Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005 [10] Oct 17October 17, 2005 Page 1 of 3 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the Planning Commission for the City of St. Joseph met in special session on Monday, October 17, 2005 at 7:00 PM in the St. Joseph City Hall. Members Present: Chair Gary Utsch. Commissioners: S. Kathleen Kalinowski, Marge Lesnick, Bob Loso, Mike Deutz, AI Rassier. City Administrator Judy Weyrens. Others Present: Mary Schroden, Jane Lowell, Jim Sand, Richard Hennings, Brad Barth, Tim McKenzie, George Molus, Todd Brenny, Mike Scherer, Ann Scherer Approve Agenda: Rassier made a motion to approve the agenda with the following addition: Add Approval of Rezoning -Possible School Location The motion was seconded by Deutz and passed unanimously. Public Hearing -Special Use Permit, Sand Companies: Weyrens stated that the purpose of the hearing is to consider the revision of a Special Use Permit issued on August 5, 2004. The Special User Permit provided for the construction of eight (8) single-story patio homes and ten (10) two story town homes. The revised site plan develops the entire site with two-story town homes. Utsch opened the public hearing. Richard Hennings of Sand Companies approached the commissioners to discuss the revised site plan for the Town home development. He stated that the town home development will be entitled Sunrise Cottages. In their original plan, they had planned to develop this area as a mix of town homes and patio homes, however, they have since sold that lot and the new developer is looking to build all two-story town homes. All of the units will be three bedrooms, rather than two. Due to the fact that they will be two-story units, the square footage will increase however the footprint will be smaller which will allow for more green space. There being no one present wishing speak the public hearing was closed. Utsch stated that he was under the impression that the patio home development was funded through a government program for seniors. He stated that in his opinion St. Joseph does not have adequate housing options for seniors. Hennings stated that Sand Companies considered senior housing in the beginning but the area did not accommodate the required parking. Therefore the plan was changed prior to City approval. In addition, Hennings further stated that the rent most likely would have been cost prohibitive for the majority of senior citizens. Deutz made a motion to recommend the Council approve the amended Special Use Permit for Sand Companies allowing the construction of 18 two story town homes. The motion was seconded by Rassier and passed unanimously. Public Hearing -Variance Request. Midnight Haulers: Weyrens stated that the purpose of the hearing is to consider two variances, one relieving the curbing requirements and one relieving the exterior requirements abutting a street front. The variance is being requested to allow the expansion of Midnight Haulers. Weyrens added that she was under the impression that they were no longer requesting the curbing variance. David Potter, President of Midnight Haulers, approached the Commissioners and stated that they are still requesting the curbing variance. There was some miscommunication between them and their engineer. He stated that they are requesting a variance for the curbing along the North side of their property facing the field and for the brick on the building facing CR133. Potter stated that he is requesting relief from the exterior adornment Ordinance for the side facing CR 133 as it will be screened from the ROW. Therefore, adding adornment is defeating the intent of the Ordinance. AI Viehill, Midnight Haulers, spoke in support of the variance request. It is his opinion that since the building facing CR 133 will be screened adornment should not be required. October 17, 2005 Page 2 of 3 Mike Scherer, Scherer Trucking, also expressed support for the approval of the variance for the exterior requirements for the same reason that the brick will not be seen due to the fencing. Tom Brenny, Brenny Specialized, approached the Commissioners to state that he feels there is no need to require that 25% of the building have brick adornment. The Public Comment portion of the hearing was closed. Utsch stated that he had some concerns with granting the variances, as the variance worksheets were not complete. It is the responsibility of the property owner to provide why the variance should be approved. 1. Exterior Requirements: St. Joseph Code of Ordinances 52.33 Subd. 9(a) requires that a minimum of twenty-five (25%) of the exterior building finish directly facing streets shall consist of materials comparable to: face brick, natural stone or cultured rock, glass vinyl, stucco, aluminum lap siding, cut block, and concrete block. Rassier stated that he can understand the request to relieve some of the requirements for the exterior of the building. He stated that if a fence will cover up that whole side of the building, and he doesn't see a need for the brick. He would rather the adornment abuts 19'h Avenue NE as that is the front of the Building. Deutz also added that he began looking at the different reasons for granting the variance for the exterior requirements. He stated that the face of the building is the side that runs parallel to the road. As a result, that is the side that would need to have the brick. He also stated that the intent of the Ordinance is to make businesses more aesthetically pleasing when driving by. It if will be covered with a fence, he sees no need for the brick. Deutz made a motion to recommend the approve the variance request to relieve a portion of the exterior requirements for 25% brick on the building. Relief will be granted for the side facing CR 133 only as this building side will be screened from public view. Further, if the fence is permanently removed the exterior must be adorned at that time following current Zoning requirements. The motion was seconded by Rassier and passed unanimously. 2. Curbin : St. Joseph Code of Ordinances 52.33 Subd. 9(m) requires concrete curb to 8612 specifications shall be used for al automobile stops and for all drive and parking areas. Property owner Dave Potter stated that there was some miscommunication between Midnight Haulers and their engineers. The Engineer hired by Midnight Haulers was not authorized to send a letter to the City stating that the property would be curbed. Potter stated that the curbing requirement is financially burdensome. He agreed to construct the improvement in June without a bid for the construction. Had he been aware of the cost in June he would have requested relief at that time. When questioned about the curbing requirement Ekola stated that drainage is not an issue as they can control the drainage in other ways such as swales, storm sewers, or catch basins. She stated that the need for the curb is due to a requirement of the City's Ordinance. Ekola did mention that she wants to review their plans whether they are putting in the curb or not. Utsch stated that if the request is granted precedence would be set and the City would have a hard time enforcing the Ordinance for other buildings. Deutz stated that the curbing requirement is an Ordinance requirement and financial considerations are not reasons for grating a variance. Rassier stated that he has concerns with the abutting property to the north if curbing is not constructed. Potter stated that they will deal with that issue if and when October 17, 2005 Page 3 of 3 the property develops. Deutz questioned other businesses along 19`" Avenue and whether or not they were required to add the curbing. According to Utsch, the Ordinance did not require curbing when they did their improvements and Midnight Haulers needs to comply with the Ordinances in effect. Loso made a motion to recommend the Council deny the variance of Midnight Hauers seeking relief from the perimeter curbing requirement. Denial is recommended as facts of findings are not present to grant the variance. The motion was seconded by Kalinowski. Ayes: Utsch, Kalinowski, Loso Nayes: Rassier, Deutz, Lesnick Motion Failed 3:3:0 jNote: St. Joseph Code of Ordinance requires a majority vote of those present to grant a variance. Therefore this matter will be forwarded to the Council as a recommendation to deny the requested variance.) Lumber One - Repuest for Rezoninq: Ted Schmid, Lumber One, approached the Planning Commission requesting that the Planning Commission initiate the rezoning process for the proposed school and abutting property. The property is located adjacent to CR 121. Schmid requested the rezoning of approximately 75 acres to E & E and the remaining 28 acres R3. Utsch stated it is his opinion that all rezoning requests should include a concept plan. As of this time a plan has not been submitted. Schmid stated he does not have a concept plan as he is not sure how the property will be developed. It is not his intent to develop the property for five to seven years. Therefore, he would like to build what the market dictates. Utsch stated that he would rather keep the 28 acres as an outlot, zoned Agricultural until a concept plan is submitted. According to Schmid, this piece of property would most likely be developed as multi-family due to the fact that there is no need for anymore single- family lots and more schools are being built in multi-family areas. Deutz suggested that they rezone the property as R3 so that people know what to expect in that area; however he did state that he would like to see a plan. Rassier made a motion to initiate the rezoning process of the property owned by Bill Moilitor and authorize the scheduling of the public hearing. The zoning request will consist of a mix of R3 and E 8 E. The motion was seconded by Deutz and passed unanimously. Adjourn: Lesnick made a motion to adjourn; seconded by Rassier and passed unanimously. y Wey~ns Ad inistrator