Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005 [02] Feb 15February 15, 2005 Page 1 of 5 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the Planning Commission for the City of St. Joseph met in regular session on Monday, February 15, 2005 at 7:00 PM in the St. Joseph City Hall. Members Present: Chair Gary Utsch. Commissioners: Sister Kathleen Kalinowski, Marge Lesnick, Jim Graeve, Bob Loso. Council Liaison AI Rassier and City Administrator Judy Weyrens. Citv Representatives Present: City Engineer(s) Joe Bettendorf and Tracy Ekola, City Attorney Tom Jovanovich Others Present: Chuck Wocken, Clarence & Marlene Birr, Joe Bechtold, Bill & Dorothy Schulte, Joanne Bechtold, Gordon Hove, Dennis & LaRau Possil, Ann Reischl, Matt Symalla Approve Agenda: Kalinowski made a motion to approve the agenda with the following addition; seconded by Deutz and passed unanimously. Add #4 Building Permits in Commercial Districts Public Hearing, ARCON Development: Chair Utsch called the hearing to order and stated the purpose of the hearing is to consider a Planned Unit Development, preliminary plat, rezoning and variance for a plat entitled Rivers Bend. Planned Unit Development/Preliminary Plat: The proposed plat is located south of St. Joseph Township Hall, adjacent to County Road 121 and contains approximately 852 housing units of mixed density. Development as a PUD will provide for some deviation on setback and lot area. Rezoning: The property is currently zoned as Agricultural. The developer is requesting to rezone the property a mix of R1, Single Family and R3, Multiple Family. Variance: St. Joseph Code of Ordinances 54.16 Subd. 3 (I) Cul-de-sacs shall normally not be longer than five hundred (500) feet measured along the street centerline from the intersection of origin to the center point of the turn around. The turn around shall have a minimum curb radius of fifty (50) feet and a minimum right of way radius of sixty (60) feet. The developer is requesting a 100-foot variance. St. Joseph Code of Ordinances 54.16 subd. 2: a.) Block Length. In general, intersecting streets, determining block lengths, shall be provided at such intervals as to serve cross traffic adequately and to meet existing streets. Where no existing plats control, the blocks in residential subdivisions shall normally not exceed one thousand-three hundred (1,300) feet in length nor be less than three hundred (300) feet in length, except where topography or other conditions justify a departure from this maximum. In blocks longer than eight hundred (800) feet, pedestrian ways and/or easements through the block may be required near the center of the block. Blocks for business or industrial use should normally not exceed six hundred (600) feet in length. The developer is requesting a 694-foot variance for one block. Rick Packer of ARCON Development has submitted the proposed plat. Rick Packer appeared before the Commission and spoke on behalf of ARCON Development. Packer stated that he has been working on this project for over three years and finally has a plat ready for approval. Packer stated that he has completed the environmental review process, which expanded over a twelve-month period. The review process utilized is entitled AUAR and once approved serves as the Comprehensive Plan for the development. With regard to the development, Packer stated that the proposed development consists of 852 units comprised of single family and multiple family. All of the lots meet the required width and depth, however there are 53 lots that do not meet the required lot area due to the shape of the lot. The average lot size will exceed 13,000 square feet. Packer stated that he has met with the Park Board and the plat includes designating 87 acres for parkland. A portion of the land donated abuts the Sauk River, providing for preservation. Approval of the plat requires issuance of two variances, one for block length and one for February 15, 2005 Page 2 of 5 the length of a cul-de-sac. In designing the plat they tried to minimize cul-de-sacs and meet all the design standards. However, due to the wetlands and topography the plat could not be designed without the use of variances. Chuck Woecken, Stearns County Park Director, addressed the Commissioners and stated that he is in support of the new development. However, he requested the City consider the development of a canoe park along the Sauk River. Their being no one further to comment the public hearing was closed. City Engineer Tracy Ekola stated that the developer and the City have been working together over the past months to develop the final plan before the Commission at this meeting. Ekola stated that during the review process the following items were considered: - Trails are provided throughout the plat as well as in the parks. (These are shown on the preliminary plat) - They were asked to have sidewalks on the major collector road and these sidewalks will connect the trails and park system. - There were some street issues such as the renaming of Jade Road to 12'h Avenue. This will be a collector road and as such should not have driveway accesses. - There was some concern with drainage and grading. This is not part of the preliminary plat, however they have re-routed water through the plat to the Sauk River. - They have completed and provided their storm water analysis and it meets the City's standards. - Flood Plain calculations have been submitted to the DNR for review. - They have shown on the preliminary plat the oversized utility mains. They also plan to provide utility stubs to the existing properties in the area. - The current street names will be revised. Ekola commended the developer for incorporating the comments of the City into the preliminary plat. Bettendorf discussed the width of Jade Road. The City is in receipt of a letter from the St. Cloud Area Planning Organization requesting that the City dedicate 100' of right-of-way to accommodate 4 lanes of traffic. The developer has agreed to dedicate 80' with additional width at each street intersection. The APO also suggested that the City try and secure an Interstate connection at Jade Road and 194. If that is the desire of the City, the plat before the Commission at this time does not make sense. An Interchange provides for commercial and industrial growth and providing housing along an interchange is not the highest and best use of the property. Bettendorf stated in his opinion the interchange should be located at CR 138. Bettendorf stated that the Commission must decide if an interchange is desired at Jade Road. Jovanovich questioned whether or not the developer would be willing to pay the improvement costs for Jade road to be a minor collector. Packer stated that they are willing to pay for the entire road; which would be 3 lanes with turn lanes in the middle, provided he is reimbursed as benefiting property develops. Utsch questioned whether or not the Park Board has approved the Park Plan for Rivers Bend. Lesnick stated it is her opinion that the Park Board has not approved the final plan and Arcon was instructed to present a revised plan to the Park Board for consideration. Packer disagreed and stated that it was his understanding that the Park Board did approve the proposed park dedication but requested to receive a final plan detailing the changes. Weyrens stated that the matter has already been placed on the next Park Board agenda at which time the Park Dedication will be finalized. Utsch also commended Packer for re-designing the plat to remove some of the cul-de-sacs. With regard to the comments of the APO, Utsch stated that it is not economically feasible for the City to construct an interchange at Jade Road and questions if that interchange would best serve the residents. February 15, 2005 Page 3 of 5 Utsch stated that he had some questions about the possibility of rezoning the area North of CR 121. The request before the Commission is to rezone that portion North of CR 121 as R3. As detailed development plans are not available for that portion, he would not support the rezoning. Utsch stated that he concurs the aforementioned area should be townhomes, but he would prefer to see a plan before approval. The Planning Commission has been working on adopting a Townhouse Ordinance and once that is adopted Packer may apply for rezoning. It is the recommendation of Utsch that the portion identified as R3 on the Preliminary Plat remain Agricultural. Jovanovich concurred with Utsch and stated that he would recommend that they do not approve the Preliminary Plat until all their questions have been answered, as it is hard to make changes once the preliminary plat has been approved. Packer stated that he has some concerns with the recommendation not to approve the plat at presented. He stated that he has completed everything asked of him by the staff. He has prepared the detailed calculations to assure that they meet the Park Dedication Ordinance. They will be dedicating twice the amount of land required by ordinance. With regard to the rezoning request, Packer stated that even if the property is rezoned he still does not have authority to build a structure. The current Ordinance requires that he secure a Special Use Permit for anything over 12 units. Therefore, the Planning Commission still has an opportunity to review a site plan. As a result, if they did not like the plan as submitted, it could be denied. Further, Packer stated that property being discussed is identified in the Comprehensive Plan, as R3, denying a rezoning request that is compliant with the Comprehensive Plan, in his opinion, does not make sense. Jovanovich stated that it is not a good idea to rezone the property R3 until they know exactly what will be built on that site. Rassier agreed and stated that the reasoning is that the developer may have a different vision for that property than the City. Packer stated that his plan was to first get the area rezoned as R3 and then find a developer who builds townhomes and have them present a site plan for Packer to bring before the Planning Commission for approval or denial. Jovanovich stated that if there are concerns of the Park Board the matter should be tabled until resolution. Deutz questioned why there is confusion with the Park Board, as the developer is providing twice the amount of Park Land. Weyrens stated that it was her understanding that the only issue remaining was whether or not a cash contribution is required. Geographically the park locations have been approved by the Park Board and will that not change. Lesnick stated that there is some confusion between useable and non-useable land and some questions about the green space along the river and whether or not they are considering that as parkland. Utsch was curious as to whether or not the useable land that they are donating is more than what is required. Ekola stated that the developer has provided detailed calculations to illustrate that the parkland being provided is useable. This information will be presented to the Park Board on Monday night. She further stated that the area along the Sauk River is shown on the Plat as green space to comply with the Shore land Ordinance. Packer stated that they have submitted full revised plans for the Park Board to review and they have also agreed to grade the parks as part of the development. Utsch questioned Packer as to why he is requesting a variance on the side yard set back, Packer stated that rather than the typical setback of 10 feet on both sides of the house; they are seeking a 5-foot setback for the garage while maintaining the 10-foot setback for the "house side" of the house. This setback arrangement would allow greater flexibility for the homeowner when trying to locate the house on the lot, giving the neighborhood a greater variety of setbacks, allows for expansion off the house side and, discourages the storage of recreational vehicles in the side yards. Graeve questioned if the developer is protecting the wetland areas. Packer stated that he has filed a mitigation plan and some upland will be will be placed in the wetland area at a 2:1 ratio. Graeve stated that his concern is the dirt and how the developer will contain the dirt from eroding on streets and surrounding properties. Packer stated that they will work with the neighbors to assure that silt is not February 15, 2005 Page 4 of 5 collecting on the streets. Lesnick asked whether or not there would be a new lift station. Packer stated that there will be a new lift station and it will be located on the North side across from the Park. After considerable discussion regarding the preliminary plat for River's Edge, Deutz requested that Commissioners summarize their concerns so that the meeting can move forward. - Preliminary Plat Approval: Jovanovich stated that any changes that are requested should be completed before the Preliminary Plat is approved. Graeve and Lesnick stated that they would support tabling action on the Preliminary Plat until all unresolved issues are resolved. - Zoning Concerns: Kalinowski questioned if they would need to hold another Public Hearing if the entire parcel is not zoned. Loso stated that the developer has indicated that they will have more than 12 units in the R3 District, and the Planning Commission has discretion over development of more than 12 units. Therefore, the developer should not have to wait an additional six months as the Planning Commission ponders an R4 Ordinance. Utsch stated his support for not rezoning the R3 portion of the plat at this time. Jovanovich clarified that a new public hearing will be required for any portion of the plat not zoned at this time. - Variance /Transportation Issues: Utsch stated that he does not support reducing the setback through the PUD process. The developer has the ability to meet the sideyard setbacks and he should be required to do so. With regard to Jade Road, those present agreed that an Interchange at 94 is not likely, therefore the developer should not be required to dedicate 100 feet of ROW. If the Interchange is desired a residential plat should not be approved. - Park Board Issues: Lesnick and Graeve requested that the Park Board resolve any outstanding issues before the plat is approved. Deutz and Rassier disagreed and stated that the outstanding Park Board issues will not change the lot/street configuration and do not understand what the outstanding issues are. After hearing the concerns of the Planning Commissioners, Packer stated that he began this process three years ago. Up until this time he has not pushed the City, but he cannot afford to wait another 30 days. He further stated that he was of the understanding that he fulfilled all the requirements of the Park Board and met the requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance. He has spent six months negotiating for the Single Family portion of the plat and cannot afford a delay in the project schedule. Therefore, Packer stated he is withdrawing his R3 Zoning request in an effort to move the plat forward. If the Planning Commission had approved the R4 Zoning District he would have make application for such. The lack of a zoning district should not delay his project. Further, Packer stated that he will be attending the Park Board meeting on Monday night and resolve any outstanding issues. REZONING RECOMMENDATION Rassier made a motion acknowledging the withdraw) of the R3 zoning request for River's Bend and recommend the Council rezone the property identified as R1, Single Family on the plat entitled River's Bend. The motion was seconded by Deutz and passed unanimously. PRELIMINARY PLAT RECOMMENDATON Deutz made a motion to recommend the Council approve the Preliminary Plat entitled Rivers Bend as presented, contingent upon the Park Board resolving all outstanding issues. The motion was seconded by Kalinowski and passed unanimously. PUD and VARIANCE RECOMMENDATON February 15, 2005 Page 5 of 5 Deutz made a motion to recommend the Council approve the request of Arcon Development to develop River's Bend as a PUD, relieving the side yard setback on minimum lot size for 53 lots. The motion was seconded by Graeve. Discussion: Loso stated that he supports the reduced sideyard setback on the garage side to promote varying house sizes and garage locations. Rassier concurred with Loso. Deutz stated in the past they have asked the developer to show which lots would be granted the variances. Packer stated that they have not identified which lots would need the variance, as they want the homeowner to have more flexibility. Ayes: Deutz, Graeve, Kalinowski, Loso, Rassier Nays: Utsch, Lesnick Motion 5:2:0 Building Permits in the Commercial Districts: Weyrens stated that she would like some clarification as to whether or not there is a point when commercial plans can be approved by City Staff without approval of the Planning Commission. Last month the Planning Commission considered a minor addition for Borgert Products which delayed the construction by three weeks. Currently the staff is working with a business owner wishing to construct a minor addition. The Building Official is working with the builder to assure that the project will meet Ordinance requirements. The Commission agreed that minor additions should not need Planning Commission approval provided that they have been reviewed for Ordinance compliance. Therefore the Planning Commission authorized Weyrens to prepare an Amendment to the Ordinance allowing staff to approve minor additions. The City Attorney will be contacted to determine if the determination for Planning Commission review will be based on the project size or project cost. Adjourn: Deutz made a motion to adjourn at 8:30 PM; seconded by Lesnick and passed unanimously. dy Wey ens inistrator