Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007 [04] Apr 02April 2, 2007 Page 1 of 4 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the Planning Commission for the City of St. Joseph met in regular session on Monday, April 2, 2007 at 7:00 PM in the St. Joseph City Hall. Members Present: Chair Bob Loso, Ross Rieke, Sr. Kathleen Kalinowski, Mark Anderson, Jim Graeve, AI Rassier City Administrator Judy Weyrens. Others Present: Mark Zimmer, Bad Neugart, Bill Lorentz, Chuck Scherer Agenda: Graeve made a motion to approve the agenda; seconded by Deutz and passed unanimously. Preliminary Plat - La Playette: Chair Loso called the hearing to order and stated the purpose of the hearing is to consider a preliminary plat for La Playette. The proposed plat is located North of Minnesota Street and East of College Avenue and contains 2 lots to be used for commercial use. The proposed plat has been submitted by Mark Zimmer. Zimmer approached the commissioners to discuss his plans for the property known as the La Playette. He stated that he is requesting to split the existing La Playette building and sell the back 1/3 known as Lot 2 which is approximately 3,245 sq. ft. This is the area where the kitchen, dancing and dining areas are currently located. The proposal is to sell that portion which will then be converted to a pizza restaurant. They plat will include a common wall agreement between the two businesses. Zimmer stated that he purchased the additional space in the 1980's and would now like to sell that space to downsize his operation and get out of the banquet business. Loso opened the hearing to the public. Brad Neugart approached the Commissioners as he is the person interested in purchasing the space from Zimmer. He stated that he plans to use a small portion of the space as office space and the remaining as a pizza place. The majority of their business will be carry out or delivery. Loso questioned what the "common wall" would be constructed of. Zimmer stated that they will construct whatever is necessary based on the building code. He added that they need to construct a double wall between the two businesses and that there will be no doors connecting the two. Weyrens stated that she has done some research into the project and any possible issues relating to parking. The minutes indicate that in 1984 Zimmer purchased the additional space for the La Playette and the Council required Zimmer provide 15 parking spaces that are paved and marked. Then, in 1987 Zimmer again appeared before the Planning Commission requesting approval to secure a rental license for the house adjacent to the La Playette. At that time the Council required three parking spaces. Therefore, based on past Council actions, Zimmer is only required to provide 18 parking spaces for the La Playette. Based on information from the City Attorney the property is operating under the non conforming use provision. As such as long as the property continues to operate as a bar and restaurant and the floor area is not increased, that use can continue. In the case before the Planning Commission the use will be consistent with the past and the proposal actually shows a decreased density. Weyrens stated that the staff is still working with the property owner regarding the requirement to have separate utility connections. Currently the facility has separate water connections but only one sewer connection. The Public Works Director will work with the property owner to assure that separate sewer connections are provided. Loso questioned Zimmer as to whether or not they leased some parking space from the Church. Zimmer explained that although he was not required to do so, the Council suggested that he contact the Church to come to an agreement whereby the La Playette would lease a portion of their parking lot on East Minnesota Street for patron parking. Loso then questioned where the additional three spaces that are April 2, 2007 Page 2 of 4 required for the rental house are located. Zimmer replied that there are two spaces behind the house and one along the side. Loso questioned whether or not they need to pull a building permit to upgrade the building and whether or not that would require them to meet the current Ordinance requirements. Weyrens explained that this is anon-conforming use and that they are not changing the use; therefore they do not need to make any changes. She added that only new buildings are required to meet current Ordinance requirements. Zimmer stated that the building has been there since 1984 and they are looking to decrease the density rather than increase it. Loso questioned whether Zimmer has plans to upgrade the current parking lot to which Zimmer stated he did not, unless it were required by the City. Loso then inquired as to how they plan to split the parking between the La Playette and Teli's. Zimmer stated that it would be part of the Common Interest Plat. When questioned as to whether or not the Pizza Restaurant will sell alcohol, Zimmer responded they will not. Kalinowski stated that she had no questions; however, if they plan to add office space, they would need to create some additional parking spaces. Deutz questioned Zimmer as to where the property line is for the rental property. Parking was also raised by Commissioner Deutz. He stated that if the use is changing, then additional parking would be required. Weyrens added that they would need to have additional parking with 350 feet if the use changes. The number of parking spaces is determined by the square footage of office space and there would be 1 spaces required for every 250 feet. Deutz stated that he is concerned with platting a piece of property to allow for another non-conforming use. Weyrens stated that it is allowed because the use is not changing. Deutz stated that when the Linneman building was sold and updated, they were required to comply with the current Ordinances and the use did not change. Weyrens explained that the use did change resulting in the need to meet current Ordinance requirements. Anderson questioned Zimmer as to the current capacity of the La Playette and how much it would decrease with the split. Zimmer stated that the current capacity is 270 and it would reduce to approximately 125/130 for the La Playette with an additional 31 shown for Teli's Pizza. Anderson stated that parking does not seem to be a big issue rather he is concerned with new development. Zimmer stated that, in his opinion, it is better to bring new businesses to town rather than simply downsizing his existing business. Rassier stated that the parking has always been an issue with the La Playette; however, there is nothing the City can do, as they are not changing the use. He did state that the current parking lot is in need of repairs and striping. Zimmer stated that he would do that; however, he would like to wait until the development next door is complete. Rassier re-stated to Zimmer that if they add the office space, they will need to meet the parking requirements. Parking seemed to be a big issue for the Commissioners. Deutz questioned how the parking spaces would be divided between the La Playette and Teli's. According to Weyrens, they must have designated spaces for each. Anderson questioned whether the spots along the street are exclusive to their business to which Weyrens stated they are not. According to Loso, he would like to see them contact the church to discuss the possibility of leasing some additional parking spaces. The public hearing was closed at 8:00 PM. A motion was made by Rassier and seconded by Graeve to recommend approval of the preliminary plat entitled La Playette based on staff and Planning Commission recommendations and contingent upon the following: ^ Parking lot must be curbed, tarred and stripped. ^ Site Plan approval does not include any rights for leasing of office space. ^ Parking spaces for Teli's Pizza must be designated April 2, 2007 Page 3 of 4 ^ Separate Utility Connections for water and sewer must be installed ^ Submittal of Final Plat Documents including CIC Documents. Ayes: Rassier, Graeve, Rieke, Kalinowski, Anderson, Deutz Nays: Loso Motion Carried 6:1:0 Rear/Side Yard Variance -Lorentz, Bill & Sally 41 - 5th Avenue NW: Loso called the hearing to order and stated the purpose of the hearing is to consider the following: 1) 19' variance on the rear yard setback and 2) 8' variance on the side yard setback. The variance is being requested to allow the construction of an accessory building. St. Joseph Code of Ordinances 52.27 Subd. 7 (b) states that side yard setbacks shall be ten (10) feet from the property line for the main structure and any garage or accessory structure. Where the side yard abuts a public right of way, the side yard setback shall be thirty (30) feet from the main structure and any garage or accessory structure. St. Joseph Code of Ordinances 52.27 Subd. 7(c) states rear yard shall have a depth of not les than 20 percent of the depth of the lot. The property is legally described as follows: Lot 38 & W 20' of Lot 37; Park Terrace. Bill Lorentz, 41 - 5th Avenue NW approached the Commissioners on his own behalf. Lorentz stated that he is requesting a 5' variance for the side yard setback to allow for an accessory building. He would like to line the building up with the garage with the abutting property owner, Dennis Pfannenstein. He added that, at the time he put in his driveway, (1968) he placed a second curb cut five feet from the property line. At that time accessory buildings were only required to be setback five feet. In addition, at the same time, buildings were required to follow a straight line. When looking the proposed accessory building, it matches what was required when the house was constructed. The neighborhood is established and built out based on those same setbacks. Therefore, Lorentz stated that he is only requesting to construct an accessory building using the same setback enjoyed by the entire neighborhood. There being no one present wishing to be heard, the public hearing was closed at 8:15 PM. Deutz made a motion to accept the findings of fact and recommend that the Council approve the two variances as requested. The motion was seconded by Kalinowski and passed unanimously. Scherer Trucking -Development Plan: Weyrens advised the commissioners that Scherer Trucking has requested to construct an addition to the existing office space. In reviewing the proposed plan it was noticed that the proposed building cross a property line as Scherer Trucking owns three parcels. Even though Scherer owns all three parcels and they are zoned the same, a building cannot cross a property line. Weyrens stated that the proposed building meets the requirements of the St. Joseph Code of Ordinances: however, the property must be platted or the addition reduced to prevent crossing the property line. Charles Scherer approached the Commissioners on behalf of Scherer Trucking. He stated that their future plans include removing the existing rental house from the property, as they have no intent to fix up the property. According to Scherer, they need more ofhce space so they would like to move the property line to allow for the expansion. At this time, all three parcels are zoned the same and it would be best to clean up the property lines. There was some discussion as to when they plan to move the house. Scherer stated that they will move the house once the current renters have moved out. Deutz made a motion to accept staff recommendation and require that the property be platted as presented with two of the parcels being combined and the City would waive the $250 platting fees with the condition that the current rental house be removed within 5 years or whenever the current tenants are no longer there, whichever comes first. The motion was seconded by Kalinowski and passed unanimously. April 2, 2007 Page 4 of 4 Minutes: Deutz made a motion to approve the minutes of March 12, 2007. The motion was seconded by Rassier and passed unanimously. Proposed Ordinance Amendment, Accessory Buildin4: Loso made a motion to accept staff recommendation and conduct a public hearing on May 7, 2007 to consider an amendment to change the rear yard setback for accessory buildings to five (5) feet from the property line. The motion was seconded by Graeve. Deutz questioned why the Ordinance was changed to begin with. Weyrens stated that it was changed to the typical setback of the zoning districts as there were some discrepancies between the two. She stated that staff is proposing to change the Ordinance back to its original language and update the R1 Ordinance to be consistent with that of the Accessory Building Ordinance. The motion passed unanimously. Advertising Signs: Weyrens stated that she received a request from the Recreation Association for the City to allow advertising signs at Millstream Park. Currently, the City does not allow for advertising signs. Deutz questioned how it could be controlled to only allow such signs in Millstream Park. He added that he would like to hear some input from the Park Board before discussing it at a Planning Commission level. Adjourn: Graeve made a motion to adjourn at 9:30 PM; seconded by Rassier and passed unanimously. ~: ~ ~~,~~ ~`~~ ud We Fens Y inistrator