HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005 [06] Jun 06June 6, 2005
Page 1 of 7
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the Planning Commission for the City of St. Joseph met in regular
session on Monday, June 6, 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, Mike Deutz, AI Rassier. City Administrator Judy Weyrens.
Others Present: Jim Fredricks, Rick & Audrey Schroeder, Erik Koenig, Jerry Hettwer, Danny Kron,
Michael Gohman, Mark Bartels
Approve Agenda: Lesnick made a motion to approve the agenda; seconded by Kalinowski passed
unanimously.
Public Hearina - Preliminary Plat, Walz's Hilltop Acres Plat 2: Chair Utsch called the hearing to order and
stated the purpose of the hearing is to consider the Preliminary Plat entitled Walz's Hilltop Acres Plat 2.
The plat is located at the northwest intersection of Hill Street and 3`" Avenue SW. The plat is being
requested to subdivide the existing parcel into two single- family lots. The proposed plat has been
submitted by Rick Schroeder, 801 3`d Avenue SE, St. Joseph, MN 56374.
Their being no one present to speak the Public Hearing was closed.
Weyrens stated that when the Council discussed the Hill Street Utility Improvements, Rick Schroeder
discussed the possible lot split of his property to allow for a second home to be built. Since Schroeder
has enough property to create two conforming lots, the improvement project was designed to
accommodate a second home. Under the Ordinance, property can be split once without platting, but only
if the property is platted to begin with. Since the property was not platted, he is required to complete the
platting process.
Loso made a motion to recommend the Council approve the Preliminary Plat entitled Walz's
Hilltop Acres Plat 2 with the following changes. The motion was seconded by Deutz and passed
unanimously.
The plat should be changed to illustrate:
^ Front easement - 15'
^ Note that Hill Street was formerly known as Hilltop Lane and 295tH
^ Public Road is 3`d Avenue
^ Side easement -15' to match existing plat.
Deutz made a motion to approve the Final Plat with the changes discussed. The motion was
seconded by Kalinowski and passed unanimously.
Rassier stepped down at 7:05.
Public Hearing -College of St. Benedict. Six Foot Variance Request: Chair Utsch called the hearing to
order and stated the purpose of the hearing is to consider a six foot variance request. The variance is
being requested to allow a driveway in asingle-family zoning district to exceed 24 feet. The property
requesting the variance is legally described as Lot 001 Block 001 College Addition.
St. Joseph Ordinance 52.12 Subd. 4 (i) states: Residential lots shall have no more than a single curb cut
providing access to the lot. The curb cut shall not be more than 24 feet in width.
Previously, the College of St. Benedict re-platted afour-acre parcel to allow for the construction of the
President's Residence. Before construction began, the College was required to rezone the newly platted
parcel and secure a special use permit to allow for the residence.
June 6, 2Q05
Page 2 of 7
Jim Fredricks spoke on behalf of the College of St. Benedict. Fredricks stated that due to the type of
residence and volume of visitors a wider driveway approach is needed. The current Ordinance does not
allow for two-way traffic.
Their being no one present to speak, the Public Hearing was closed.
Deutz questioned if the Planning Commission granted a variance in Northland Addition. Weyrens
clarified that the variance request in Northland was denied, however, at one time the Ordinance
regulating curb cuts did not specify if the wings were included. Therefore, until the Ordinance was
amended some driveways exceeded the 24 feet inclusive of the wings. Deutz also clarified that the
driveway to CR 121 is only temporary and when Field Street is constructed the driveway must be
removed. Therefore the request before the Commission at this time is only temporary.
The Commissioners discussed the zoning of the property. Utsch stated that the property being discussed
at this time was zoned residential single-family and should be treated the same as other single-family
homes. Lesnick stated that she feels an exception should be made since the request is only temporary.
Kalinowski stated that this residence is not like other single-family homes, it does not have the same
focus. Therefore Kalinowski stated that extraordinary circumstances do exist.
Deutz stated that it should not have been zoned R1 if they could not comply with the Ordinance. He
stated that to allow for the additional curb, the property should be rezoned. Lesnick also stated that this is
not a normal residence. Weyrens advised the Commissioners that if they choose to rezone the property,
they would need a Public Hearing.
The Commission spend consider time discussing need for a requirement to manage curb cuts and if the
Ordinance should be amended. Loso stated that the City should look at changing the ordinance to allow
for wider driveways. Utsch stated that three car garages necessitate the need for larger driveways.
However, it is not uncommon to taper driveways to 24 feet at the curb and widening them as it
approaches the garage.
Deutz made a motion to table action on this request until the next meeting when additional can be
made available to the Planning Commission on the need for regulating curb cuts and if the
Ordinance should be amended allowing a 24' curb base and 3' on each side (Total curb cut
requirement 27'). The motion was seconded by Graeve and passed unanimously.
Mike Gohman, consideration of lot split: Mike Gohman approached the Commissioners to discuss the
potential lot split of his grandmothers' property at 201 E Minnesota Street. Gohman stated he would like
to divide the property into three lots, building one new home and converting an existing shed to a patio
home. Gohman stated that he has three platted lots and he should be allowed to build on each lot.
Weyrens stated that the Ordinance does make an exception for property platted prior to the codification of
the Ordinances. However, the provision does not allow for the reconfiguration of previously platted
property. In order to utilize the grandfather provision, the lot has to be built on as it was platted. While
the ordinance does allow for building on the lots, it does not waive any other requirements such as
setbacks or maximum lot coverage. Gohman stated that in his opinion he is not increasing the density of
the neighborhood as many of the abutting lots are small.
Weyrens questioned whether or not this would fit the density of the area. In addition to density, the
proposed development would require numerous variances on setback requirements. Gohman stated that
the current home encroaches on the next lot by 10' due to the four-season porch that is on the back of the
house. Rassier stated that there are only three other lots similar to this in the City that could be
subdivided. Utsch stated that the Planning Commissioners need to keep in mind that they have turned
down similar requests based on Ordinance compliance.
Graeve suggested that the City consider developing a different set of standards for homes located in the
original part of town, 1St Avenue to 3~d Avenue. Graeve stated it is his understanding that stated the lots in
June 6, 2005
Page 3 of 7
the aforementioned district are small and do not comply with the current zoning regulations. If that is in
fact the case, then the City should look at revising the Ordinance.
During continued discussion amongst the commissioners, Lesnick stated that she would rather see a
house on the property than a shed. The conversion of the shed will improve the neighborhood and add
affordable housing. Loso reminded the Commissioners that they need to follow the Ordinances that are
currently in place. Rassier stated it is his opinion that the proposal before the Commission makes sense
and it should move forward. Kalinowski stated that when she reviews the requirements for granting a
variance she couldn't find a condition that would justify Ordinance relief.
Gohman questioned why Northland was allowed to develop with smaller lots and reduced setbacks.
Deutz stated that the Developer was allowed smaller lots in accordance with the affordable housing
initiative and they met all the remaining Ordinance requirements. Weyrens advised Gohman that the
property owner can make application for the requirement variances and move forward with submitting a
preliminary plat.
Northland Heights, Preliminary Plat: Previously, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing for
the Preliminary Plat entitled Northland Heights. At that hearing the Planning Commission tabled action on
the plat and requested that the Council consider assisting the developer with ROW acquisition for 15tH
Avenue. Rassier reported that the City Council has authorized the use of eminent domain for ROW
acquisition and will work with the property owners to try and reach an equitable solution. Weyrens
clarified that the Developer has agreed to pay all the costs associated with ROW acquisition.
Ted Schmid, Chief Manager of Lumber One, approached the Commission requesting approval of the
preliminary plat. Schmid stated that he has made numerous attempts at securing the ROW and he needs
to move forward so that he can begin building in 2005. Schmid clarified that phase one of Northland
Heights will consist of the following 88 lots:
Lot 1-6 Block 1
Lot 1-28 Block 2
Lot 1-30 Block 3
Lot 1-16 Block 4
Lot 1-3 Block 5
Lot 1-5 Block 6
It is intended that phase one will be completed by 2008. Utsch clarified that the connection with County
Road 133 must be complete on or before the construction of phase 2.
Deutz made a motion to recommend the City Council approve the Preliminary Plat entitled
Northland Heights contingent upon the following:
(1) The City obtains the necessary right of way to allow access from the platted property to
County Road 133 at the Developer's expense.
(2) The Developer shall construct or pay the costs of construction of the road and the
underground utilities to County Road 133.
(3) The Developer may proceed with final platting of Phase 1 of the development if it enters
into a written agreement satisfactory to the City which shall assure the Developer's
performance of conditions 1 and 2. Phase 1 consists of Block 1, Lots 1-6, Block 2, Lots
1-28, Block 3, Lots 1-30, Block 4, Lots 1-16, Block 5, Lots 1-3 and Block 6, Lots 1-5.
(4) The Developer may not proceed with final platting of Phase 2 of the development
consisting of Block 2, Lots 29-36, Block 5, Lots 4-16, Bock 6, Lots 6-27, Block 7, Lots 1-9,
Block 8, Lots 1-13, and Block 9, Lots 1-5, until such time as conditions 1 and 2 are met.
June 6, 2005
Page 4 of 7
(5) If the Developer does not proceed with Phase 2 by January 1, 2008, then the Developer
shall complete the construction of the road and underground utilities by September, 30,
2008."
The motion was seconded by Loso and passed unanimously.
Midnight Haulers -Development Plan Request: Jerry Hettwer of Hettwer Reality Services approached the
Commission on behalf of Midnight Haulers. Hettwer stated that Midnight Haulers is proposing to
construct a 21,000 sq. ft. warehouse addition to their existing warehouse building. Hettwer stated that the
property owner Don Harvey along with tenat Dave Potter are available the Commission has any
questions for them. Hettwer clarified that Midnight Haulers has occupied the former Vic West Steel site
and is located on the corner of 19th Avenue NE and CR 133. Currently, the warehouse is 43,064 sq. ft.
with an additional 4,1045 square feet in office space. The proposed addition will create a facility with
68,895 sq. ft. The warehouse sits on 6.39 acres of land and sewer and water have recently been
installed.
Weyrens stated that the Development Plan has many outstanding issues and if the Planning Commission
desires they can review each of the comments at this meeting or table action until a revised site plan can
be submitted. The Commission agreed to review the items at this meeting and started with the comments
of the Building Official.
Building official comments:
1. A six-foot high chain link fence is shown around the perimeter of the truck parking area and
circulation route along the east side of the building. The fence appears to be placed on the right
of way line along Co. RD 133. Verify County setback requirements for fence along right of way.
Hettwer stated that fence has been placed according to City Ordinance. Weyrens responded that
since the abutting road is a County Road, the Council setbacks will apply.
2. Off Street Parking Requirements:
1 space/ 500 sq. ft. floor area
8 spaces plus 1 space for each 2 employees on each shift -submit total planned employee
count. Due to the size of the building, they are required to have 27 pa-Icing spaces; however, they have
proposed 36 spaces.
3. Loading berths are required based upon the following tabular schedule of gross floor area of
warehouse. While there appears to be loading berths provided, there are no specific details. The
total number required has been estimated and is subject to change when more detail is provided.
5,000-16,000 s.f. -One berth; 16,000-40,000 s.f. -Two berths; 40,000-70,000 s.f. -Three berths
70,000-1,000,000 s.f. -Four berths; Berths must be at least 50' x 10'; Three Compliant loading
berths must be provided. Code requires that they have three docks, however with the two additional
above ground docks that they are building, they will have six total.
4. Parking standards, SAC and WAC, etc are based upon gross S.F. of building. Please verify and
submit accurate building dimensions. For Review.
Hettwer clarified the square footage as follows:
Previous Office 4,045 sq ft New 4,045 sq ft
Ware House 43, 064 sq ft 64, 851 sq ft
5. A lock box is required to be installed on new building prior to issuance of the certificate of
occupancy. Hettwer stated that they are okay with installing a lock box,
6. The side yard setback adjacent to roadway shall be landscaped in accordance with protective
covenants and such reasonable requirements as established by the Planning Commission. 52.33
subd 6 (c). Provide landscaping details for setback along County Road 133. Hettwerand Potter
stated that they intend to put 1 tree every 35' along 19th Avenue except where the sign will be placed. The
same landscaping will be installed along County Road 133. Utsch stated that they should consider placing
June 6, 2005
Page 5 of 7
shrubbery around the sign and along the parking lot rather than trees. The Planning Commissioners
suggested that they ask Scenic Specialties to help with the landscape design.
7. The parking lot in the SW corner encroaches into required front yard set back. Such
encroachment is not permitted. 52.33 subd. ti(b). Redesign parking to comply with required 30'
setback from property line. Hettwer stated that they will work with the required 30' setback. He stated
that it will be tight, but all 36 parking spaces should fit. The area will be reconfigured with new illustrations.
8. The parking lot on the north end of the building encroaches into the required 25' side yard
setback. Modify parking to comply with setback requirements. Hettwer stated that the parking lot will
be moved 15'.
9. Dry wells are considered as Class V injection wells by MPCA. Class V injection wells are
prohibited. The dry well shown on the south side of the building must be eliminated. Hettwer
advised the Council that the dry wells will be closed up and they will put dumpsters there instead.
10. Provide details of proposed sign for compliance review. Potter stated that they don't have a drawing
of the sign right now, but it will be compliant with the Ordinance for signs. He plans to have a wolf and the
lettering for the sign made out of aluminum. They will also have some landscaping around the sign.
11. Provide details of how lawn areas shown on east side of the building are sustainable. They will
remove the lawn areas.
12. Existing unpermitted above ground fuel storage tank must be brought into compliance with
building and fire codes for spill containment and setbacks from the building. Hettwerstated that the
fuel storage tank will be removed from the site.
13. All parking and circulation isles, including existing surfaces must be equipped with 66-12 curb
and gutter. According to Hettwer, they will work with Engineering and comply.
Engineering comments:
1. Class 2 parking area (for semi truckltrailer) in NE corner of site may require a variance from
bituminous surface requirement and curb and gutter requirement of Ordinance 52.10 Off Street
Parking, Subd. 5 Parking Lot Standards (parking lot standards for industrial uses may be subject
to variance or modification by the conditional use permit for the specific industrial use). Hettwer
stated that they were thinking of putting in class 2 because of the trucks. The Planning Commission
requested thaf curb and gutter be placed along the edges by the parking area to control weeds.
2. Provide curb and gutter around proposed bituminous parking lot in SW corner of site. Provide
curb and gutter at driveway entrances. Maximum entrance width to be 36 feet per City
Engineering standards. According to Hettwer, they do no intend to use this entrance; however they do
want to keep it for future use. They will change the entrance to be 36' wide rather than 50' as it is currently.
3. Provide site plan showing drainage patterns and elevations for parking lot, access road, etc.
Show how surface water will be collected and routed to ponding area or storm sewer system.
Ordinance 52.18 indicates the drainage plan should include surface water runoff flow direction
(arrows showing drainage patterns and run-off rate) and show how water will be conveyed rom
the site and how surface water will be conveyed to storm sewer or ponding areas. The proposed
size, alignment and intended use of any structures to be erected on the site shall be included in
the site plan.
4. Runoff discharge may not exceed the capacity of the downstream storm sewer system. Parking
lots and lawn areas may be used for temporary storage during the 100-year storm event. There
must be a 2-foot elevation difference between the high water level and the lowest structure
opening.
The site plan will need to show the drainage arrows.
June 6, 2005
Page 6 of 7
5. Note number 8 on the site plan indicates the SWCD shall be contacted once facilities are installed
and before site grading. The SWCD does not have jurisdiction for this site.
6. If lawn area indicated on the site plan is to be newly seeded lawn, the site fence shall also be
installed behind the curb along the newly seeded lawn area. They will extend the silt fence to the
south.
7. Correct existing drainage problems at the north entrance. (i.e. ponding is occurring at the existing
north entrance). This was already discussed.
8. Describe/show how surface water runoff from north class 2 parking area will be managed to
minimize erosion potential from the parking area into the ponding area to the west. Collect runoff
from parking lot area in culvert or catch basin before routing to pond (i.e. do not sheet flow
parking area into pond). Ekola advised Hettwer that they should construct a swayle down the east/west
center of fhe parking lot with a catch basin area.
9. Topsoil stockpile noted on the site plan to be temporary (during construction) only? Hettwerstated
that it would only be temporary.
10. The proposed bituminous parking area encroaches into the drainage and utility easement.
Parking lots are not a permitted use/structure in easement areas.
Ekola stated that the City recently authorized the East/West Corridor. As a result, there may be a shift of
County Road 133. If the new road would encroach upon their property, they would be compensated.
Graeve questioned the origination of the name of the company. Potter stated that they are available to
serve their customers at all hours of the day.
Lesnick made a motion to recommend the City Council authorize the Mayor and Administrator to
execute a Development Agreement between the City of St. Joseph and Midnight Haulers for the
construction of a 21,000 square foot building addition. Approval is contingent upon re-submittal
of a revised site plan. The motion was seconded by Deutz and passed unanimously.
Deutz stepped down.
St. Joseph Industrial Park East: Weyrens presented the Planning Commission with a plat entitled St.
Joseph Industrial Park Plat 3, which is located in St. Joseph Township. In 2004 the City and Township
modified the process for reviewing plats in the Orderly Annexation Area. It was agreed that the City and
Township Engineer would review plans jointly and the comments would be forwarded to the Planning
Commission for consideration. `
City Engineer Ekola stated that she has reviewed the plat and submitted her comments for review. The
only outstanding issue is the location of easements. Concern has been expressed regarding release of
easements when a property owner purchases two lots. Townships do not have the authority that
Municipalities do with regard to releasing easements. If an easement is released in the Township it must
be completed through district court and is costly. The City is proposing that instead of recording
individual sideyard easements, a provision be .included in the site permit that requires execution of the
necessary sideyard easements. This would prevent un-necessary easements.
Kalinowski made a motion to accept the comments of the City Engineer and recommend the
Stearns County Platting committee adopt the recommendations and approve the plat entitled St.
Joseph Industrial Pak East 3. The motion was seconded by Rassier and passed unanimously.
Ordinance Amendments: Rassier stated that the Commissioners should get together as soon as possible
to discuss the possible Ordinance amendments. Weyrens stated that the meeting scheduled for July 4
June 6, 2005
Page 7 of 7
must be rescheduled and the Ordinance Amendments can be added to that agenda. If the agenda
becomes to full, a second meeting can be scheduled at that time. The Commission agreed to meet on
July 5, 2005.
General Business District: Deutz stated that the City needs to find a way to convert homes into
businesses in areas where it was rezoned from Single Family to Business. Deutz stated that homes are
sitting empty, as property owners cannot sell their home as they are too small for commercial use and
some mortgage companies will not finance non-conforming uses. Weyrens reported that the EDA has
formed a sub committee for the Downtown revitalization. This committee will address concerns and
forward them to the Planning Commission and City Council. Weyrens recommended the Planning
Commission wait to look at Ordinance Amendments until the committee has finished.
Feed Mill: Weyrens updated the Commissioners on the feed mill project. She stated that a developer is in
the process of purchasing the feedmill for conversion to a mix of commercial and housing. However,
before he can design the building he must make sure the building is structurally sound. To do this, the
grain bins must be removed. At this time a building permit has not been issued as a development plan
has not been submitted and approved by the Planning Commission.
Lesnick made a motion to adjourn; seconded by Loso and passed unanimously.
~~~~
J dy eyrer4s `~~
dm' istrator