Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout[05] Tom Borresch, Public HearingMy OF ST. JOSEPH Planning Commission Agenda Item 5 MEETING DATE: April 5, 2010 AGENDA ITEM: Public Hearing — Special Use Permit, Variance Tom Borresch, 9 —17th Avenue NE SUBMITTED BY: Administration PREVIOUS PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: In 2006 the Planning Commission recommended approval and the Council adopted the Transportation Corridor Overlay District. This district affects property that abuts major highways such as County Road 75. For your convenience I have attached a copy of the minutes from the action in 2006. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The City staff contact Tom Borresch when it was noticed that large accessory buildings were placed in the front setback area at 8856 Ridgewood Road. The property in question is zoned B2 Highway Business and also regulated by the Transportation Corridor Overlay District. With regard to the B2 Zoning District, permitted uses do not include outdoor display sales. The General Provision of the Ordinance does allow Interim Use permits for temporary uses in areas of transition. The Transportation Corridor Overlay District was established in 2006 as was intended to help protect the investment of property owners. The B2 Zoning District contains high aesthetic requirements including landscaping. When the Centra Care, Credit Union and Coborn's site was developed they were required to meet the Corridor provisions and it did include additional costs. As buildings along the corridor are expanded or building permits are required the provisions in the Overlay District apply. The recent car lot approved by the Planning Commission and City Council included a provision that the car lot cannot extend in the front yard setback or view shed. In reviewing the variance application the statutory requirements for granting a variance are not met. Granting a variance in this case will confer rights to one property owner that is denied to others in the same district. With regard to the Interim Use Permit, the Ordinance states that in granting an interim use permit the standards for granting must meet the requirements of the Special Use Standards. Again, they do not seem consistent. It is understood that the property owner is trying to survive the economic times and utilize his property to the fullest, but we must apply the Ordinance. Based on the information submitted the variance and interim use do not meet the criteria. The Planning Commission needs to determine if they concur and weather approval or denial will have to identify the reasons for the decision and conclusion. 5:1 ATTACHMENTS: Request for Planning Commission Action ..................................................... ............................... 5:1 -2 HearingNotice .................................................................................................. ............................... 5:3 Findingsof Fact .............................................................................................. ............................... 5:4 -5 Application for Interim Use ............................................................................. ............................... 5:6 -8 Applicationfor Variance ................................................................................... ............................... 5:9 -12 PropertySketch .................................................................................................. ............................... 5:13 VicinityMap ................................................................................................. ............................... 5:14 Ordinance 52.21— Transportation Corridor Overlay District Site and Design Standards ...... 5:15 -20 Ordinance 52.07 Subd. 4 Interim Use Permit ............................................ ............................... 5:21 -22 Ordinance 52.07 Subd. 3 Standards for Granting Interim Use ................. ............................... 5:23 2006 Action establishing Ordinance .............................................................. ............................... 5:24 -27 5:2 CITY OF ST. JOSrTH s WWW.cityof stioseph.com SCANNED Judy Weyrens Administrator Publish: March 27, 2010 8856 Ridgewood Road 5:3 zs College Avenue North • PO Box 668 . Saint Joseph, Minnesota 56374 Phone 3zo.363.7zoi. Fax 32o.363 034L Public Hearing City of St. Joseph Administrator The St. Joseph Planning Commission shall conduct a public hearing on Monday, April 5, Judy Weyrens 2010 at 7:10 PM at the St. Joseph City Hall, 25 College Avenue North. The purpose of the hearing is to consider an Interim Use permit to allow outdoor sales and a variance to place items within the view shed of CR 75. The property is legally described as Lot 002, Block 001, Neu Addition, located at 8856 Ridgewood Road. Mayor Al Rassier St. Joseph Code of Ordinances 52.07 subd. 4(a) allows for an Interim Use Permit as follows: Purpose: The purpose and intent of allowing an interim use is: 1) To allow a use for a limited Councilors period of time that reasonably utilizes the property in the manner not permitted in the Steve applicable zoning district 2) To allow a use that is presently acceptable but that with Frank anticipated development may not be acceptable in the future. Bob Loso Renee Symanietz St. Joseph Code of Ordinances 52.21 limits the storing or display of goods from the view of Dale Wick the corridor roadway. The request for Interim Use and Variance has been submitted by Tom Borresch, 9 —17'" Avenue NE, St. Joseph MN 56374. Judy Weyrens Administrator Publish: March 27, 2010 8856 Ridgewood Road 5:3 zs College Avenue North • PO Box 668 . Saint Joseph, Minnesota 56374 Phone 3zo.363.7zoi. Fax 32o.363 034L City of St. Joseph IN RE: FINDINGS OF FACT Application of Minnesota Home Improvement, Tom Borresch AND DECISION Interim Use Permit —Outdoor Sales Variance Request — Viewshed, Intent 709 County Road 75 East FINDINGS OF FACT On April 5, 2010 the St. Joseph Planning Commission conducted a public hearing to consider the application of Minnesota Home Improvement/Tom Borresh for an Interim Use Permit to allow for outside display sales and a variance to have such display in the Transportation Corridor Overlay District. The matter was duly published and notice was provided to property owners within 350 feet of the above referenced property. The Planning Commission hereby finds the following facts as it relates to the request of Tom Borresch to secure an Interim Use Permit to allow for outside display sales and a variance to have such display in the Transportation Corridor Overlay District. 1. In May 2006 the Planning Commission reviewed the Zoning Ordinances for potential amendments. At this time the Planning Commission was presented with a new Ordinance entitled Transportation Corridor Overaly. The intent of the transportation Corridor Overlay District is to enhance the visual appearance and continuity of development from parcel to parcel within highly visible, high- traffic corridors and to maintain the long -term function of arterial and collector roadways. 2. On December 4, 2006 the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed zoning amendments which included adoption of the Transportation Corridor Overlay District. The Planning Commission unanimously recommended the Council approve the Ordinance as drafted. 3. On December 17, 2006 the St. Joseph City Council unanimously accepted the recommendation of the Transportation Corridor Overlay District and the Ordinance was published and became effective in December 2006. 4. In addition to adhering to guidelines in the B -2 Zoning District, the property also falls under the regulations of the Transportation Corridor Overlay District which was established by Ordinance in 2006. The purpose of the overlay district is to protect and promote the health, safety and general welfare of the public; to enhance the visual appearance of the corridor; to protect and promote the appearance, character and economic values along the corridor and the surrounding neighborhoods. S:4 5. The proposed site plan indicates that outside sales will be located within the view shed area which is not permitted in the Overlay Ordinance. 6. Site Management that is not consistent with the Corridor Overlay district may make application for a variance and granting of a variance must meet the statutory findings as identified in St. Joseph Code of Ordinances 52.07 Subd. 2. 7. The subject property is zoned B2, Highway Business. As such the Ordinance does not list outdoor display sales as a permitted use or a use under special use permit. However, St. Joseph Code of Ordinance 52.07 Subd. 4 allows for Interim Use Permits that allows for uses for a limited period of time. Granting of an Interim Use Permit must meet the standards identified in Subd 3. DECISION AND CONCLUSION Based on the Finding of Fact, the St. Joseph Planning Commission recommends of the Interim Use Permit based on the following: Based on the foregoing Finding of Fact and Decision and Conclusion of the St. Joseph Planning Commission, the request for Special Use is forwarded to the City Council as a recommendation for Passed by Resolution of the St. Joseph Planning Commission on April 5, 2010. CITY OF ST. JOSEPH By Kathleen Kalinowski, Chair By Judy Weyrens, Administrator 5:5 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss COUNTY OF STEARNS ) NAME: tom borresch APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL USE PERMIT City of St. Joseph 25 College Avenue N PO Box 668 St Joseph, MN 56374 Phone (320)363 -7201 or Fax (320)363 -0342 �sB5� (7c(5e w004 K2V ADDRESS: 917th ave se st joseph mn. 56374 PHONE: 2,503,303 Fee$l4Qp.o? Paid X Date i 5 I 0 I/We, the undersigned, hereby make the following application to the City Council and Planning Commission of the City of St. Joseph, Stearns County, Minnesota. (Applicants have the responsibility of checking all applicable ordinances pertaining to their application and complying with the ordinance requirements.) 1. Application is hereby made for a Special Use Permit to conduct the following. display & sell storage buildings on land we currently pay taxes on. 2. Legal description of land to be affected by application, including acreage or square footage of land involved, and street address, if any (attach additional sheet if necessary): neu add lot 002 block 001 subdivsioncd 00069 section 11 townshipl24 range 029 3. Present zoning of the above described property is: 62 - Highway 75 Business 4. Name and address of the present owner of the above described property. same as above 5. Is the proposed use compatible with the future and present land uses of the area? Please explain: r Yes F- No currently selling home improvement type products out of the same location 5:6 6. Will the proposed use depreciate the area in which it is proposed? Please explain: F- Yes r No many businesses along corridor display similar products or items. 7. Can the proposed use be accomodated with existing City service without overburdening the system? Please explain: R Yes r No not selling exact items along business corridor 8. Are local streets capable of handling traffic which is generated by the proposed use? Please explain: r Yes r" No end road Attached to this application, and made a part thereof, are other material submission data requlraments, as indicated. Applicant Signature: C\�- C—s d Date: 3.15.2010 Property Owner Signature: G�— e > Date: 3.15.2010 FOR Date application submitted: Date application completed: Planning Commission Action: r Recommend Approval r' Recommend Disapproval Date of Action: City Council Action: r' Approved r" Disapproved Date of Action: Date Applicant/Propertyowner notified of City Council Action: 5:7 City of St. Joseph Required Material Submission Special Use Material Completed applications for Special Use requests and required fees shall be submitted the City of St. Joseph Zoning Administrator at least 20 days prior to the proposed date of consideration by the City. The twenty days allows the City to review the application, forward the application to other entities for review as required and notify the public as required. Only completed applications will be accepted. It is the applicant's responsibility to submit required materials. If an application is determined to be incomplete, notification, which indicates which portion of the application is incomplete, will be mailed to the applicant within 10 days following submission of the application. REQUIRED MATERIALS - The applicant shall provide the following: MATERIAL REQUIRED COMPLETE COMMENTS 1. Additional written or graphic data reasonably f' Yes required by the Zoning Administrator or the Planning y Commission as described below: r No In O+ s1 /-.r .� C H YvA%,� All applications must include a narrative of the Special use request. The Special Use application S�.r.,r. d v . �- t c, �.c�1 -; J ►fir must be completed in its entirety including the h a f -+-i 't- y c a J.,� -�� c9-P reasons as to why the Planning Commission and City Coundl should approve the request. S -f - 5-o", CF ►-. w 2. Site Plan containing the following: f:;L Yes - Legal description - Site plan showing parcel & building dimensions (- No i� o.��C - Location of buildings showing square footage, easements, curb cuts, driveways, w1 �O \"d Z� r S y,1 �GC�s.• -�/ access roads, parking / spaces, off - street loading areas, sidewalksI - Landscaping t.,n. r` w� and screening plans - Drain and erosion control Drainage plan with elevations C �• 5 �...,� � c,,c � w . _ �.N � C-r~ ? y - Sanitary sewer and water plan with estimated use !' o r rr . �) F, ► o S� b r d O h r. h S i `� - Soil type and location of wetlands - Proof of ownership I,AJ 1�..s�r�c S r�� c�n�v✓, Wu,1 Required ,Av t- V A-Q-c1 3. Fee. Yes S f",C -k-`- $400.00 (If held during a regular scheduled meeting) r No $800.00 (If a special meeting is required) Kve,-F. OL i 1 Ar� ^„ 4. Payment of Additional Fees. h \L v, , I /we understand that I /we are responsible for reimbursing the City for any additional legal, engineering, building inspection or planning fees associated with my request. Applicant Signature: (7\1, ` Date: 3, 1, 5 Z p1 fl 5:8 APPUCATION FOR VARIANCE City of St. Joseph 25 College Avenue N PO Box 668 St. Joseph, MN 56374 Phone (320)363 -7201 or Fax (320)363-0342 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss COUNTY OF STEARNS ) Paid Date 2-2. f U 1/We, the undersigned, hereby make the following application to the City Council and Planning Commission of the City of St. Joseph, Steams County, Minnesota. (Applicants have the responsibility of checking all applicable ordinances pertaining to their application and complying with the ordinance requirements.) PROPERTY OWNER NAME: 0 M CJ1 La.l) w wfc PROPERTY OWNER PHONE NUMBER(S): PROPERTY OWNER ADDRESS: g s 15 l7 12,1' j a.- uj 0 0,J G-1L. S, _ !7S Q43 rn IJ • SO l q ZONING DISTRICT: 2 _ Z LEGAL DESCRIPTION: lA add i 0-4... JOZ b 1 oc.k rD� 1 S (�}�cl dig �.c� 00f PROPERTY OWNER SIGNATURE(S): --ion W� 1 T \"r s ' -`P M, 4 r/�►M -� �. c`� 2 �j 1. The request(s) which we desire for our property ir✓are in conflict with the following section(s) of the St Joseph City Code: Section: S Z .Z j Section: Section: 2. Proposed non- conformance(s): "! 5 f ► tc�v -� Q •-s h. Lr: Gi C{ W \ \ j�,yQ -f-4.� c, M..6. �, J e. i 1 thc h CA, r ?� 3 S i hr+ ► \ o. �-� X11,. tiu P- I c a►•� fv ST -�t�e S �, j tj 3. What special condidtions and circumstances exist which are particular to the land, structure or building(s) involved which do not apply to the land, structures or building(s) in the some zoning classification? (attach additional pages as need) A N U vd i Nn� ►c..s'- w tf-i i ►� �,�- ;� -+,..� -}v �1..:- "15 '3 -\.c. tr.s �� o� \ v.�. WY V :�}o� W jv� or. �r �i►�1 a �..+ 1 s.d g tii� -.rr�- Q..O 1. b ��rs G.f�+.j d i3 p L� Y c)J:' Ste) �S � .t, v 1 t�c..e s r �ti. z..:. {�s•r \. � d �.. c � .N-�r .� d v �..�•c Z i ,.1 � c� f o �` v � �.o clwc� -S V,la,�► C p4y ; „�� Ir,,,,g L rY.pv+�� -(' Ayl w ��s i y i t...� G-'� v►S{� o...v- 0"jAj O-) 1 3 r.�v �Z-.. s , w �-.�l r'n r.5-s- s �_ S lisp -qp 1. �L Cj- ; f - ri'r•�v,aT r'3 rn G ",J Q Ga ► r, 'Z vU y \ \ �r Y�c• Y- w�$ �r.4. $ r.r.o \ \ (� C p f.a .� S w ', -Y:-. i> a� 4. Do any of the special conditions and circumstances result from your own actions? If the answer is yes, you may not qualify for a variance. F Yes fX No 5. what facts and considerations demonstrate that the literal interpretation of the zoning code would deprive you of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district under the terms of the zoning code? (attach additional pages as needed) No 0=0'1 o 6. State your reasons for believing that a variance will not confer on you any special privilege that is denied by the zoning code to other lands, structures or buildings in the same district. W LV �- p i+-�a� iJ�R! t� -rLl� i�.-j t 11).J c� v L f� t`^- v�'�.a.r.. �'V •�Y�. "-��..iL PiH, �:lJl/ 1/) 01/' r J j,���:�'► Cam! W J J W 2. r PL ce-.$ .t. ' ADO � L 7. State your reasons for believing that the action(s) you propose to take is✓are In keeping with the spirit and the intent of the zoning code. —I. I'rN ,' s r, b.,� o-S 4-0 1G¢.op i,.J i�l, � l�� h�p�� -,n • ti.� rr .� 1^��,i,,� �d � �X�� -� v 8. State your reasons for believing that in a strict enforcement of the provisions of the zoning code would cause undue hardship. Undue hardship means that the property in question cannot be put to reasonable use if used under the conditions allowed by the zoning ordinance. Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship under the terms of this code as referenced In the state statutes. '�t �H1 T r�r'►���J °� O a � $..e_uS � '��, A � / � �.t! -3�1. , S in h i .� �.e�..Q.. CJ- W z...� -e., 1-� � �.,Y -• �-v� �20..� .e.r c� � ,� p rz,,� ya . 2 J — Z,S' F�'ea.'3' i� o ✓- I y s 5-h p c -,e-►c ► y - o a t c. c.- �-�. {tee. P.� ls� C. S OV-0— P o , ►. r �►A-s , 6v n G y s 1 rn A_J a ��5 3 .0 Attached to this application, and made a part thereof, are other material submission data requirements, as indicated. Applicant Signature: l L — �.� Date: Property Owner Signature: (� ��� Date: 3 Z C� r Date application submitted: Date application completed: Commission Action: r Recommend Approval r Recommend Disapproval Date of Action: City Council Action: r Approved r Disapproved Date of Action: Date Applicant/Property owner notified of City Council Action: 5:11 City of St. Joseph Required Material Submission Variance Material Completed applications for variance requests and required fees shall be submitted the City of St. Joseph Zoning Administrator at least 20 days prior to the proposed date of consideration by the City. The twenty days allows the City to review the application, forward the application to other entities for review as required and notify the public as required. Only completed applications will be accepted. It is the applicant's responsibility to submit required materials. If an application is determined to be incomplete, notification, which indicates which portion of the application is incomplete, will be mailed to the applicant within 10 days following submission of the application. REQUIRED MATERIALS - The applicant shall provide the following: MATERIAL REQUIRED COMPLETE 1. Additional written or graphic data reasonably r Yes required by the Zoning Administrator or the Planning Commission as described below: (- No All applkations must Wude a narrative of the variance request. The variance appllkation must be compieted in its entirety including the reasons as to why the (Planning Commission and City Coundl should approve the request. �7�C- ,�.i� �s�- 2. Requir (Jv r- S T j- Yes $ 400. uring a regu eduled meeting) J � No lar sch $800.00 (If a special meeting is required) 3. Payment of Additional Fees. COMMENTS no-f- y© ► 'V--A --3-0 9,4t' G-^-1 -,j cr1 -tea_ & CC— W S -0- C�, a�✓ �,,,- 4-.0 o Glee - (p Go-,..si84✓ I'j G- S "r w c L, Itwe understand that I/we are responsible for reimbursing the City for any additional legal, engineering, building Inspection or planning fees associated with my request. Applicant Signature: Date: 3 ;?Z [ a 5:12 f7 �f LJ� N In T r N V C M S t� a J •� s Q fi i i 4 � 1 Z i l � 0 N t i �r �r 2/ -, A S S � � J 5:13 s1 , � s I l � 0 N t i �r �r 2/ -, A S S � � J 5:13 s1 , Buffer Map 4031411 50 CT 8646 II 1 1 I 1 £s644 4 1 A II q li lk 8805 8615 1414 161A 8545 1404 s ? ' ' * 1409 -- _� -- r 14 '0 8677 m T / 8733 ! r' 21 22 19 } 20 1722 1809 Q �S rte 8825 104 I1 30 127 i 28 �� 1825 108 " \ 81— f t— } — 1814 f ', ~r 8550 III �' y�08170. 105 4 -2103 1824 ^ l' `709 'Y 112 jn 110 1 109 D ! 110 t r��y } i 113 .. ? ! 2010 12211.3 � 1 118 l_— � �-7 118 117 j . 118 128 119 I wt 122 119 I i 1 1213 ' r i� 1211 +7c, 128 125 !! 128 125 126 j 1717 �F' f;' r: f w — - - - ---I — ( 1 1906 �> BAKER ST £_ BAKER ST £ ^_ A R ST £ I ry i - -- --L i 212 ' i �522 , t 20A .1 203�> _204 121 '201' 201 200 — y t' 208 ' , '212 209- —21O 213 w t -- — 207 r f?6pyr+ght k SEH x003 212 �q� 213 436ft Disclaimer: This map is neither a legally recorded map nor a survey and is not intended to be used as one. This map is a compilation of records, information and data from city, county, state and federal offices, and is to be used for reference purposes only. 5:14 https: // portal. sehinc. com /sehsvc/html /dvo /mapLayout.htm 3/26/2010 ORDINANCE 52 — ZONING ORDINANCE Section 52.21: TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR OVERLAY DISTRICT SITE AND DESIGN STANDARDS Subd. 1: Intent. a) This district is intended to protect and promote the health, safety and general welfare of the public; to enhance the visual appearance of the corridor; to protect and promote the appearance, character and economic values along the corridor and the surrounding neighborhoods. b) This district is furthermore intended to maintain the long -term function of arterial and collector roadways; to limit access and the number of conflict points; to promote vehicular circulation; and to promote prevention or reduction of traffic congestion and danger in the public streets. Subd.2: Ste. a) The Transportation Corridor Overlay District shall be defined as follows: 1. CSAH 75 Corridor: A. West of South Fork of Watab River: areas within 300 feet from the nearest edge of the CSAH 75 right of way. B. CSAH 75 West of 20th Avenue: areas within 300 feet from the nearest edge of the CSAH 75 right of way. 2. 20th Avenue Corridor: A. South of CSAH 75: areas within 300 feet from the nearest edge of the 20th Avenue right of way. B. North of CSAH 75: areas within 300 feet from the nearest edge of the 20th Avenue right of way. 3. CSAH 2 /CSAH 3 Corridor: A. South of CSAH 75: areas within 300 feet from the nearest edge of the FUTURE CSAH 2 right of way. B. North of CSAH 75: areas within 300 feet from the nearest edge of the CSAH 2 /CSAH 3 right of way. 5:15 ORDINANCE 52 - ZONING ORDINANCE 4. 1 -94 Corridor: A. 500 feet from the nearest edge of the 1 -94 right of way. Subd. 3: Exemptions. Single and two - family residential uses shall not be subject to the standards of the transportation corridor overlay district. However, at such time that a single or two - family residential use is to be converted to another use it will be subject to the standards of the transportation corridor overlay district. Subd. 4: Uses Allowed. Permitted, conditional, interim and accessory uses allowed within the transportation corridor overlay district shall be the same uses those allowed in the applicable underlying zoning district(s). Subd. 5: Setbacks, site coverage, building height, building requirements contained within the applicable underlying zoning district shall apply. In addition the following standards shall be observed. All buildings shall maintain a minimum setback of one hundred (100) feet from the road right -of -way limit. Comer lots shall maintain two front setbacks. Subd. 6: Parking_ Standards. The following standards shall be in addition to those required within Section 84 of this ordinance relating to off - street parking and loading. Where standards conflict the most restrictive standard shall apply. a) Parking areas shall be designed and located so as to have minimal visual impact along transportation corridors. Therefore, all parking areas shall be constructed in the rear or side yards, unless specifically permitted in the front yard by the Planning Commission. When permitted in the front yard, additional landscaping and buffering may be required by the Planning Commission to minimize visual impact. No parking will be allowed within a fifty (50) foot setback from the nearest external boundary of the applicable transportation corridor right -of -way limit. b) Where a development application covers land located adjacent to an existing parking lot used for similar purposes, a vehicular connection between the parking lots shall be provided wherever possible. For development applications adjacent to vacant properties, the site shall be designed and constructed to provide for a future connection. c) Parking lot landscaping. All development sites shall landscape an area equivalent to fifteen (15) percent of the total area of the required parking lot. Said required landscaping shall be employed within the subject parking lot and adjacent to walkways within and leading to /from the subject parking lot. Subd. 7: Sign Standards. The following standards shall be in addition to those required within Section 52.11 of this ordinance relating to signs. Where standards conflict the most restrictive standard shall apply. 5:16 ORDINANCE 52 — ZONING ORDINANCE a) Free - standing signs shall not be placed nearer than twenty (20) feet from the nearest edge of the transportation corridor right -of -way. b) Free - standing signs within the required landscaped greenway shall be designed in a manner complementary to the landscaped greenway. c) Free - standing identification signs shall have a low - profile design not more than eight (8) feet in height and shall be designed to complement and reflect the architecture of the building. Subd. 8: Site Design Standards. a) Viewsheds. 1. Viewsheds shall be defined as the area between two separate locations wherein an uninterrupted view of each point is maintained. The viewshed in the transportation corridor overlay district shall at a minimum correspond to a forty (40) foot landscaped greenway as measured from the nearest edge of the applicable right of way. 2. Viewsheds shall be considered in all development proposal applications within the transportation corridor overlay district. Development shall be designed to minimize the visual intrusion of all buildings, structures, and landscaping in the viewshed. b) Outside storage/displav of goods. Outside storage or display of goods except automotive and similar large item sales shall be completely screened from the view of the corridor roadway by the employment of a vegetative buffer. This standard is in addition to those required within the underlying zoning classification and Section 52. 10, Subd. 10 of this ordinance relating to outdoor storage. Where standards conflict the most restrictive standard shall apply. c) Utilities. Utility lines, including electric, cable and telephone, to serve the development project shall be installed underground. All junction and access boxes shall be screened. All utility pad fixtures, meter boxes, etc. shall be shown on the site plan and integrated with the architectural elements of the site. In redeveloping areas within the transportation corridor overlay placement of utility lines underground is highly encouraged. d) Fences. 1. This standard is in addition to those in Section of this ordinance relating to fencing. Where standards conflict the most restrictive standard shall apply. 5:17 ORDINANCE 52 — ZONING ORDINANCE 2. Fences exceeding four (4) feet in height shall be located in the side and rear yards only. Chain link fences, including those with slats are prohibited when visible from the public right -of -way. 4. No fence shall be permitted in the front yard, except that those provided to enhance the visual appearance of the site/landscaping plan may be allowed provided they do not exceed two feet in height and are of a reasonable linear length. e) Mechanical equipment. Mechanical equipment shall be shielded and screened from the public view and designed to be perceived as an integral part of the building. f) Street tree landscaping. In all instances where commercial and/or multi - family residential districts are adjacent to any public street, street treellandscaping will be required as approved by the City. Subd. 9: Building Layout/Design. a) Integrated development. All buildings within the property shall be developed as a cohesive entity, ensuring that building placement, architectural treatment, vehicular and pedestrian circulation and other development elements work together functionally and aesthetically. Architectural treatment shall be designed so that all building facades of the same building (whether front, side, or rear) that are visible from the public right -of -way, shall consist of similar architectural treatment in terms of materials, quality, appearance and detail. b) Clustering. Buildings shall be clustered together to preserve natural and landscape open areas along the transportation corridor. Buildings shall be arranged in a manner that creates well - defined open space that is viewable from the traveled portion of the corridor. c) Architectural Appearance/Scale. New buildings shall have generally complex exterior forms, including design components such as windows, doors, and changes in roof and facade orientation. Large flat expanses of featureless exterior wall shall be avoided. The treatment of buildings shall include vertical architectural treatment at least every 25 -30 feet to break down the scale of the building into smaller components. 2. Orientation. Building facades and entrances should be oriented in a manner toward the primary means of vehicular access. 5:18 Scale and proportion. New construction should relate to the dominant proportions of buildings and streetscape in the immediate area. The ratio of height to width and the ratio of mass (building) to void (openings) should be balanced. 4. Architectural details shall continue on all facades visible from the public right -of -way. 5. Any facade with a blank wall shall be screened with vegetative treatments and/or the installation faux architectural treatments (e.g. fenestrations) so as to break up the mass and bulk of the facade in a manner fitting the intent of this section. d) Materials. Building materials shall be typical of those prevalent in commercial areas, including, but not limited to, stucco, brick, architectural block, decorative masonry, non - reflective glass and similar materials. Architectural metal may be used for a portion of facades facing public rights of way but shall not be the dominant material employed with windows and doors being excluded from this calculation. e) Color. The permanent color of building materials (to be left unpainted) shall resemble earthen tones prevalent in nature. Showy and striking colors shall be avoided. fl Li tin 1. All outdoor lighting fixtures shall be down - directed, with light trespass not to exceed 0.5 foot - candles at the property line. 2. All island canopy ceiling fixtures shall be recessed. 3. Whenever possible commercial lighting should be reduced in volumelintensity when said commercial facilities are not open for business. Subd. 10: Vegetative Screening/Buffers. a) This standard is in addition to those in Section 52.12, Subd. 3 of this ordinance relating to landscaping. Where standards conflict the most restrictive standard shall apply. b) Any required vegetativelplanting screen shall be designed, planted and maintained in accordance with a landscaping plan approved by the Zoning Administrator. c) The painting screen shall provide an effective buffer between the area to be screened and the adjoining roadway or commercial /industrial development. 5:19 ORDINANCE 52 — ZONING ORDINANCE d) The planting screen may be comprised of previously existing vegetation (provided that the majority of such existing vegetation is trees), new plantings or any combination of existing vegetation and new plantings. When complete, the vegetation and plantings shall provide a dense year -round screen satisfying the purpose and intent of this section. e) The planting screen may consist of a mixture of deciduous and evergreen trees and/or shrubs or a planting of evergreen trees and/or shrubs. f) The planting screen shall be subject to on -site inspection by the City which, if necessary, may prescribe that additional plantings be made in order to satisfy the standards set out herein. g) The property owner shall maintain vegetative/planting screening in accordance with the approved landscaping plan and to abide by requirements for any additional plantings. h) Vegetative buffering. In all instances where commercial and/or multi- family residential districts are adjacent to single- family residential districts, and in all instances where commercial districts are adjacent to multi- family residential districts, there shall be established within the commercial and/or multi- family district, as applicable, a screened yard of vegetative buffering between the districts. The arrangement and spacing of the vegetative buffer shall be provided in such a manner as to effectively screen the activities of the subject lot. It shall generally be provided along the property line, unless topographic or other considerations would make it more effective if located back from the property line. 5:20 Subd. 4. Interim Use Permit. a) Pu se. The purpose and intent of allowing interim uses is: l . To allow a use for a limited period of time that reasonably utilizes the property in the manner not permitted in the applicable zoning district. 2. To allow a use that is presently acceptable but that, with anticipated development, may not be acceptable in the future. b) AlMlication. Public Hearing, Notice and Procedure. The application, public notice and procedure requirements for interim use permits shall be the same as those for Special Use Permits as provided in Section 52.7, Subd. 3 of this Ordinance. c) Standards. The Planning Commission shall recommend an interim use permit and the Council shall issue such interim use permits only if it finds that such use at the proposed location: Meets the standards of a special use permit set forth in Section 52.7, Subd 3, of this Ordinance. 2. Conforms to the zoning regulations, performance standards and other requirements of this Ordinance. 3. Is allowed as an interim use in the applicable zoning district. 4. Will terminate upon a tangible date or event specified in the resolution approving said interim use permit. 5. Will not impose, by agreement, additional costs on the public if it is necessary for the public to take the property in the future. 6. Will be subjected to, by agreement with the owner, any conditions that the City Council has deemed appropriate for permission of the use, including a condition that the owner will provide an appropriate financial surety to cover the cost of removing the interim use and any interim structures upon the expiration of the interim use permit. d) Termination. An interim use permit shall terminate upon the occurrence of any of the following events; whichever first occurs: 1. The date specified in the permit; 2. A violation of the conditions under which the permit was issued; or 3. A change in the City's zoning regulations which render the use nonconforming. 5:21 e) Successive Applications. Whenever an application for an interim use permit has been considered and denied by the City Council, a similar application for an interim use permit affecting substantially the same property shall not be considered again by the Planning Commission or City Council for at least six (6) months from the date of its denial, unless a decision to reconsider such matter is made by not less than four -fifths (4/5) vote of the full City Council. f) Anneals. All decisions by the Council involving an interim use permit request shall be final except that an aggrieved person or persons shall have the right to file an appeal within thirty (30) days of the decision with the Stearns County District Court." 5:22 �t� -ec�aS �l(S� -f'�dv►� f Sta�Gav�G� e) Standards. The Planning Commission shall recommend a special use permit and the Council shall order the issuance of such permit if the application conforms to the specific standards set forth below, as it would apply to the particular use at the proposed location: Will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, morals, comfort, convenience or general welfare of the neighborhood or the City. 2. Will be harmonious with the general and applicable specific objectives of the comprehensive plan of the City and this Ordinance. 3. Will be designed, constructed, operated and maintained so as to be harmonious and appropriate in appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and will not change the essential character of that area. 4. Will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing of future neighboring uses. 5. Will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services, including streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water and sewer systems, and schools. 6. Will not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. 7. Will not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property, or the general welfare because of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors. 8. Will have vehicular approaches to the property which are so designed as not to create traffic congestion or an interference with traffic or surrounding public thoroughfares. 9. Will have adequate facilities to provide sufficient off -street parking and loading space to serve the proposed use. 10. Will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural, scenic, or historic feature of major importance. 5:23 December 4, 2006 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, December 4, 2006 at 7:00 PM in the St. Joseph City Hall. Members Present: Interim Chair S. Kathleen Kalinowski. Commissioners: Marge Lesnick, Bob Loso, Jim Graeve, Al Rassier, Mike Deutz, Mark Anderson City Administrator Judy Weyrens. Others Present: Steve Frank, Greg Kacures enda: Deutz made a motion to approve the agenda; seconded by Graeve. Kalinowski added the following item to the agenda: After 4 Election of Planning Commission Chair The motion passed unanimously. Interim Use Permit= 4031'4 Avenue NE: Chair Kalinowski called the hearing to order and stated that the purpose of the hearing was to consider an Interim Use Permit to allow an owner occupied rental at the property described as S2 of Lots 11 thru 14, Block 23, Loso's Addition. Ryan Lieser, 403 1st Avenue NE, St. Joseph, submitted the request. Kalinowski opened the public hearing and the hearing was dosed as no one present wished to speak. Deutz questioned whether or not the items listed on the inspection report have been completed. Weyrens stated that they must be finished prior to Council approval; however, due to the current weather conditions, the parking area will be completed by spring. Lesnick then questioned Liesees intent for the property. Weyrens advised Lesnick that because the property was used as single - family in the past, it could continue to be used as such. As a result, he secure an Interim Use Permit to allow for an owner-occupied rental. Deutz made a motion to accept the flndings of fact and recommend that h t the Council approve e Interim Use permit for 403 lot Avenue NE. The motion was seconded by Loso. Rassier questioned the June 1" deadline for the completion of the parking and siding to which the Commission agreed to accept the recommendations of the Rental Housing Inspector. The motion passed unanimously. Planning Commission Addition: Kallnowski introduced Mark Anderson as the newest member to the Planning Commission. Ordinance Updates: Kalinowski opened the public hearing and stated that the purpose of the hearing was to consider the adoption or amendments to the following Ordinances: ■ 52.11 Signs • 52.21 Transportation Corridor Overlay District Site and Design Standards ■ 52.09 PUD Planned Unit Development Overlay District ■ 54 Subdivision Regulations ■ 51 Building Ordinance 56 Fence Ordinance ■ 52.27 R -1 Single Family Residence District • 52.28 R -2 Two Family Residence District 52.29 R-3 Multiple Family Residence D'otrk t ■ 52.34 LI Light Industrial District ■ 52.12 General Performance Standards • 52.31 B-1 Central Business District • 52.32 B-2 Highway 75 Business District 5:24 December 4, 2006 Page 2 of 3 52.33 B -3 General Business District Weyrens stated that the proposed Ordinances have been posted on the City of St. Joseph Website and have been available for comment in the City Offices. Kalinowski opened the Public Hearing. Greg Kacures, 3071 Avenue NE, approached the commissioners with questions regarding the Sign Ordinance. He questioned when the Sign Moratorium would be lifted. Weyrens advised Kacures that the Council passed the Moratorium to expire on December 31; however Weyrens stated that it would be lifted once the Council adopts the revised Sign Ordinance. Weyrens stated that there were no changes on the permitted sizes of signs within the City; rather the language was changed to be more constitutional. The public hearing was closed. Rassier commented that the Planning Commission members have worked very hard on the aforementioned Ordinance Amendments over the past few months. Weyrens added that there are a few amendments that the Planning Commissioners have not yet seen. There are some proposed changes to the B-1, B-2, and B -3 Business Districts to allow for single family dwelling units in these districts that are currently being used as dwelling units to apply for an Interim Use Permit for a non owner occupied rental. Rassier stated that the reason for this proposed amendment is to allow for transitional zoning from single - family to commercial. Graeve questioned whether or not they would be limited to 3 non - related people as in the residential districts or whether or not they could have more based on the size of the house. Weyrens clarified that they would follow the same guidelines as those issued in the residential districts with the exception of being non -owner occupied. Weyrens suggested adding that the maximum density would be defined as definition of family as in Ordinance 55. Deutz stated that this is a positive step for the City, as this allows these homes to be used rather than be vacant until the transition to commercial is completed. Deutz made a motion to recommend the Council amendment Ordinances 62.31, 52.32, and 52.33 adding a provision for rental units In all districts by issuance of an Interim Use Permits. Further the Ordinance Amendment should include language to IimR the maximum occupancy as that currently allowed in R1 Zoning Districts. The motion was seconded by Lesnick and passed unanimously. There were some questions relating to the Sign Ordinance as well. Greve questioned who the Zoning Administrator is for the City. Weyrens replied that she currently acts as the Zoning Administrator. There was some question as to what was meant by the aggregate square footage of a sign. Deutz clarified that this would pertain to those businesses where there are more than one sign involved or if it were a business center with multiple tenants. Kalinowski stated that the PUD Ordinance was amended just as the Commissioners had discussed. Graeve, however, stated that he had some concerns with a section of the Ordinance, which states "Wetlands can be utilized to determine the area of developable land He feels that the developers should not be able to use the wetlands for that purpose. Weyrens advised Graeve that the wetlands are to be used as a design feature for a development. Loso added that although the wetlands could be used to determine the area of developable land, it could not be used as buildable land. According to Rassier, developers could use the wetland area to increase their density, but the developer would still need to bring plans to the Planning Commission for approval. Rassier made a motion to approve the Amendments as presented for Ordinances 52.11, 52.21, 52.09, 54, 51, 56, 52.27, 52.28, 52.29, 52.34, and 62.12 and recommend that the Council execute the amendments and authorize the same to be published. The motion was seconded by Deutz and passed unanimously. 5:25 December 4, 2006 Page 3 of 3 Weyrens advised the commissioners that they would receive new copies of the zoning ordinances after the first of the year. Election of Chair: ifJeutz made a motion to nominate Sr. Kathleen Kalinowski for Planning Commission Chair. The motion was seconded by Graeve. Rassier made a motion to nominate Bob Loso for Planning Commission Chair. The motion was seconded by Lesnick. As there were two nominations, the commissioners took a voted with Loso receiving 5 votes and Kalinowski receiving 2 votes. Therefore, Loso will be the Planning Commission Chair for the year 2007. . Adioum: Ressler made a motion to adjourn; seconded by Lesnick and passed unanhnousiy. �y1 � J dy yrerfs or S:26 AO,jk MUNICIPAL DEVROftma Gem, li c. DATE: May 17, 2006 MEMO TO: Planning Commission, Administrator Weyrens FROM: Cynthia SmithStrack, Municipal Development Group RE: Potential Zoning Ordinance Amendments Request: The Planning Commission is examining several potential ordinance updates, including the addition of standards for parcels abutting major transportation corridors and standards relating to environmental conservation. Background: Environmental Corridor Overlay MDG has prepared sample language for the Planning Commission to consider relating to a transportation corridor overlay district and environmental conservation standards. The intent of the transportation corridor overlay district is to enhance the visual appearance and continuity of development from parcel to panes within highly visible, high - traffic corridors and to maintain the long -term function of arterial and collector roadways. Proposed standards would apply to specific areas adjacent to arterial/commercial roadways i.e. 100 feet from right of way (consistent with zoning requirements for Individual lots) except that Interstate 94 overlay would be 500'. Proposed standards within the corridor will (a) maintain viewsheds adjacent to roadways (aesthetic benefit — soften affect of development proted corridor for possible expansion and provide for buffering between high traffic and potentially residential areas) and (b) promote unified lot layout, building design and development scale within the first tier of lots abutting major transportation thoroughfares as a means of avoiding a build -out scenario which ultimately results in a haphazard development pattern. DRAFT standards are attached for review /comment. The EDA has reviewed the draft. Environmental Conservation MDG has prepared sample language for the Planning Commission to consider relating to environmental conservation. The intent of this language is to promote the 'small town atmosphere' within St. Joseph by protecting, preserving and enhancing the natural resources and landscapes which have historically defined the City and region while encouraging a resourceful and prudent approach to the development and alteration of land. Proposed design standards would be placed into affect for all new non - administrative subdivisions and developments requiring a SW PPP . under NPDES regulations (typically one acre or more). 5:27 � \« -- � ee p ee o ()1 � CF) D � � Cn QL � N) 0 CD o � k � 6 0 6 C) C, » c) r-q- �«a \ }® ;Z \ \ \ :R \ -7 \m 0 CD 5D CD $E7\ CL (mXCL * q q \ ! 0 q CL ; / ; ( CD PL ƒ ®/) �� /\ Lity of St.7osepF 25 CofteAvmue-NW P.O. Box 668. St Joseph, MN56374 (320) 363 -7201 Fax: 363 -0342 City of St Joseph Public' Hearing Judy Wri-m Maw The Planning Commission for the City of St Joseph shall •conduct a public Lwy J. Hos6 hearing, on Monday; January 6, 2003 at 7:05 p.m. in the -St. Joseph City Hall. The purpose • of the hearing is. to. consider a fifteen - percent. (15%) variance on. the exterior Bob requirements Of a building and a special use - permit to allow industrial and office C"Y Ehlon storage.. The property is legally described as: Kyle senada« Ahm Ruda Lot 2, Block 1 Neu Addition and-Is located -at 8856 Ridgewood (Road. St. Joseph Code of Ordinances 52.22 'Subd. •7 (c) states: Building Exteriors: Acceptable building materials shall include brick, stone, tip-up concrete panel, decorative concrete block or. glass. Wood siding, plastic and other combustible materials not. listed es acceptable shall -not be used for building- exteriors. Architecturally approved steal is acceptable - provided that at least fifty percent (50%) of the building (excluding - windows ' and doors)' consists. of brick, stone, tip=up' concrete panel, 'decorative concrete block and /6t glass. Any buildings undergoing renovation, repair or an addition,,so as to require-the-issuance. of a building permit, shall be brought into conformance with this.subsection•a the' time the-repairs,- renovations or addition are completed. St. Joseph Code of Ordinances 52.22 Subd. 4 (c) states: The following use shall require - a- Spedal. Use Permit based on the procedures set forth in Section 52.9 of this Ordinance: Industrial and office warehousing. The request to consider a fifteen .percent (15%) variance on the exterior requirements of a building and a spedal use permit to allow industrial and office storage has been submitted by Thomas Borresch; 9 — 17"' Avenue SE St. Joseph, MN 56374. Jud Weyrens ministrator Published: December 20, 2002 April 15, 2004 Page 2 of 7 Ressler made a motion authorizing the Planning Commission to conduct a public hearing for the possible amendment to Ordinance 34.18, Park Dedication. The motion was seconded by Vick and passed unanimously. Honer Homes - Preliminary Plat Braden & Benit Place Weyrens reported that the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on March 1, 2004 for a preliminary plat for the two duplexes owned by Honer Homes on East Minnesota Street. The platting is requested to allow the existing duplexes to be sold as separate housing units. The Planning Commission tabled action on March 1, 2004 and requested the City Attorney review if the rental licenses for the property are transferable and 9 the density could be reduced after the platting is completed. it was the opinion of the attorney that after the plat is completed: the property would be allowed to continue as rental. However, upon issuance of a rental license, the property must meet the requirements such as parking and room size. if the property meets the licensure requirements, each unit would be allowed to rent to a maximum of fnre persons. After reconsidering the matter at the Planning Commission on April 5. 2004, it was the recommendation to approve the Preliminary and Final Plat of Braden and Benit Place. Weyrens clarified that the Plat before the Council is more administrative, as the property is already developed. The proposed plat is consistent with the Ordinance governing Common Interest Communities. Ressler made a motion accepting the recommendation of the Planning Commission and approving the preliminary and final plat for the following properties: 504 and 508 East Minnesota Street — Platted as Braden Place 606 and 608 East Minnesota Street — Platted as Senit Place The motion was seconded by Wick and passed unanlmously. Minnesota Home Improvement. Steal Use Request: Tom Borresch of Minnesota Home Improvement appeared before the Council requesting issuance of a Special Use Permit. Utsch stated that the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on April 5, 2014 to consider issuance of a Special Use Permit to allow used trailer sales at the property located at 9 —17'" Avenue NE. The property Is zoned as 82, Highway Business. Utsch stated that the Planning Commission recommended approval with the contingency that the Special Use Permit is only valid until May 1, 2005. The sunseting of the permit was included as Borresch Indicated the use was for a one -year period, and he did not wish to meet the Ordnance requirements regarding the parking area. U the use would extend beyond one year he would be required to do so. The Planning Commission also recommended approval contingent upon the property owner adhering to the Temporary Sign regulations and the Outdoor Storage provisions. Rassier stated that he is not opposed to the Special Use Request, but Is concerned that the property owner is not being required to meet all the provisions such as parking lot surface. Ressler slated it is his opinion that the City should not be relieving requirements on a temporary basis and each use should be viewed as a new business with adherence to the Ordinance. Utsch made a motion to Issue a Special Use Permit to Minnesota Home Improvement, 9 —17ei Avenue NE to sell used trailers with the following contingencies: 1. The Special Use Permit sunsets on May 1,2W5. 2. Temporary signs will not be used for advertising the sales, unless application is made In accordance with the Ordinance, including the maximum number of days allowed. 3. The property will meet all the outdoor standards for granting a special use permit in a B2 Business District. This Includes screening of areas that abut residential districts. 5-Are- ov4i,'�iaA ­vGi— /& Ileme --n //1Y//60-0Z4 "low 4!11'1WZY CITY OF ST. JOSEPH u1l Ong College Avenue North • P.O. Box 668 • St. Joseph, MN 56374 Permit Application (320) 363.7201 • Fax (320) 363 -0342 Permit Number. Phone Number:�J yys .ss (if different from above): Parcel ID #: Description: Lot: Block: ated Construction Start Date: Estimated Completion Date: 7-1-0-3 ess (include City, State, Zip): itect: Contractor License # — Phone:��' Phone: Phone: ng Classification: _ Variance Required: . 10'aseIAC r jai Structure Setbacks: Front Yard: --�1�— Rear Yard: Side Yard (1): Side Yard (2): gro • ize: Width: Length: Comer Lot: Yes No-,L Type of Construction ►ensions: Height: Width: A29 " Depth: ' Fire Suppression System: ;upancy: Re 'dential Commercial__ Industrial Accessory Other. Jv Remodel Addition Demolish Garage: Detached Attached gage Shed `�,�Deck _ Porch , . Fence . Pool _+________ Lower Level .scription of Work: ctneal Contractor: imbing Contractor: schanical Contractor: _ :ptic Installer: .�-- rereby certify that I have read and examined this application and know e same to be true and correct. All provisions of laws and ordinances lveming this type of work will be complied with whether specified herein not. The granting of a permit does not presume to give authority to date or cancel the provisions of any other State or local law regulating nstruction or the performance of construction. This permit becomes ill and void if work or construction authorized has not commenced thin 180 days. Name Date Date Value of Work (Including labor): Permit Fee: Plan Review Fee: WAC / SAC Charges: Water Meter Fee: State Surcharge: Total Amount Due: Paid Check #: --0,. LZ Separate permits are required for plumbing, mechanical and electrical. All inspections must be called in at least 24 hours in advance by contacting: AIISpec Services 14562 Ronneby Road NE, Foley, WIN 56329 (320) 293 -5298 — phone (320) 387 -2703 — fax sen.sa,. P;ti, r....., vn11...., o,.slas.,.. A44I..1..1 !`....., 0-1, - n....11 —.+ r,..,., W 1 Z J I l � IJ.I a of °- N O w 0 1 I ,oz -1 ,Z£ ,09 I 1 I 1 j 1 I QQ ' W U U i < 1 z j p J Z, co 0 x XI oo W I I I N I � M I I I W i 1 I w I I z In 3 I 1 1 I rn 1 II 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 `I I _7. I 1 N O W I I {I N I i I `II 0 1 1 II 1 I I Z s� � w m J_ w ? . Li t z �E mad 1 I{ I ai r . i w I s rn � 7 o� I ,sz ,09 r VI ,$ I � I � I . �LA z --b � � N O I I OL O Q. aN � J V I W40d �. i it ' I � ,OZ ,Zc ,9 9. 0 O 1 i 1 dZI 0- J W' F- Land Use Management of Orderly Annexation Area City of St. Joseph / City of Waite Park Platting Application received by County. County reviews to determine completeness and conformance to County Ordinance and City/Twp land use. County sets public ring, prepares __tice, mails, publish County forwards staff report to City/Twp. City responsible for preparing meeting material City prepare final findings of fact and record action Orderly Annexation Agreement & MOU Zoning Administrator Stearns County Environmental Services Interim /Special Uses Variances Application received by County. County reviews to determine completeness and conformance to County Ordinance and City/Twp land use. County sets public hearing, prepares notice, mails, publish Rezoning Application received by County. County reviews to determine completeness and conformance to County Ordinance and City/Twp land use. County sets public hearing, prepares notice, mails, publish Township of St. Joseph Lot Split Administrative Division of a split for the quarter purpose of section attachment Administrative split for the purpose of treatment system County forwards staff County forwards staff report to City/Twp. report to City/Twp. Joint Planning Board Membership: City —1 Council, 3 Planning Twp —1 Board, 3 Planning County — District Commissioner Township Responsible for Conduct Public Hearing minutes IAdopt final findings of fact Boundary line adjustment Administrative split for the purpose of securing a mortgage County staff review and notification only to City Note: The Joint Planning Board has final authority on land use matters.