Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004 [06] Jun 21June 21, 2004 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, June 21, 2004 at 7:00 PM in the St. Joseph City Hall. Members Present: Chair (Council Liaison) Gary Utsch. Commissioners: Bob Loso, Marge Lesnick, Jim Graeve, Mike Deutz, Sister Kathleen Kalinowski. Administrator Judy Weyrens. Others Present: Kay Lemke, Ellen Wahlstrom, Andrew Berger, Janel Weisen, Tim Borresch, Jim Fredricks Variance Repuest -Stone House Tavern: Utsch stated that the Planning Commission tabled action on the variance request of Stonehouse Properties LLC to construct a sign 44% larger than the maximum allowed. The matter was tabled to allow the petitioner to provide information as to why the variance should be granted and to receive an opinion from the City Attorney as to how the size of a sign is measured. Weyrens presented the Commission with an opinion from the City Attorney whereby he indicates that the size of a sign is measured by the surtace the letters are mounted. Weyrens further reported that the property owner, Stonehouse LLC has withdrawn their request for variance as they were able to redesign the sign. Since the City did not receive a formal withdraw of the request, Weyrens requested the Commission recommend the Council deny the request. Graeve made a motion to recommend the City Council adopt the following findings, denying the variance request of Stonehouse LLC (see exhibit "A"). The motion was seconded by Deutz and passed unanimously. Mike Deutz stated that he would not assume his position on the Planning Commission until the Birch Street Rezoning is completed as he has a potential conflict of interest. Public Hearing -Birch Street -Rezoning: Chair Utsch called the public hearing to order and stated the purpose of the hearing is to consider the rezoning of all property north of the east/west alley abutting Birch Street East between the north/south alley between College Avenue North and 1St Avenue NE and the north/south alley between 1St Avenue NE and 2"d Avenue NE. The property is currently zoned R-1. Weyrens clarified that the City Council on June 3, 2004, by a unanimous vote of the City Council, initiated the rezoning request that is before the Planning Commission at this meeting. Utsch opened the floor those present for questions or comments. Kay Lemke of 33 E Ash Street spoke in opposition to the rezoning. She stated that her property abuts the area in question. She discussed three other businesses in that area and how they fit the neighborhood. She addressed reasons as to why she feels that these three businesses are non-intrusive to the neighborhood. 1. Beauty Shop -Lemke stated that the Beauty Shop fits the area and causes no concerns because there is access from College Avenue which blocks extra traffic in the neighborhood. 2. Loso's Pottery -She mentioned that this is another business that works for the neighborhood due to the fact that they make the pottery, but do not sell anything from that location. 3. Baggenstoss Trucking - At this location, all they do is store trucks. There is no need for extra traffic. Lemke further stated that the house on the corner of Birch Street and 1St Street just sold and it is her understanding the house was sold as a residential property. If this is correct then the homes in question can be sold a residential and should be zoned as such. Tim Borresch of 121 E Ash Street: spoke neither in opposition nor in favor of the proposed rezoning. He addressed some issues that he feels are important to consider. June 21, 2004 Page 2 of 8 • With regards to the alley behind this property, there is not enough room in the alley for two cars to pass one another and he questions if commercial traffic can be supported in the neighborhood. • Borresch questioned who would pay for improving the alley if traffic warranted such. • Questioned the maintenance of commercial property and stated that typically the front of commercial property is maintained but the garbage and parking are located in the rear yards. If that is the case then the remaining residential neighborhood will have to look at the worst side of the property. . • Borresch further questioned who will be responsible for the maintenance of Ash Street as the residents have recently been assessed for the reconstruction. Additional traffic will cause the road to deteriorate faster than if the road is residential. Janel Weisen, Why USA Realty: Weisen spoke on behalf of Dorothy Court whose property is in question and in favor of the proposed rezoning. Wisen stated that Dorothy Court initiated the first process for rezoning. The request came after a buyer for the home requested to use the house for office space. Weisen stated that through research she discovered that the property owned by Court was identified on the Future Land Use Map in the Comprehensive Plan as Highway Business. Therefore, she submitted an application for rezoning. Wisen questioned why the City would spend a considerable resource on adopting a Comprehensive Plan and then not following the document. . Wisen stated that one of the objections to the previous application was that rezoning the area in question will reduce the amount of affordable housing. In researching the housing stock in St. Joseph, Wisen stated that at the present time there are 68 homes for sale with 30% of them selling for less than $150,000. Wisen stated that affordable housing is available in St. Joseph and should not prevent the subject area from being converted to Highway Business. Wisen further stated that from a realtor perspective, it is hard to sell houses with a major highway in the front yard. Highway 75 has an average of 27,000 cars per day, this is not conducive to residential living. According to Weisen, the property that was recently bought on the corner of 1St and Birch was sold as investment property hoping that the rezoning would pass. It is a single person, not a family. Weisen stated that this area would not be a safe place to raise children. Ellen Wahlstrom of 409 8th Ave NE spoke in opposition to the proposed rezoning. She stated that she does not live in the area and is not directly affected by the rezoning. However, she did mention that she lives is an area in which a new development was recently added. She said there have been some serious problems in her area due to buildings being too high and having water runoff. She also stated that a residential neighborhood should be protected with a buffer area and questions if one is provided in the Highway Business District. In her neighborhood, there are trees, bushes, grasses, etc all of which provide a buffer. Andrew Berger of 26 E Birch Street spoke in favor of the proposed rezoning. He stated that the matter before the City at this time appears to be a battle between businesses and homeowners. Berger urged the Planning Commission to rezone the subject area as it is not a safe place to raise children and is not residential in character. He further stated that the residents abutting Ash Street are opposed to the rezoning as they are afraid of the infringement of commercial activity and want to keep a buffer between their property and CR 75. Berger stated it is his opinion that the property owners on Birch Street are the buffer for the residents abutting Ash Street and they should not be denied the rezoning request because other property owners want to continue to use their property as they are currently. Mike Deutz, owner of multiple properties along Birch Street E spoke in favor of the proposed rezoning. He stated that rezoning this area is part of the Comprehensive Plan and as a result, the request should be honored. Deutz commented on the three business mentioned by Lemke. He stated in his opinion these three properties do not conform with the R1 Zoning Ordinance nor do they pay commercial tax rates. Therefore, Deutz requested that the Planning Commission accept the rezoning application. With regard to potential road repair. Deutz stated that the property owners were assessed for the new road and Ash June 21, 2004 Page3of8 Street was built as a commercial road. Therefore, the road should not deteriorate and the City planned for excess traffic. Buffers have been a question and a concern for residents in this area. The current homeowners along Birch Street are the buffers at this time. Deutz stated that a large buffer is part of the Comprehensive Plan for this area. Weyrens reported that she has received two comments regarding the rezoning. The first is a written request of Dorothy Anderson, representing the property owners at 103 Ash Street East. Her letter requested the City deny the rezoning request and keep the area residential in nature. The second comment was a phone call from Gary Stock, 117 -15~ Avenue NE, who spoke in support of the rezoning. Lemke spoke in response to some comments made by others. She stated that the houses along Birch Street are not the buffer. She stated that she is still able to hear traffic from her home. According to Lemke, new roads in the City may lessen the traffic on Hwy 75, therefore it takes away some of the safety concerns. Lemke further stated that not all homes purchased in this area are by young families with children. The Public Hearing was closed at 7:22 PM. Utsch responded to the some of the concerns raised during the public hearing. ISSUE RESOLUTION Back of Building facing residential neighborhood The Zoning Ordinance require that garbage areas be screened. In addition the revised Zoning Ordinance includes language on outdoor storage . Commercial -vs- Residential Street Reconstruction Costs Land Use Controls Throughout the Comprehensive Plan process, the City planned for the area being discussed at this time to be commercial. During the public hearings for the Comprehensive Plan no one objected to the future conversion of this area to Highway Business. When the City reconstructed Ash Street, it was built to a commercial grade. In addition, when the project was assessed, non homestead property was charged a larger percentage. Therefore, the residential property owners are not paying for commercial roads. A question arose as to whether or not the City could prevent a high use business from purchasing multiple lots and developing a use that is not compatible with the neighborhood. The City Attorney has provided an opinion that states the City does have control through the current regulations to deny any of the permitted uses if it is not compatible with adjacent land uses. Graeve stated that he is concerned about a strip mall being built along this area. In his opinion business should conform to the neighborhood, not change the character of a neighborhood. Graeve read the intent portion of the Highway Business District whereby it states the purpose of the Hwy 75 Business District is to provide development that is pleasant, attractive, and aesthetically pleasing. Graeve stated June 21, 2004 Page 4 of 8 that he is opposed to the proposed rezoning until specific development plans are presented. With regard to the letter from the City Attorney, Graeve stated it is his understanding that if the property is rezoned, the City automatically takes the defensive roll which is amore difficult position. For example, if a use is denied, the City must provide the evidence that the use in incompatible with the neighborhood. Kalinowski stated that the City does not want to do strip zoning nor is that allowable under Minnesota Statute. Therefore, the entire area must be rezoned. She further stated it is her opinion that it is logical to rezone this area because it is not safe for families with children. Lesnick made a motion to recommend that the Council adopt the findings of the Planning Commission and rezone the property abutting Birch Street from current R1, Single Family to B2, Highway Business. (See attachment "B") The motion was seconded by Kalinowski. Ayes: Utsch, Lesnick, Kalinowski, Loso Nayes: Graeve Deutz resumed his chair. Rezoning Request -College of St. Benedict: Weyrens presented the Planning Commission with a request from he College of St. Benedict has requested to construct a Presidents Residence across from the main entrance. To do this, first, a determination of appropriate zoning must be made. It appears that the best way to rezone this property is to rezone the portion of the property where the house will be located as R1 with a Special Use Permit. The Special Use Permit would be very specific and will place limitations on future uses such as converting it to rental. Jim Fredricks, Facility Management Officer, spoke on behalf of the College of St. Benedict. According to Fredricks, the College purchased a 62-acre site a while back for future development. They hired a new President for the college effective August 1, 2004. As a result, they are looking to construct a Presidents Residence on 4 of the 62 acres. The proposed residence would be 5,000 square feet. There will be extra hospitality space, dining space for up to 24 persons, and stand up area for up to 70 persons. The design will be traditional and similar to the main building, but on a smaller scale. According to Fredricks, this will be good for the College because the president can attend campus events, but also have her privacy. Utsch stated that in order to look at rezoning 4-acres as R1, first they must provide a preliminary plat showing what they will do with the rest of the land. Since there are not current plans for the rest of the land, they can show the rest as outlots, but they must provide a preliminary plat. Weyrens stated that there are some access issues that must be resolved before the property can be platted or rezoned. Graeve questioned what the residence would look like. Fredricks stated that it will be red brick and have stylish windows. Deutz questioned why they are looking to subdivide the property. Weyrens stated that the College doesn't necessarily want to plat the property but they are seeking rezoning and the only way to accomplish that without rezoning the entire 63 acres is to plat the property and zone the four-acre tract. The City is prohibited from having two different zoning classifications for one parcel of property. Deutz also questioned Field Street and how that will align with the proposed residence. Weyrens stated that the plans presented illustrate Field Street and the location is very close to where the connection will occur. Fredricks stated the proposed driveway is 305 feet from Field Street. Deutz asked if it would make more sense to have the property border Field Street rather than have a small piece of land adjacent to Field Street. Fredricks concurred. Deutz also questioned the natural gas pipeline and the proposed soccer fields that are illustrated on the easement. He stated that the City is unable to put anything over the easement and questioned who is liable if the College were to put something over it. Frediricks stated that the College would be responsible for liability and before the soccer field is constructed they would meet the gas company to assure they could be constructed. Fredricks again stated the College is only looking to build the Presidents June 21, 2004 Page 5 of 8 Residence at this time. The proposed layout out presented to the Commission is a "best guess" as to how the property would be developed in the future. Loso made a motion initiating an amendment to the Zoning Map to consider re-zoning 4 acres of property owned by the College of St. Benedict. The Public Hearing will be conducted on July 12, 2004 and the amendment will consider a R1, Single Family Zoning change. The motion was seconded by Lesnick and passed unanimously. Ad~iourn: Lesnick made a motion to adjourn at 7:40 PM; seconded by Kalinowski and passed unanimously. Judy eyrens Admi istrator June 21, 2004 Page 6 of 8 Attachment "A" RESOLUTION OF FINDINGS A RESOLUTION OF THE ST. JOSEPH PLANNING COMMISSION, ST. JOSEPH, MINNESOTA, RECOMMENDING DENIAL OF A SIGN VARIANCE REQUEST WHEREAS, the St. Joseph Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on June 7, 2004 to consider a 44' variance request on the maximum size of a business sign. The request for variance was submitted by Stonehouse LLC. The purpose of the sign was to construct a business sign for the Stonehouse Tavern and Eatery located at 2010 County Road 75; and WHEREAS, all required public notices regarding the public hearing were posted and sent; and WHEREAS, the St. Joseph Planning Commission duly opened the public hearing and accepted testimony on the application. After all those wishing to be heard testified, the hearing was closed and the Planning Commission discussed the request; and WHEREAS, the St. Joseph Planning Commission tabled action on the variance request to June 21, 2004 to gather additional information from the City Attorney and property owner; and WHEREAS, the St. Joseph Planning Commission reconvened on June 21, 2004 and reconsidered the variance request of Stonehouse Properties LLC to construct a sign 44% larger than that allowed by the St. Joseph Code of Ordinances. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ST. JOSEPH, MINNESOTA, that it adopts the following findings of fact relative to the variance request: Finding A: Property owner withdrawal. Finding: The property owner submitted a faxed re-design of the sign, whereby it was noted that the sign has been re-designed to meet the requirements of the St. Joseph Code of Ordinances. Finding B: Variance Findings. Finding: The Planning Commission could not identify any findings to grant the variance request as a hardship was not present and the granting of the variance would have granted rights denied to other property owners in the same Zoning District. BE IT RESOVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ST. JOSEPH, MINNESOTA, that the variance request of Stonehouse Properties is hereby denied. June 21, 2004 Page 7 of 8 Attachment "B" RESOLUTION OF FINDINGS A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ST. JOSEPH, MINNESOTA RECOMMENDING REZONING REQUEST AFFECTING PROPERTIES ABUTTING EAST BIRCH ST WHEREAS, the City Council on June 3, 2004 by a unanimous vote initiated a request to rezone property located along Birch Street from the current R-1 Single Family to B2, Highway Business; and WHEREAS, the City Council authorized a public hearing for a same area for which a rezoning public hearing was conducted on May 3, 2004. At that hearing the Planning Commission recommended approval to rezone the area to B2 Highway Business and the City Council denied the rezoning by a vote of 3-2 in favor. Minnesota Statute requires 4/5th vote for the rezoning of property from residential to commercial or Industrial; and WHEREAS, the St. Joseph Zoning Ordinance includes a provision allowing a successive hearing for the same application without waiting six months if the Council by a vote of 4/5th approve such; and WHEREAS, all required public notices regarding the public hearing were posted and sent for a public hearing to be held on June 21, 2004 before the St. Joseph Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission duly opened the public hearing and accepted testimony on the application. After all those wishing to be heard testified, the hearing was closed and the Planning Commissioners discussed the rezoning request. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ST. JOSEPH, MINNESOTA, that it adopts the following findings of fact relative to the rezoning request: Finding A: Initiation and Process St. Joseph Code of Ordinances 52.07 Subd. 5 identifies three specific process for amending the Zoning Map. Finding: The City Council on June 3, 2004 unanimously moved to initiate a petition for the rezoning of certain property abutting Birch Street East. St. Joseph Code of Ordinances 52.07 Subd 5 (a) identifies City Council initiation as a method of amending the Zoning Map. Finding B: Consistency with the St. Joseph Comprehensive Plan. Chapter 4 of the St. Joseph Comprehensive Plan, entitled Land Use, establishes planning districts and indicates future land uses. Finding: The subject property is located in Planning District 7 of the St. Joseph Comprehensive Plan. The future land use map guides the subject area for Highway Business. Therefore, the Zoning Amendment is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. June 21, 2004 Page 8 of 8 Finding C: Conversion of a residential area without a Development Plan. Finding: The St. Joseph City Attorney has provided an opinion that the City has the ability to review and approve development plans within the Highway Business District. This review includes a provision that the use is compatible with adjoining property. (St. Joseph Code of Ordinances 52.31 Subd. 9) Further, St. Joseph Code of Ordinances 52.31 Subd. 6 provides a buffer between commercial and residential development. BE IT RESOVED THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ST. JOSEPH, MINNESOTA, hereby requests the City Council accept the recommendation of the Planning Commission to rezone property abutting Birch Street East from the current R1, Single Family to B2, Highway Business. ~2'~~ Ju W res Administrator