Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008 [10] Oct 13October 13, 2008 Page 1 of 3 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the Planning Commission for the City of St. Joseph met in regular session on Monday, October 13, 2008 at 7:00 PM in the St. Joseph City Hall. Members Present: Chair Kathleen Kalinowski, Commissioners Ross Rieke, Mike McDonald, Mike Deutz, Mark Andersen, John Meyer and Dale Wick, City Administrator Judy Weyrens. City Representatives Present: City Attorney Lori Athman Others Present: Jim Schuman, Mark Beaty, Corey Gerads, Igor Lenznor, Mike Phillipp, Donna Kellerman, Nelda Dehn, Herman Gangl, Tom Gustafson, Jennifer Steinkamp, Ellen & Bob Wahlstrom, Judy & Marty Meyer, Brad Cob, John Gregg, Lanae Cobb, Don Fischer, Jason & Jennifer Abraham, Jacque French, Mike & Nicole Klassen, Sarah Pennings, Aaron Bangasser, Carol Jenkins, Margy Hughes, Tate Viere, AI Lindseth Agenda: Andersen made a motion to approve the agenda; seconded by Meyer and passed unanimously. Public Hearing -College of St. Benedict. 37 College Avenue S: Kalinowski called the hearing to order and stated that the purpose of the hearing is to consider the issuance of a special use permit. The special use permit is requested to allow the construction of a bus shelter for the College of St. Benedict, in a R1, Single Family Zoning District. The proposed bus shelter will be located on property owned by the College of St. Benedict located at 222 West Minnesota Street. St. Joseph Code of Ordinances 52.27 Subd. 3: Uses under a Special Use Permit. The following uses shall require a Special Use Permit based on the procedures set forth in this Ordinance: a) Governmental and public utility buildings and structures necessary for the health, safety and general welfare of the community. k) Uses which in the judgment of the Planning Commission and City Council are similar to those listed in this zoning district. The request for special use was submitted by the College of St. Benedict, 37 College Avenue S. Weyrens stated that both subsections (a) and (k) were referenced as it is a safety issue; however, it will not be a public bus shelter. Previously, the Planning Commission met and came to consensus that this should be dealt with as a special use rather than as a rezoning request. She added that this bus stop will be used strictly for the transfer of students. Jim Schuman, 1604 Summit Avenue N, Sauk Rapids, approached the Commissioners and spoke on behalf of the College of St. Benedict. Schuman stated that the College of St. Benedict currently has a bus stop on 3~d Avenue NW. At this time the College is requesting authorization to construct a bus shelter to protect the students waiting for the bus from inclement weather. The shelter will be an open glass structure with an aluminum roof. McDonald questioned Schuman if he believes that the shelter will be used frequently by the students. Schuman stated the shelter is being built at the request of the students so it is anticipated that it will be used frequently. Deutz questioned Schuman as to the location of the building and whether it will be located on City or College property. Schuman advised the commissioners that they will meet all setback requirements. The public hearing was opened and closed at 7:10 PM as there was no one present wishing to speak regarding the request for special use. Deutz made a motion to recommend the Council issue a Special Use Permit to the College of St. Benedict to allow for the construction of a bus shelter for the College of St. Benedict in an R1 Single Family Zoning District. Approval is contingent that the structure must meet all setback requirements of the R1 Zoning District. The motion was seconded by Meyer and passed unanimously. October 13, 2008 Page 2 of 3 S & H Development: Weyrens presented the Planning Commission with the draft Findings of Fact, recommending the Council Issue a Special Use Permit and amend the Graceview Estates PURR to allow the construction of two R3 Structures with a total of 75 units and two eight plexes and one duplex. The Facts of Findings presented were those discussed at the September 30, 2008 Planning Commission Meeting. The Planning Commission requested staff to prepare formal findings for approval based on information presented by the Commissioners. Meyer questioned how the facts of finding were prepared to which Weyrens stated that they were based on submissions by commissioner McDonald as well as staff and the City Attorney. There were some questions as to whether these were facts to which Deutz stated that whether the motion approves or denies the application, the facts are an opinion. Deutz made a motion to accept the findings of fact as presented and request the City Council issue a Special Use Permit to S 8~ H to allow the construction of two apartment buildings. The motion was seconded by McDonald. Discussion: Wick stated that it is his opinion that the Facts of Findings are merely opinion and do not include actual facts. He also stated that the Findings prepared were those of Commissioner McDonald and he too had prepared facts of findings. It was clarified that the motion that moved the matter forward was based on McDonald's Findings and that is what is before them tonight. McDonald stated that he is willing to reconsider some of the items if others have ideas. Ayes: Kalinowski, Deutz, McDonald, Rieke, Meyer Nays: Wick, Andersen Motion Carried 5:2:0 McDonald stated that the commissioners received a letter from Sarah Pennings, Graceview Coalition and he requested that it be included with the official packet to which Weyrens stated it would. S & H Site Plan Review: Mark Beaty, Cole Architects, approached the Commissioners to discuss the site plan. He stated that per City staff recommendation, they have submitted a revised landscape plan. According to Beaty, they plan to construct a 3' berm to act as a buffer between the apartments and the adjoining residential area. The 3' buffer will screen any headlights from the parking lot. He added that they plan to plant pine trees as well to serve as a year round buffer. Beaty stated that they will be using typical lighting for the parking lot. With respect to the buildings, Beaty advised the Commissioners that there will be "bump outs" on the building to give it an appealing facade. The "bump outs" will be 36" rather than 30" to give the building a more 3D appeal. He stated that the decks on the building will meet the push/pull requirement. The building height must be less than 35' and they have a proposed height of 34'11". He stated that the height is due to the recent handicap rulings that state that tuck under garages must provide van access. Meyer questioned whether there will be brick on the front of the building. Beaty replied that fagade will include 35% rock faced block. McDonald stated that a big issue for the residents in Graceview is that of the construction traffic. He questioned whether all of the construction traffic can be parked on the apartment property to which Beaty stated that it could be. Rieke stated that staff has recently reviewed the history of this project with respect to access issues. Weyrens stated that they have and when the original concept plan was approved, they were to provide two access points to CR121. Although there is no guaranty that the College will allow for an access across their property, it is one suggestion to gain an additional access. She stated that they may want to allow the construction of the first building with the condition that Field Street be constructed prior to the construction of the second phase. Andersen questioned if there is a need for two accesses. Weyrens stated that, currently, 4th Avenue is the only access into Graceview Estates. Deutz clarified that when the original concept plan was approved, there were to be two accesses to CR121 prior to full build-out. Weyrens stated that the two access points would be Callaway Street and Field Street. October 13, 2008 Page 3 of 3 Deutz questioned whether this would be built in phases to which Beaty and Weyrens both stated it would. Weyrens stated that this is the proposed timeframe for the project: Phase 1 Apartment #1 2008 Phase 2 Townhomes 2008-2009 Phase 3 Apartment #2 2009 She stated that they may begin construction of the townhomes at the same time as the first apartment building. Wick questioned the setbacks for the R3 Overlay with respect to the Townhomes. Wick stated that St. Joseph Code of Ordinances 52.29 Subd. 7(b) states that "In the event the side yard of an R-3 residence abuts another residential district, all principal structures shall be set back 50 feet from the property line." It appears that the townhomes only have a 20' setback. Deutz stated that the second building appears to only have a 40' setback from the side yard. Weyrens advised the commissioners that the townhomes would not follow the R3 Ordinance rather they would follow the ordinance relating to townhomes as those are the guidelines that have been followed for the other townhomes that were already built. Deutz mentioned that they are proposing a 3' berm and he stated he would like to see something taller. He then questioned whether there is another exit from the property and suggested that the project be developed in phases dependent upon gaining additional access to CR121. He, too, stated that there were some issues with them meeting the setback requirements. Rieke spoke to the architect and stated that there needs to be some more clarity before their site plan can be approved. Corey Gerads approached the commissioner and stated that he is the builder for the project. He questioned Rieke as to what he is looking for. Rieke stated that he would like to see more visuals with respect to the look of the project and the proposed berm. He would like to see where the proposed easement would be located and some clarifications on the conversations that have taken place with respect to an additional access. He also stated that he would like some revisions made to meet the setback requirements. With respect to the berm, Gerads questioned what height they would like to see the berm. Based on consensus of the commissioners, they would like to see a 6' berm. As the commissioners would like additional information, Kalinowski stated that the next meeting will be held on November 3 and the Planning Commission will take action at that time. Weyrens added that the Council with then act on it at the November 6 meeting. McDonald requested that the architect verify that they do meet the parking requirements for phase 1 by itself in the event that phases 2 and 3 are not built for any reason. Weyrens advised the commissioners that they do meet the parking requirements. In addition, Meyer requested to see civil drawings of the plan to show elevations and drainage. The commissioners clarified that the following issues should be brought back for consideration at the next meeting: • Revised site plan showing the 6' berm. • Revised site plan showing the future access to CR121 • Setbacks for the townhomes. Rieke made a motion to table the approval of the site plan until November 3. The motion was seconded by Wick and passed unanimously. Adjourn: The meeting was adjourned at 8:05 PM by consensus. ~' , J y Weyr ns l ~~ dm' istrator