HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998 [11] Nov 09Pursuant to due call and notice thereof the Planning Commission for the City of St. Joseph met in regular
session on Monday, November 9, 1998 at 7:00 p.m. in the St. Joseph City Hall.
Members Present: Chair Hub Klein. Commissioners Kurt Schneider, Marge Lesnick, Cory Ehlert, Jim
Graeve. Deputy Clerk Judy Weyrens.
Others Present: City Engineer Joe Bettendorf, Michael Contardo, Dick Taufen, Tom Brannan, Leo
Buettner, EDA Director Chad Carlson, Len Wiener, Art Hiemenz, Edith Hiemenz, Tom Skahen.
Special Use Permit, Michael Contardo: Chair Klein opened the hearing at 7:05 p.m. and stated the
purpose of the hearing is to consider issuance of a Special Use Permit. The permit is being requested to
allow a rental unit in a General Business Zone.
St. Joseph Code of Ordinances 52.20 subd 3 (d) allows for the following Special Use Permit: Multiple
Family dwellings provided that the use either adjacent to or provides off-street parking and there is no
conflict with adjacent activities.
The property is legally described as follows: The westerly 50' of the southerly 108' of Lot 1 Block 8 of
the Original Town of St. Joseph, Stearns County, Minnesota.
Michael Contardo spoke on his own behalf. He stated that he is requesting authorization to construct a
studio apartment in the lower level of his office buildings. The apartment would be approximately 500
square feet and be rented to one person.
Ehlert questioned Contardo as to how many parking spaces he currently provides for the dental clinic.
Contardo responded that his current parking lot has space for eight (8) vehicles. Since the clinic only has
one dentist, the current parking is adequate enough to support the rental unit. Rarely are there more than
four (4) vehicles in the parking lot and the rental unit will only require one (1) parking space. If needed,
Contardo stated he could extend the parking lot to the east.
Dick Taufen, 31 - 2°d Avenue NW, questioned why Contardo is requesting to add an apartment unit to the
dental clinic when he already has two rental units.
Contardo responded that when the building was constructed he hoped to rent the lower level to a
business. However, the lower level is not conducive for business rental as it would require an elevator.
Therefore, the only use left is for a rental unit and it is becoming an economic issue.
Taufen stated that it is his opinion that allowing more rental is a mistake. He stated that the neighborhood
is currently surrounded with rental units and the behavior of the tenants is not compatible with a
neighborhood. He stated that the residents should not have to worry about vandalism and theft of
personal property.
Contardo stated that he understands the problems associated with student rental but feels the
landlord should be accountable for managing the property. As a landlord he screens his tenants and has
a zero tolerance policy for unacceptable behavior. Contardo stated that he has not had any problem
with his rental units and would hope the neighbors would contact him if problems occur.
Tom Brannan, 114 Ash St. W, questioned the Planning Commission if the rental unit is approved, how
many tenants could occupy the building.
Contardo stated the area to be used for a rental is a small space and he could not see renting to
more than one person. Ehlert stated the Commission could place a maximum density requirement on the
special use permit.
Page 1 of 6
Taufen questioned if the unit would be for personal use. Contardo responded that he would lease the
apartment to someone other than himself.
Schneider questioned if another rental unit should be allowed in the downtown area. He can understand
rental on mainstreet as the renters would not be disturbing a neighborhood.
Contardo stated that because of his business on the upper level, he will have control of the lower
unit and will not tolerate undesirable behavior. He stated he would be screening the tenants very
carefully and will have a restrictive lease. Ehlert requested that Contardo caution his renter about the
importance of exhibiting neighborhood behaviors.
Ehlert questioned the access to the lower unit.
Contardo responded that the lower unit has access both from 2"d Street 1VYV and from the main
entrance by the parking lot.
Ehlert made a motion to recommend the City Council approve the following resolution of findings;
seconded by Lesnick and passed unanimously by those present.
Resolution of finding
The request of Michael Contardo for a Special Use Permit came before the Planning Commission at a
public hearing held on November 9, 1998. The purpose of the hearing was to consider issuance of a
Special Use Permit. The permit is being requested to allow a rental unit in a General Business Zone.
St. Joseph Code of Ordinances 52.20 subd 3(d)_ allows for the following Special Use Permit: Multiple
Family dwellings provided that the use either adjacent to or provides off-street parking and there is no
conflict with adjacent activities.
The property is legally described as follows: The westerly 50' of the southerly 108' of Lot 1 Block 8 of
the Original Town of St. Joseph, Stearns County, Minnesota.
The request for Special Use has been submitted by Michael Contardo, 26 - 2°d Avenue NW, 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 a Special use Permit as stated in St. Joseph
Code of Ordinances 52.8 subd 4 (a-k).
Therefore, based on the above findings, the Planning Commission makes the following recommendation:
Approve the Special Use Permit as requested, with the following conditions:
1. The maximum density of the rental unit is one person.
2. One parking space will be marked and designated for the exclusive use of the
rental dwelling unit.
The hearing was closed at 7:30 p.m.
Page 2 of 6
Preliminary Plat. Buettner Industrial Park: Chair Klein called the hearing to order and stated the purpose
of the hearing is to consider a preliminary plat for the Buettner Industrial Park. The proposed plat is
located north of County Road 75 between County Road 133 and Joseph Street; containing 58.52 more or
less.
The property to be plated is as follows:
That part of the Northwest Quarter (nw1.4) of Section 1 I. Township 124, Range 29, Stearns County, Minnesota lying North of
the railroad right of way as the same is situated over and across said S 1/2 NW '/4, lying southeasterly of the centerline of County
Road Number 133 as the same was constructed and traveled on October 1, 1998 and lying northwesterly Line A described below,
together with that part of the South Half of the Southwest Quarter (S '/z SW '/<) of Section 2 in said township and range lying
southeasterly of said centerline of County Road Number 133 and West of Line B described below and together with that part of
the East Half of the Northeast Quarter (E'/z NE 1/.4) of Section 10 in said township and range lying northerly of said railroad
right of way, lying southeasterly of said centerline of County Road Number 133 and lying East of Line C described below.
Line A: Commencing at the northeast corner of the Northwest Quarter (NW '/4) of said Section 11; thence South
98'49'05" West along the north line of said NW '/< for 981.48 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence
South 0'0'41" West for 1698.69 feet; thence South 89'36'49"West for 39.46 feet; thence deflect to the right along a tangential
curve, having a central angle of 25'03' 18" and a radius of 375.00 feet, for 163.98 feet; thence North 65' 19'53" West for 100.00
feet; thence deflect to the left along a tangential curve, having a central angle of 24'39'26" and a radius of 375.00 feet, for 161.38
feet; thence South 0'00'41' West for 691.23 feet to the northerly right of way line of said railroad and there terminating.
Line B: Commencing at the northeast corner of the Northwest Quarter (NW '/<) of said Section 11; thence South
89'49'05" West along the north line of said NW '/a for 981.48 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described: thence
North 0'00'41" East for 283.25 feet to the centerline of said County Road Number 133 and there terminating.
Line A: Commencing at the intersection of the east line of said E %z N 1/4 of section ] 0 with the centerline of said
County Road Number 133; thence southwesterly along said centerline for 555.65 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be
described; thence deflect 67' 11'50" to the left for 724.87 feet to the northerly right of way line of said railroad and there
terminating.
Further the hearing is to consider rezoning the below described property from Industrial to General
Business. The purpose of the request is to develop the property commercially. The property is located
north of County Road 75 between County Road 133 and Joseph Street and described as follows:
Legal of Entire Parcel:
That part of the Northwest Quarter (nw1.4) of Section 11. Township 124, Range 29, Stearns County, Minnesota lying North of
the railroad right of way as the same is situated over and across said S 1/2 NW ''/a, lying southeasterly of the centerline of County
Road Number 133 as the same was constructed and traveled on October 1, 1998 and lying northwesterly Line A described below,
together with that part of the South Half of the Southwest Quarter (S '/z SW '/<) of Section 2 in said township and range lying
southeasterly of said centerline of County Road Number 133 and West of Line B described below and together with that part of
the East Half of the Northeast Quarter (E %z NE 1/.4) of Section 10 in said township and range lying northerly of said railroad
right of way, lying southeasterly of said centerline of County Road Number 133 and lying East of Line C described below.
Line A: Commencing at the northeast corner of the Northwest Quarter (NW Y4) of said Section 11; thence South
98'49'05" West along the north line of said NW '/< for 981.48 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence
South 0'0'41" West for 1698.69 feet; thence South 89'36'49"West for 39.46 feet; thence deflect to the right along a tangential
curve, having a central angle of 25'03' 18" and a radius of 375.00 feet, for 163.98 feet; thence North 65' 19'53" West for 100.00
feet; thence deflect to the left along a tangential curve, having a central angle of 24'39'26" and a radius of 375.00 feet, for 161.38
feet; thence South 0'00'41' West for 691.23 feet to the northerly right of way line of said railroad and there terminating.
Line B: Commencing at the northeast corner of the Northwest Quarter (NW '/4) of said Section 11; thence South
89'49'05" West along the north line of said NW '/< for 981.48 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described: thence
North 0'00'41" East for 283.25 feet to the centerline of said County Road Number 133 and there terminating.
Line A: Commencing at the intersection of the east line of said E `/z N 1/4 of section 10 with the centerline of said
County Road Number 133; thence southwesterly along said centerline for 555.65 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be
described; thence deflect 67'11'50" to the left for 724.87 feet to the northerly right of way line of said railroad and there
terminating.
Page 3 of 6
Legal description of section to be rezoned:
A section of property 439' x 597' lying easterly of the SW corner of the above described property. The
section contains 5.76 acres more or less.
The proposed plat has been submitted by Leo Buettner; 5855 Ridgewood Road; St. Cloud MN 56303.
EDA Director, Chad Carlson spoke on behalf of Leo Buettner. Carlson stated that the Economic
Development Authority has been working with Leo Buettner on the proposed plat that is before the
Commission. The plat was designed with large lots to accommodate future business expansion.
The Commission questioned whether this plat requires the developer to contribute either park land or cash
in leiu of land. Weyrens responded that the Subdivision Ordinance requires the developer of Industrial or
Commercial property to contribute 2% for parkland, which could be land or cash. Carlson stated that this
matter would need to be resolved with the property owner.
City Engineer, Joe Bettendorf, presented the Planning Commission with the following comments
regarding the preliminary plat of the Buettner Industrial Park:
1. A determination needs to be made if the area to be developed will be called a Business Park
or Industrial Park. Carlson stated that the area will be developed as a Business Park.
2. The name of the developer is misspelled.
3. Drainage and Utility Easements need to be identified.
4. Existing utilities need to be indicated on the plat.
5. An error in contour needs to be corrected to Lot 1 Block 3.
6. Street Names need to be verified and corrected.
7. Elm Street is only platted as a half street and should be platted in its entirety.
8. Drainage issues need to be addressed.
9. Right-of--way needs to be secured for sanitary sewer and water main placement.
Bettendorf also discussed the concept of creating a greenway area in the Industrial Park. If this is to be
done, it needs to be included in the developer's agreement. Carlson stated that he has discussed this
matter with Leo Buettner and restrictive covenants have been developed for the plat area. Further,
Carlson stated the EDA is in the process of negotiating an exclusive marketing agreement with Buettner
and the covenants will be part of the agreement.
Weyrens stated that the following comments from consultants were received:
1. St. Cloud Area Planning Organization: Suggested the City verify the exact location of the
realignment of CR 133 and discuss future roadways with St. Joseph Township.
City Attorne~John Scherer:
a. The plat does not contain the proposed utilities, setback lines with dimensions and does
not reference zoning of adjacent properties.
b. The Developer did not submit supplementary data as required by the Preliminary Plat
regulations.
c. The lots meet the minimum requirements of Industrial Zoned property.
d. Verify ROW needed for CR 133 realignment
e. Whether a developer's agreement is needed and if so what will be included.
Page 4 of 6
Ehlert made a motion to recommend the City Council approve the Preliminary Plat of the Buettner
Industrial Park as presented with the following contingencies.
1. Approval of the City Engineer
2. Approval of the City Attorney
Further, the motion requests the Council require the developer to provide a greenway in the Industrial
Park and make it part of the developer's agreement.
The motion was seconded by Schneider and passed unanimously by those present.
Rezoning request: Buettner stated that in addition to requesting plat approval, he is requesting a zoning
change for Lot 1 Block 3 Buettner Industrial Plat from current Industrial to General Business. It is his
intent to develop that parcel commercially with possibly a convenience store, furniture store, grocery
store and video store.
Ehlert stated that the Planning Commission has not been supportive of spot zoning in the past and
questioned if the property needs to be zoned General Business to develop. Further, in the Industrial Zone,
a special use permit is required for all uses, giving the Planning Commission an opportunity to review all
plans to assure the business meets all criteria and is compatible with neighboring uses. Buettner stated
that the sale of the lot is contingent upon it being zoned General Business. It is his opinion that if the City
does not rezone Lot 1 Block 3, the development will not occur. Weyrens stated that even if the property
is zoned General Business, a Special Use Permit would need to be approved to allow a gas station in a
General Business zone.
Carlson stated that it is his opinion that the property abutting County Road 75 will develop commercially,
meeting the intent of the current General Business regulations. If the lot in question is zoned General
Business, the Planning Commission will still have the opportunity to review the plans of proposed
businesses. The Ordinance requires Planning Commission approval before issuance of any building
permit in a General Business Zone.
The Commission discussed the possibility of updating the Ordinance to allow General Business uses in
the Industrial Zone. The Commission agreed to discuss this matter with the Council at the joint meeting
scheduled for November 16, 1998. Therefore, Lesnick made a motion to continue the rezoning hearing
on December 7, 1998; seconded by Graeve and passed unanimously by those present.
The hearing was closed at 8:30 p.m.
Lot Split Request, Art & Edith Hiemenz: Art & Edith Hiemenz appeared before the Commission to
discuss a proposed lot split of Lot 11 Block 23 Peter Loso's Addition. Ehlert stated that acting on the
advice of the City Attorney, the Council referred the lot split request to the Planning Commission. Edith
Hiemenz expressed concern that the request did not need to come before the Planning Commission and
did not appreciate having to delay action on the request. Tom Skahen, Sunset Manufacturing, stated that
the lot split is being requested to add parking for the expansion of his company.
The Commission reviewed the lot split as it relates to the Ordinances. Lesnick made a motion to request
the Council approve the following lot split:
North half of lot 11, Block 23 Peter Loso's Addition.
The motion was seconded by Ehlert and passed unanimously by those present
Page 5 of 6
Len Wiener, Parkin Pg lan: Len Wiener appeared before the Commission to present a parking plan for his
proposed business development of a indoor mini golf course. Wiener stated that he currently leases space
in the former bank building on Minnesota Street and is planning to open a mini golf course. According
to the Ordinance, the Planning Commission and City Council must approve his parking plan. Wiener
stated that he has researched many alternatives which included the following:
Requesting the City consider closing the alley between Loso's Store and the former Bank
building, allowing parking in this area. Conclusion: Lack of adequate fire access and
business access does not make this feasible.
Lease parking space from St. Joseph Meat Market. Conclusion: The property owner
does not wish to sign a written agreement allowing such.
Requesting the City consider changing traffic flow in the alley by Loso's Store allowing
only one way traffic. By doing this two parking spaces could be created. Conclusion:
Lack of adequate fire access and business access does not make this feasible.
Provide two parking spaces behind the site and two parking spaces on the lot Wiener
owns on College Avenue. The lot on College Avenue could be used for employee
parking. Conclusion: Feasible and practical.
Wiener stated according to strict interpretation of the Ordinance his business proposal would require six
(6) parking spaces, but since this property is located in the Central Business District, the governing body
has the authority to determine the needed parking. Therefore, Wiener is requesting the Commission and
Council approve requiring four (4) parking stalls for the development and accept #4 above.
Based on the information presented by Wiener, Graeve made a motion to recommend the Council
approve the following parking plan of Len Wiener in order to allow the development of an indoor mini
golf course. The motion was seconded by Lesnick and passed unanimously by those present.
Parking Plan: Provide two parking spaces on the property where the development will occur and two
parking spaces on the property owned by Wiener on College Avenue North. The parking on College
Avenue North will be utilized by the property owner and employees.
Approve Minutes: Graeve made a motion to approve the minutes of October 5, 1998 as presented;
seconded by Lesnick and passed unanimously by those present.
Adjourn: Lesnick made a motion to adjourn at 9:10 p.m.; seconded by Graeve and passed unanimously
by those present.
r~
Judy Weyrens
Deputy Clerk
Page 6 of 6