HomeMy WebLinkAbout1992 [04] Apr 06Anr i 1 E~. 1992
Fage 1
Pursuant to due call a.nd notice thereof tt;e ~~. - ~ -
~~~~n~~rn„, fommission for
the C i ~' 'J f .`^" t JI_!`@ ~"' et :. r'~ _j ~ :~. =~="_ ~T , 1 ~, ~n
_ ~ _ p.~ m n _~.li r' _ ;ail_ 'l inn Monua.y Apri 7 19._..::.
at. 7:00 p. m. in the St. Joseph City HaI..
Members Present: Chair Hub Klein. Members of the Commission Linda
Sniezek, Kurt Schnieder, Hub k;lein, Dan Nierengarten, Donald "Bud"
Reber. Secretary of the Board Judy Weyrens. City Attorney John
Scherer.
Others Present: Council Liaison Stephanie Hazen, Bob Loso, Kay Lemke,
Robert Wagner, Joe Hanson, Robbin Hanson, Pill Gohman, Ted Klein,
Elaine Ohman, Jenny Rothanburg, David Lindbloom, Ray Brandenburger,
Caroline Schriml, Frank Imhol±e, Da.r~lene Solarz.
Approve Minutes: Reber made a motion to approve the March ~, 1992
minutes of the Board as presented; seconded by Schneider.
Ages: }stein, Sniezek, Schneider, Nierengarten, Reber.
Nayes: None. Motion Carried 5:0:0
Kay Lemke: Kay Lemke, 33 Ash Street East appeared before the Commission
requesting a variance hearing to construct a garage two (27 feet from
the property line, and to build the garage larger than the maximum
allowed 800 square feet. The Commission scheduled a public hearing for
Monday, Ma.y 4, 1992 at 7:30 p.m.
Caroline Schriml: Caroline Schriml, 102 1st Ave Southeast appeared
before the Commission to request a variance hearing to allow the lot
split of her property. After discussion, the Commission scheduled a
public hearing for Monday, Ma.y 4, 1992 at 8:00 p.m.
P.ay 8randenburger -Re-Zoning: Chair };lain called the public hearing to
order at 7:45 p. m. and read the publication notice. The purpose of the
hearing was to consider a request to re-zone the below described
property from the current Agricultural zoning to General Business. The
property is legally described a~ follows: That part of the Southwest
Quarter of the Northeast Quarter (SW 1/4 NE 1/4) of Section Ten (10),
Township One Hundred Twenty-Four (124) North, Range Twenty Nine (?_9)
West, lying North of the railroad right-of-wa.y of the St. Faul and
Facific Railroad Company as located over and across said land. The
parcel contains approx. 21.67 acres, more or less, Mr. Brandenburger
feels that the only- proper use for the land is General Business as the
property ha.s highway frontage and it is consistent with the land use to
the West. After discussion, Reber made a. mct.ion to recommend Council
approval for re-zoning the above described property from the Current
Agricultural t.o General Business. Approval is recommended because the
adjacent property is General Business in nature and is consistent with
the C~_irrent property. The motion was seconded by Sniezek.
Ayes: k;lein, Sniezek, Schneider, rierengarten, Reber.
Na.~~es: None. Motion Carried 5:0:0
Aprii 0, 199
sage
The hearing was closed at 8:00 p. m.
Ted Klein - Re-zonin Chair Klein called the hearing to order at 8:00
p. m. and read the publication notice. The purpose of the hearing was
to consider a request to re-zone the below described property from the
current Single Family to R-3, Multiple Family. The zoning change is
requested to allow for the construction of an additional unit to the
existing duplex. The property is legally described as Lot 001, Block
003. Those parts of lots 1-~-3 & 4. Block 3, Loso's 7th Addition
Lying Sw'ly of a. Line ?5' SW of Centerline of East Bound Hwy #75.
Ted Klein spoke on his beha.if. He is requesting the re-zoning so that
he can combine all of his parcels located on Old Highway 52, and
construct a third rental unit. The new addition would be set 22' of
the street and a parking lot will be placed adjacent to the proposed
addition, removing the angle parking in front of the current unit. Mr.
Klein stated that the parking lot would be large enough to park a.t
least ten (10) cars, and he would construct some type of border line in
front of the new unit. to eliminate cars angle parking off Old Highway
5~. The garage that is existing will be torn down.
Cindy Lindbloom, 407 Cypress Drive spoke against.. the proposal stating
that the area, is saturated enough with rental units and students, and
re-zoning the parcel would create a. larger problem. She stated that
they a.re currently having problems with noise related to parties, and
cars parking on her front lawn.
Elaine Ohman, 337 Cypress Drive al:~o spoke against the proposal stating
above normal noise levels and parking problems as her objections.
She also felt that the addition would decrease her property value.
Sob Loso, 301 Birch Street. West also objected to the proposal, citing
the same objections, density and noise levels.
Don Hanson, 341 Cypress Drive, was unable to attend, but objected in
writing stating the following reasons: 1) Promises from the last
addition (1989) did not follow thru. Mr. Klein had promised a parking
l:~t in the back of the units and a barrier would be placed in front to
eliminate angle parking - as of today this has not yet been followed
thru. ~1 The Street is too narrow for additional parking of cars.
3) Parties continue down into the Cypress Drive residential area and
noise continues after 10:00 p. m. 4) He is concerned for the safety of
his children, both from traffic and because they don't know their
renters.
Commissioner Linda Sniezek spoke in favor of the re-zoning stating that
Mr. Klein has been a very responsible landlord and the neighbors should
exchange phone numbers with him and call him immediately when a problem
arises.
Reber made a motion to recommend Council denial for re-zoning of
the above mentioned property from current. Single Family to R-3,
PlultiE~l~_ Fami:. LrFnial is requested l;e,sed on the following findings,
which contradict the Joseph Code of Ordir-:an•,~es:
Apr i l c7, 199
Fage 3
Section 53.2 subd 1: To promote a.nd pr•etec:t. the general public
health, safet_ Ticra.l S, ,omfc7rt a.nd 7e r7=ra i wP i f,a.r e Ot t.hE
inha.bitan±.s cf the City of Wit. Joseph.
Section 53.^ subd 3: To pr~va~7t the ~~vercrowding of land and
undue concentration of population.
Section 52.2 subd 6: To promote the character and preserve and
enhance the stability of properties and areas within the City.
The motion was seconded by iJierengarten.
Ayes: Reber, Nierengarten.
Nayes: Sniezek Abstain: Schnieder, F':lein.
The hearing was closed a.t 8:40 p.m.
Ted Mein _ ti/ariance Request: Chair Flein ca.i led the hearing to order
at 8:45 p. m. The purpose of the hearing was to consider a request for
a. thirteen (13) foot variance on the front yard setback, in an R-3
zone, to allow construction of an a.dditicna.l unit to the existing
duplex. Zoning Ordinance 52 of the St. Joseph Code of Qrdinances
requires a 35 foot front yard setback in an R-3 zone. The property is
legally described as Lot 001 B1ocI< 003. Those parts of lots 1-~-3 & 4.
Block 3, Loso's 7th addition lying Sw'ly of a tine 75' SW of Centerline
of East Bound Hwy #7.5; and Lot 007, Block 00~; Lots 7 & 8 & E2 of West
Street. Vacation, between blocks 2 E~ 3, Less Highway Blocl< ~'.
Mr. Klein stated that he is requesting a variance of thirteen feet tc
align his proposed unit with the existing uni±s.
Those present wished to express their opposition to the variance for
the same reasons as to why they were opposed to the re-zoning request.
In responses to their opposition, Mr. Y•.lein fPlt_ that by adding the
proposed unit, it would clean up some of the problems with parties.
The garage that is existing on the proposed site has become a party
room, a.nd by bui]ding a. new unit, the garage would be demolished. He
also felt that the new building would be an asset to the neighborhood,
and encouraged the neighboring residents to call him when the problems
arise.
Reber made a motion to recommend Council denial of t_he thirteen (13)
foot variance request of Ted F:lein. Denial is based on the following
findings, which contradict the Joseph Code of Ordinances.
Section 53.7 subd 2 (a) That there are exceptional or
extraordinary- circumstances or conditions applying to the property
in question as to the intended use of the property that do not
aF'F1y generally to other properties in the same zoning district.
The exceptional or extraordinary circumstances must not be the
result cf actions taken by the petitioner.
Section 57.7 subd 2(d) That the prol_7osed variance will not impair
ar: s.de~-iuate _uF~pl;,f of 1 i.;~ht and sir to adjacent property, or
diminish or impair established pr•uperty values within the
April 6, 1992
Fage 4
surrounding ar•es, or in an,y ot}-~er respect impair the public
health, safety or welfare of the residents- of the City.
The motion was seconded by Nierengarten.
Ayes: Nierengarten, Reber
Naves: None.
Abstain: Sniezek, Schneider, Klein.
The hearing was closed a.t 9:00 p. m.
Fence Drdinance: According to the St. Joseph Code of Qrdinances, a
public hearing must be held on the proposed fence ordinance. Chair
Klein scheduled the hearing for May 4, 1992 at 7;Q0 p.m.
The meeting was adjourned at 9:15 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
~~~~~
Judy Weyrens
Secretary of the Board