Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002 [11] Nov 04November 4, 2002 Page 1 of 8 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the Planning Commission for the City of St. Joseph met in regular session on Monday ,November 4, 2002 at 7:00 p.m. in the St. Joseph City Hall. Members Present: Chair Gary Utsch. Commissioners Marge Lesnick, S. Kathleen Kalinowski, Jim Graeve, Kurt Schneider, Mike Deutz. Council Liaison AI Rassier. Administrator Judy Weyrens. Others Present: Neil Franz, Jean Dehler, Rick Poplinski Approve Agenda: Kalinowski made a motion to approve agenda with the addition of 8 -Lot Split Request, K 8 L Properties. The motion was seconded by Deutz and passed unanimously. Approve Minutes: Lesnick made a motion to approve the October 7, 2002 minutes with the following corrections: ^ Add Kalinowski to those present ^ Discussion of Minutes: Change second to last sentence with the following.• ...will review any future ..... ^ Public Hearing Kim Jensen: Add the following to the end of the third paragraph: The Commission stated that the City needs to determine a method of informing developers and realtors of the St. Josh Code of Ordinances regulating rental units. The motion was seconded by Utsch and passed unanimously. Kalinowski made a motion to approve the October 15, 2002 minutes as presented; seconded by Lesnick and passed unanimously. Public Hearing -Robert Gamades, 100/104 College Avenue South -Front yard setback Variance Utsch opened the public hearing and stated the purpose of the hearing is to consider a variance request on the front yard setback requirements. The property is located at 100 and 104 College Avenue South. St. Joseph Code of Ordinances 52.19 subd. 7 (a) states that the front yard of any R-3 residence shall be 35 feet from the property line. The property owner is requesting an eleven foot variance on the front yard setback. The request is a result of the reconstruction of College Avenue South and the taking of additional land for right-of-way Neil Franz spoke on behalf of Robert Gamades. Franz stated that Robert Gamades owns two apartment buildings located at 100 and 104 College Avenue South. Both the buildings were constructed before the R-3 setbacks were established. Therefore, the buildings currently are non conforming and the additional 10 foot loss of right-of-way creates a larger non conformity. Franz stated that Gamades, as part of the ROW taking, are requesting a variance on the front yard setback so that in the event of a disaster, the apartment units can be rebuilt. Franz stated that his client is supportive of the ROW acquisition but would like an assurance from the City that the buildings could be rebuilt. In addition to the ROW acquisition, Gamades is participating in the grant funding which will limit the rent for fifteen years. Therefore, Franz stated during the ROW negotiations Gamades requested a variance on the front yard setback to assure that he could continue to use the property in its existing manner. Through correspondence with the City Attorney it was recommended that a variance be request ed with the understanding that in the event of a disaster the buildings could be rebuilt. Franz stated he would like to have as a result of this variance request, an acknowledgement that in the event of damage to either building, the property owners would be permitted to rebuild on the same site using the same foot print. He also stated that it is unusual to request a nonconforming use variance before the fact. However, the variance will assist bringing the condemnation action to a conclusion. Utsch closed the public hearing. November 4, 2002 Page 2 of 8 Kalinowski made a motion adopting Resolution PC2002-_ recommending the City Council approve the variance request of Robert Gamades, granting a twelve foot variance on the front yard setback in a R-3 Zoning District. Resolution PC2002- RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A FRONT YARD SETBACK FOR ROBERT GAMADES WHEREAS, Neil Franz acting on behalf of Robert Gamades has submitted a request for variance from the Zoning Ordinance regulating front yard setbacks in a R-3 Zoning District, and WHEREAS, the applicant has submitted the required site plan and development application for review; and WHEREAS, Section 52.19 subd. 7 (a) requires a front yard setback of not less than 35 feet from the lot line, and WHEREAS, The applicant has indicated that the variance request was a condition of the taking of right of way for College Avenue South, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the proposed variances as they relate to the findings for granting a variance as defined in Section 52.8 of the Zoning Ordinance, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has made the following findings relating to the front yard setback request: 1. Extra ordinary circumstances apply to Robert Gamades as the taking of property for the right of way for College Avenue South reduced the setback for the existing buildings; and 2. Granting of the variance will not impair adequate supply of light and air to adjacent properties or diminish or impair the public health or safety NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION THAT: the Planning Commission does hereby recommend the City Council of the City of St. Joseph approve the following variance for Robert Gamades: 1. Variance from Section 52.19 subd. 7(a) Front Yard setback -granting an eleven foot variance. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT: The Planning Commission is recommending the approval of the variance to allow for the replacement of the existing building should the buildings be destroyed by fire or catastrophe. In the event of fire or catastrophe, the same foot print must be constructed. The variance does not allow the property owner to construct a larger facility or tear down the facility to build a new complex. The motion was seconded by Rassier and passed unanimously. Mike Deutz stepped down from his chair. Public Hearing -Mike Deutz 111 College Avenue North -Special Use and Variance Request: UtsCh called the public hearing to order and stated the purpose of the public hearing is to consider a Special Use Permit request to allow a rental unit in a General Business District and four variance requests. The first variance is requesting relief from the sideyard setback requirement and the remaining variances are being requested for relief from the parking lot standards. The property is located at 111 College Avenue N, legally described as Lot 010, Block 002 Townsite; N63' of Lots 10-11 and 12. November 4, 2002 Page 3 of 8 St. Joseph Code of Ordinances 52.21 subd. 3 (f) provides for the following under Special Uses: Mixed use of a Permitted Use and a multiple residential dwelling units; but only if at least 50% of the interior square footage (exclusive of the basement or cellar) is used full time for a Permitted Use. The area consisting of multiple residential dwelling units must meet the standards of Section 52.19, Subd. 5 and 6. Parking requirements shall be separately determined for the commercial and residential uses in accordance with Section 52.14, Subd. 4. St. Joseph Code of Ordinances 52.21 subd. 5 (b) states: Side yard setback shall be five feet from the lot line. The property owner is requesting a 2.6 foot variance. St. Joseph Code of Ordinances 52.14 subd 4 illustrates the required parking for development. Based on the plan submitted by the property owner, 36 parking spaces are required and 24 are provided. Therefore a variance of 12 parking spaces is being requested. St. Joseph Code of Ordinances 52.14 subd. 3(e) states off-street parking facilities for dwelling shall be provided and located on the same lot or parcel of land as the building they are intended to serve. The property owner is proposing to provide parking on two separate parcels. St. Joseph Code of Ordinances 52.14 subd. 5 (a) states parking lots shall be constructed and maintained in a useable condition, with a hard surface consisting of concrete, bituminous, pavement or paver stone designed to drain and dispose of surface water. Recycled bituminous or concrete shall be provided except as permitted in an industrial area by special use permit or variance. The property owner is proposing to pave the parking lot on the parcel on which the building shall be constructed. However, the remaining parking area located on an adjacent parcel is proposed to be class 2 material. Utsch stated that he has reservations acting on the Special Use Request and Variance as the complete plans have just been submitted and the Fire Chief, Public Works Director and City Engineer have not had the opportunity to review and comment on the plans. Weyrens stated that a set of plans were submitted previously but they had changed and new plans were to be submitted. Weyrens further stated that Bettendorf received the revised plans on Friday and did not have time to submit written comments. However, he did indicate that in his opinion the variance on the alley setback should not be approved. Utilities are located in the alley abutting the proposed development site and relieving the setback has the potential of creating maintenance issues in the future. Utsch stated that he also has some concerns regarding snow removal and would like a recommendation from the Public Works Director. Mike Deutz spoke on his own behalf. The proposed development includes ^ A two (2)-story building which will consist of residential rental on the second floor and commercial-office rental on the first floor. The rental unit will include 2 three bedroom and 2 two bedroom units. ^ The building location will need to meet the state fire codes being ten (10) feet off of the southerly property line. ^ Upon determination of the number of required parking spaces, they will be provided on the adjacent property owned by Deutz. The adjacent lot is planned to be developed in 2003 and at that time the parking lot will be paved. ^ The building will consist of wood siding with a brick facade, resembling a colonial building. Utsch stated that while he objects to moving forward with the public hearing he will do so unless the Commission moves to table such. Their being no motion to table the hearing, Utsch opened the floor to comments from those present. Deutz stated that he has been working with a staff member of SEH regarding the drainage of his property. At the present time the infrastructure is not built to carry all the surface water down the alley. Therefore, the drainage will flow both to the alley and to College Avenue. Their would be sufficient drainage to November 4, 2002 Page 4 of 8 College Avenue but Stearns County has denied cutting into the road. Deutz stated it is his understanding that a swale will be cut in the area where the catch basins are located on Birch Street West, diverting the overflow of surface water. Weyrens stated that Bettendorf has not forwarded comments to the Planning Commission as he has only been in receipt of the plan for two days. Jean Dehler of 31 West Minnesota Street requested the Planning Commission require Deutz to provide enough parking for the rental portion of the development. She stated it has been her experience that landlords do not provide enough parking in the downtown area creating parking problems for the downtown businesses. Dehler stated that she has had to revert to permit parking in her lot on the corner of 151 Avenue NW and Minnesota Street West to assure that the employees of Accu Serve have adequate parking. Dehler further stated that she experienced parking difficulties when the City approved the rental unit for Deutz on Minnesota Street as only six parking spaces were provided, leaving no parking for the lower level businesses. Dehler requested that if the Special Use and Variance are granted, that the parking area on the adjoining lot owned by Deutz be tied to the development to assure that parking will always be available. Their being no further comments from those present, Utsch closed the public hearing. Discussion of the Planning Commission included the following: ^ Snow removal, Deutz stated that he removes the snow from his existing developments and will continue to do so with this project. • A ten foot setback must be maintained on the south property line for fire codes. If the setback is reduced fire shields are required to be placed on the windows and they are not aesthetically pleasing. ^ Parking in the front. Deutz stated that parking has been provided along College Avenue for the convenience of the business tenant located on the east of the building. The office suites are divided north and south with no indoor walk through. Therefore parking needs to be constructed on both the east and west. ^ The building has been designed for two tenants but could be increased for four tenants. Utsch requested the Planning Commission discuss each request of the property owner moving forward with a recommendation to the City Council. With regard to the Special Use Permit, Utsch stated that the requested use of business and rental is an acceptable use in the General Business District . However, he would like the City Engineer to review the plans and forward a recommendation to the City Council. Rassier made a motion to adopt Resolution PC2002-_ recommending the City Council grant a special use permit to Mike Deutz to allow a rental unit in a General Business District. RESOLUTION PC-2002- RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR MIKE DEUTZ ALLOWING A RENTAL UNIT IN A B1 ZONING DISTRICT WHEREAS, Mike Deutz has submitted a request for a special use permit to allow a rental unit ina B1 Business District, and WHEREAS, the applicant has submitted required site plan and building plans for review; and WHEREAS, Section 52.9 of the Zoning Ordinance outlines requirements for the issuance of a special use permit; and WHEREAS, the public hearing was duly noticed and published with notices mailed to all affected property owners within 350 feet of the proposed project; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the proposed site and building plans as it relates to the St. Joseph Code of Ordinances and St. Joseph Comprehensive Plan. November 4, 2002 Page 5 of 8 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE ST. JOSEPH PLANNING COMMISSION THAT: The Planning Commission does hereby recommend the City Council of the City of St. Joseph approve the special use permit for Mike Deutz allowing the construction of a rental unit in a 61 Zoning District. Approval is contingent upon the following: 1. The property owner complies with St. Joseoh Code of Ordinances 52.21 subd. 3 (fl at least 50% of the interior square footage (exclusive of the basement or cellar) is used full time for a Permitted Use. 2. The area consisting of multiple residential dwelling units must meet the standards of Section 52.19, Subd. 5 and 6. Parking requirements shall be separately determined for the commercial and residential uses in accordance with Section 52.14, Subd. 4. 3. Completion of the rental license process 4. Approval of the City Engineer. The motion was seconded by Kalinowski and passed unanimously. Utsch stated that in recommending approval of a variance, the Planning Commission must review the established criteria. With regard to the provision allowing a variance if a hardship is present, Utsch stated that he does not believe one exists and the property owner can develop the area without securing a variance. Utsch clarified that he was referring to both the sideyard setback request and required parking spaces. Deutz clarified that he can provide enough parking on the adjacent parking lot and is withdrawing the variance request for required parking. Weyrens clarified that as the public hearing requested included a variance on the required parking spaces she would recommend that the Planning Commission take formal action denying the variance request. Kalinowski concurred with Utsch and stated Deutz has alternatives available and does not support granting a variance for either the sideyard setback or required number of parking spaces. Lesnick made a motion adopting resolution PC2002- _ recommending the City Council deny the sideyard variance request and the number of required parking space variance request of Mike Deutz. Resolution PC2002- RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING DENIAL OF A SIDE YARD SETBACK AND REQUIRED PARKING FOR MIKE DEUTZ WHEREAS, Mike Deutz has submitted a request for variance from the Zoning Ordinance regulating side yard setbacks in a General Business District, and WHEREAS, the applicant has submitted the required site plan and development application for review; and WHEREAS, Section 52.21 subd. 5 (b) requires a side yard setback of not less than 5 feet from the lot line, and Section 52.14 subd 4 requires the property to provide 27 parking spaces, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the proposed variances as they relate to the findings for granting a variance as defined in Section 52.8 of the Zoning Ordinance, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has made the following findings relating to the side yard setback request: 1. Extra ordinary circumstances do not exist; and 2. Granting of this variance would grant the property owner rights denied to others in the same zoning district. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION THAT: the Planning Commission does hereby recommend the City Council of the City of St. Joseph deny the following variance for Mike Deutz: November 4, 2002 Page 6 of 8 1. Variance from Section 52.21 subd. 5(b) Side Yard setback -Denying the 2.6 foot request. 2. Variance from Section 52.14 subd 4 -Requiring 27 parking spaces The motion was seconded by Rassier and passed unanimously. Utsch stated there are two (2) variances being requested regarding parking: 1. Allowing parking for a dwelling unit on property other than that where the building is located, and 2. Construction of the parking lot on the adjoining property with Class-2 material in anticipation of constructing a second building on that same property. Utsch stated he is not opposed to providing parking on the adjoining parking lot. However, the parking lot needs to be tied to the development so that in the future the parking lot cannot be sold without the development. Weyrens stated that if the Commission recommends approval, the City Attorney can draft a document restricting the use of the parking lot for the life of the development at 111 College Avenue North. Rassier questioned if the parking lot will include curb and gutter. Deutz stated it was not proposed but he is not opposed to constructing a berm on the edges abutting the alley. Utsch stated that if it is the intent of Deutz to commercially develop the lot where the parking lot will be constructed, it is logical to resolve any drainage issues before constructing the parking lot. However, he would not support leaving the parking lot with a class two material for an extended period of time. Rassier stated that he would support the class 2 material for a period not to exceed one year or when the City Engineer resolves the drainage issue in the area. Utsch made a motion to recommend the City Council adopt resolution PC 2002-_ recommending approval of the variances regarding location of parking and parking lot material Resolution PC2002- RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF PARKING LOT LOCATION AND CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL FOR MIKE DEUTZ WHEREAS, Mike Deutz has submitted a request for variance from the Zoning Ordinance regulating parking lot location and construction material ,and WHEREAS, the applicant has submitted the required site plan and development application for review; and WHEREAS, Section 52.14 subd. 3(e) states off-street parking facilities for dwelling shall be provided and located on the same lot or parcel of land as the building they are intended to serve, and WHEREAS, Section 52.14 subd. 5 (a) states parking lots shall be constructed and maintained in a useable condition, with a hard surface consisting of concrete, bituminous, pavement or paver stone designed to drain and dispose of surface water. Recycled bituminous or concrete shall be provided except as permitted in an industrial area by special use permit or variance, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the proposed variances as they relate to the findings for granting a variance as defined in Section 52.8 of the Zoning Ordinance, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has made the following findings relating to the parking lot location and construction material request: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION THAT: the Planning Commission does hereby recommend the City Council of the City of St. Joseph approve the following variances for Mike Deutz: November 4, 2002 Page 7 of 8 1. Variance from Section 52.14 subd. 3(e) Side Yard setback -Approving the parking lot on an adjoining property. 2. Variance from Section 52.14 subd 5 (a) - Approving temporary class 2 material BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, THAT approval is contingent upon the following: 1. Execution of a development agreement between the City of St. Joseph and Mike Deutz restricting the use of the parking lot for the building to be constructed at 111 College Avenue North. The agreement must be in place for the life of the development at 111 College Avenue North. 2. The parking lot must be paved within one year from Council adoption of this resolution or the earlier of the following events: a. Development of the lot where the parking lot is located. b. The City Engineer resolves the drainage issues in the area being developed. The motion was seconded by Kalinowski and passed unanimously. Kalinowski made a motion to recommend the City Council approve the site plan for Mike Deutz to construct an office building with rental on the second level as presented. Approval is with the understanding that the building must be reconfigured to meet the sideyard setback. The square footage of the building cannot exceed that which was presented at this meeting and on file in the City Office. The motion was seconded by Schneider and passed unanimously. Mike Deutz resumed his chair at 8:30 PM. Madison Park PURD. Viking Development Group: Rick Poplinski of Viking Development/Signature Homes presented the Planning Commission with a concept plan to develop 34 acres of property adjacent to Forest Ridge Addition. The property is currently owned by K & L Properties and is in St. Joseph Township. Poplinski stated the proposed development includes the following: ^ 32 Traditional Single Family Homes (75' - 80' lot frontage) ^ 32 Entry Level Single Family Homes (55' - 60' lot frontage) ^ Townhomes (2 & 4 unit buildings) 26 units ^ Apartments - 66 units Poplinski clarified that the entry level homes include reduced setbacks and smaller lots with the traditional single family homes selling in the mid range meeting the minimum lot standards. Utsch stated that the City of St. Joseph has already exceeded the required affordable housing and is hesitant to approve a concept plan that has 50% of the single family lots requiring reduced lot sizes and setbacks. Utsch further stated that he has received comments from residents criticizing a recent development with reduced setbacks as the homes look alike and are too close. Poplinski stated the development proposed is similar to Magnolia Park in Sartell. Magnolia Park has twelve different house plans providing variety to the neighborhood. By general consensus the Planning Commission requested Popliniski resubmit the concept plan providing more traditional family homes meeting the Ordinance requirements. Graeve stated that he does not share the same opinion of the Commissioners and supports smaller lots sizes providing affordable housing. The Commission discussed the proposed transportation plan for Madison Park PUD. The proposed plan includes the following transportation system: ^ Private roads through the townhouse section ^ 2 north and south roads, one connection to Dale Street East and 17th Avenue SE. The second interior road connects to Baker Street East and a proposed east/west road that connects to Dale Street East. ^ Extension of 88th Avenue to County Road 75. November 4, 2002 Page 8 of 8 The Commission expressed concern regarding ingress/egress for the proposed apartment complex. Based on the submitted plan, only one egress/ingress is proposed and that will connect to 88th Avenue. Poplinski stated that the main gasline extends on the southern boarder of the proposed property and they have not resolved how that corner of the plat will be utilized. The concept is to construct apartments south of the gas line and north of the townhomes. The regulations regarding gas mains do not allow any building/construction, including roads, over the main. Therefore, this area needs further review. The Commission stated that two ingress/egress must be provided when the plan is revised. The Commission also stated that the City Council and Planning Commission will need to come to consensus on the east/west bypass before this plat is approved. As approving this concept plan will begin the east/west corridor around the City. When questioned on the timeframe for development, Poplinski responded that he hopes to finish the planning process during the winter months and begin utility construction in the spring of 2003. Rassier questioned if Madison Park will include a park. Poplinski responded that he is proposing to contribute 8% in lieu of land and would like consideration for the walking trail that is being placed around the perimeter of the development. Utsch stated that the Park Board would have to be consulted regarding the parkland contribution and this matter must be resolved before the preliminary plat hearing. Poplinski agreed to resubmit the concept plan at the next regular meeting of the Planning Commission with anticipation of conducting the Preliminary Plat hearing in January. Lot Split Request - K & L Properties: Weyrens reported that when the K & L Plat was annexed into the City it was noticed that a parcel of property containing .71 acres was located adjacent to 88th Avenue and a portion of that lot is the actual road ROW for 88th Avenue. The property owner is requesting the City authorize a lot split, deeding to the City the ROW for 88th Avenue and attaching the remaining property to Lot 1 Block 1 K & L Addition. Deutz made a motion to recommend the City Council authorize the lot split of the .71 acres of K 8~ L Addition, deeding a portion to the City of St. Joseph and attaching the remaining property to Lot 1 Block 1 K 8~ L Addition. The motion was seconded by Rassier and passed unanimously. Adjourn: Lesnick made a motion to adjourn at 8:55 PM; seconded by Schneider and passed unanimously. J y eyrens~ dmi istrator