliance. =. The Interim Use Permit shall expire when the majority of the property is redeveloped as _ Yes - Nc rX N/A commercial or within three years of March ?, 201 ~, whichever comes first. 4. If the area surrouncing 34 College Avenue N is not ready for cornmerciai development, r - Yes r- Nc IX N/A Tom Dullinger may apply for a three year extension which will be subjecet tc items t and 2 above. The following Ordinance \/ioiaticns or cemp!aints have beer j- _--^_-^--____---_^- _-~--___._ .~--_~__ ~._.~~!__.__ received by the City Offu.es o! Felice Department, 'Nc Violations 2007 2008 Rental Period i Ownership Copy of deed showing Requirement Reou~remenr r_ 5C % ~"" "100% Interest must be attached fulfilled r- Yes Ne X N/a hereby affirm that my primary residence is c ~~• C __.-~i~ ~~ ~;_-,v,~;~ acrd that I am the owner of record of the property subject to the Interim Llse Permit which is bc~^ing renewed by this application. I understand that the Interim Ilse Permii may be revoked if any infiormation on the renewal application is false. ~igrature ~ t~,,9 ie ~ ~~_ CtalE of M N County of Stearns /l 'q //,, On this~day of , 20 U ~ before me ~ ~NG ~~1(~-' a netar~ y public, personally appeared SU `~ ( proved on the basis of SaI!Sfactory evidence tc be -he person(s) Whose name (sj Is (are Subscribed tC :his irStr~~me^', and aC~:noWIeCIGed (he/She/they) FXe: timed ?nP. Same. ',J`,/itn c,5 ,m, ~rd Of?I,'.lai Seal. 7.1 ~ ~ ~ q~ SP,RA~ BA ~C~ ` NotarySignatt;re /~~J J,~.~. ~//,/,`^ - ~; S~OTARYFUE?lIC MINNESOTA ` WWI` v"~ ---- - ~~ -~~. My Commission Expires Jan. 31, 2010 4 Print Corr;; ~...~ ~ _t ,f JUL 2 8 2008 CITY OF ST. JOSEPH N'~r'~k;e' Ol ! e!"'ar'iS Extensio~~. Date N/P. ~52iij ~.~7 /2v I I Print i orrr~ F JUL 2 ~ 2008 ~~l'T'1-.~1t~~"I~ll3;~;~ l~t~P l~f'~'1.~~''1~L l).F~ _(?~'"I f~:~R~~~~ i15Ir P~~}~N73'h Applicant Nar!P Student Housing I I C Adcress i 19 College Avenue N Zoning ~ R1, Singe ~ amity Bi, C er~trzl Busness ; ' B2, ~,ighway Busness Date of issuance Mar 20, X008 Fxpiraticn Cate Nlar 3, 2011 Ccnditions. 1 Aporova! of the Rental Hcusing Inspector Rental Reg strticn Fees Paid (2007 2GG8 RPn~a; Period) Certificate of Compliance Issued (2007-2008 Rental Period) 4i- c; i , ,iOSEPH f~!umber Gf i enznts s Fxtensor~~ Dzte N/A 2 i he Planning Commission will review the license znnuaily assuring the property is ma~ntainec according to the St, Joseph Code of Ordinances. The license will be renewed on compliance 3 the Interim Use Permit shall expire when the majority of the property is reaeveloped as commercial er within three years of March 3, 2011, whichever comes first rX Yes ~ No N/A X Yes NC N/A X Yes No .._ N/A j-- Yes ~" No X N/A 4. Ir the area surrounding 119 College Avenue N is nct ready for commercial development, f Yes Nc ~X N/A Student r lousing l LC may apply for a three year exter;sion which wilt be subject to items 1 and 2 above _..-------------..-..a.__-~---- Thefollowing Ordinance violations or complaints have been received by the City Offices or Polio e Cepartment ~No violations 2007-2008 Rental Period Ownership Copy of deed showing Requirernent Requirernent -~ 5G % ~~ 100% interest must be attached fuifiiier,~ i Yes ; "LL No , c N/a I hereby affirm that my primary residence is ,'~~=~~ ~ay~7~~:~~';~,c c,~ ~ ,~'~ and that I am the owner of record of the property subject to the Interim Use Permit whit}; is being renewed by this application. I understand that the Interim Use Permit may be revoked if~ny infarmation ary the renewal application is false, Signature __ ~> ~'~ 'l~~y' C;a*-e ~' - ,~ ;'' ~~ ~=~ State of M.1I County of Stearns _ , i ~~ (:n thlS / 'j/ day Of --ol (%.i~ , 20 ~' ~ ,before me ! ,~-i.":r~~.~ ~~3_~ej ~ ~ ~i1L ~~ ~~ t _ ~ ~ , a no ary public, personally appeared ;'~' 1= J~~ ~-i~"-'"7 ! proved On the bdsls C` SatiSfaCtOry eV~dP.r1Ce to iJe the per50n(S} WiIOSe name (s) S (a''e} subSCri;eC tC thlS inStrUment, and acknowledged (he/She/they eXPCt~lted The Same V4`I?WPBS mV hand and OftlCld! sea.. ~ ~ / ~ ' ~~ / ~,n~n/+n ~ a.1n.~/~,+,/v~rn~n~nnv+nMnnnt, ~ ; i; No*.ary ~ignat:.rP i ~,1.~r>t-~_~i._ /.~' ~L ~~d~ ~,t ~.Y-e-r-•~ ~[AL ~~? .; a~ ~'~ii - 4 ~ ~ itiot;rry r ub1~~>Asinn~ota V'h~~Y+/S^~'N'~/+°~"V+!`~JYy't'JtiM~Ytio*1+1r'~ Print Form Phone Log Date Jun 30, 2008 Time 4:00:00 PM Initials jw Last Name Conway First Name Parents of Patrick Phone Number ~- Call Back Number ~- Other email address ~~ ~ Address 35 - 2nd Avenue NE City/Zip St. Joseph Company ( Miscellaneous (` Return Call (' Complaint (: Following up on call (" Inquiry (' Other Stopped in office regarding rental Summary of Mr. & Mrs. Conway came to the office to discuss the property owned by their son Patrick at 35 - 2nd Conversation Avenue NE. The property is currently rented to a family and Patrick does not live at the same. His parents have indicated that Patrick has graduated and moved tot he Twin Cities where he has a job. He was not aware that he could not rent his house. In fact it was for sale at one point but a professor at the College rented the house and he removed it from the market. I told the Conways that the City had started a file to investigate the rental as we have were notified that the property was not occupied as an owner occupied rental. They questioned the position of the City and why we do not allow rentals and if it is better to have vacant homes. I explained the City is trying to balance the neighborhoods between short term and long term residents. They questioned if they could apply for a variance to which I informed them that anyone can make application for a variance but the Planning Commission must follow the statutory guidelines and they must prove a hardship other than financial, the variance cannot be as a result of the petitioner, and they cannot receive rights denied by others in the same zoning district. I also advised them that the process is costly and it is unlikely they would be successful. We discussed the timing for notifying the residents and I informed them that I did not think 60 days was unreasonable. They questioned if Patrick could still rent if he declared it his primary residence. I informed them that I could not make the determination but the City is aware that he has not lived at the residence in the past 12 months and the Planning Commission would be receiving this information. They will have to convince the Planning Commission that it is his residence. Mrs. Conway stated that he travels with his job and would only be at the residence one and awhile, when he is not on the road. I again informed them that it is not for me to judge, they have to present their case. File Location rrrti cry r r. ~c~cptt Planning Commission Agenda Item 8 MEETING DATE: AGENDA ITEM: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: August 4, 2008 Public Hearing S & H Partnership a. PURD Amendment b. PUD/Special Use Permit PREVIOUS PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: In December 2001, the Planning Commission was presented with a concept plan for the development known as Graceview Estates. The proposed developed was a mixed use development with curvilinear roads with varied setbacks and home styles. In 2002, after considerable negotiation, the Planning Commission and City Council approved the PURD entitled Graceview Estates as it was presented. The development would then be developed in phases, as is development today. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Staff has completed considerable research regarding the submittal of S & H Partnership to construct the multi-family portion of Graceview Estates. The project includes two apartment buildings, 35 unit and 40 unit, two four unit and one duplex. The original preliminary plan approved by the City included two forty unit buildings, one ten plex and one eight plex for a total density of 98. The proposal before the Commission is a total of 88 units constructed in phases. Tom Jovanovich has reviewed the material and will be providing a legal opinion tomorrow, Friday. It will be forwarded to the Commission as soon as possible. When the hearing notices were mailed to the property owners within 350 feet we included a copy of the original concept plan and corresponding preliminary plat along with narrative explaining the past events. In an effort to try and provide a further understanding of the original plat, I have attached the minutes from the Planning Commission and City Council. In 2001 the City did not have formal application forms nor did we enter into Developer Agreements for PUD's. As you know that process has changed and the City becomes very specific in Development Agreements. In reviewing the proposal before the Council we had to pull out the Ordinances that were in effect at the time the application was received by the City. Tom Jovanovich's letter will address the impacts, but in short, once the City approved the preliminary plan the developer has a right to develop the property as long as it is consistent with the preliminary plat. This is the same process that is used for housing development and the recent Coborn's Plat. The area is planned much like a Comprehensive Plan and then as each phase is developed a final plan is submitted. In 2002 the Ordinance included a section on PURD (Planned Unit Residential Development) and allowed for mixed density within a single development without the need to rezone. Therefore all of Graceview is zoned R1 while it has components of R3 (attached townhomes). I have included the pages from the Ordinance. For this reason, the developer will not need to rezone the property and it will be withdrawn from the agenda. The housing development is administered under the same guidelines. The City changed the sideyard setback on the garage side from five feet to ten feet. The new set back does not apply to Graceview. The developer has met the requirements of the Ordinance and they are not seeking relief. The initial review of the project used the existing R3 Ordinance which has more regulations than the previous version. Therefore you will see some of the comments based on the existing Ordinance, but the developer has agreed to incorporate them. During the staff discuss we also requested that the developer provide an easement on the west side of the development for a potential connection to CR 121. Again, he is not required to do so, but agreed. The developer has also agreed to provide a courtyard or recreation area on the grounds. You will see from the plans that a landscape plan has been submitted and they have tried with trees to provide a buffer. The developer still needs to go through the hearing process to amend the PURD to allow the additional building (duplex) and the Ordinance past and present require multi-family development beyond 12 units to complete the PUD and Special Use Permit process. I understand that a petition is being circulated protesting the rezoning and I have included some of the emails that have been circulated. Again, Tom's letter will explain in further detail. There has also been concern about the building being student rental. As you are aware the City cannot prohibit student rental. The developer has indicated that the units will be market rate and are not guided for college housing. In addition, the College of St. Benedict and St. John's has announced their intent to require four year residency. This requirement will significantly impact the existing rental units. I have attached a memo from CSB confirming the decision. I have asked the City Engineer and City Attorney to be present at the meeting. If you would like additional information please let me know and 1 will see what I can do. ATTACHMENTS: Hearing Notice, Site Plan and Plan, Original Plat information, Miscellaneous information REQUESTED PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: . ~. CITY OF ST. OS~PH 1 WWw.cityof stjoseph.com City of St. Joseph Public Hearing The Planning Commission for the City of St. Joseph will be conducting a public hearing on Administrator Monday, August 4, 2008 at 7:45 PM. The purpose of the hearing is to consider the following: ~udy Weyrens 1) Amendment to the Graceview Estates PUD approved in 2001; 2) Re-Zoning of property described below from R1, Single Family to R3, Multiple Family. 3) Special Use Permit and PUD to allow the construction of two apartment buildings with a total of 75 units, two - four plexes and one- duplex. Mayor AI Rassier The proposed development site is legally described as Outlot A; Graceview Estates 2. The PUD Amendment, Zoning Amendment, PUD and Special Use Permit applications have been Councilors submitted by S & H Partnership, 229 - 5"' Avenue South, Suite 101; St. Cloud MN 56301. Steve Frank Rick Schultz Renee Symanietz Judy Weyrens Dale ~1Uick Administrator __.__ _._ ~ ~,`L~;. ~~ ~ ,~ ..,~ ~.r, ~. a t~ s~,,a ~-- ,, ~ _ .s,. ~ - ~- ti r,, :cr ~,, ~, ~''~~ j ___, Outlot A, Graceview Estates 2 zs College Avenue North PO Box 668 Saint ~oseph, Minnesota 56374 phone 3zo.363.72oi Fax 3zo.363.o34z PROJECT NARRATIVE S & H Replat of Graceview Estates 2 is a plan consisting of apartments and townhomes. The plan consists of a total of 85 units and is broken down as follows: Graceview Apartments -1 - 40 unit building with 18 tuck under parking stalls 1- 35 unit building with 14 tuck under parking stalls Townhomes 2 -4 Plexes and one duplex When the PUD for Graceview Estates was approved in 1991, the plan for the area being replatted included two forty unit apartments; one eight plex and one ten plex. (See original concept and preliminary plat map) The proposed development is consistent with the original plan and is actually reducing the density of the original development area. The original proposal in 1991 was a concept plan and as each phase was developed, final plans were submitted. The original concept plan serves as the master plan for the area and cannot be changed without an amendment to the PUD. Therefore, the PUD must be amended due to the newly proposed townhouse portion of the project. The original concept plan illustrates two buildings, one eight plex and one 10 plex with a maximum density of 18 units. The proposed plan has three buildings with a maximum density of 10 units. The additional building requires the PUD Amendment. oha,~~oPa~ Phase i-zoos Phase 2 - 2008/2009 The proposed project will be constructed in phases as Phase z-zoio illustrated on the right. The phasing schedule is subject to change based on market needs. Apartments - A management company will take care of the operations/maintenance of the apartment property. This includes the maintenance of the buildings, pavement, storm pond, lawn care and snow removal. Each apartment building will have a community room and work out facility. A washer and dryer will be furnished for each unit in the apartment and each unit will include a hookup for a future fireplace. There will be an elevator in each building and the tuck under garages will have access through the hallways eliminating the need to go outside. Townhomes - An association will be created for the townhomes and will be comprised of all the owners of the townhome units. The association shall maintain all properties and common areas and shall assess individual property owners a proportionate share of the joint or common costs. Items to be maintained by the association include, but are not limited to, maintaining the exterior of the buildings, lawn maintenance and snow removal. PO BOX 668 PHONE (320) 363-7201 25 College Avenue North FAx (320) 363-0342 CI'h/ Of $t. 7oseph St. Joseph MN 56374 E-MAIL jweyrens@dtyofstjoseph.com wEa SITE http://www.dtyofstjoseph.com DataViewOnline Map Page 1 of 1 Outlot A - Graceview Estates 2 i '~ ~ i i 55 -~ HST (~ ~'~ . '' ~ aFN 5T ~' r , ~ S~~ _ 2 ~~ 7 -~~~I ~ r- m ~ ~ ~ ~' 7 ,- r T ~ ' J ~ Y- ,-+} ti~'1' '~: ~ iL~n. ±-1-J~1! _-" S TA ST`~~ _ n~1 r ,i.l-~ _ _M4Plk~EsC1 'yam= ,~ S-~~ht YT ~'k 'y ~'~.'~S'`S,~ Mt; - r-t-~'-TT~~ } n:. I ~ ~ ~I ~~, 'tyI i ~ ~ J• Jai ~ ti~~~t f~ ~~,~ I~ I ~ _i ~ fit„ f ~'~~1~- ~,I- '` ~1 ~ ~ `` Y. -y..~1fr . et' Y'I-r`" J~ ~.` ~-`1 m ~~I~' - ~, ,'--1 ', -~l I t ~7rt4'~1 ~ ' ' ~ i' r~ `'~ ~r t''^.+ ~ ~ C`-1 ~~ { p.BLE ST E . _{ rm_ ~ ~~I f3AKEft 5T E' _ ~ I III ~S' " r ? ~~ a --~ 4 s ~~ fiF.tCEH ST E , ~ T. - - L~t, ~'~~ ~_ ~ `~ ~ __ ~ - ~ i~4~ry,~CA1lA1MAY S t i . h- w_ - r ~ ~ ~ ~~. Y ~~(~yt. '•7 t w ~'. M +~r ~~ ~ , f . l .~ c i~T,"1°, ,.. y .. i ~fY s. :'1- .,l ,..ti. '~. ~ ,. I I_1J ~ t ~~;~_ L lu.-i~_L pA4atvFSUTA'ST E rJ, -} c ~. t ~~ Tf r ~~~ S T 'I ~~ ~~ ~~'~STE ~! ~~Sr~ ESTE ~-'~'ri_ ,u u rt '~' ~ m' u3 g Y'' ¢ ' F.' ~ ~!+ GRAi:k~~ IEtV b7T ;~~ ~'~' r` I' I~ ~ 1 ~ ~ _~ ~ Q ~ a , <' ~ W +~~,~ ~,, ~ t ~ ~ LI . ~ r DALE. ST E - {y' t+L tsa V'~ Y ~~ ~~ ~ ~ hC ~;: ~~~` A fr ~~J J' --~I ~x ~~'/Y.rtt~i m +,~j ~ - ~ ~ ~ 2 ~ ~~'~ t 11 Disclaimer: This map is neither a legally recorded map nor a survey and is not intended to be used as one. This map is a compilation of records, information and data from city, county, state and federal offices, and is to be used for reference purposes only. https://portal.sehinc.com/sehsvc/html/dvo/mapLayout.htm 7/22/2008 APPLICATION FOR SUBDIVISION REVIEW City of St. Joseph 25 College Avenue North St. Joseph, MN 56374 PH: (320) 363-7201 FAX: (320) 363-0342 APPLICANT(S) NAME: S&H Partnership DATE: 7-] 4-08 ADDRESS:229 5'" Ave. S. Ste 101; St. Cloud. MN 56301 PHONE NUMBER(S):320-251-8284 FAX: PROPERTY OWNER(S) NAME (if different from Applicant):Same ADDRES PHONE NUMBER: FAX: PLEASE ATTACH ANY ADDITIONAL NAMES, ADDRESSES AND TELEPHONE NUMBERS OF ANY OTHER PERSONS, FIRM AND CORPORATION HOLDING INTERESTS TN SAID LAND. 1/We, the undersigned, hereby make the following application to the Planning Commission and City Council of the City of St. Joseph, Steams County, Minnesota. (Applicants have the responsibility of checking all applicable ordinances pertaining to their application and complying with all ordinance requirements): A. Application is hereby made for: (Applicant must check any/all appropriate items) Preliminary Plat Review x Final Plat Review Planned Unit Development Plan Review Minor Subdivision Review B. Parcel Identification Number(s) of Property; Legal Description of Property: (Please .Attach Metes & Bounds Description) Outlet A, Graceview' Estates 2, St. Joseph. MN, according to the recorded plat thereof C. Required lnformation: 1. Name of Alat: S & H realate of Graceview Estates 2 2. Location W of 4'" Ave SE St. Joseph Development Manual Forms for Platting, Zoning, and Building Application for Subdivision Review Updated 04/04 3. Gross Area: 6.96 acres 4. Number of Lots: 5. Current Zoning Classification(s): PUD 6. Desired Zoning Classification(s): PUD 7. Cun ent Zoning Classification(s) of Adjacent Parcels: PUD 8. Name of Pending Street Name(s) Included in Development: None 9. Name & Address of Land SurveyorlEngineer: Linda Brown. Tom Herkenhoff. Bonestroo, 3717 23'a St. S.. St. Cloud. MN 56301 D. Does the proposed preliminary plat require rezoning? Yes, Explain N/A No E. Is the proposed preliminary plat consistent with design standards and other requirements of the City of St. Joseph Subdivision Ordinance, Zoning Ordinance and Comprehensive Planning documents'? Yes, Skip to F No, if `No" applicant must complete items below in italicized print No' applicant must complete items below in italicized print The request(s) which //Gt% desire for our property require a variance from the following section(s) of the St. Joseph City Code. Section: Section: Section: Proposed variances(s): What special conditions and circumstances exist which are particular to the land, structure or building(s) involved ivhicla do no! apply to the land, structures or building(s) in the same coning classification (attach additional pages as needed? Do any of the special conditions and circumstances result from your own actions (if the answer is yes, you may not qualify for a variance}? Il'hat facts and considerations demonsfl•ate that the literal interpretation of t/re -Doing or subdivision code or St. Joseph Development Manual Forms for Platting, Zoning, and Building Application for Subdivision Review Updated 04/04 other Cit}~ code/plan would deprive you of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district :a~der the terms of the zoning code (attach additional pages as needed)? State your reasons fw• believing that a variance will not confer on •you any special privilege that is denied h}> the code to other lands, structures or buildings in the same dish•ic•t: State your reasons for believing that the action(s) you propose to take is/are in keeping with the spirit and intent of the code? State your reasons•for believing that a strict enforcement of the provisions of the code would cause undue hardship. Undue hardship mean that the propertti~ in question cannot he put to a reasonable use if used under the conditions allowed by the code. Economic• co~7siderations alaTe shall not caastitute an undue hardship under the terms of this code as referenced instate statutes: F. Describe the physical characteristics of the site, including but not limited to, topography; erosion and flooding potential; soil ]imitations; and, suitability of the site for the type of development or use contemplated. St. Jpseph Development Manual Forms for Platting, Zoning, and Building Application for Subdivision Review Updated 04104 G. Describe the fiscal and environmental impact the proposed development will have on adjacent property owners and the City of St. Joseph. H. if Application is for a PUD, provide a statement that generally describes the proposed development and the market which it intends to serve and its demand in relation to the city's Comprehensive Plan and how the development is designed, arranged and operated in order to permit the development and use of neighboring property in accordance with the regulations and goals of the city. 1 . Applicants for preliminary plat review must provide with this application the names and addresses of all adjoining property owners within 350 feet of the subject property. J. Attach completed copy of applicable submittal checklist(s) with application. I/We understand that any work to be done will require reimbursement to the city for engineering, consulting, mapping or studies that may have to be done in conjunction with this subdivision. This includes any fees in conjunction with preliminary or final plats. In addition a check for the appropriate fee(s) must be submitted along with the application. By signing this application below, I/We are hereby acknowledging this potential cost. ~ ~-~ ~, ' Applicants i ature 5 a- ~ ~ Prope wners Signature Date ~ -- `~ -d ~ Date St. Joseph Development Manual Forms for Platting, Zoning, and Building Application for Subdivision Review Updated 04/44 Information - 2008 S & H Final Plat ~~ r;~.. ti.,,a ~: ~r x ~ ,~ + ',~s^.~i~ Y.~?_ ~ `~ 00 O O N t .~ _~ 7 n C C ~"~ 0 61 Q ~ L ~ L ~ ~ a Q O ~ ~ a u-, ~ = rn v o2S N 0 V1 N v N O N O N a~ c O L 4 .-w O M iD L/l Z 0 U a c ~C G A 4 +~.~ G d C O i .; C W a .` d Gl C .~ W C .~ ~ O ~ o ~ ~ ~ °~ i C C1] rh v o ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ _ ~ _ U _ ~ ~ O ' ~ O M .+ . M U7 ~ '-'i ~ ~ l!l i ~ ~ ~ ~, Z N C1 C ~ z ~ ~ ~ O ~ Q Q ~ O i ~ V ~ M ~ v ~ O i ~ N o v ~ ~ a o v ~ u c t V n ~ L ~ ~ o ~"~ (/) a Q U N U1 a `W /_ L L Z wV W .O L a rn i ~ ~ d N N a _ Vi N E O ~ O C a~i '~` ~ G N ~ C 'O •N G Y N j C ~-' ~ a '. a+ r ~' 3 ~ °' ~' v a a a .~ 'c ~ ~ in r~ a :~ rn c ~ ~ c ~o > N aCi w v o, E ~ E ~ 'x ~ m ~ E ~ O ~ Y V A ~ d ~ 7 "~ O L LW F- ; Vl C ~' c r a c ~. 3 'c i ~ .~ O C a A ~ N ~.,~ C ~.- E ~ N ~ 'N G C N U C ~ O~ ~ c E r c n v Q io u3i n > ~ V v~ A N ~ N v ~ i u W ~ 3 ~ ~ ~ d W N ~' O V+ O ~ N ~ C p V ~ c = n ~ ~ ~ ~ O C O D io C O~ O d u O r a m io o+ c 0 s E ~° C n O A 0 c ~p C n C u y~ A a a V N ~O L A W ~+ :~ 0 Y O 3 C E O O ~i C 7 E E u° w t rn c v d C E r n r W To O E d 3 0 N m 61 L 7 O L VI u N 10 L N C fir' N m rn a or a~i E 0 t c O d u w d V d .3 M C ~ O O C s ~o 3 F a L t .3 V C N u V N C d W pQ C n ~0 7 L .~ C d 10 i0 L C ~O n 00 O O N ~` GO O O N t '~ _~ n •~ n~ s y -°- C ~ V ~ C Q N O y d ~. ~ ~ \ ~ Gl 7 O ~ ~ C ~; 0 ! n V ~ i L C ` ~ L ~ ~ T ~ y ` ~ ~ ~ to Q7 a.+ ! ~ ~~ y C ~ O L ~ ~ + ~ VI n } L N d ~ U ~ +=' .Q d N ~ C C _ C ~ N Q) ~ ~ ~ w N .~ ~ ~ n ~ ~ ~ c a 'r '' C o . - , a ~ vii ~~ ~ n ~ p, ai p ~ d 'p a~ L ~ t0 R ~ ~ C M n A y `n M t .~ N ~_+ 3 v ~ ~ N c n v, ~ H ~ ..~ C ~ y -~ s ~ in a ~ c 0 , o ~ a i o r o y ~ i n J.~ u ~ Q7 L c s '. C y ~ O C n y C 1A U L n i' N (p O ~ G C ~ ~ ~ f0 ~ n A ~ ~' c ~ ~ ~ a y) i a y y U1 f0 •L ~ t ~ ° ~ .c s `y" n E !- - 3 F- 1- ~ a 0 M '~ G! d u X d y O C C V ~ ,+ -+ N ~ N L t ~ ~ y N p~ ~ -. O L U a.+ C O C V y C ~ ~ 01 n ~ m m a ~ ~ to •~ ~ ~' c !^ ~ ~ N V ~ ~ 't c v=i N ~ ~ M OC ~ V O ~ ~ c ~ ++ ~ C i ~C ~ ~ C d [D O t O =' ~ O ~=' M ~ IA _ C V ~ C V d ~ O ~ ~ O n a a a a 0 0 N s v _~ r, u O J 0 0 N ._ ~i _~ n _rt / i iii ,~- i ~LIj _ - ~ ~ ~'; ~ , -~ _~ .C 0 0 N t a., ,.-i _~ 7 r'1 ~~ ~ a c~ G .O EEE1E CT 0 0 N s n f~ L _~ X ~..~ ~~ .~ ~+ LL 2 Q V~V d y '~ ~:. ~. .{ ~ Y. ti ~ :~ . ~~d . ~~~~ ~ ~ ~ 1~ ~ .. ~ 5~ ~. R ~ !2~ ~~~G E~~\ • 9 u ; ~,~ vr; -- ..•~ ~...~ w, ~t 9`- lJ 0 0 N t .~ _~ n L 0 i-~ a .~ a~ a a --- - - !~ ^ ^ ^ ~~~ ~aio~.; Ls ^ ^ • ^ ^ ^ ~ ^ , .... _... ,.,, _ •, (1'llilfl ].\9151?{\ ,1\ ..-~ l- a W~ -ui,. ,._ u.~ - i1 ~ ~ ,r _-~ ~ ~ z ~. _ _ _ ~ I ~ I -, 4 ~: . - ~ ~ . - ~ ~ w~ ,~ W~~ ~~ _ (Y ~' I 1 ~ T__,.I ~ ~ ~' ~ -- - - a.. ____. ~a-=r~=Vi=i' - ,~ '. Imo. I~ [ ~~ [ ~ W,: e.~: ,~ ~I i ~y~ o I I ~-7 r- O ~~-. L.._! _. ~. \. P u ~r u E $ o n 0 c O E E c o 1 ` .- 1 I" -- } ! ;~ ,, , ., ~_~~: ~. ~~ 1 ONOd tl31VM Ntl015 ~~~ ~ , ,~ ,,1 1 _ 1 _. I 4 - - ' ~ =yc=_ _i.___- I ~ ~ S11V15 tl30Nf1-M~f1187/M ~ ONOd tl31VM Ntl O1S ~~~.,~,,. 1 ~ ~~ 17Nf101 .Y_'JNIOl109 ~~ ~ ~ ~-r ~~~-~ r,~,roe~'~~.LC=~s'a ,. ~, i ~ r ~, ,,. ~ . , ~, 1 /-' i ~ ~ ~ .. ~ ~ .1 ~ r H~` ; ~ , ~ ~ ~ .~, ~ ~ ~ ' / .~ , ~ ~- - ~ ,, ~" ~ - _~ - - _ _~._ . _..._.~_. _..__ ..y.. ----...~.~_ O 0 N s ~ ., ~ ~~n i _ i~ 1 1 I I ~ ----~ E - - -- - -~ i -' ~ ' -. ,~ ~, ,~,~~,~ O 0 N s v r-, C fC a c .~ r~ a o, 0 0 N ~ ~ Q1 O O O O O O N N N ~ ~ .-~ N M 61 61 6l H N H fp f0 f0 t t t a a a PROJECT NARRATIVE S & H Replat of Graceview Estates 2 is a plat consisting of apartments and townhomes. The overall PUD maximum density range for the property is 86 units, using 2 bedrooms per unit. The plan consists of 84 units total. Graceview Apartments consist of 1 - 40 unit building with 18 tuck under parking stalls and 1-34 unit building with 14 tuck under parking stalls, resulting in a total of 74 units. The layout is consistent with the planned unit development which was previously approved regarding the multi family housing as part of the original PUD plan for Graceview Estates. The density which is being proposed is actually less than what was shown on the approved PUD plan. The PUD plan approved 2 - 40 unit apartment buildings, (provided the density requirements were met.) This project has 74 units, and is in compliance with the density standard. The PUD plan approved 1 - 8 plex and 1-10 plea units (provided the density requirements are met.) This project consists of 2 - 4 plexes and 1 - 2 unit dwelling. This is less density than what was previously approved in the PUD. Apartments: A management company will take care of the operations /maintenance of the Apartment property. This includes the maintenance of the storm pond, the lawn care and snow removal. Each apartment building has a community room and work out facility. Each apartment has one guest accommodations. A washer and dryer will be furnished for each unit in the apartment. There is an elevator in each building. There will be hook ups for fireplaces provided in each apartment unit. The tuck under garage units have access thru the hallways thereby eliminating the need to go outdoors between the vehicle and the apartment unit. Townhomes: An association will be created for the townhomes. The association will be comprised of the owners of the townhome units. The association shall maintain all properties and common areas in good repair and shall assess individual property owner's proportionate share of joint or common costs. In the event that the association fails to maintain properties in accordance with the applicable rules and regulation of the City, or if the City incurs any expenses not immediately reimbursed by the association, then the City shall have the right to assess each property it's pro rata share of the expenses. Items to be Calculations for density for Graceview Apartments Updated 7-21-08 Building A 16 - 1 bedroom = 16*3000 =`48,000 SF 20 - 2 bedroom = 20*3500 = 70,000 SF 4 - 3 bedroom = 4*4000 = 16,000 SF TOTAL =134,000 SF SCHEDULE OF ALLOWANCES (For each parking space provided within the building, or underground, subtract 300 sf) 18 tuckunder parking spaces * 300 = 5,400 SF SUBTRACT (If multiple dwelling site is within 300 ft of an R-1 or R-2 Residence District, add 300 sf per unit, for all units constructed on the site.) The zoning adjacent is PUD, so this would not need to be subtracted, but the density works when subtracting this amount. 40 units*300 = 12,000 SF ADD (If multiple dwelling unit contains indoor recreation and social rooms equal to 25 sf per unit or 1,000 SF, whichever is greater, subtract 50 SF per unit) 40 units*50 = 2,000 SF SUBTRACT TOTAL SF FOR BUILDING A =138,600 SF Building B 11 - 1 bedroom = 16*3000 = 33,000 SF 17 - 2 bedroom = 20*3500 = 59,500 SF 6 - 3 bedroom = 4*4000 = 24,000 SF TOTAL =116,500 SF SCHEDULE OF ALLOWANCES (For each parking space provided within the building, or underground, subtract 300 sf) 14 tuckunder parking spaces * 300 = 4,200 SF SUBTRACT (If multiple dwelling site is within 300 ft of an R-1 or R-2 Residence District, add 300 sf per unit, for all units constructed on the site.) The zoning adjacent is PUD, so this would not need to be subtracted, but the density works when subtracting this amount. 34 units*300 = 10,200 SF ADD (If multiple dwelling unit contains indoor recreation and social rooms equal to 25 sf per unit or 1,000 SF, whichever is greater, subtract 50 SF per unit) 34 units*50 = 1,700 SF SUBTRACT TOTAL SF FOR BUILDING B =120,800 SF Townhomes 10 - 2 bedroom = 10*3500 = 35,000 SF TOTAL =35,000 SF SCHEDULE OF ALLOWANCES (For each parking space provided within the building, or underground, subtract 300 sf) 10 attached parking spaces * 300 = 3,000 SF SUBTRACT (If multiple dwelling site is within 300 ft of an R-1 or R-2 Residence District, add 300 sf per unit, for all units constructed on the site.) The zoning adjacent is PUD, so this would not need to be subtracted, but the density works when subtracting this amount. 10 units*300 = 3,000 SF ADD TOTAL SF FOR TOWNHOMES = 35,000 SF TOTAL AREA FOR DENSITY 138,600 SF (40 unit) 120,800 SF (34 unit) 35.000 SF (10 Townhomes) 294,400 SF TOTAL AREA REQUIRED Total area of property = 303,010 SF Building coverage: 18.1 % (maximum allowed = 30%) Impervious Surface: 44.4 % (maximum allowed = 50%) V602.dwg 7/28/2008 3:36 PM ~.;vr o n ~ ~ a -Doom= N y j ~ °oC°-I a ao = ~ j ~ a m ~ zc c z 3 ~ o N w N .., i \ \ ,~ i i - `, i / / . i ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ / ~ ~\ \ ~ / ~ ... ~ . ~ _ . SOD'00'00"E 169.18 I / ~ I - 1 I - I ~ I I :' 1 I I \ mc~Omom 1 i ~z I I I / \ ~ N<-,mDr I Z m m I oom ~ I ~ i m . - ~ V~ Z O 1 ~ I I O m y ~ I I = I Nzl" _ _ -~~ _ _ -. "• \ i I - min I ~-t .5- I .1 N I I ' V~ I 1 / wo O I~ SO , T ~ I I I j I O ~ OI'1 m I O i ` I Io - I Oti I = I. I it I ~ N Nm I I i ~ I m __ ` .. ... - z .- m I ~ om i I x m o N '~ _ I ~ o I ,~ I - '-- u - I _ r ~ I I I G m A N I '~.>, I.. m I ~~O I mOK.-Z / I f m I N=r I N ~ Dn=mZ 1,~ I -Demo I vi<mom x /. \ ,- I - i tmiiv- r O Nfv \ 1 y I I ~- \ ` i N-i r \ \ 1' ~ I i\ \ 1 I ~ \ \ \ I , ; y i \ \ ~ _ .. ... \ \ ~ \ ~ ~ /~~ r o. VI ~" ~ n ~ C ~ a N n G ~ m d C { `~ ° 3 ~ N m ~~~ ~ ~ p 7 ~ ~ a~aa°.: a Trnn7 a sc~, w ~ ~""m P m c a ° m 9 ~ '~ a ,~ a ; 0 nn c ~ ~ m ~ O - , \\ --~ \ -~ ~ - \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ .. . \ , \ \ •- \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ , O a ry 7 N ~ O w 0) O. p10 fD?O~ar7 pn~10/17NT~p7 y a~ o N eo rn a m N ~a m~~ A~~ W a ai amincoa o a 1Oav^^~ ~~ -~ o~° w °a~m'~ a_m ~^ ~a^° n~ m° 3 - 3 m ° w ~ ~ m ° o ° ~ ~ a m ~ ~>>~o. to ~~~o> gv rm m a c n~~ ~? 7 a a 3~ o a ^, ~o c o m' ~ °mm ~,~~~3m~~rv °o ~ a m ~ ,~+Ufa ~ ~bN oa~•<~ ymjFOn o'er^^°m^°'mo~orj~' °^ O O nl a O N dl m N N H ~ n) m O ~~p, t0 F+ N C 1(DO m~ O O A? 7 N^ N a n ¢p ~< m 3n °,° z 3° ~a~=tea ~°~~,~amQ=°,'~ ooa°o;Z~ ~fDNmN >>~'o~mn a_.^o ~ o ~Zm ~ iO m a a c ~ ,~ ~ ~ 7 2 n m 2 0 CTI N (1i ili Z --I V ~- d f?f n /~Il -U O Z ~ N ~ m' ° LARRY HEIM ~ SURVEY BY : DRAWN BY : DMS SL. CIOYd Off CE 3717 23rd Street South x „ POND ACCESS EASEMENT ~ DESrcrveDer: Saint poud, MN 56301 N ~ c ~ ' ' S & H REPEAT OF GRACEVIEW ESTATES 2 APPROVED BY : DMK Phone: 320-251-4553 Fax: 320-251.6252 ~ gonestmo ~' ST. JOSEPH, MN DATE: 07-2e-O6 0 BONE5TR00 2006 Webshe:www.bonestroo.cpm J i:\[oyo~maauouu~\GAU\Uwg\269809001Vti04.tlwg 7/28/2008 3:39 PM N00'89'01"W 38.30 44.47 NOD'S9'01"W 7~-- ~C-;._.._.~-------- \ / \ of ~ ~ o / i i / \ ^'~ ' ' ° \ \ >N89 00 42 E 53.47 / - ~ ~ ~ / DUI ~ ~ ' i \ , / ml ': ~ - N44'00'43"E 7.07 \ Y ~ V v / - ~ 49.47 \ / \ / ~\ ~ / / / ... / ~\ , ~ / // - / / \ -5- / ~/ ~ ~• / .\ , / ~ __• \ /~/ ~ s \ / / ... 1 \\ ~ =a '---__ ~ \ ~ --i ..- ~ . -. .- i \ \ ~1 / ~ ~ ~\ / \ /// ~ ~ / ~ ~ / ~ ~ ~ / / \ / ~ \ / /~ ~ ` ~ / \ ~ ::: ~ ~ / \ \ ~+3~ [ c ~S rout "" Sn~cx O (A ~' T vl A aC O ~ a V1W O VIN ¢~~ D ~osoo~3w3:c3mo m n „o r N N Ida N '" N O .~ G N mc m N .~i C 7 N n C A C A C n R d C b d O R 0 d O x C N . Son m"mvmv n2.~~n ~ 3np ° 'O rn O1 ~ ~s ° o m o F ~ v< o. c ~.c v T ~ „ a ,~ - ~ Nmo ~ ~ m ~ m ~ m ~ m r °. y v, g rn, '" S v ° m '" ~ n ~ v m D r - _ o al N ° f n p ~ C ~ m ~ 3 ,o, In f1~o nf1~ Dr n° a;+a;;on ~ ~ mn N m ~ N .. N .. y ~ a 1O O ° c < fD O o - ~ -^ M~ a ^ ~~~ N u-, v ~ . `- C O -i o ~3~ n °° ~.°, °~ m uNi ~ m m ~ m ~~ 7 N~ S F 3 p ~ - G7 d rn ^ ~ V wa m In~~~ d ~d mmx:+rc°~ooo°on3a c:~m..m: m n ~ a< Gla? m'°~o mm~m° 3 n N 'o (~ x ~ ° ~ ~ T n a ~ ~ o ~ T N~ ;~ tp~ a m ~~ o~ c ~ ~ o ~ao omp mZ~ ~ o~' mom ~° `n /~0 f1 ?C 3~~Stn , , i o V a .~ N nn S A 3 O 7N ~ W N O A T^ ~ N p ~ a°:~ n y T ~ H H rt O "c v, ~~~ A N W ° °~ nm° ~'O~ ° T ~ N ~ul.,3n+ , m , m^oc°ifDm°iaN~oN°mw3^o`~ .°mm01vfr° O rn m o~3°~ ^Nr°~u°i~~`~~a~3w^u°i~.N+~m~,N.,trn.°.~ s m ~ N Z Z N ~on~ ~ '~~mRom~°m a+A~o~~ m 1mD ~ g '" ~' m on ~ ~ ~ ~3mu,m~g~ ~'"R i t~D~ m mou 0 , c o ~ ~ ~ T m 3 p n m o o T~ o- 0 N o Q m~ .~ ~' i ~' a v ^N° g.l too_ ~ w, ~ o ~ m ° ~~ o ~ to o o SURVEY BY : SL. ClOlud Of'fICE " LARRY HEIM ~ S DRAWN BY : DMS G `O 3717 23rd Street South N ~ o ~ POND ACCESS EASEMENT DESIGNED BY: ~ BOnesl~ ~ ~ c ~ ~ Saint Cloud, MN 56301 0D '" S & H REPEAT OF GRACEVIEW ESTATES 2 APPROVED BY : DMK Phone: 320-251-4553 ~ DATE: 07-28-OB Fax: 320-251-6252 ST. JOSEPH, MN Website:www.bonestroo.mm ® BONESTROO 2008 J T:\2696\269808001 \CAD\Dwg\269608001 Vfi03.tlwg 7/28/2008 3:37 Pu \ / ~ ~ / \ / \ / / \ \ / / / \ \ .., \ / / \ \ / / \ \ \ / / ~` / y/i//~\\ / J~ ~\ //i / :.^,\ \ \ V " S69'S7'OS"W 22.64 lt`:~ \ / \ / _ ~ \ 590'00'00"W 13.53 - ~ / ~ / \ ~;•- / /\ \ / / \ I / \\2`e \\\~ / / I ~.. // %\.. \\\\// I / // ~\\~ \\ / III /// /// m-~,~D,~I \\\\~ \\\' Om =D rK o / / ., ~ \ / // ~rN,im \\ ~ o / r ri / = •,> / /// ~ . '<\ / ~ / ~, / ~ V~ 3 nv1--~ c w,nmomon_nn° Tava <~°° fDmm~m 'a°N^~,°c,,,°'3~°ct,°7~~'"^m°S~~~pa'~"c~u~D,~nc„°'°o°o ^m>; r N~pNa mN,^.<~ ~3.~01~~~~wm'°'~n~c°oD7v c~RoZ°o~~,..3oo~Dr^O['[°~nm ni ~~ 2 F N v~ K Q ~ C H 7~ y d y m m ~ n m ~ N N~ T~ ~ T ~p Q° n Q C 1° ° N~ obi 7 a D (aj h o mac < ° m m~m~ ~o ~ f,am~p u, ~ -I~ Nao ° T v 10 1o y~~m ln.~ n a v, X00°'7::° ° om _~ °ra ~0a~ u1Di~m•^~mm°m°,~o_oa~ma^' wn~~a~O a~ ~,~1t~~o0u,3 r a°o~rf ~°?'^~ a01o,7-~~w r.iufDiRoo- a~Nm~N` 1OR'~man°'°'o~om~~ 0 a~ m m m o ao n a «'< 0 3 N ,,, ~ m 0~^ rn m ;;'' m?~ z~ con 3 o G~ ~ .. d Na ~NO'm'2' '^~W<~o~~"7rnmo'mn~~~3. -^>>~ oauciZ~r3~7 a hl m~ w~aam ~Zn~mF.mo~aoaaa~ayRom~~~N7o'o,°a^n3~~~O0 n ~ c m m o m ~ 0~ a ? °°,~ u, ~~~'" ~ uto m °1 ~,uai ono c via wo o:' '° ~° A ~m °. and m°~mwafD,or,;:w~.m~~~c°' tn~c'^~OC ~°~o~~ '°o°m°~'a .~ c.c ~'~vm a0n ;~ °'0nm ut n a0 inn a~7oi0c -0 nR n a,~m c~arp1DSn~ '°^no'° ~mclo~o0a° °nrnR^ ~ w ~v1`"mA ^o°mTZ~swono~i°~m°o3o~~,°rvl''Nw~waa~m~av~ m O ~ t~ii C a 0~ „C,r ~ b A p, N r~ W O O. 1n a '< a n 0 7. ~ w G .+ ~D 7 n ,a-~ D~ uNi Z n`bi °m 3 '.1 °~~.wica~a'"zmg•tn~'o~b1~a~'J°~~3,,'° ma~~~ovi mono oi.<acn ~ cooao moycwm iO 0a1~~0 rnn _~R^~~ < $nn ONmo~,a ~~'~m O1~~o~o,n ^03~~o6F0v0n1R~ ~ E ~<3m ~~am0 m WmO^n°oc~ °'w~a,°vmc~a~$,~uaia°- :'~ m <~ o~wao ai" ~ a m No~i,oma,~~'a^T ~m ° N c LARRY HEIM SURVEY BY: St. Cloud Office ~ °i o DRAWN BY : DMS < ~ m ,~ 3717 23rd Street South ~ ~„ POND ACCESS EASEMENT DESIGNED BY: ~ ~ c „ Safnt Cloud, MN 56301 ~- goneStroo N x o ~ ` 5 & H REPEAT OF GRACEVIEW ESTATES 2 APPROVED BY : DMK Phone: 320-251-4553 ~ ~ DATE : 07-28.08 Fax: 320-251-6252 ST. JOSEPH, MN _ ®BONE9TR00 2006 Website:www.bonestroo.com Jul 25 08 03:16p Riverside Real Estate. 3202513350 p.l DECLARATION OF PROTECTNE COVENANTS AND RESTRICTIONS S & H Replat of Grace view Estates 2 July 2S, KNOW LL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS, that S & H Partnership, is the owner of all following describ real property: S & h Replat of Grace view Estates 2, lots 3 thru 12, and lot 13, the common ownershi for lots 3 thru 12, in the city of. St. Joseph, MN, Stearns County. These Protective Covenants affect all 1 Q Townhouses lots within S & H Replat of Grace view Estates 2, and lot 13, the common ownershi for lots 3 thru 12. The O rs desire to establish the nature of the use and enjoyment of the Property and do hereby declare a Property subject to the following express covenants, stipulations, and restrictions, as to the use and joyment thereof, all of which are to be construed as protective covenants and restrictions running 'th the title to the Property and with each and every part and parcel thereof, to-wit: 1. These versants are to run with the land and shall be binding on all parties and all persons claiming under th until July 25, 2018, at which time said covenants shall be automatically extended for successi periods often (10) years, unless by vote of a majority of the then owner's of the Froperty it is agreed to change said covenants in whole or in part. 2. If the 'es hereto, or any of them, or their heirs or assigns shall violate or attempt to violate any of the cove ants herein, it shall be lawful for the other owners, individually, or any other person or persons owning y real estate property situated within the boundaries of the Property, to prosecute any proceed' gs at law or in equity against the person or persons violating or attempting to violate any such covenant and either to prevent him, her or them from so doing or to recover damages ar other dues for such viol tion. 3. Invaiid~tion of any of these covenants by judgment or court order shall in no way affect any of the other pro isions, which shall zemain in full force and effect. 4. This P perry and each one of these R-3 Residential lots, thereof shall be used exclusively for single family re idential purposes. No building shall be erected, placed, or altered on any lot until the construe n plans and specifications and a plan showing the location of the structure or structures in the case of y additional outbuilding have been submitted and approved by the Architectural Control Cammitt a ("ACC") as to quality of workmanship and materials, harmony of external design with existing s tares, and as to location with respect to topography and finish grade elevation. No fence or wall, whe er for construction or landscaping purposes, shall be erected, placed, or altered on any Lot without a prior, written approval of the ACC, Jul cc^5 08 03:16p Riverside Real Estate Page 2 4. 3202513350 p.2 a- Home lan A royal. One set of completed prints of the home as well as the proposed Lot selection must be bmitted to the ACC I'or appxaval. Prints must include foundation pla», floor plan, all exterior elevation ,location and width of driveway, and projected finish grades following back-filling and landseap' g. In addition, description infornnaXion on materials such as brick, stone, siding, and roofing as well as a tenor color schemes may be requested. Construction may not be started until the builder and/or o er has received a letter of approval from the ACC; one (1) copy of which will be signed by the boil r and/or owner and retained by the ACC along with the comple[e set of prints. Any substantial change ode following approval must be submitted to the ACC for re-approval, All plans and documen are to be delivered to S & H Partnership at 229 5`~ Avenue South St. Cloud, Iv1N 5630]. b. Archit ctural Control Committee. The ACC shall initially be composed of only two ttlembers. James E Stang a d Lawrence N Heim; they will serve as the sole members of the ACC until the earlier of the folio ; (1) ten (10) years following the date of the recording of this Declaration; (ii) their resignation, death, or isability; or (iii) unti180% of the lots within the Property have been sold. Upon the expiration of the ini 'al term as provided for above, the ACC shall be composed of three (3) members, each wish five (5) y ar periods thereafter until the expiration of these covenants. All fee owners shall be entitled to one vote reach lot owned, regardless of whether or not they have constructed a house upon said lat. Contract or deed vendors may assign the right to vote to the vendees on said contract. No member of the ACC hall be entitled to any compensation far services performed pursuant to the covenants. c. Not erred a Waiver. The failure of the ACC or any owner to insist in any one or more cases upon the strict erformance of any of the terms, covenants, provisions or agreements herein contained shall not be co ed as a waiver or a relinquishment in the future of the enforcement of any such term, covenan condition, provision or agreement. The acceptance of performance of anything requixed to be performe with knowledge of the breach of a term, covenant, condition, provision or agreement shall not be deeme a waiver of such breach, 5. All gle family residences shall be subject to square footage minimum requirements as follows: Jne-sto single family residences: 1,250 square foot minimum with attached garage. 6. Each 1 t may have an attached double car garage. 7. Na bilI oards, signs, or other advertising shall be allowed on the property other than: a. Si s erected for identification of streets, traffic control, and directional purposes; b. Si of a temporary nature advertising property far sale and construction signs. c. 'boxes shall contain names and addresses only. Jul c5 08 03:16p Riverside Real Estate 3ZOc513350 p.3 page 3 $. No nox ous or offensive trade or activity shall be carried on, in or upon any building site, tract or parcel of l d within the Property, nor shall anything be done thereon which may be an annoyance or nuisance t the neighborhood. No livestock nor wild or domestic animals of any kind shall be allowed to roam the ronertv. 9. Theo er of each lot must provide off--street parking for all vehicles used by the residents of the lot; no p 'ng shall be permitted oz~ any common casement roads yr public roads; no junk or wrecked automobil s, inoperable farm machinery, or buses, large trucks, or mobile homes shall be brought upon or kept, o remain exposed upon Property, and no automotive repairs shall be undertaken or perntted on any part o the Property. Each Owner shall be permitted to have and keep upon the Property not more than (i) r creational vehicle, such as one boat and frailer, or camper, provided that no recreational vehicle y be used for residence purposes while on said Froperty and that they can be parked only for a period o 24 hours according to stipulations of this covenant now current or enacted thereafter. 10. No to may be further subdivided until such time as all original lots have been sold. All subdivisions shall be i accordance with the zoning ordinances of Steams County, Minnesota. 11. No discharging of firearms or hunting shall be allowed on any lot or portion of the Property. 12. Comp lance with these covenants shall not excuse noncompliance with government zoning and/or land use dinances upon the same subject. Compliance with government zoning and/or Iand use ordinance of the public authorities shall. not excuse noncompliance with these covenants. 13. Each ~t owner shall be allowed to keep not more than two (2) dogs, two (2) cats provided that they are not ke t, bred, or maintained for any commercial purpose. 14. No filer, basement, camping truck, tent, shack, garage, barn, basement house, or other out- building cted ott the Property shall at any time be used as a residence temporarily or permanently, nor shall any cture of a temporary character be used as residence. No structure intended to be used as a residence may be moved into any lot 15. Any all excess Property family re cture which shall be erected or placed on any building lvt shall have the exterior finish in not more than one (1) year from the start of construction. Within the one (I) year period, building materials, fallen timber and debris shall be removed from the Property and the hall be graded and landscaped to general conformity with the adjacent Property. All single idences shall be completed within two (2) years of the date of the original purchase of the lot. ua:iop page 4 16. No purpose grading own site ; effect the surface el shall be ri natural w 17. No c which is ia] trade or business of any kind shall be carried on, in or from any pari of the Property to those covenants. 13, No garbage, or other debris shall be kept on the Property, and each Property owner covered by these coo Hants shall promptly carry away or cause to be carried away all such trash, garbage or debris, so that th Property belonging to each owner shall be clean and orderly. These IN Drafted b~; Heim, 229 5'" Avenue Sou St. s1~630 H ership. ,M \ James E tang -General Partner, S ~. H Pshp STATE OF MINNESOTA OF STEARNS p.4 soil, sand, or gravel shall be sold or removed from any part of the Property, except for the 'excavating for the construction or alteration of a building on said Property, or for the proper ;reof, and any excess soil remaining from excavation or grading thereof, and any excess soil from excavation or grading, and not otherwise used by the owner in the improvement of his gall be removed by the owner. The elevation of a lot nay not be changed so as to materially surface elevation of surrounding lots. The owner of any land subject to materially effect the vation of the surrounding lots. The owner of any )and subject to these Protective C.ovenant.S >ponsible for the drainage of surface waters from such part of the Property other than by Lawrence NHeim -General Partner, S & H Pshp this 2$a' day of July, 2008, before rne, a Notary Public within and for said County, personally eazed James E Stang, and Lawrence N Heim, to me personally known who being by me duly ern they did say that they are the Partnership of S& H Partnership, the partnership named in foregoing instrument, and that said instrument was signed on behalf of said partnership by hority of its Board of Directors and said Partnership acknowledged said instrument to be the act and deed of said partnership, n Notary Public eRr~ r~Rr ee) Notcry ~ • Mirr+saotc . E a Jan g), shall commence on August 1, 2008, WHEREOF, the undersigned owners have hereunto set hislher hand on , 2008. ~< ~ /~~C 7 . ~6 "~ \\ \ `\ \\ \ N EW T RE ES 1 SHR UDS TYPE ~ ~ ~ i u w b ~ _ ^ UANTITY ~ 7c ~ i L~ 7 ml O A O D LETTER ~^ © ~ SYH90L r' 7 a 7 ~ O a 7 D = = n = i ce 7~0 a Z > D ~ A A = = n ~ 1 z i ~ n D ~ m o p~ o r ~ ~ 2 m ; s z v v R "' m c i ~ E "' D = ~ ~ ~ ~ r 3 <' = ; ~ " D c X z 4 Q A z S r ~1 i V °~ W Q W O V N //~~ 1/ _ m D r D n ~ rn f r m 4 - > > c c = D D m _ F F F F ~ o 0 0 o n ~ i y 0 0 0 0 D m ~ ~ g ~ z ~ of D D D D 7 7 ' 7e 7 7 7 7 ml to R ml 0 o v o <;'' ``\ --T---r-- -- - ~~ I \ I ~ ~ /; i i ~ ~ i i ~ ~ /~ i ~ \ ~ ~~ ~ - T ~/.- ~-- ~~ ~ ~i"~ _ /j PRELIMINARY - FOR BIDDING ONLY ~eT~: ~_~~ ~: eee~„ ~m: , \ -5 and Hlti / '' ~ -\ ~. ~~ \~` ~ ~ ~ ~ i .,1, . - _ . s r y e i e e i a s •mr b • rm w e r i ~ W a I I 5 t ~ s~ O_ tip C j f ~ ~ ~ 3 a o f ~ r~'o n of i o 'T^ ' o o n n or s o c ~ rn ~ ~ s ~1 O (7 D m a O n N~~~ OpAz z_0~ ~Z<r ~dtA omv ADz N~~ ~~w. m m r z r n Dm r mD m rn O r °m 0 z z O 7(l 2 r flr 2 D n m D 4r U D r Ur S 2 m N tlr n D m w W N 0 U_r pl'0< DOAz z_a-< ETON omo A~~ m~ m r 0 n D f) m a O n z r to c m A to Z rn r m D ~_ O z O I v PRELIMINARY - FOR BIDDING ONLY D 4r S D x z >1 m N PLUIftU: U}lY-UC _ - ,-. ;.. A..... , r-p.'. .. r...,-..., . y-,_ - ~ _.... , -. ~ ~.- '--_ ,_~_~. ~,~a _ o P...E~.O.~~.SEIl:.;~~ _ _ ~ -__ ~~~~~_Tha~a docwnav~C6 arq noL!..v;eUd tor_ tiuddmp yel~aa xgntdLn~mk,aed_nxxueelad.~.oyra tmiR _ , . -- - - i ~ ~ _:_.. _.. Ler~ndt v~lid.~-~~ L F___~t~SQ~.r~P.~ - _ _... °~ ~~_ ,~„. Ov .. ,_ .. ... ;_.. - ota n r 34t Ui~1IT - BLbG~ __$ g- r, o~ - r ~ .. ~ ._ ~ ~ - - I'Aerab car i-` Chat ihu la • fcifYCati ~ 9 F tl D P P °~ ~ ~ ~~. R eperP4; b(I Ts'or unebr my Grtct auP or ~~ ort. A- R C N- I T~E C iT S ~~~ P Crvuion . . . __ ~~ ~ ap ~ ~ n~ ~- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r and that I~e~p ,p my tlcsn}Fd Arch~t~ct ~ ~ t ~_ ~... _.-~ ~_.: ~ _/ - _ " . ; APARTMENT , BYTILDI~G ~ ._ . undtf L11Q JaWa _OI Chf ateLa Ot ,CJlt1J•ili$ 1~-w ~~~-P f4 ,, .~ g.~ ~ , , ~ . _- i . ~ __ . I -_i . ' -ST...~L~?TJI3; ~ MN. ~ _ ~ __ . , , _ ~~- ~?5 B/g ~ . ^ dat ~ --- ~~_ o~. __ __~ Bent CI i-MN,GL3 ~ ~ ~ - ~ urf - . Namr N,Q YIAPL ~E- cr-LG~o r3~or s --- - 0 z m r r*i D _~ O z ~ ~ °' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a o { ~' ~ ~ ~ ro °° n ~ o ~ T ro ~ a ~ s N ~ n 3 ~ o 3 ~ `r _~ n D ~ rt ~ n 7 ut 7 ~ ~ IG ~ ^ i-F N ~- .=' ~ . w~~u ^rrr rrra rrra ~~ _~ m m r r~ D --I O Z IJ LIFESTYLE BUILDERS .r! LARRY HEIM • ~ i ~ ~,Wr,,,r.®.,,,.,~,~„v,~„e,.mn X e•-r-o i c zoos dr a ~ ~••~• ~ .d.,e< ~ ~- 3os EAST cEnAa sTREET 4 - P L E rr "°"r''* °°°°~ ~ ~"r' O00®° ° ~O1'" ST. JOSEPH, 1[N 58374 ~wr s - R A0t uems vmr rvmra v~vr un,,.~ar HOME 127.3 ELLEN ^ ar oA! a A• Om YA rmi ruc PHONE: 320-963-8462 raoira ru~os A L OARAGE ~~^` WOLF FAX: 320-363-8629 ~~~e r~rr 00 iii~ii ^~ ~`~. ~ ~ i~~e roro ^rre rus ~~ 3:46 PM • o o ~ z ~ 0 = Z p o c o 0 I I ~ I I x ~ 1 ~ I I I x I I I I I I full A O ~ D G b ~v~ Z m G7 Z Z T m -i D m 1 ~ I n I ^ II i II II ~ II II II ^ ~~ ~a n I la II II II ®®® II ~ ~ a pop S2 ~ p 3 ~.. ~ Z < ~ m ~ ~ m# A F ~ ~ ~ m i 3 0 m v m o ~ 8 x m ~ o m c '° rA _ x °z m ~ O ~Bo ® ~ ~ ~ f p ~ o Z $ m o $ Z ~ x )< rn j ~ ~ I / / \ I en /// ~ /~ ~ ' ~ n / // \ I // /.~ I T. j ~ \\ / / I / I //// cl % I ~ ` ~ \ / ~ /// \\\ I // y ~ I 1 ~ ` in // ~ a I / A I 1 I:l / // \ a I / / ~ m I ro 1 \ ti? / ro / \ r j r190'OQ'00'E 132.52 /~ II~ s'~~gg I _ ~ _ Rlwloee.o2 /// \\ +y. . -. -. '` ~ ~ /S 3'00 ~2~° 1 ;:.: ;, ',~_ ..,._ .. ~rarpeosr n aw //'-' >------ -- B9 S90'00'00'E 289.59 ~ 1 ~r 7D ' / / ._ o ~ f - ° 0 0 0 0 0 -~F' ~-tD•--_.. « 15' RCP ~~ '` ~ ~! ,. // °s I / ~ ~~.- ~ 1 ------------j- W / j ~. ~ i " // (p ; INV- .11 \ 1 _...... 10 FOOT DRANAGE I 1 I / MV+Olw800~ r--------------------------------------- RJD"DTICITY --y- ? // -,µ~~p-. / ~' yr~ ~ 'J \ . ~ EASEMENT I 9' " m ' ~DRAINACE EASEMENT PER DOC NO 1 j ~` -~ - ~ I / / ~ ' ~,~ p i 1021428, GRACEVIEW ESTATES ~ .~ I "~ ~ Ct ! ~ti~(~ I I ~ .. -- ' I ~j Rt __ i ~~,' ,may ~ ~ ~ pyq/~ \ \yYYV/ , , 4 - I , " d , rlb [~ ~ ~ I J! (11 i 1 '~ ~ d' jd" ~'m' .q+ °r `fir) ` 4 ~ ~ / v I II './ o , ~ ~ ~ ~ tip s ~ INV-1oe2a, / - :' .. y yb rl 'Os ..5 FOOT ~ ,A , ~I DRAINAGE AND , ' ~~~7f1T785. . b°j ~~ ~I ~ ~\\\ 1 UTILITY EASEMENT " .~ ,Aa~~d 9 ® ``~ 1~ ~ J ~ ~ " ~~ \ l ~ ~9 dui ``.. ~ , ~ S ~,' ~ ~ \ ~ i ~, ~ ~ O , ' roc-1aee. , ~, •~ ~ ; ~ I I ~ i` 2W+10ar71 1 a ~ ? ~. a \ w \\ \ 1 Y \ 1 ~ LI O ~. /~/ _ r I ~,• \ 1 N ~ ,~ T-- \ ~~ ~~ \\ ~ 1 nwcarx ~~ . thaw ~~ ,~ ~'~ O ~~~~ ~ r ~. ~ ~j~~~ ~ \\ '~' 1 tI~ ~ I I_.... I A~ of ~~~ ~ ~~~w ~ \ 1 / Q \`\ I ~ ~ \ \ " ~ -~ 1O 1wvoa m9° ~,% I ' ~ I w ~. ~ ~ ~ lr-1 ~ ~.\ \\ I / N28'S4'28'W 3528.x...:. I 11' , I \~~~~~ rTt \~\\. (1 ~ V 1 ~ ~ ~ I } ~ ., I ~ ~ 1! I \ ~ ~~~~ 1 1 t 1 i I , q~ 1 I ~ ~-_______ ~ , - ,' I ~ ----------- I ____ I , _~ ,~ I ~ 1 ~8 I ~I, /// -------------- I i _ / I n I i ,~~~~~ C r'' i I ~ 1 I I ~ I .-~~ ~ ~ INV~1 ~ 0 i 1y w IS ~. - ,,. -_~ • _-- - -_~ ~~' _ _ ~; t' _ ~ h7 1 \ N8+k59 1,2 ,'f 12. Ir RcP'~- _- 1 ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ \ rr i4l I/ ~ • J ' I ~\ / I \ 1 ~ ~ ~ a `\ ~ r0 o a0~ ~m~ p~stn 9CN D•~ 9NrNiNO O 0000000000000 0 -1 aA $ Sn a m x ~p ~o? '&~ ~` ~T~mlps= f =° S ~..~-.~~~~~-. a spy S 4N~Om0VmuJ.WN~ > A V WNN'~ ~~m ~~~ QJaG T Z ~r N~~J~A T ~ Z m V N W N ~• 3 4 W ~ O ~ Ojy6 7p m0 O C >> p yvy ~p1 o~ Gpf ~ 0~~3' app m l7 C D No 3 <D~D O A N N ~) P flii~ j D0 ~ J O O.~ A Z (pn rN Z? pIO Z ~D (l) _ ~NNNNNNNNyN!N~' W ~ 2S ~~~rn ~'(1~'~n S~~ ~HN ~ D wrW~=O `' t7~n ~~~~ y>~ ~"m$~~~'~'wY.~.Y.~Eo ~ ~ p~cy o"'m ~g'I~ Gc3Z m °N~~' ICVn ~r~ ~ I~ 1"o'~v I o ~ v ~ F~~p ~~ m Oo ~ ~ ~ ? ~ Ifi ~5 O H > 3^S I FD /D~ mo Oi ~t o to r~ r O m ~ ~~I^ I ~ a C > Vj ~mi'If ~ ~~ O V w OODDO.. ~ » O ~~ 2 gr ~ C 0000 000000 N v DS gS~m o m m m ~m Y~yJ ~yj y f.l D y ~sb~ I.o ~ ~ A a ~ Z~ v ~~~ ~ ~~ s; ~ ~A D ~~~ I ~ ~ gasp ~~ 3 ,. Z~ W ~ (1m n ~p m N Z__ ~t$ A ;-1 ~ ~~ ~A ~ ~m+~L1m o~ ~ N Nm ~O D~ v m 0 v s xemsr orrnY nu. rwx w.w sreorrc imn,nwiwer w.a axerumn"e m~ REVISION DATE swtvEV er: St. CIOOd O//IC! N LARRY HEIM ~,~,~°mm°~f MuM aiNµDE lTTM~TliOf~"A ~Y V~em®rxoresim+a urm ~ °$° CONCEPT PLAN PRINT NAME: EINDA H aROrm w °"Aw" ar ~ °q 3717 23rd Street South O m° I/~~AG~~"r~^~ LOT CHANGES m-xs•oR DES1d+EO er : ue Saint Ooud, MN 56301 p o° ~ OUTLOT A, GRACEVIEw ESTATES 2 App"pyEp,,. ; Phone: 320-251-1553 ~ Bone'Stroo aIGNATURE: R Fax: 320-251-6252 ST JOSEPH, MINNESOTA PATE, m-of-2ooe 23ae2 DATe : 06-li-moe w~:~•~~.~m uc. No. m eoN 6050000050000Q°Q o 4N~°mm VO~Nl UN~j( .. > `~NNNNNNNNNN~"• IR 3 ommuwr"uwuL'iGLia i ~~ O • G1Z an ~~ R@z W ZZ~ ~ ~ i 0 pia a n :,j '+ii~ ~RP~ y mm.. i to ...C .~ ~Q, 1 „ ~ , l ~ ,~NOO~~~•~e1M ~ a c z , ~ ~ : • 20.85 .f~ m .. N00'S9'01'W D71A7 { 8 1 1 \I I I /~ ~ -' \ Q $~ o URA 1 \ I I rn % ~`~-"~` ``~„ lZ0.a ~ ~~~ ~~~~ I 8~\\ \\\n' n~i• ~~~ \\ \\ ~ ~ "~ of '~`' \`, ~~~`~ ~ a~~m ~NRR~ I ~ r\\ \\ ~ N . ~,` ~ t~. ~\r / h:A'i E:S COURT ~ tau ~pS ~\ t $ ~.~. ~~~ `1 , _ , t„ 1 q %i I is ! I \ ~cn ~.Qrr ~ ~r •iE; ~ ~ ~ ~ % .. N00'00'45'EI288.59 \ ~ { Ua ~ ~ cO '~~,: A• i Ipt •:4./' '~\` u' 1, n ~.•.. 5r iS ~ !I ~`` ~u ~ N~ m . ... i (~i r i \\ eD > •~ _. '- ' x~~~~ ~ ~ N .. ....... E 5 I SJ I`` h IO (l~ ~ ( ~\Y yy._~___ .` 8d~~g ~~°~ ~ -----~ 46'Z~Z 36L.Z Y1 j TOOp0~1' fyo/A, 'b9' ~°' '"~ ~` `` oo~~~lt ~ ~~ ~~~~~ b°~~ I ~ 'oi l' I \ I r.r I r~ / t'liri.~ ~T S,V, '4~ ~ a' ~ts~ " 4ti . ~~~ :a~\ . - '\ ~~ y ~'''~~.. i ra i ~ e / ... \ ~~6"y~z g~~ L_---- ~ ~~ .;r i iii \\ I I ~ ~~ r.r /~ ~e~,, ~:' ``,` \\ ~\ ra \\ ''% ~>g~~ ~~a~ Ir----.:~- ~ ~ ~ I F~f4A$~Tf ~ /~, ra \\\ I \\\ //may[. 6 -- ' w ~ n~ t~ 1' i ~I I I ~~ ~ I i I ~~ / ~\~ I ~~ § I ~ ~ 8 I ~ ~ ~ ~p ,~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ a ~~ 3 ~ ~ 3 R S ~ Z 8 ~ € 8 ~ ~ ~ S ~r 8 °3 g~ a ~~ S ~g = ~ e i ~~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a ~~~ o '~ ~ ~ ~ 6 ~ ~ ~~ _ ~ ~ s ~ a r 4 ~ ~ III II III r S S ~ ,~ ~ ~ ~ ~Y ~ I ~ y ~ ; P ~ a a ~ s ~ ~ a s _~ s $ ~ ~ ~ ~r ~ 3 ~ q ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ R ~ 3 ~ ,~ V~~InI ~ '~ ~ Ig a ~ ~ I €:~ ~ ~ - III e ~ ~ ~ s ~ m ,~ ~ $ ~ ~ : ~ S = ~ ~ ~ ~~ Y ~ _ -1N ~ ~ ~ 5 ~ ~ ~ ~~ a ~ g 9 = ~ ~~ ~ $ " s a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 8 ~~ ~ S ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~8 ~ ~ ~ t+ ~~ g ! 3 ~_ ~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~ N G ~~ii O m •• m J O'i U p + W N ; • S m ~j m 1- J f O4i t~- P 4 N ~ G O b m G r ONi I- UNi ~ r INi~ ~.f IJ G O m m J O~ U A W N ~ O b r m J Ori f 11~ D !- U ~.i C Z ~ m ~ m x ~ u o a k a k ~ a ~ + W y k . U U ' _ n N u W : Omi m m m b - .,, N m N Y P rn O .~, U Y V i V v U 'C V ',~ V .~i W ~ Y in U Y V Y J a 4Ui x V .`C J m LUi w I/ : V x V yyrn W ~ 4 a 4 Y' J .`G J m 4 'P V : J m 4 ~ U i J : J Zz S.~m Y D i L w w r m z i i i i z J ' ' Y V Z !7 ~ ~ f . ~ ~ ~ { ~ ~ Z Information - 2001/2002 Graceview Estates -Preliminary/Concept CONCEPT OF GRACEVIEw ESTATES PLANNED UNIT RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT ~ ~, K y ~ ~ ~, _- -.. .,~ r -`~ ~. tom` "`'"~'' ~`. _ , %~r~k.'" , s ~ ~ ?~ ~: ~p i s ',~f j") e ~ i - - ,, ~ ,. ~33~ cf ~n ,~. y~ . t.. rode ~ ~r~ ~ 0 ~_ i ~_ ~, fw...a~.A„~ = PREL/M/NARY PLAT OF GRACE1ijEW ESTATES .,.. • - ,., ~ , PLANNED UN/T RES/DENT/AL DEVEL OPMENT " r_ ~~ ,~ .' ;;' ~ ~f ~ , C/TY OF ST. JOSEPH i _ `""':"~-: `.- ~.,=.~ ,,;;;" - t 1 `( ' I r"~~;:-~~~:_ r/ 9,.w.K,ves I --+----- r.~ ~^:~.r.~'..L`~Lm.. i'o'a~ f = '/i.•o: • ~.\ v H~ ~ li;. i _ _ _ . -1 ~ ' own I ;.F . _ S $riSCl` 'snwy ~aw•~ -~ ~wo.ii-. fi.. •F ____'~ I~,I_ _-y _-_~it __ ~•.•...~°.+...~"`"'«: ."-'.':w", i:.i u~.. a" v.~nwn i ~ rr.nl ' -- ' ' . ~ • I • ~ i°i's• i ...•,a.w.~. L~•. ~ i « i . _ i _ . _ t!<•. o~ sue. `..,, wfa.Mf 1 ~ w '•°".nj~'~°'~" ~\ xa. ~ vu ~„ ~ w.owu ~ ~ w". i .u ...~ ~^.~ w... :"~ : •u w„"w.: _____. ~___ _____ _ r -- - ,:• _ - If ,~~ v. • - IflI i•' ai/.~ I I- i rte. sau'h~~~w.~~~'~I.• " •n• •w A ff }u1 •. .waon '9 Mr I.WS•i w f•~ ^~~ r~.~•a~••~ w~ ' •' -..r _ - Cpl ~~ ;~~.:. ~ `~==~ e `-}-LU ~ 5 ~ n ~~ ~ .rows' Q ...w. ~r . ~ _ _.' ~ i. I••I»6+1.1 I :'. ~'w: ~ ~yee -- ~~ a_: '/ T f _ r• s .- _ e mow, ' r""".... .. t ~~ ' 1 I, ~`'~ >f ~ I ~. ,, T ~_ - l ~ M ~v g e ~ •1 i s' M^ -p: ~_ .,' ~ ~_~.f.lra au__ a; I ~ i u rwo ~ ri'~,'~' • 1 'Y `':••' ' ~ a tea. '----- b • I w~ ~ . --.1` _-K \ '~~ ~ +,' I •^~ Y1f1 .a --___ 1i'E~~j___Y.~~~ ~ f~~ w w p f , • fati 'tl `e~ G . ~2''' + .>. _ _ _ _ ~ YI -' _ _ _ • ~ woven • •. w w.w __- __~ .f_- _C__w _`A~, _1_~- _;k•• __ l' ______~ILLJ~1~1~K ~l-_ L "a. • _ •'•iwL~y~w,~. -- ~ L r,~l w. ,- ] _ ~ I ____Yi }. ~~___ ~ --- w M'DI`I0~ ____ a M .00- wnW ~. w / ~° a ~.i~ r'F `~ ~•~ e-••6i'1• •BlOgf• _ I, $• I o' ~.~_., ~/ ~Ar: ( VJf. .. ! ~ ~ ••1 _ '^ 1 ' ~ '~: ~/ `J~u ~••~ •,h• ' ( •p.• •n~• • ,~f 1 iry.1'1.1 ' O ~g'•i d li ,.+•d~~ ..._ frJ; ', ~ D '•w •w ,:~ // . rp nnu iJ i1 [~.•~.• ,~~ ••• _ fl ~. - i .l'' • ~t }~~ n 1' ~ ,' •rr-,S ..li 1 it .r,.• I l°_•!" I n_ x.' r.1 •r. ~ ~;w.•w. • 9 ~~ '~ - ~ r wI. ~, 'uc -__ _ ~' I .-I~w•s i• y ~+rw. JA ' f ,i~ _ 's ~111~; afRu{ i. ~ - _ • ? ~ ['•`rw~• "~. • n••lr, Y 9' .d ,d 1 i ,''A'i _D ' • w •~ •S • a) ,•• ; 9 ~6 n.f•r •m _1 ~ -' _ -_ n ~-- t, r' ;. - <"w •;a RII///1 h+~ "~/~,_ ..>. \_.`~ ~ __ ~ \.• 1 5a ~d O 'w'r 1 ~ ,Yt~ • •• •~ ' Y~~ ~ ~)~ ' r 1•'' fM •~' , 1 f - •D I' g '~V • • wy• ' M __ ~ pF - -',p __~fl -.. rrsnae ~'IS"~:_.___~~'~~ Knr.~.u •_ _ ~,..~ ~~I i__•...i•i. ,~, C .~•.• 1• w~l.l r-• •1 I 11 jl ••w l'A 1 a Y• r , L'1;. .;Y ~ - R',r•••r. 1 ~~ ^~! d~+- ,. ±: i , J'; ~ 9 ~ ~~•.d. ~ . e '.~... ) _) ln,... IJ 1 1.i : ~•' I .: ,yib.('1'' 1' _ i _ 'rs '- G i ~ / ~ 0 i _ ~_, A •sl . mow.-... `, ~X~ _ ~~~c•- . _~.• c*~..... ~' a~`~ , a, ~~ 1'`~ -*•••, '~a,~ - \J~ `__V_~I~\i'l.,`tl ~{,~L l'~~ N _ ~~~ ~ f • ., *~ •' 1)I •'!. > '__ , ou" °1R•Y•t6Miq" , ~ _ _ _ _ _ _Ma _ _ _ _ . _ , `. _' ~ s,areeys-T. uns• .. - >oa-, _- - ,M _~T _ •nw ~r--------------- mu•nlo.w[wsw[...•)-- ~ ~•~. vn~w••°o•~f"1.:~w~` ii _ -a~,'C:~~.y:., Howl _.~ ,.,• c°w.~ ~ T1 .,.,~s _ - ° .... ~" we-_w.~' .:~ w'..a'w n ^~•w.a~nc 'e awrm ` a a u ~ouma""w "..+w."'°""~`.w'" r~.a"~w :°A° r ° nfn re.-la•.w ~ _ _ _ _ _ iuu w as ~ - w.w . maw. n~ ww.w ro "wn. wlr+n i0ia faas.n n.•s q •a °Y --. Extract of the December 3, 2001 Planning Commission Meeting Public Hearing, Bob Herges/Rick Heid -Graceview Estates Page 1 of 4 Bob Herges, Rick Heid -Graceview Estates Preliminary Plat• Chair Utsch called the hearing to order at 7:00 PM and stated the purpose of the hearing is to consider a preliminary plat, P.U.R.D. application to develop approx. 91 acres with mixed housing, and to rezone the property from current Agriculture to R1 Single Family. The property is located South of Baker Street and West of 7`~ Avenue NE/95~' Avenue. Legally described as follows: The Southeast Quarter of The South East Quarter (SW '/4 SE '/4) of Section Ten (10) in Township One Hundred Twenty -Four (124) North, of Range Twenty-nine (29) in Stearns County, Minnesota, LESS AND EXCEPT; The North 66 feet thereof AND ALSO LESS AND EXCEPT the East 30 feet thereof. The Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter (NE '/4 NE 1/4) of Section Fifteen (15), in Township One Hundred Twenty-four (124) North, Range Twenty-nine (29) West n Stearns County, Minnesota, LESS AND EXCEPT: Commencing at The Northwest corner of said NE 1/4 NE '/; thence East on an assumed bearing along the North line of said NE '/4 NE '/4, a distance of 500 feet to the point of beginning of the land to be described; thence South 00 degree 09 minuets 26seconds East parallel with the West line of said NE '/4 NE '/< a distance of 1330.93 feet to the South line of said NE '/ NE '/o; Thence North 89 degree 57minutes 43 seconds East along said South line of NE '/4 NE '/4; a distance of 819.95 fee to the East line of said section; thence North 00 degree 10 minutes 42 seconds West along said East line a distance of 1330.38 feet to the Northeast corner of said Section; Thence West along the North line of said Section $19.47 feet to the point of beginning and there terminating. AND The Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter (NW '/< NE '/<) of Section Fifteen (15), in Township One Hundred Twenty-four (124) North, of Range Twenty-nine (29) West in Steams County, Minnesota, LESS AND EXCEPT: That part of the NW '/< NE '/<, of Section 15, Township 124, Range 29, described as follows: Beginning at the NE Comer of said Quarter-Quarter, said Point being south 89 degrees l lminutes West, 1320 feet from the NE Corner of said Section; Thence along the East line of said Quarter-Quarter, due South 310 feet; thence South 89 degrees 11 minutes West 250 feet; thence due north 310 feet to a point on the North line of said Section; thence along said North line North89 degrees 11 minutes East, 250 feet to the point of beginning. The request for preliminary plat and P.U.R.D. development has been submitted by Bob Herges and Rick Heid; 25 N l ls' Avenue, St. Cloud MN 56303. Bob Herges stated that he and Rick Heid recently purchased property from St. Benedict's Monastery to develop with mixed residential housing units. The property contains approximately 91 acres and is located between south of Kennedy School, south of Baker Street East and west of 95`s Avenue. Herges stated that in an effort to provide quality development, he hired a landscape designer to plan the development. The proposed development has been named Graceview Estates. At this time Herges introduced landscape designer Rick Hams. Harris stated that he has worked in over 250 communities providing planning services. Harris presented some basic information on planning and discussed how he prepares a development. The process used by Harris includes integrating the characteristics of the community while maximizing the use of the land. Harris stated that when he plans a development, a typical design has 32% less streets, larger lots and provides for significant side and front views. Graceview Estates has been designed as life cycle housing, housing for all levels of living. The development will include bay homes, townhomes, single family homes, multiple family homes and senior units. The development includes ten ingress/egress with an average lot size is 14,253 square feet. Chair Utsch opened the floor for questions and comments. Art Budde of 106 - 7`h Avenue SE stated that he is pleased with the concept of the housing development and types of housing. However, Budde questioned why the extensions of 4"' and 5~' Avenues do not match the existing street alignment. In his opinion the lack of a four way intersection will create poor visibility. Therefore, the streets should be aligned to match. Budde also questioned if access to County Road 121 will be provided. Extract of the December 3, 2001 Planning Commission Meeting Public Hearing, Bob Herges/Rick Heid -Graceview Estates Page 2 of 4 Herges stated that the plat has been redesigned eliminating the extension of 5`h Avenue and a four way intersection has been created at 4"' Avenue. This change has been made as a result of input received from the public prior to the public hearing. Bettendorf stated the long term plans include a connection to County Road 121. Bettendorf further stated that he had the plan reviewed by a traffic engineer and he is recommending that a second ingress/egress to CR 121 be provided near Kennedy School. The development is large and traffic needs to be moved efficiently to major roads. Herges stated that he and Rick Heid do not own the property that connects to County Road 121. However, they did meet with the property owner, (College of St. Benedict), and they are not supportive of extending a road through their property. Steve Schirber of 30152 - 95`" Avenue questioned if the new development plans include the reconstruction of 95`s Avenue, and will the City require access to County Road 121 before construction can begin. Utsch stated that the Planning Commission and City Council will be meeting in December to discuss the Transportation Plan for St. Joseph and the need to establish the east /west route planned for south of the proposed development. Bettendorf stated at this time there are no plans to reconstruct 95`h Avenue. It would be prudent to install utilities simultaneously with the installation in Graceview Estates, the City Council has discussed the island of property on 95`h Avenue that is still in St. Joseph Township and the process of annexing those properties. At the time of annexation utilities will be available and the street will be improved. Herman Gangl of 30084 - 95`"Avenue questioned the future alignment of 95`h Avenue if the street is improved. It is his understanding that the current road is off center and the road will be moved. Bettendorf stated that when the road is improved or reconstructed, the road will be placed in the correct location. Without completing survey details and viewing the property the exact location of the road cannot be determined. Bettendorf stated he will review the matter. Kathy Salzer of 131 - 4`" Avenue SE questioned the amount of traffic that will be generated by the proposed housing development, both during construction and after the homes are constructed. Salzer questioned how traffic will be controlled during the construction season and after the development is completed. Utsch reiterated the City Council and Planning Commission will be meeting on December 17`h to discuss the future roads. The Planning Commission understands the need to establish connections to County Road 121 and construct an east /west corridor at the southern end of the development. Bettendorf stated the City could require the developer to provide a temporary road for construction traffic. This road should be connected to County Road 121. The temporary road could be installed at the same location the traffic engineer is requesting a second ingress/egress. The developers will need to negotiate an agreement with the College of St. Benedict as they are the owners of the property which abuts County Road 121. Mike Philip of 30018 - 95`"Avenue questioned the future street design for 95"' Avenue from Baker Street East to the Palmersheim property, what accommodations have been made regarding the natural gas line and if a holding pond or storm sewer is planned for the area being developed. Bettendorf responded that the developer and City are aware of the gas line and have made provisions for it in the design. The easement for the gas line prohibits any construction in the easement area. As far as surface water and drainage, the development is engineered with storm sewer/catch basins and the surface water will be drained to the existing holding ponds as well as the new ponds proposed in the development. Bettendorf further stated the housing development has been planned with catch basins. Brian Donnay of 202 - 7`" Avenue SE reiterated the need to provided alternate ingress/egress for the development and encouraged the Commission to require a road to County Road 121. Bob Kroll read a statement concerning planning and the need to consider public input in the decision making process. Bettendorf stated that he agrees with the need to involve the community in the planning of the development and that is the purpose of the public hearing. All testimony received at this meeting will be considered before a decision is made. Rick Schultz of 30054 - 95`"Avenue questioned the design of the proposed development. Schultz stated that it is his opinion that comparable housing should be constructed adjacent to the existing housing stock. Therefore, the rental units proposed adjacent to his property should be changed to single family homes. Extract of the December 3, 2001 Planning Commission Meeting Public Hearing, Bob Herges/Rick Heid - Graceview Estates Page 3 of 4 Herges stated the area adjacent to the 95`h Avenue is proposed to be upscale attached housing. The homes are not rental units, rather town homes. The proposed value of the attached housing will exceed the value of the existing house stock adjacent to the proposed development. Art Budde of 106 - 7`" Avenue SE restated that he would like the Planning Commission to require an access to County Road 121 and questioned the rationale for requiring an ingress/egress to County Road 121 adjacent to Kennedy School. Bettendorf responded that when determining the location of roads there is a minimum distance that must be considered. The City's transportation plan has always included an east/west corridor running parallel to the proposed development. The City placed the two accesses using the original one planned. Further, it is important to construct roads where they will be used. A portion of the property retained by the College of St. Benedict is in the process of being sold for a commercial use. Therefore, the proposed road neaz Kennedy School would no only serve the housing development but the commercial development as well. The Planning Commission may consider using this proposed road as a temporary construction road as well. Mary Ann Graeve of 619 Minnesota Street East questioned who owns the property referred to as Field Street and how close will proposed development and roadway be in relation to the existing wetland. If the proposed development allows for surface water to drain into the wetland there is a possibility the wetlands will become contaminated. It seems to be a common trend for people to use chemicals in lawn care and if proper drainage is not provided it could be detrimental to the residents of St. Joseph. Graeve stated that when making decisions the City needs to look at the quality of life and how the proposed development will affect the lives of the residents of St. Joseph. Bettendorf stated that the College of St. Benedict owns the property referred to as Field Street. The current construction plans for County Road 121 include providing water and sewer lines in the same azea. Therefore, it is certain the City will be able to secure the necessary right-of--way for the construction of an east/west corridor. As far as the surface water drainage, the development will be drained with holding ponds and storm sewer outlets so that the wetlands will not be disturbed. Herges stated that he has been reseazching the possibility of internalizing the sanitary sewer system and water for the proposed development in the event that an agreement cannot be reached with the College of St. Benedict. In discussing this matter with his engineers, it appears as though it would be a feasible alternative. Therefore they may not have to use the proposed Field Street. Jean Marthaler of 139 - 7`" Avenue SE questioned the ingress/egress for the development and who will have the final authority if the access to County Road 121 is required. Marthaler also requested the developer be required to provide a temporary road for construction vehicles. Marthaler also questioned the depth of the proposed holding pond that to be located near 4`s Avenue SE and Baker Street East. Bettendorf responded that the Planning Commission will review the testimony presented at this meeting and make a recommendation to the City Council; at which time the City Council will make the final decision. As faz as the depth of the pond, it is proposed to have a maximum depth of six feet. Gladys Schneider of 118 - 3'd Avenue SE stated she is not opposed to the development and is impressed with the presentation. However, Schneider questioned if anyone has considered the affect the development will have on the current City water supply and storage capacity. The residents have recently paid for a new water storage facility and she does not feel that she should have to pay for another tower in the near future. Bettendorf responded that the City has recently purchased additional sewer capacity /conveyance from the City of St. Cloud. Therefore, the City will have a sufficient sewer capacity for many years. The City will have to begin researching an additional site for a second water storage facility and land for additional wells. The cost of the future improvements will be paid for by hookup fees for all new developments. In 1986 the City implemented water and sewer hookup fees and these fees have paid for many improvements to the utility systems. The City Council will be reviewing the current fees in the upcoming months to assure that the fees collected will cover the future utility expenses created by the growth the City is experiencing. Duane Giada of 29772 - 95`" Avenue questioned the proposed east/west extension referred to as Field Street and the redesign of 95`'' Avenue. The proposed housing development vacates a portion of the existing 95a' Avenue realigning the road around the proposed development. Gaida questioned the need for the realignment. Bettendorf responded that the road referred to as Field Street is proposed to be located south of the wetland area near the existing gas shelter. Extract of the December 3, 2001 Planning Commission Meeting Public Hearing, Bob Herges/Rick Heid - Graceview Estates Page 4 of 4 There being no additional testimony Kalinowski made a motion to close the public hearing at 9:10 PM; seconded by Deutz and passed unanimously. The Commission agreed to discuss the testimony received on December 19, 2001 at 7:00 PM in the St. Joseph City Hall. At that time a recommendation will be forwarded to the City Council. Chair Utsch will meet with the City Engineer, Attorney, Developers Rick Hied and Bob Herges and City Staff to review the items of concern and present the information to the Planning Commission on December 19, 2001. Draft December 19, 2001 Page 1 of 3 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the Planning Commission met in Special Session on Wednesday, December 19, 2001 at 7:00 PM in the St. Joseph City Hall. Members Present: Chair Gary Utsch. Commissioners S. Kathleen Kalinowski, Marge Lesnick, Kurt Schneider, Mike Deutz, Jim Graeve. Council Liaison Al Rassier. Administrator Clerk Judy Weyrens. Others Present: Bob Herges, Rick Heid, Tom Herkinoff, Linda Brown. Approve Agenda: Deutz made a motion to approve the agenda with the addition of Commissioner announcements; seconded by Lesnick and passed unanimously. Bob Herges, Rick Heid - Graceview Estates Preliminary Plat• Utsch stated that he along with the City Engineer, City Administrator and Public Works Director met with the developers to review the proposed development. The following is a list of issues raised at the public hearing along with possible resolutions. CONCERN RAISED AT HEARING POSSIBLE RESOL UTION The proposed development will create additional traffic 4`~, 5`~ and 7~' Avenues will be posted with seven ton through residential neighborhoods. weight restrictions. Construction delivery vehicles cannot access seven ton roads. Rather than extending 4`~ Avenue SE, 5`~' Avenue SE could be extended. This change would not move traffic straight through to County Road 75 and people may choose an alternate route. A temporary construction road should be installed adjacent to Lot 5 Block 8 Residents on 95`~ Avenue requested the developer The developer has already changed the plan to change the design so that similar style of homes will be construct bay homes adjacent to 95`~ Avenue rather adjacent to their property, than the original design where Town homes would abut 95~' Avenue. Access to County Road 121/College Avenue South The developers do not own the property that abuts should be required. County Road 121 Therefore, they cannot construct a road from the proposed development to County Road 121. However, the property owner, (College of St. Benedict), has agreed to allow a temporary construction road. The City Council and Planning Commission have agreed that an easUwest corridor (Field Street) needs to be constructed at the southern edge of the proposed development. However, the construction of Field Street will not occur until at least 2006. Park Dedication Fee The Park Board will be meeting to discuss allowing the developers to pave walking trails and connect the trails to Klinefelter park in lieu of payment of the Park Dedication fees Draft December 19, 2001 Page 2 of 3 The Commission spent considerable time discussing access to County Road 121(College Avenue South). Herges stated that he and Heid recently met with the College of St. Benedict to discuss access to County Road 121. The College is in the process of selling a portion of the property in question for a commercial building. The proposed access to County Road 121 has the potential of benefiting the commercial project. Therefore, Herges stated that he and Heid are trying to come to an agreement with the College. At this time the College is in the process of appraising the land and once the appraisal is completed they will meet again with the College of St. Benedict. Herges is hopeful that they will reach an agreement with the College. Deutz questioned if the City has the authority to condemn property for the purpose of providing access roads. Weyrens stated that although the City does have the that authority it is hoped that the College and the developer will come to an agreement. Schneider questioned if the City could give the developers a deadline as to when they have to have the access completed. Weyrens stated that the issue before the Planning Comrission at this time is the preliminary plat. It is important to make sure the road connections are planned and secured within the development. After the preliminary plat is approved the developer will come back to the Planning Commission requesting fmal approval of the first phase of the development. The Planning Commission could consider limiting the number of homes to be built before the access to County Road 121 is complete. Herges stated that if they owned the property to County Road 121 they would build the access in the first phase. However, since they do not own the land they have no right to construct the proposed road. Graeve stated that the road to County Road 121 is crucial in making the downtown area easily accessible to residents of this area. Rassier made a motion to recommend the City Council adopt the following Resolution of finding, approving the Preliminary Plat for Graceview Estates; the motion was seconded by Kalinowslci and passed unanimously. Resolution of finding The request of Bob Herges and Rick Heid for a P.U.R.D. application and rezoning request came before the Planning Commission at a public hearing held on December 3, 2001. The purpose of the hearing was to consider a preliminary plat, P.U.R.D. application issuing a special use permit to develop approx. 91 acres with mixed housing; and to rezone the property from current Agriculture to R-1 Single Family. The property is located south of Baker Street and West of 7`'' Avenue SE/95"' Avenue. The property is legally described as: The Southeast Quarter of The South East Quarter (SW '/< SE '/<) of Section Ten (10) in Township One Hundred Twenty -Four (124) North, of Range Twenty-nine (29) in Stearns County, Minnesota, LESS AND EXCEPT; The North 66 feet thereof AND ALSO LESS AND EXCEPT the East 30 feet thereof. The Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter (NE'/<NE 1/4) of Section Fifteen (15), in Township One Hundred Twenty-four (124) North, Range Twenty-nine (29) West n Stearns County, Minnesota, LESS AND EXCEPT: Commencing at The Northwest corner of said NE 1 /4 NE '/4; thence East on an assumed bearing along the North line of said NE '/< NE '/<, a distance of 500 feet to the point of beginning of the land to be described; thence South 00 degree 09 minuets 26seconds East parallel with the West line of said NE '/< NE '/a a distance of 1330.93 feet to the South line of said NE '/4 NE '/4; Thence North 89 degree 57minutes 43 seconds East along said South line of NE '/< NE '/4; a distance of 819.95 fee to the East line of said section; thence North 00 degree ] 0 minutes 42 seconds West along said East line a distance of 1330.38 feet to the Northeast corner of said Section; Thence West along the North line of said Section 819.47 feet to the point of beginning and there terminating. AND The Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter (NW '/4 NE '/<) of Section Fifteen (15), in Township One Hundred Twenty-four (124) North, of Range Twenty-nine (29) West in Stearns County, Minnesota, LESS AND EXCEPT: That part of the NW '/4 NE '/4, of Section 15, Township 124, Range 29, described as follows: Beginning at the NE Corner of said Quarter-Quarter, said Point being south 89 degrees l lminutes West, 1320 feet from the NE Corner of said Section; Thence along the East line of said Quarter-Quarter, due South 310 feet; thence South 89 degrees 11 minutes West 250 feet; thence due north 310 feet to a point on the North line of said Section; thence along said North line North89 degrees 1 I minutes East, 250 feet to the point of beginning. Draft December 19, 2001 Page 3 of 3 The request for preliminary plat and P.U.R.D. development has been submitted by Bob Herges and Rick Heid; 25 N 11"' Avenue, St. Cloud MN 56303. In consideration of the information presented to the Planning Commission and its application to the Comprehensive Plan and Ordinances of the City of St. Joseph, the Planning Commission makes the following findings: The proposed development is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan and meets the requirements of the St. Joseph Code of Ordinances. Therefore, based on the above findings, the Planning Commission makes the following recommendation: Approval of the P.U.R.D. application granting a special use permit to allow for the development of 91 acres with mixed housing and to rezone the above mentioned property from Agricultural to R-1 Single Family. Approval is contingent upon the following: 1. 4~', 5~', and 7a' Avenues are posted as 7 ton roads 2. The northern access to County Road 121 will be moved to Lot 5 Block 8 3. The property abutting 95"' Avenue will be developed with Bay homes rather than the proposed Townhomes. 4. The Park Board approves the Park Dedication Fee -allowing the paved walking path to meet the park dedication requirement. 5. A temporary construction road will be installed at the access mentioned in #2 above. 6. Only phase one of the development can be approved without a paved access to County Road 121. It shall be the responsibility of the developer to come to an agreement with the adjoining property owner for access to County Road 121. If an agreement cannot be reached the developer should notify the Planning Commission. 7. Approval of the City Attorney and Building Inspector 8. Approval of the City Engineer -meeting all the requirements detailed in a letter dated November 28, 2001 (See exhibit "A") Lesnick made a motion recommending the City Council mapping the northern County Road 121 extension to Graceview Estates on the Official Transportation Map; and, if the developer cannot reach an agreement with the property owner the City will construct the road within the means available to municipalities assessing affected property owners. The motion was seconded by Deutz and passed unanimously Miscellaneous: Graeve reported the Fruelingsfest planning will begin on January 14, 2002 at the St. Joseph Community Fire Hall. The theme for the 2002 event is "Celebrate Historic Baseball." Adjourn: Deutz made a motion to adjourn at 8:30 PM; seconded by Lesnick and passed unanimously. Judy Weyrens Administrator/Clerk Extract of the January 17, 2002 City Council Meeting Graceview Estates Graceview Estates, Bob Herges and Rick Heid: Bob Herges and Rick Heid approached the City Council requesting approval of the preliminary plat for Graceview Estates. The Planning Commission on December 19, 2002 recommended the City Council approve the Preliminary Plat for Graceview Estates with the following contingencies: 1. The following Avenues are posted as 7 ton roads: 4`ti, 5`~, and 7`'' 2. The northern access to County Road 121 will be moved to Lot S Block 8 3. The property abutting 95`~ Avenue will be developed with bay homes rather than the proposed townhomes. 4. The Park Board allows the paved walking path to meet the park dedication requirement. 5. A temporary construction road will be located at the access mentioned in #2 above. 6. Only phase one of the development can be approved without a paved access to County Road 121. It shall be the responsibility of the developer to come to an agreement with the adjoining property owner to secure access to County Road 121. If an agreement cannot be reached the developer should notify the Planning Commission. 7. Approval of the City Attorney and Building Inspector. 8. Approval of the City Engineer -meeting all the requirements detailed in a letter from the Engineer dated November 28, 2001 Herges stated that the first phase of development will include 27 single family homes and 28 bay homes. In an attempt to resolve the access issue, Herges stated that he met with representatives of the College of St. Benedict and they have not expressed interest in selling any additional property. The College is working with Centra Care to construct a medical facility near this site and the proposed road would abut this property. Rassier stated that the Planning Commission has concerns if the development proceeds without an access to County Road 121. The residential streets adjacent to the proposed development were not designed to handle the volume of traffic that would be generated by this development. Herges expressed frustration and stated that he started the platting process in October, and the access was not discussed until December. Based on the favorable response of the Planning Commission and City Council Herges received in October he closed on the property. If he had been aware of the concern there is a good chance this issue could have been resolved. However, Herges stated he has made numerous attempts to purchase the property to provide an additional access and has not been successful. City Attorney John Scherer responded that the City is supportive of the development and is willing to work together to resolve the outstanding issues. However, the concept plan presented in October is not a detail plan and until engineering reviews the plan and the public hearing is conducted the issues cannot be identified. City Engineer Joe Bettendorf stated that the access to County Road 121 may not be logistically possible for 2002 as County Road 121 will be reconstructed. When questioned if Stearns County will grant an additional access to County Road 121, Bettendorf responded that the accesses will be limited with stricter provisions for driveways. The proposed road recommended by the Planning Commission would serve both the Graceview development and the remaining property owned by the College of St. Benedict. Loso questioned the need for the additional access and indicated in his opinion the additional access could cause a traffic problem at County Road 121. Hosch stated that a road needs to service the proposed development so that excessive traffic is not routed through existing neighborhoods. Loso responded that constructing a road does not guarantee that people will use the road and typically people will take the shortest route possible; which in this case maybe the residential neighborhood. Ehlert stated that he is not in favor of generating additional traffic through the Eastern Park Addition. The roads were not constructed to handle considerable traffic and the roads are narrow. Ehlert suggested that as an alternative the Council look at East Baker Street and change the characteristics similar to that of Minnesota Street. Removing the stop signs would move traffic faster and may entice residents to use this route. Extract of the January 17, 2002 City Council Meeting Graceview Estates Bettendorf stated that before the Council accepts the preliminary plat the access issue and utility easements should be secured. At this time the utility lines are proposed to be extended along the southern property line of the College of St. Benedict and then into Graceview Estates. The developer should negotiate the easement and include the document with the preliminary plat. Ehlert concurred with Bettendorf that the two remaining issues should be resolved, as it is his understanding once the preliminary plat is approved it cannot be altered. Hosch stated that he has some concerns as to where the proposed southern access, (known as Field Street), has been placed on the preliminary plat. At a recent meeting facilitated by the St. Cloud Area Planning Organization they informed the City that before a road can be mapped an extensive study must be completed. Therefore, Hosch requested the Council consider requiring the developer to designate the southern 60 feet of the plat as aright-of--way easement. Herges stated that he is willing to change the plat to accommodate the 60' right-of--way for the purpose of construction of a roadway. Herges questioned whether the preliminary plat can be approved and at the same time he would continue working on the access and easement issues. Herges stated that due to the cost of holding the property, he would like to continue in an expedient manner so that construction can begin this summer. Scherer recommended that the preliminary plat approval be tabled until the issues have been resolved. However, in an effort to assist the developer the fmal plat and preliminary plat could be worked on simultaneously with one presentation to the Council. Linda Brown and Tom Herkinoff, engineers for Graceview, stated they could make the changes as requested by the Council and have the information ready for the next meeting. Hosch concurred with Scherer and the proposed developers along with City Staff should meet with representatives of the College to further discuss the access. Herges questioned the fate of the project if the access issue can be resolved. Scherer stated that the City has the ability to use eminent domain, but considers this a last resort. He is confident that an agreement can be reached. Ehlert requested that Scherer provide the Council with an outline of the condemnation process. Hosch made a motion to table the PURR application requesting a special use permit to develop 91 acres known as Graceview Estates until February 21, 2002. The tabling is necessary to try and secure right-of--way for an access to County Road 121 and utility easements along the southern property line with that owned by the College of St. Benedict. The motion was seconded by Loso and passed unanimously. Rassier made a motion to extend the 60 day action requirement on a land use request until February 21, 2002. The tabling is necessary to secure the road right-of--way and utility easements. Discussion: Ehlert requested clarification on the motion and if the property owner is required to request extension of the 60 day requirement. Scherer responded that the City can extend the 60 days if additional information is needed and at the time of the extension the Council must clarify what information is needed. The motion was seconded by Schneider and passed unanimously. Extract of February 21, 2002 City Council Meeting Graceview Estates -Preliminary Plan Preliminary Plat. Graceview Estates -Bob Heroes and Rick Heid: Bob Herges and Rick Heid appeared before the Council requesting approval of the preliminary plat of Graceview Estates. Herges stated that he along with the City Engineer, City Attorney, Mayor and City Administrator Clerk have met with representatives of St. Benedict's regarding an ingress/egress on the northern section of property owned by the College of St. Benedict abutting County Road 121. The ingress/egress has been requested by the Planning Commission and Council to assist with the efficient movement of traffic from Graceview Estates. At this time the College has not indicated willingness to release property so the ingress/egress can be completed. Hosch elaborated that the City submitted four alternative to the College of St. Benedict for consideration and have not received a favorable response. The College has submitted a letter stating they need additional information before making a decision and do not anticipate making a decision until April 25, 2002.- Hosch stated that the road is an essential element before the final plat can be considered. Herges expressed frustration with the process and stated that he needs to move his project forward and cannot wait until April. He was of the understanding that the College would render a decision on February 14 and now the date has been pushed back further. Herges stated that he has attempted to resolve the outstanding issues of Graceview Estates but cannot go further without owning the property in question. At this time Herges requested the City approve the preliminary plat of Graceview Estates as presented. The Council was of general consensus that before final approval of Graceview Estates, the developer must secure a temporary construction easement from the College of St. Benedict to allow ingress/egress from County Road 121 to the proposed development. Further, the developer must provide the City with executed utility easements from the College of St. Benedict to allow the installation of utility lines along the southern edge of their development extending to County Road 121. The Council agreed to consider this matter again on March 7, 2002. Scherer recommended the Council resolve the ingress/egress issue or at least have an understanding of the status of the proposed northern access before approving the final plat. Bettendorf questioned if the outlots/drainage areas provided in Graceview Estates would be privately owned or if the developers will be requesting the City to assume ownership upon platting. Linda Brown stated that the development assumes that all the holding ponds/drainage areas would be privately owned either by an association or individual property owner. Bettendorf requested the engineers for the developer verify the width of the proposed roads. In reviewing the plat it appears as the roadbeds will only be 32 feet in width and typical residential streets in St. Joseph are 36 feet in width. The developer agreed to review this matter before submitting the final plat. Bettendorf also questioned the vacation of an easement as requested in the development application. The easement vacation is for a portion of 95tH Avenue that will be redesigned. Scherer stated that the vacation of easement should not be considered until construction of the affected phase. The developers agreed withdraw the easement release request at this time. Hosch made a motion to approve the preliminary plat of Graceview Estates with the following contingenies: 1. The developer will continue to secure a temporary construction ingress/egress from the College of St. Benedict for temporary construction in phase one and work with the City to secure a permanent ingress/egress for future development. Phase two of Graceview Estates cannot be approved until an access to County Road 121 is secured. 2. The developer will secure a utility easement for the installation of water and sewer lines from the College of St. Benedict. 3. The Engineer verifies the width of the roads in the development to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The motion was seconded by Loso and passed unanimously by those present. ~:, non-re~i~rifa"I ~~~~~~m~~esulting traffic generated and parking; demands created; d) The proposed schedule for the development of a site; e) A statement setting forth the reasons why, in the opinion of the applicant, the PURR will. be in the public interest and consistent with the objectives specified for PURD's by Section 12.01. 5ubd. 5: Action b Plannin Commission. Within forty-five (45) days of the i ing o t e app ication, the Planning Commission shall hold a public hearing on the proposed PURD following written and published notice as required for amendments of this ordinance. Within forty-five (45) days of such hearing, or at a later time agreed to by the applicant, the Plarming Commission hall recommend approval or disapproval of the preliminary proposal with such changes and conditions as it may suggest and shall transmi-t its recommendation to the City Council. In its recommendations the Commission shall determine whether the proposed PURR is consistent with the objectives for planned-unit residential developments specified in Section 12.01 and with the comprehensive land use plan of the Cityy; whether the proposed development will advance the general welfare of a neighborhood and the City; and whether-the. ~' benefits, combination of various land uses, if proposed, and the inter-relationship with the land uses in the surrounding area justify the deviation from standard district regulations allowed by this ordinance for PURD's. Subd. 6: Action b Council. Upon receipt of the recommendation o. t e .ann~'ing commission, the City Council. shall consider the application within thirty (30) days after receipt from the Planning Commission and, after holding such public hearings as it deems necessary, shall approve or disapprove the application with. such changes or conditions, if any, as it may deem appropriate. Tt shall include a findings on matters on which the Planning Commission is required to make determinations under Section 12.05. The applicant shall pay for-the cost of the Public Rearing. Subd. 7: Final Review and Approval. An application for review approval of the~inal `~everopment p a'I-n -shall be filed by the applicant with the Planning-Commission within twelve {12) months of the date on-which approval of the preliminary plat was given by the City Council. If application for final approval is not made within the-time required, the proposal. shall be ,considered abandoned. An application for final approval may be tiled for ppart of a PURR area for which preliminary approval has been granted by the City. Council. A final plan for apart of a PURb shall provide the same proportion of open space and the same over-all dwe ling unit density as is i , provided in the over-all preliminary plan.. ._.J -101- Subd. 8 : D~ac~~~t~~~~i~ ~~~ia application and its supporting documentation s a I give the same .information as is required of plats under the subdivision control ordinance of the City in addition to such other information as required by this- ordinance and by the Planning Commission as a condition for approval of the preliminary plan. In addition., the application shall be accompanied by such other documentation, such as restrictive covenants, incorporation papers, by-laws of home owners' association, dedications,-and other conditions specifically required pUy~the Planning Commission and the City Council for the particular Subd. 9: Action on Final A lication. Procedure for action by the Planning CommZBSlon an t e ity ouncil on an application for' review and approval of the f3.na1 plan for a PURR shall be the same as prescribed by this article for the action. on the preliminary proposal. In giving approval, the Council may specify the length of time within which construction of the project must be begun or completed, and it ma attach such other conditions as it deems necessary. The final development plan shall be in general conformance with the preliminary development plan as approved. Subd. 10: Uses Permitted. Compatible residential uses may be combined in a P t e proposed location of mixed residential uses will not adversely affect adjacent property or the public health, safety and general welfare. When a PURR proposes a mixture of single family dwellings with multiple dwellings, no more than twenty (20) percent of a tract shall be used as multiple dwelling development. Subd. 11: Standards.. a) General.. Every PURD shall conform to the. standards pre~~i'bed in this section. b) Relationshi of PiTRD Site to Ad'acent Areas.- The es gn o a s a t o into account t o relationship of the site to the surrounding areas. The perimeter of the FURD shall be so designed as to minimize undesirable impact of the PURR on adjacent properties and, conversely, to minimize undesirable impart of adjacent land use and' development characteristics on the PURR. c) Minimum Size. A PURR shall consist of at leas t twenty acres. d) Minimum Lot Size. The-minimum lot size requirements 0 of er sections of this ordinance do not apply to a PURD except that the minimum lot size requirements of the vndexlying zone shall serve as the criterion to determine the maximum dwelling unit density of a total development. The maximum dwelling unit density shall be determined by the area remaining-after appropriate space for street -102- right-~~s~~i~~t~~~~dications have been determined and subtracted from the total PURR area. The Citq Council may, however, authorize an increase in-the number of multiple dwelling units up to the limits set by this paragraph when the site of the multiple dwellings allows traffic to proceed from the. multiple dwelling.-sate to an arterial street so as not to create-vehicular traffic in a single family or two family dwelling arise neighborhood, artd when the proposed increase in .density meets all th+e standards under the PURT1 Section and Section 8..04 of this tlydinance. The maximum density for multiple dwellings under the PURD shall be one one bedroom unit for each 2,500 square feet of lot. area, one two-bedroom unit for each 3,400 square feet of lot area, and one .three-bedroom unit for each 3-,500 square feet of lot area. e) Set-Back and Side Yard. Re urements. Notwithstand- ing of er provzs ions o t is tic e, every lot in a PURR ' abutting the perimeter of the PURD shall conform to yard requirements for the underlying district. ..Side yards between buildings in a PURR shall be net less- than ten (10) feet-but such buildinggs may be built without reference to the property lines of the: individual lots on which they are built. f) Access to Public Ri ht-of-wa The site of a PURR s a a ut, an t e mayor internal street or streets serving the PURD shall be connected to, at least one arterial street. g) Utiht Re uirements. Utilities, including to ep one an electrical systems, installed within a PURD shall be placed underground.. Utility appurtenances which can be effectively screened ma be excepted from this requirement if the City finds. that such exception will be consistent with the objective of this Article and-the character of the proposed PURR. h) 0 en.S ace. Common open space shall be either held n common ownership by all owners in the PURR or dedicated for public use with approval. of the City Council. Whenever possible, common open space shall be lined to the open space areas of adjoining developments. Common open space shall be of such size, shape, character, and locations as to be useable for its proposed purpose. i) Pa~rki~n Off-street parking and loading space shall eb-provided in each PURR in the same ratios for types of buildings and uses as required in the underlying zoning district. ~../' -103- WITH THESE CONCERNS BEFORE US, WE ASK THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND COUNCIL TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING MODIFICATIONS TO ANY PROPOSED PLAN: ~_ build single family dwellings along strbets (g~keland 7"' Ave SE/95n') This is an arce where current single family dwellings already exist. We expect these single-family dwellings to face east and North, as they would border tlrese streets. We expect comparable housing to be built next to existlng housing. 2. oreuare for exits to county road 121. This would mean a joint agreement between this plat and the College of St Benedict plat that borders county road 121. Our request is to allow for exits on the north and south of this property. it does not make sense to improve a major through street in preparatlon of traMt;, without having some relevant use for it As this development grows, it will kxrtainly tax residentlal traffic. County road 121 would allow for and is currently being planned to handle moro traffic more eAldently. As tfie planning commission and coundl has a great deal of Bout in this matter, R would be in your best Interest to lobby for and set aside land for potential acoasses to county road 121, from this development and the College of St. Benedict land. A similar situation was witnessed in the Northland development' where the developer set aside land for a potential road access. We see this a no different. ,a. avow for me ovss~ouav m omer easy-wes~ o norm-souu~ comaors wmm~ mss orone~y. The ability to traverse from one point to another is a hindrance that can be eliminated by additional roadways used within any development. A few additional roads also tend to alleviate congestion and give motorists alternate paths to work and play from home, rather than funnel all traffic into one or two centrally located roads. 4. Build mull-family dwellings nearer to county road 121. By positioning the multi-family dwellings nearer to county road 121, you in effect accomplish two goals: i. take advantage of improvements to county road 121, which in the long run will be better suited to handle higher volumes of traffic this portion of the development will create. 2. Align multi-family dwellings to those areas of the public that will take advantage of this type of housing -college students. This assodation has the potential to be highly utilized by college students. 5. Ensure new strce*~ in this new development are not staggered with eYisting sire in the neighborhood. The ability to control traffic and allow for pedestrian traffic is more easily accomplished by standard 4-corner intersections. As 7s' Ave SE was maintained several ycers earlier, the eoundl at the time admitted their mistake at the stagger that exists between 7"' Ave SE and what was county Road 133, now Elm street, as it crosses Minnesota street At that time, the dty engineer (Mr. Bettendorf) was quite adamant that such staggering was not in the best interest of the dty and would try to prevent such staggering to again be built. ti. consider altering the lot size Eo allow for more frontage We have seen and continue to see developments that enlist this prindpal of less being more. By reducing the frontage for home sites, you in effect reduce the number of options for size and style of home. What might be a very diverse dimate in home styles, quiddy becomes the "army barracks" look so dosely assodated with developments already in St Joseph, Bartell, St Michael, Albertville and St Cloud. Regardless of your variation to setback, the look will remain the same, because of the similar style and look of home. Please use prudent judgment when agreeing bo lot size and frontage. 4. Highway noise and property value by ].P. Nelson, .louma/ of Transport Economks & Policy, May 1982, p. 117- 138. 5. Residential noise damage costs caused by motor vehicles by D. Haling and H. Cohen, Transporbbon ' Research Re~/rk, Issue 1559, p. 84-95. 6.Out of the car and into the future by Md> Lowe, World Watch, Nov./Dec. 1990. - 7. Managing traffic speeds in residential areas by K. Kim, Transportation Quaiteny, Vol. 51(1), p. 127-133:_ The attached copies of 45+ signatures represent appr. 70% of the home and land owners that either border or are to the general vidnity of the proposed development between county road 121 and 7tl' Ave. SE. HAVING RECENTLY BEEN INFORMED ABOUT THIS DEVELOPMENT, ~ SUPPORT THE FOLLOWING STATEMENT(S): Our Goal: Work with existing dty planners and council to ensure the folkowing measures are met: i. Reduce the impact of node and traffk upon quality of life. Ensure the quality and capaaty of access roads (existing or m be provided by the applicant) aorommodate traffic generated by the proposed devebpment 2. Avoid property devaluation, will not substantialy and permanenty injure the current use of neighboring property 3. Assure adequate measures are taken for pedestrian safety 4. review growth management polides bo prevent future incr~ses in traffic and noise 5. Serves the public interest Community Involvement The anent design is not based on feedback from the surrounding community, but from the devebper, the landowner and the builder. These will directly affect us, the adjacent property owners changes, yet have had no opportunity to help design, disass, challenge and offer altemathres. I understand a public pre-plat approval meeting will be held, but also am aware of the several meetings already taken place with the planning and zoning commissioh, in preparation of this pre-plat meetlng. It would behoove the planning commissbn and relevant coundl members to seek opinions of these residents. Their opinion may offer alternatives that would avoid confrontation. Without this solidtation, factors may be overlooked. Residents have but a small window. of opportunity to refute a offer aitematlves to this pre-planned development - a window that appears to be shut when so much up front work has been done without their opinion or involvement. There has been enough Information presented to several parties that: i humbly request that you .the planners and coundl members seek out and solidt responses from adjacent homcowners and potentially affected residents, prior to the pre-plat meeting, ~noerning this proposed development. Traffk: As traffic volumes increase the safety of our streets declines abng with property value, air quality, and the quiet we enjoy ih our homes. Noise. Health & Prosy Value Traffic noise can interfere with sleep, conversation, and other neighborhood pursuits. About 2% of us are exposed to traffic noise at a level, which affects health. Traffic noise can have a signiftcant effect on property value. A home located adjacent to a major highway may sell for 8% to 10% less when compared to one located abng a quiet neighborhood street. Truck traffc kanrers property value at a rate 150 times greater than cars. This is because at 50 feet trucks emit noise at 90 dBA while a car traffic produces noise at a level of 50 dBA. While some truck traffic is essential on neighborhood streets (e.g. refuse collection, delivery trucks, and ftre engines) an increase in trucks passing through a neighborhood aouki lower properly value and overall quality of life. Wasted Time Traffk congestion is one of the most frustrating and costly symptoms of poorly regulated growth. Those of us who commute to work by pr spend 110 to 310 hours a year behind the wheel. ThaYs a lot of time spent unproductively, St. Joseph is bedroom community, for those that commute regularly into St. Ckwd or work in and around Minneapolis. Possible Solutions. Protecting a neighborhood~from traffic impacts boils down to minimizing the speed and volume of traffic, particularly the volume of traffic. Frst and foremost, new development should be guided to sites with access to mass transportation and major routes. Uhfortunately, for some time to come much of our growth will continue to be car oriented -not mass transit oriented. This brings us to two key questions: • How much traffic is too much for a neighborhood street? • How pn we reduce the impact of existlng traffic on neighborhood quality of life? Lim~g Traffic Increases on Neighborhood Streets Factors whld~ may change traffic on a neighborhood street include: increasing the number of houses with " access to the street; fuming adead-end (cul-de-sac) street into a through street; "Improving" a street by widening, straightening, etc., and expanding or creating new commercial, industrial, or institutional uses with access to a neighborhood street. Unfortunately, there are no generally accepted criteria for traffic levels compatible with neighborhood quality of life. The criteria presenthr used to assess traffic impacts, Is geared towards preventing congestion. This criteria is based upon a rating system known as Level t7f Se~vlae or LOS for short. LOS ratings range from A th F, with A being the best and F is severe congestion, gridlock. Many local and State highway agencies restrict devebpment projects that would cause LOS to drop below D in urban areas and C in rural settings. Tra c Volume & Neighborhoods Impacts The volume of traffic causing an unacceptable LOS may be well above that causing excessive noise, safety, health, or property value impacts. For example, a typical two-lane (one lane in each direction) 20-foot wide neighborhood street can accommodate a trafftc volume of less than 1,000 vehicle trips without a significant adverse effect on quality of life. As shown in the following table, a typical single-famiy detached home will generate about ten vehicle trips per day. Trips/Building Tyce Dav: Single-family detached house 10.0 Townhouse 8.5 Apartment/Condominium 6.5 So a neighborhood street with a hundred homes fronting on it would cant' about one thousand trips per day. At 1,000 to 4,000 trips per day, impacts may justify a combination of education and modifications to streets to reduce trdffk impacts. At 5,000 trips per day increased police enforcement plus education and street modiftcations would be needed to manage quality of life impacts. Traffic volume would need to approach 8,000 trips per day before the LOS would begin showing a need to constrain traffic increases. At that point a traffic signal may improve the LOS rating. Once the signal is installed the LOS approach would then permit traffic volume to increase up >b 15,000 trips/day before a failed rating would again be reached. As the preceding discussion illustrates, the LOS rating system may not be very effective in protecting a neighborhood from traffic increases that would degrade quality of life. Calming Neighborhood Traffic/Education: A popular education technique consists of a radar gun and a large electronic display. The display is mounted along a neighborhood street where it will be easily seen by passing motorists. A volunteer points the radar gun at an approaching car. The driver of the car then sees their speed on the electronic display. While this and other education techniques can reduce speed, the effects tend not to fast very long afterwards. Street Modificat~ns: Engineered modifications tend to be more effective and longer lasting than education techniques, but they are also more expensive and may not be readily accepted by the public. Folkmring are some of the more frequently employed modiftcations. Speed humps can reduce traffic to 15 mph. The humps are 3-4 inches high and 12 feet long. Modifying the entrance to a neighborhood street can reduce through traffic. Examples of modifications include a reduction In the entrance width of the street and posting no-turn signs to discourage drivers from entering the street. Two-way or four-way stop signs can cause some speed reduction But heavy enforcement is needed to ensure stop signs effectiveness is maintained. A traffic circle may be more effective than stop signs. However, drivers tend to speed up in the middle of a block m make up for time bst at the circle. Increased enforcement of speed limits does improve compliance but without on-going efforts the benefits may be short-lived. In one study enforcement reduced the average speed by 12% and lead to more than a ftve-fold increase in the number of drivers complying with the posted speed limit. This study also found that most of the worse speeders were neighborhood residents and the majority (62%) were over 25 years old. 1. Mean Streets: Pedestrian Safety and Reform of the Nation's Transportation Law by the Environmental Working Group www.ewg.org 2. Mean Streets 1998: Chikfren at Risk by the Surface Transportation Policy Project. http://www.transact.org/ 3. U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, Trdnsparbtlon Slat/stlcs Annual Repv~t, Washington, D.C., 1995. ~~..i.• ~ i;,n^~tc /' ~t'i LAC 1~~. ~L'M \ ~MVC/~~ ~'L i~ss~ ~ut~:k~ r-~ ~,~,~ 1T1~ hul-~ ~ I ~~ ~~ ~ -t 1r~71 ~~ . b li f? ~ ~ ; ,v u ~i ~ .. n.e ~- ~~ _ _ ~ i /31 7a~~ -~•~ ~ 25 ` 7Y~ l~'L`~ ~~' Il ~ ~ ~~~ ~~ Sf: \p-1 1 ~" /~v~ S ~ - 1~7 ~" ~~~Z 5F eo" 7~~ a~~ •~ ~ it:~~ s, ~ ~ t~ 1~.~. 13. ~~ S'~=. y ,t, ~~~ C > .« lam/-~~A~ SC .% J ~ f' .r...l 5~~. i /~ EAST ~'~ ~{~=" Ja ~ re i~~l U*"` r'~~~ Si I I y ~` ~~~ ~ (_ j?S L~~'~6~ S.•~~ ~~s ~~- ' ~v~ s. E SS~.~.1 L ~n_~ t ~ i ~ c /~ yo) ~ r~ Arc /v ~~ 103 ~ 3 2~ib'~" ~ .J- T: J4SEP~} //~/ ~'r`l ~ ~'~ St •, ~ ~1 ~ ~ ;~ In • l3~ _ 71~ A~ ~ S•~ ,~ fir. ~t '~ 9 ~+~+n d~~ N i'/t.d (fit l~ Z ~ ~ -~ r '- ~i, ~' S.n ~' opt r iv (,~~ -e ~-c r FYI L( ~~• ~.LJ-L~Z~- ~` ~,! - ~ ~. +. _, i ,~~~-~~~ // SS114C~ }~YG-.S -~1 N _~ r l~~ 161 t/ /? d H /~t 1 ~, c' .+ r`` ~ ..~y S ~: . ~t i~/Y~/ ~~ iv1Y~ I'7Z.lt~<<~ Concerned residents of the planned development that would twrder County 121, Baker St, and 7"' ave se/95"' ave. ~.LnS+ ~~ 1.Ir.i~. lfl/'~+^w SC.•Ht~~i L//~~~~ ~~°~C'1„lt) i t~iC~.~E L .~ /ir"•IC.c~C//'J .a~w~ n TAa-~~,1-~k ~°~' .; -, L ~~ a ~ l '~ r ~~ //-~.. 1 _. t't'y- !STN 14J% ~x~ ~ 7•~ Td ~ .~c~ r~F~S ? n/-.r ST .r ~~-., ,~. ,~~-t', -, ~:.~.i ~ // 1 ~- ', L'1 }'~,. ...,. , ~- , ,. ~ ~. ~ --: l ~~• ,: ., =~ ~ - ~. ~ c. ~ i C .! ~ . ~/ / L• r I• ~ r - ~ Ate'. 4. - p1 T~_ Q ,i z i ~_ ~~ I~1 I iii 4awCx. a. ~ f .~ 1 A 1 1 ~-/r I 1 i i '1 `~------~_ i C A~.w.+ w ~'~ ~~ ~ - j n~~ f ~. ~ . ~~.__ ~ ~_~ ~ -, :., ~ ., ~.~ ~~. \ ' "~ ~ ' _~ , , .. . ...~ -- 1 .w ~ --. t i~ ~ ~ *~' - r o - :~ ~~~~r M isc Information - 2008 College of Saint Benedict Residency. Program December, 2007 Currently, 81 percent of College of Saint Benedict students live on campus. Our residence halls and campus apartments are at full capacity. We require first and second year students to live on campus, and most juniors and seniors choose to continue living on campus. The college is in the process of planning for afour-year required residency similar to most of our peer liberal arts colleges. The purpose of such a program is to ensure that all students receive the full benefits of our Residence Life program, a core part of the education at the College of Saint Benedict. The college's goal for this four-year residency program is to house a minimum of 90 percent of CSB students in campus housing. To meet our overall housing program goals we expect to need an additional 150 beds on campus proper. The plan also calls for either the renovation or retirement of some of our oldest student housing. We expect to fully implement the four-year residency plan in 2012 at the earliest. Inquiries about College of Saint Benedict housing can be directed to Mary Geller, Vice President for Student Development at CSB at 363-5601. Please note: Saint John's University has its own plan for campus housing. Inquiries about Saint John's University should be directed to Michael Connolly, Dean of Students at SJU at 363-3512. Judy Weyrens From: Brad Cobb [1231t1c(~charter.net] Sent: Monday, July 28, 2008 3:35 PM To: Judy Weyrens Cc: rep.lany.hosch~house.mn; 'LaNae Cobb' Subject: Graceview Estates Re-Zoning Concerns Thank you Judy for taking the time to talk with me about my concerns with the Graceview Estates re zoning meeting and apartment building projects and for sending me that map. I am also cc'ing State Rep tarry Hosch this message too -Larry is someone I trust to ensure things are done correctly and fairly. I really believe the City needs to move very cautiously with this project on these fronts: A) Public Safety -with only one current access road (4`" Ave S.E.) going in an out of Graceview and with the addition of 85 (x2 or x 3 depending on how many individuals live in each unit with vehicles) units will directly impact traffic volume and causing driving concerns on an already busy residential street. We cannot build anymore living units in this development until other access roads are built and traffic flows studied. We will be inviting a serious accident to happen here -especially with all the families that live along 4'" Ave S.E with small children and several child day cares and the non Graceview Estates residerns who use Callaway Street as a short cut to Kennedy and St Bens. THIS IS THE FIRST AND MOST IMPORTANT REASON WHY WE CANNOT BUILD ANY MORE LIVING UNITS IN GRACEVIEW with a close second being lose of resale value see B next. B) For the homes that will be closest to the apartment buildings like mine - I feel we will be losing a quality of life or comfortableness by having an apartment within 50 feet(?) of our back yard.... Does that seem fair? Would we ever be able to resell our home at its current value? I would like to invite you and/or the builders, city planning group and/or city council members to my back yard for a friendly visit to see for themselves - I am serious about this invitation. C) Also, looking at the plan you sent me - I see a lot of potential for re structuring or location of some of the buildings and parking spaces assuming the re-zone is approved so that they are not so close to our homes. It really is hard to imagine a 3 story monster apartment building staring down on our home from our back yard. 1 feel the building should be in the middle of the area not on the edges nearest single family homes. D) I am very concerned about pedestrian traffic cutting through our yards as a short cut to these apartments and if this were to ever happen (trespassing by these apartment residents on my yard) - I will be become the police force worse nightmare for logging complaints and holding someone accountable. E) You stated that St Bens has a rule that 9096 of their students need to live on campus but I feel that other 10% (and/or the St Johns crowd) will find these apartment pretty convenient to live in. I have recently driven by some of the apartments in St Joe and you can tell right away which ones are student housing apartments and low income apartments. I think we all know what market this builder is going after-lets not kid ourselves here. Again, thank you Ludy for your time and consideration in this matter. I realize that you are not the policy maker. FYI- a petition is circulating around the development and should be presented on August 4. I am going to help with that petition drive but will not be at the actual August 4 Brad Cobb 333 4`" Ave. S.E. St Joseph MN 56374 271.0093 Judy Weyrens From: Brad Cobb [1231ttc@charter.net] Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2008 6:31 AM To: 'Larry Hosch' Cc: 'Judy Meyer'; 'LaNae Cobb'; pennysap@gmail.com; Judy Weyrens; alanrassier@yahoo.com Subject: RE: Graceview Estates Re-Zoning Concerns Larry Thank you very much by helping out with a phone call or two - we would appreciate that support. That was the reason I copied you on my email to Judy W. because of your past involvement with the St Joseph City Council and to bring some "past" perspective to this zoning issue. Sounds like a rather large Graceview Estates neighborhood crowd is planning to attend this meeting on 8/4 and a well signed petition will also be submitted to the city office on or before Friday. A few of us are requesting comments from the city police and fire chiefs on the public safety concerns for such a complex. A number of us feel the single biggest issue is public safety -there is only one street going in and out of Graceview Estates - 4`h Ave S.E.and in our opinion (we live here and see the traffic patterns especially during the winter months) this street cannot handle anymore traffic. This is a residential neighborhood with several day cares and many families with small children. And with only one side of the street having a sidewalk brings another element of concern as well. Then the economic and personal effect of having a large apartment (non ownership properties by tenants) in our backyards is also a major concern for many of use. Again, we would appreciate any help we can get on this matter. Sincerely Brad Cobb Resident Graceview Estates St Joseph MN Thank you Judy for taking the time to talk with me about my concerns with the Graceview Estates re zoning meeting and apartment building projects and for sending me that map. I am also cc'ing State Rep Larry Hosch this message too -Larry is someone I trust to ensure things are done correctly and fairly. I really believe the City needs to move very cautiously with this project on these fronts: Public Safety -with only one current access road (4"' Ave S.E.) going in an out of Graceview and with the addition of 85 (x2 or x 3 depending on how many individuals live in each unit with vehicles) units will directly impact traffic volume and causing driving concerns on an already busy residential street. We cannot build anymore living units in this development until other access roads are built and traffic flows studied. We will be inviting a serious accident to happen here -especially with all the families that live along 4a' Ave S.E with small children and several child day cares and the non Graceview Estates residents who use Callaway Street as a short cut to Kennedy and St Bens. THIS IS THE FIRST AND MOST IMPORTANT REASON WHY WE CANNOT BUILD ANY MORE LIVING UNITS IN GRACEVIEW with a close second being lose of resale value see B next. For the homes that will be closest to the apartment buildings like mine - I feel we will be losing a quality of life or comfortableness by having an apartment within 50 feet(?) of our back yard.... Does that seem fair? Would we ever be able to resell our home at its current value? I would like to invite you and/or the builders, city planning group and/or city council members to my back yard for a friendly visit to see for themselves - I am serious about this invitation. Also, looking at the plan you sent me - I see a lot of potential for re structuring or location of some of the buildings and parking spaces assuming the re-zone is approved so that they are not so close to our homes. It really is hard to imagine a 3 story monster apartment building staring down on our home from our back yard. I feel the building should be in the middle of the area not on the edges nearest single family homes. i am very concerned about pedestrian traffic cutting through our yards as a short cut to these apartments and if this were to ever happen (trespassing by these apartment residents on my yard) - I will be become the police force worse nightmare for logging complaints and holding someone accountable. E) You stated that St Bens has a rule that 90% of their students need to live on campus but I feel that other 10% (and/or the St Johns crowd) will find these apartment pretty convenient to live in. I have recently driven by some of the apartments in St Joe and you can tell right away which ones are student housing apartments and low income apartments. I think we all know what market this builder is going after -lets not kid ourselves here. Again, thank you Judy for your time and consideration in this matter. I realize that you are not the policy maker. FYI- a petition is circulating around the development and should be presented on August 4. I am going to help with that petition drive but will not be at the actual August 4 Brad Cobb 333 4`~ Ave. S.E. St Joseph MN 56374 271.0093 From: Judy Weyrens [mailto:jweyrens@cityofstjoseph.com] Sent: Monday, July 28, 2008 1:07 PM To: 1231 tlc@cha rter. net Subject: Judy Weyrens From: Brad Cobb [1231t1c@charter.net] Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2008 3:48 PM To: alanrassier@yahoo.com; sfrank@stcloudstate.edu; rschultr@mywdo.com; symanietrrenee@clearwire.net; contatctdalewick@hotmail.com Cc: Judy Weyrens; pennysap@gmail.com Subject: FW: Graceview Estates Re-Zoning Concerns Date: July 29, 2008 To: St. Joseph City Council Members From: Brad Cobb, resident of Graceview Estates Subject: Opposition to re-zoning Graceview Estates St Joseph City Council I am opposed to the re-zoning of the Graceview Estates Single Family to Multi Family for a number of different reasons: • Public Safety -with only one current access road (4th Ave S.E.) going in an out of Graceview Estates addition and with the addition of 85 (x2 or x3 depending on how many individuals five in each unit with vehicles) units will directly impact traffic volume and causing driving concerns on an already busy residential street. We cannot build anymore living units in this development until other access roads are built and traffic flows are studied. We will be inviting a serious accident to happen here -especially with all the families that live along 4th Ave S.E with small children and several child day cares and the non Graceview Estates residents who use Callaway Street as a short cut to Kennedy and St Bens. THIS IS THE FIRST AND MOST IMPORTANT REASON WHY WE CANNOT BUILD ANY MORE LIVING UNITS IN GRACEVIEW ESTATES ADDITION. • For the homes that will be closest to the apartment buildings like mine - I feel we will be losing a quality of life or comfortableness by having a 3 story apartment building within 50 feet(?) of our back yard.... Does that seem fair? Would we ever be able to resell our home at its current value? Would you want this development in your backyard? I would like to invite the builders, the city planning group and/or city council members to my back yard for a friendly visit to see for themselves - I am serious about this invitation. • I am very concerned about pedestrian traffic cutting through our yards as a short cut to these apartments and if this were to ever happen (trespassing by these proposed apartment residents on my yard) - I will be become the police departments worse nightmare for logging complaints and holding someone accountable. Once you approve a re zoning situation, it is hard to change it back. Once the building are built you can never go back..... How can you say yes when so many people say no to this proposal! You will be amazed at how many people will be showing up for the August 4 planning meeting that are apposed to the re zoning and the building of apartments in the Graceview Estates addition. Brad Cobb 333 4th Ave. S.E. St Joseph MN 56374 271.0093 a use. a va a Reph~Repl}' AllFor~~~ard From "Bute~lhoTf, Linda 1." <I,jbutenhoffi~sielotadstate.edu> To "alanrassier@yahoo.com" <alanrassier@yahoo.com>, "Frank, Stephen" Report <sfrank@stcloudstate.edu>, "rschultz@mywdo.com" - ~ .,,; as <rschultz@mywdo.com>, "symanietzrenee@clearwire.net" ~-- '~' ,-. ._ .. .. , . , .., ., .. seam Mayor and Council Members: It is with great concern that I write to you. I received a letter in the mail from the City Administrator, Ms. Judy Weyrens, announcing a Public Hearing on changing the zoning for Outlot A, Graceview Estates 2. I am deeply concerned about the construction of two appartment buildings with 75 units, two fourplexes and a duplex in my backyard. Our neighborhood, as all of you are aware, is full of small children. I am concerned about the safety of my child and the rest of the neighborhood children. I have been told by a local realtor that these appartments will likely be more than half full of college students. When I first moved to St. Cloud, I lived near SCSU campus and I am well aware of college student behavior and attitude toward their environment: loud music, broken bottles, trash, etc. In addition, as you know, properly values have fallen. The construction of appartment buildings in this neighborhood will not help maintain the value of our homes. Does the city have statistics on what will happen to properly values once the appartments are built? I would like to see this data. Will it be available at the hearing? I would also like to see the data for the need for these appartments. On the City of St Joseph website, the City's comprehenvise plan's Chapter 5: Housing section "IV Community Input" states that 28% of respondents want more single family housing and 13% of respondents want more multiple family housing. With the College of St. Ben's addressing the need for senior housing why the change in zoning from single to multiple when the community appears to want something else? The housing study that was also done seems to support the position of the community. From what I can tell from the City's website the 2008 plan update has not yet been completed. Why are significant changes being made now? I would like to know your position on this issue? I would hope that each of you oppose the changing of the zoning from R1, Single Family to R3, Multiple Family. Or, is the public hearing just a front and the matter already decided since S&H Partnership has already purchased the land with the understanding that the submitted permit requests for construction will be approved. Is this how our city does business? Make agreements with developers, then have a public hearing to rubber stamp what the mayor and councilmembers have already agreed to? I hope not. Sincerey, Linda Butenhoff 514 Ellie Court St Joseph, MN 56374 http://hostopia.clearwire.net/hwebmail/maiUmessage.php?index=13695 7/30/2008 rage i or i Rep1~ Rep1}~ ~11For~~ard From "Butenhc~f#; Linda J." <ljbutenhoff;u~stcloudstate.edu> ~' ~ ~~' Report as spam To "symanietzrenee@clearwire.net" <symanietzrenee@clearwire.net> Subject[No Subject] Date Mon, 28 Ju12008 14:40:16 -0500 [07/28/2008 01:4oPM MDT'J Dear Councilwoman Symanietr: It is with great concern that I write to you. I just received a letter in the mail from the City Administrator, Ms. Judy Weyrens, announcing a Public Hearing on changing the zoning for Outlot A, Graceview Estates 2. I am deeply concerned about the construction of two appartment buildings with 75 units in my backyard. Our neighborhood, as you know, is full of small children. I am concerned about the safety of my child and the rest of the neighborhood children. I have been told my a local realtor that these appartments will likely by more than half full of college students. When I first moved to St. Cloud, I lived near SCSU campus and I am well aware of college student behavior and attitude toward their environment: loud music, broken botNes, trash, etc. In addition, as you know, property values have fallen, the construction of appartment buildings in this neighborhood will not help maintain the value of our homes. Does the city have statistics on what will happen to property values once the appartments are built? I would like to see this data. Will it be available at the hearing? What is your position on this issue? I would hope that you oppose the changing of the zonin g from Iti, Singte Family to R3, Multiple Family. Or, is the publich hearing just a front and the matter already decided since S&H Partnership has alread submitted permit requests for constructiong. Is this how our city does business? I thought we lived in a democracy! Sincerely, Linda Butenhoff 514 Ellie Court St Joseph, MN 56374 http://hostopia.clearwire.net/hwebmail/mail/message.php?index=13565 7/29/2008 rage i of i Rep4~Rep}}' .~1}For~~ard From }Ieaiher rn<irquart ~daveaT~dheatherster;cr ~mai}.et~m~ - Repc~rt as Spam To symanietzrenee@clearwire.net SubjectRezoning of Grace View Estates Date Sat, 26 Ju12008 13:28:07 -0500 [ov26/2o08 12:28PM MDT] This HTML message has styles embedded in it. . C:}ick here to SNOV+~ the Std-1es. Good Afternoon. As a resident of St. Joseph and a homeowner in Grace View Estates, I am writing to you in strong opposition of the rezoning of Grace View Estates Two. Although I understand the want for growth in the community, I feel that this type of growth is not in the best interest for the neighborhood. It has the potential to lower the property value of the single family homes already established here. It would also introduce more car traffic and make our area less safe for children to play. Considering that Grace View akeady has multifamily dwellings, I feel that apartment buildings and more duplexes would shift this neighborhood in the wrong direction. I hope you will take these thoughts into consideration as you make your decision to keep St. Joseph a growing family community. Sincerely, Heather Marquart 517 Ellie Court St. Joseph MN http://hostopia.clearwire.net/hwebmail/mail/message.php?index=13419 7/27/2008 Yage 1 Ul L Rep1~ l~.ep1~ AlI1=c~r-~~ard From "1=is~:her, Dona3d" <l~F1SC111:R~resbsju.e~u% To "symanietzrenee@clearwire.net" <symanietzrenee@clearwire.net> K`p°rt as Spam ~ ;, SubjectOpposition to Proposed Rezoning of Outlook A, Graceview Estates 2 Date Sat, 26 Jul 2008 13:55:34 -0500 [o~ia6i2oos i2asPM IvmT] ' This HTML message has styles embedded in it. Click here to SHOW the Stiles. Council Member Symanietz, I am emailing in regard to the proposed rezoning of Outlook A, Graceview Estates 2 from Rl Single Family to R3 Multiple Family dwellings. Both I and my wife, Anita Fischer, are adamantly opposed to this rezoning. The creation and occupancy of the proposed apartment, fourplex, and duplex dwelling units will SIGNIFICANTLY increase the traffic volume on 4th Avenue Southeast as there is no other access to this parcel of land. We believe the large increase traffic will endanger the children that live in the neighborhood and reduce property values. We strongly urge you to vote against the rezoning of Outlook A, Graceview Estates 2 to R3 Multiple Family dwellings. Your constituents, Don and Anita Fischer 235 4th Avenue Southeast St. Joseph, MN 56374 Don Fischer Associate Professor/Physical Education Chair Strength and Conditioning Coach HCC 22A http://hostopia.clearwire.net/hwebmail/maiUmessage.php?index=13421 7/27/2008 SEH MEMORANDUM TO: Judy Weyrens City Administrator FROM: Randy Sabart, PE DATE: July 25, 2008 RE: St. Joseph, Minnesota Replat of Graceview Estates 2 Preliminary Plan and Plat Review(Updated w/Public Works Comments) SEH No. STJOE 103971 D92 I reviewed the preliminary grading and utility plans dated July 14, 2008, and have the following comments: 1. The calculations for the maximum dwelling density should be submitted and reviewed. Based on a cursory review, it appears that when the drainage easement (pond) areas aze subtracted from the total plat area, the required space needs may not be met. 2. R-3 is identified as the underlying zoning district to the PUD in the submittal; however, the St. Joseph zoning map identifies the area as R-1. Verify the correct zoning district and associated zoning requirements. o Side yard setback for R-3 (underlying) zoning is 20 feet. The side yard setback for Lot 12 is only 15 feet from the property line. 3. Provide a minimum 10-foot drainage and utility easement around the perimeter of the plat per Ordinance 54.16, Subd Sb). 4. Submit bedroom size information. Aone-bedroom unit with a bedroom size of greater than 140 SF requires 2.5 parking spaces per unit instead of 1.5 spaces per unit. Verify the size of the bedroom is less than 140 SF, or revise if necessary. 5. Pazking setback is 15 feet from lot lines. One parking stall in the southwest corner of the southern most parking lot in Lot 1 does not meet this setback. 6. Verify all building setback requirements of the gas pipeline (easement) are satisfied. It would be prudent for the developer to review the development plans with gas company. 7. The drawings shall incorporate the City of St. Joseph's Standard Construction Detail Plates except in those situations where a City Standard Detail for a construction item does not exist. Examples: o Use City of St Joseph standard hydrant detail: 8.5 foot bury, 22-inch traffic flange, gate valve installed between the curb and hydrant. o Use City of St Joseph standard sanitary service detail -all sewer wyes and fittings shall be PVC SDR 26. o Use City of St Joseph standard manhole casting: Neenah R-1733. o Use City of St Joseph standard number of adjusting rings : 2 minimum, 4 maximum. 8. Relocate the existing hydrant at the northern most driveway to the apartment complex that will interfere with the proposed construction. Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc., 1200 25th Avenue South, P.O. Box 1717, St. Cloud, MN 56302-1717 SEH is an equal opportunity employer ~ www.sehine.eom ~ 320.229.4300 ~ 800.572.0617 ~ 320.229.4301 fax Replat of Graceview Estates 2 July 25, 2008 Page 2 9. The minimum setback from a pond's high water level (HWL) to a building pad is 70 feet per the City's pond design standards. Apartments on Lots 1 and 2, as well as the townhome on Lot 11, appear to be within 70 feet of the HWL. 10. The100-year back-to-back rain event creates a HWL of 1088.81 in Pond 4, which is within 2 feet of the lowest opening in the adjacent structures (1090.74). Revise building pad elevation or pond grading to create a minimum of 2 feet elevation difference per the pond standards. 11. Twenty-foot wide pond access is required to both ponds. If the proposed driveways are to be used for pond access, an ingress/egress easement should be included in the plat to reserve reasonable access for the City. 12. Adjust pad grades for Lots 3 - 6 to improve drainage to 4`h Avenue from the front yard. 13. Adjust the proposed sanitary sewer pipe grades to comply with the Minnesota Plumbing code for 8-inch sewer. Revise sewer grades between manholes MH3 and MH 5, and also between manholes MH 6 and MH 7. 14. Submit a signage plan for the development. 15. Submit an erosion control and turf establishment plan for the development. 16. The 100-year design storm used in the hydrology design was 5.76 inches over 24 hours. The St. Joseph SWMP requires the 100-year design storm to be 5.80 inches over 24 hours. 17. The infiltration rate on Pond 5 was obtained from the MN Stormwater Manual. Table 12.INF.9 in the manual has two infiltration values for areas with a hydraulic soil group "B"; these are 0.6 in/hr and 0.3 in/hr. The hydrology design for Pond 5 uses an infiltration rate of 0.6 in/hr. To meet the St. Joseph's SWMP (safety factor of 2:1) and to use the more conservative value in Table 12.INF.9; an infiltration rate of 0.3 in/hr should be use for Pond 5. 18. It is indicated that Pond 4 has testing data to support a modeled infiltration rate of 9.0 in/hr. The testing results for the infiltration rate must be provided. 19. It is understood the proposed utilities are proposed to be privately owned and maintained. Utility construction must still meet City material and construction requirements. If any storm sewer is proposed to owned, HDPE storm sewer will not be accepted. 20. Storm sewer from CB 5 to CB 6 is undersized. Revise. 21. Invert and/or top of casting elevations on the storm sewer design sheet do match the invert and/or top of casting elevations on the grading plan for the following structures and or pipe lengths: o Pipe from CB 5 to CB 6 o CB 15 o Outlet from CB 15 22. The outlet pipe from CB 12 proposes to connect a 21-inch pipe into an existing 12-inch pipe downstream. It is unlikely the downstream pipe(s) will have sufficient capacity. Verify and redesign accordingly. 23. Submit a traffic controUdetour plan for the utility work impacts on 4`}' Avenue. 24. Public sewers 0-10 feet deep require a minimum of 20 feet of drainage and utility easement when passing through private property. The 15-inch RCP stonm sewer on the north side of the project has 10 feet of dedicated easement on the north side of the current plat, but the plat for Graceview Replat of Graceview Estates 2 July 25, 2008 Page 3 1 does not indicate that the easement on the south side of that plat is for drainage and utility purposes. Verify that the total easement dedication complies with the ordinance. 25. Provide sanitary sewer cleanouts/manholes at the exterior of the apartment buildings in conformance with the MN plumbing code (ex. west apartment complex). 26. Provide isolation gate valves on all water main pipes connecting to the public water supply on 4`~ Avenue. Evaluate use of wet-tap connections. 27. Provided additional plan detail (grades, construction limits, pavement section, bituminous mixtures, etc.) involving the street and curb and gutter replacement associated with the utility connections on 4~' Avenue. Correct the note to "Connect to Existing Sanitary Sewer" at MH-3. 28. Modify specification section 01500, paragraphs 3.03-B.2 and 3.03-C. The Contractor will not be permitted to access water from a hydrant. The contractor shall make arrangements with the City of St. Joseph to obtain water from the fill station at the water treatment plant or obtain construction water from their own source. 29. Revise specification section 02280, paragraphs 2.03. If sanitary sewer chimney seals are needed they shall be of the internal seal type, and not the external type. A maximum of 4 manhole adjusting rings will be permitted per city standazd construction details. 30. Delete spec section 02510 paragraphs 1.03 A.13 through A.15, pazagraph 1.OSC., paragraph 2.03, and pazagraph 3.02J. Only City staff shall operate valves and hydrants. Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC) water main will not be permitted. Dead-end water mains shall terminate at a hydrant. 31. Flexstake mazkers/posts for gate valves and hydrants shall include a reflective material decal. 32. Revise specification section 02530, pazagraph 3.02N.1 to state that any sanitary sewer pipe with less than 7 feet of cover shall be insulated. Revise paragraph 3.04 to state that closed circuit televising is required on all sanitary sewer mains following jet cleaning (also see pazagraph 1.04A.3 provisions). 33. Clarify intent of specification section 02533, paragraph 3.02C.1.c. 34. Markers for water and sewer service stubs shall include reflective material. See specification section 02510, paragraph 3.04E and section 02630, paragraph 3.04D 35. Given the work within the public right of way, the project manual shall incorporate the City of St. Joseph's contractor liability insurance coverage requirements. The City of St. Joseph and SEH shall be named in the policy as additional insureds. 36. The developer's engineer is advised to incorporate into the project manual the language from the developer's agreement with respect to stockpile limitations. o The Developer shall provide a spoil pile management plan before final plat approval. The plan will identify all spoil piles, including location, material type, and erosion control. At any given time, the stock piles cannot exceed twelve (12) feet in height and only select grading material and topsoil may be stored on site. All stock piles must be removed no later than two (2) years from the date of execution of the final plat. 37. The project manual does not include Standard General Conditions of the Construction Contract and Supplementary Conditions. Thus, it is not evident if a correction period for defective work (by the developer's contractor) is defined consistent with those that will be defined in the developer's agreement. Replat of Graceview Estates 2 July 25, 2008 Page 4 djg c: Terry Thene, City of St. Joseph Ron Wasmund, Inspectron, Inc. Tom Herkenhoff, Bonestroo p:\pt\s\stjoe\common\d92 replat of gaceview est 2\m-city review 072408.doc GRACEVIEW ESTATES ST. JOSEPH, MINNESOTA EXHIBIT A i ABLE ST. E. ABLE w; w ~ ~ w ~ vi w `''' -- vi a ~ ~ ~ w w a w x' > ~; a ~ ~ Q 1~ I = __. w O = ao a H _ ~ S ~- O1 ST. E. O CALLAWAY ST. E. ALLAWAY ST. E. ~~~ - w w w N vi vi w w w Q < > Q 2 = ~ ~ ~ ~ o :DALE ST. E. DALE ST.E TER WAY SOH U N 0 t50 ]00 EXHIBIT A GRACEVIEW ESTATES ST. JOSEPH, MINNESOTA