Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005 [11] Nov 01November 1, 2005 Page 1 of 5 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the Planning Commission for the City of St. Joseph met in special session on Monday, November 1, 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. City Representatives Present: City Engineer Tracy Ekola, City Attorney Tom Jovanovich Others Present: Jerry Hettwer, Jeff Haviland Approve Aaenda: Deutz made a motion to approve the agenda with the following deletion: Delete Minutes The motion was seconded by Lesnick and passed unanimously. Public Hearing -Rezoning Request. Leo Buettner: Utsch opened the hearing and the purpose of the hearing is to consider rezoning Lot 2, Block 3 from the current Industrial to B2, Highway Business. Previously, the EDA and Planning Commission considered the request to conduct a Public Hearing to rezone the some property in the Buettner Business Park from Industrial to Highway Business. Based on the recommendation of the EDA, the Planning Commission initiated the process for rezoning Lot 2 Block 3, Buettner Business Park. The proposed use is consistent with B2, Highway Business. Jerry Hettwer, Hettwer Realty Services, approached the Commissioners to represent the property owner, Leo Buettner. Their reason for requesting the rezoning is to promote high value development and take advantage of the highway location. Although Hettwer was unable to divulge who the potential buyer is, he stated that it is a retail business. The potential user needs more than one lot for his business. The 1St lot is 5.699 acres and the second lot, the lot in question, is 7.836 acres. The first lot is currently zoned 62, and as a result, Hettwer stated that it would make sense to zone both lots the same. Elm Street is the current separator between the Industrial Zoning District and the 62 Zoning District. According to Hettwer, Buettner originally hoped that this piece of property would be zoned commercial. The public hearing was closed. Loso made a motion to recommend that the City Council rezone the aforementioned property from the current Industrial to B2, Highway Business, as it is a consistent use along Hwy 75. The motion was seconded by Rassier and passed unanimously. Public Hearing -Variance Reauest. Cory Ehlert: Weyrens stated that the purpose of the hearing is to consider a variance request on the maximum accessory space in an R1, Single Family Zoning District. The property owner is requesting a five hundred forty foot variance to allow a tuck under garage under the existing garage. St. Joseph Code of Ordinances 42.27 Subd. 4 (g)I11 states: One or two accessory buildings covering a combined area not greater than 1,350 square feet are permitted. Cory Ehlert, 716 7th Avenue NE, approached the Commissioners, as he is the property owner requesting the variance. According to Ehlert, due to the layout of the lot, they are able to do a walk out to the back of the house and he intended to add a space under the main garage as extra storage space. Ehlert interpreted the Ordinance as it referred to lot coverage rather than total square footage of accessory space. Weyrens added that the tuck under feature for the garage would create a balance with the house and the garage. If the variance is not granted, the space will be used as habitable space. The public hearing was closed and opened to the Commissioners for discussion. Utsch stated that he has reviewed the site plan along with the statement of facts and he thinks it is a unique situation, as there is November 1, 2005 Page 2 of 5 no extra green space being taken away. Kalinowski did not see a problem with granting the variance, however she felt that one of the findings could be written differently. St. Joseph Code of Ordinances 52.8 subd. (d) states that "the proposed variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property or diminish or impair established property values within the surrounding area, or in any other respect impair the public health, safety or welfare of the residents of the City". ORIGINAL FINDING: The property owner is trying to find a home that fits into the neighborhood to protect the values of the surrounding properties and meet his needs. The home proposed keeps the integrity of the neighborhood and protects the land values. NEW FINDING: The proposed variance will not impair the public health, safety or welfare of the residents of the City. Deutz made a motion to recommend approval of the variance based upon the findings of fact. The motion was seconded by Kalinowski and passed unanimously. Utsch called for a short recess at 7:25 before beginning the final Public Hearing. The meeting was reconvened at 7:30. Public Hearing -Amendment to Comprehensive Plan and Rezonin4 Reauest. Ted Schmid: Weyrens stated that the purpose of the hearing is to consider rezoning a portion of the property described below as a mix of E & E and R3, Multiple Family. The hearing is also requesting an amendment to St. Joseph Comprehensive Plan allowing for R3 in the area described below. The rezoning and Comprehensive Plan amendment will allow the construction of a school facility and mixed unity density. The Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 14, Township 124 North, Range 29 West, Stearns County, Minnesota. AND the south 225.33 feet of the Northeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 14, Township 124 North, Range 29 West, Stearns County, Minnesota AND the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 14, Township 124 North, Range 29 West, Stearns County, Minnesota, LESS AND EXCEPT the South 858.00 feet (52 rods) of the East 660.00 feet (40 rods) of the said Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter. Containing 75.0 acres more or less. Previously, the Planning Commission has agreed to initiate the process to conduct a public hearing for the rezoning of 102 acres formerly owned by Aloys Bechtold. Ted Schmid of Lumber One, who is proposing to sell approximately 75 acres to District 742 for a K-8 school and develop the remaining acreage as R3, Multiple Family, has submitted the request. The Comprehensive Plan indicates the area in question as low density. Therefore, the Comprehensive Plan must be amended. The subject property is located in Planning District 14 and while the district does allow for mixed and tiered density, it states it is for areas abutting CR 121. A site plan has not yet been provided, as the property will not be developed for five to seven years. The future development will depend on the housing needs at the time of development. Ted Schmid, Lumber One, approached the Commissioners to request the rezoning of his property. He stated that he was contacted by the School Board about potentially selling them some of this property to build a school in St. Joseph. Since then, they have held an informational meeting with the residents within 350' of the proposed site. He stated that the biggest concern raised by the adjacent property owners was to how they could be assured that the R3 portion would not negatively impact them economically. Having a mix of R3 and E & E is not uncommon, as it is seen quite often in other neighboring cities. Tim Able, 29457 Kiwi Court, approached the Commissioners in opposition to the rezoning. He stated that few people would say that the City does not need a school in St. Joseph and that is not his concern. The 28 acres that they are requesting to rezone R3 is what he is concerned about. He stated that he attended November 1, 2005 Page 3 of 5 the informational meeting and thought that was a very nice opportunity to hear more about the potential project. At the meeting, they mentioned that if the rezoning were not approved, the deal with the School Board would not go through. He urges the Commissioners to do what is best for the community, as in 5-7 years this area might need something that the community cannot handle. He also stated that if this project is approved, he stated that he is concerned about the road extending south along 12th Avenue. The possible road would run directly behind the houses on Kiwi Court. Currently, the residents along there have nicely wooded 1-acre lots and a new road would take out some of their property. He does not see that as an improvement to their properties and they would not have direct access from their properties, but yet they will be responsible for paying the costs for the road, sewer, etc. Bill Molitor stepped up as the co-owner of the property in question. He stated that the School Board approached them and asked them if they would sell them some land to build the school. Jeff Havillan, Kiwi Court, also approached the commissioners with some questions as well. He questioned whether or not a referendum has been done yet to see what residents think of issues such as Field Street and whether or not they agree with the growth. Weyrens stated that no they have not had a referendum; however if a developer comes in with a request for development and the City has the capacity to grow, they cannot deny them of that request. Weyrens also mentioned that the City has had manageable growth in the past and will continue to have manageable growth in developments such as ARCON where development will be spread over 12 years. Havillan then questioned whether or not the residents agree with the growth. Jovanovich explained that if a developer buys a piece of land, they have the right to develop that land and they can only deny the request to rezone the property if there is a legal basis for the denial. Havillan also questioned whether or not the City had a referendum for the Comprehensive Plan. Rassier explained that there was no referendum held; however Public Hearings were held during the process in which residents could voice any concerns. Mani Campos, 9219 295th Street, spoke to the Commissioners in opposition to the rezoning. He brought up two issues as to why he is opposed to the rezoning. 1. Campos stated that, in his opinion, having amultiple-family neighborhood near a school is not always a good idea. He does not feel that St. Cloud is a good model of planned development and St. Joseph should not model what St. Cloud has done. 2. He also mentioned that it seems as if the School Board is holding the City "hostage". They are aware of the fact that St. Joseph needs a school; however they should have thought about this prior to now. Overall, Campos does not think that this is a good idea for the City. The public portion of the hearing was closed. After the considerable amount of Public Input, the commissioners opened it up for discussion. Utsch stated that he has some problems with R3 portion of rezoning this piece of property. o The property will not be functionable for 5-7 years and it is too early to know what will be needed at that time. o There is no site plan available and he would rather wait to rezone the property until a site plan is available for Planning Consideration. o The Purchase Agreement with the School Board has too many contingencies. The School Board should be able to purchase the property they are looking at without the contingencies. The driving force for the need to rezone is to raise the property values for the land they are seeking, which the Attorney feels is not a valid reason for the rezoning. o This is premature at this point due to lack of public infrastructure. o The Comprehensive Plan indicates that this area would be tiered development; therefore the Comprehensive Plan would also need to be amended. Loso stated that when Rick Packer, ARCON Development applied for rezoning, the Planning Commission denied the rezoning request until it is apparent what is needed in the housing market. November 1, 2005 Page4of5 Deutz commented that all of the zoning districts allow for a School and that there was never one area designated for such. According to Utsch, a school in St. Joseph is a good idea; however he does not see a need to rezone the remaining 28 acres until Schmid is ready to develop that property. Deutz then stated that the best use of that area would be single-family homes and that would result in more profits for the developer. The developer is allowing the School District to purchase approximately 75 acres to construct a school. If the rezoning is approved to allow for the remaining 28 acres to be multi-family, the Planning Commission will still have control of what is built. Utsch restated that he feels the developer should wait to rezone the property until they are ready to develop the site. Loso questioned why this is a City issue. In his opinion, it is the School Board's responsibility to purchase the land and build the school. Utsch stated; however, that the sale of the property is contingent upon the rezoning of the entire parcel. Loso also questioned whether or not there are any other possible sites. Schmid addressed the Commissioners and stated that they have some facts missing. It was noted that an appraisal was needed for the property before the School Board would purchase the land; however Schmid stated that the appraisal is only for the 75 acres rather than the entire parcel. Schmid also stated that they were approached by the School Board and that the School Board really liked the site in question. As Schmid mentioned before, R3 or higher density zoning is seen near schools in many other communities. Due to the lack of infrastructure, Utsch stated that the plan is premature. He questioned who would pay for the addition of the public infrastructure. He is also concerned that the School Board has not yet come before the Planning Commission to state that they have a site in question and discuss their plans for a school. According to Schmid, the School Board has met with the City Administrator and the Mayor as well as attended the neighborhood meeting that was held. They have already begun their soil borings in the site. Rassier also stated that he is concerned about the lack of public infrastructure. He stated that he recently visited Westwood in St. Cloud to get a feel for what it would be like to have a school near a multi- family housing development and he stated that the idea does not seem unrealistic. Ekola approached the commissioners stating that SEH has been working with the City on a Feasibility Study, which is not yet completed. The scope of the project has changed since they began. She mentioned that this would be discussed at a later date with the Council, as they ordered the Study to be done. Jovanovich questioned whether or not Ekola was working on more than one site, which Ekola replied that she is. She also explained that she couldn't break down the costs, as it is too complex. Graeve stated that in the letter that the Planning Commissioners received from the Attorney, the issue of the City contributing'/< million dollars in exchange for allowing the City to use the facility raised some questions. Weyrens added that the City Council has not yet come to terms on that as of yet. According to Jovanovich, the issue is too premature at this time due to the fact that it was not setup properly. There was also some question as to who would be responsible for any improvements that would be made to the property in question. Graeve questioned why the developer would not be responsible for the improvements, as in most other cases. Weyrens stated that it is hard to figure out how services will be connected to the site. According to Schmid, the purchase agreement between the developer and the School Board, it states that the School Board will pay for their own hookups. Weyrens added that the School Board has asked that the City finance this as a Public Improvement project, whereas the City would accept all of the costs for the project. Weyrens stated that they would be assessed for their portion. Deutz questioned why a Feasibility Report has not yet been completed for this site due to the size of the infrastructure. Ekola, Weyrens and Rassier all stated that the Council ordered the Feasibility Report two weeks prior, which Ekola mentioned is not enough time to prepare such a large report. After considerable discussion, Deutz stated that this issue is too premature at this time to consider any rezoning. Upon hearing of a second potential site, Deutz questioned its location. Jovanovich stated that the possibility of a second site does not affect the request for rezoning which is currently being discussed. November 1, 2005 Page 5 of 5 The current request is too premature as there is no public infrastructure and the Comprehensive Plan would first need to be amended. Schmid approached the Commissioners again stating that the City's Attorney has some facts incorrect. He stated that he would like to take some time to get the correct facts to the Attorney as well as get feedback from the School Board on the two different site possibilities and bring this issue back for discussion at a later date. As a decision must be made within 60 days of when the request was submitted, Jovanovich asked whether or not Schmid would be willing to allow 120 days. Loso made a motion to table the rezoning of the above referenced property until the December meeting at which he would like the School Board present for discussion purposes. The motion was seconded by Graeve and passed unanimously. Other Matters: Weyrens reminded the Commissioners of a joint meeting with the Township at the Fire Hall on Wed, November 3, 2005 at 8:00 PM. The purpose of the meeting is to discuss land use management and how to protect the Corridor as well as extending the Orderly Annexation Agreement. Adjourn: Deutz made a motion to adjourn at 8:20 PM, passed by consensus. J~~ G~~ J y eyrer(s ~~~ mi istrator