Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout[04] Tom Borresch - IUP/VarianceOW OF t�7:.JcRSN H MEETING DATE: AGENDA ITEM: SUBMITTED BY: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Council Agenda Item `1 May 3, 2010 Tom Borresch, 9 -17th Avenue Interim Use, Variance Administration PREVIOUS PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Included in this packet is the same information that the Planning Commission received for the April meeting. As you can see from the attached minutes, the Planning Commission did open and close the public hearing and due to the absence of the petitioner the matter was tabled to May 3, 2010. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Also included in this packet is a letter to Mr. Borresch identifying the outstanding issues. The letter was hand delivered in Mr. Borresch in the City Offices on April 14, 2010. explained to him in my office the requirement to be at the meeting and all the issues need to be resolved. I asked him to provide me with the additional documents before April 28 and as of writing this memo I have not received any additional information. Mr. Borresch did move the sheds off property for which he does not own. They have been moved to the side. The Planning Commission still must determine if the outside sales will be allowed, and if so, what are the conditions. Does the area need to be paved and are the number of units going to be limited. The issues regarding the trailer sales adjacent to Minnesota Street will also need to be addressed. Enclosed with the letter to Mr. Borresch is the approval for the trailer sales. At the time of approval Borresch was provided a year permit which was eligible for extension if the parking lot were improved to meet the Ordinance standards. At this time the parking lot does not meet the standards. This is a separate issue from the current request but should be considered at this time. If the use is to expire, the City will need to send a letter to MN Department of Public Safety rescinding zoning approval. ATTACHMENTS: 2010 [04] Apr 14 Weyrens Letter re: Land Use Application .. ............................... 4:1 -4 Past Actions of the Planning Commission ............................... ............................... 4:5 -7 2010 [04] Apr 05 Request for Planning Commission Action ............................... 4:8 -9 2010 [04] Apr 05 Hearing Notice ............................................... ............................... 4:10 Findingsof Fact .......................................................................... ............................... 4:11 -12 Application for Interim Use ........................................................ ............................... 4:13 -15 Application for Variance ............................................................ ............................... 4:16 -19 PropertySketch ........................................................................... ............................... 4:20 VicinityMap ............................................................................. ............................... 4:21 Ordinance 52.21— Transportation Corridor Overlay District Site and Design 4:22 -27 Standards ...... Ordinance 52.07 Subd. 4 Interim Use Permit ........................ ............................... 4:28 -29 Ordinance 52.07 Subd. 3 Special Use Permit Standards ........ ............................... 4:30 2006 Action establishing Ordinance ....................................... ............................... 4:31 -34 SiteDrawing ................................................................................. ............................... 4:35 2003 [01] Jan 06 Public Hearing Notice ................................... ............................... 4:36 BuildingPermit 03- 10 .................................................................. ............................... 4:37 -39 REQUESTED PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: The Planning Commission must make a determination on the Variance and Interim Use Request of Tom Borresch and determine compliance for the property abutting East Minnesota Street. CITY OF ST. JOSEPH WWW.cltyof stioseph.com April 14, 2010 Mr. Tom Borresch MN Home Improvement Administrator 9 —17th Avenue NE HAND DELIVERED Judy Weyrens St. Joseph MN 56374 RE: Land Use Application — Outdoor Sales Mayor 2005 Special Use Permit Al Rassier Councilors Dear Mr. Borresch: Steve Frank Bob Loso Please be advised that the Planning Commission on April 5, 2010 tabled action on your Renee Symanietz request for Interim Use as there was not a representative present at the meeting to discuss Dale Wick your plans. In reviewing your requests, the Planning Commission discussed the not only the current application, but the Special Use Permit and Variance from prior years. In reviewing the actions it appears as your properties may not be in compliance with the permits issued. To help facilitate the planning process so that your current application may be considered the past actions are identified below along with any deficiency. Special Use and Variance, January 2003 — Exterior Building Material Relief and warehouse /storage in a B2 Zoning District. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on January 2, 2003 to consider a variance providing relief on the exterior requirements and a special use permit to allow warehousing or storage in a 132 Zoning District. The special use permit limited the warehouse and storage to that which is used by MN Home Improvement or Leaf Guard. In reviewing the site plan it is apparent that the building is constructed over the property line. While the purpose is not to have the building moved, just to make the property owner aware of their property line. The proposed location of the outdoor storage sheds were also located on property not owned by the petitioner. In addition, there is a current court action outstanding with regard to use of property in the rear yard that is not owned by MN Home Improvement /Leaf Guard as well. On October 27, 2009 the Police Department has cited you for this violation and the ROW for MNdot /Sante Fe Rail has yet to be replaced. While you partially complied with moving the shed that was constructed without a permit the ROW has yet to be restored. It is my understanding that you were to complete the restoration this spring. Remedy, unless the material is moved within 10 days, the police department will issue a second citation requiring mandatory court. zS College Avenue North • PO Box 668 . Saint Joseph, Minnesota 56374 4:1 Phone 3zo.363.7z01 Fax 3zo.363.0342- Special Use Permit, April 5 2004 — Used Automotive Sales The Planning Commission conducted a hearing to allow for the sale of trailers. The Special Use Permit was issued for a one year period that would expire in one year unless the property conformed to the B2 Zoning regulations including parking. Remedy, in order for the property to continue with the trailer sales, the revised site plan must be presented to the Planning Commission for consideration. All the provisions including parking lot standards must be completed for the use to continue. Interim Use Permit, April 5, 2010 — Outside Storage, display and sales of accessory structures After being notified by the City Offices that your property was in violation of the Zoning Ordinance, you submitted an application for an Interim Use Permit to allow for outdoor display and sales of accessory structures. Your property is zoned B2 and included in the Transportation Corridor Overlay District. As such outdoor sales are not listed as a permitted use and they were initially placed outside of your property boundaries. Since you were not present at the meeting on April 5, the Planning Commission tabled action on your plan. After the meeting the Building Inspector informed you that the accessory structures needed to be moved onto property you owned and in the side yard setback area. The buildings have since been moved back, however, they are still located in the front yard. In order to consider your request for Interim Use Permit, the following items will need to be addressed: 1. Restore the Railroad /MnDot ROW along the rear setback line within 5 days of receipt of this letter. 2. If it is your intent to continue selling trailers at the property located at 9 —17`h Avenue SE, a detailed site plan must be presented to the Planning Commission illustrating that the property will be in full compliance with the B2 Zoning District. Specifically the parking area must meet the standards outlined in the St. Joseph Code of Ordinances. 3. Prepare a detailed site plan for the property located 8856 Ridgewood Road. The site plan must include the following: a. Lot dimensions and locations of buildings in relation to said lines. b. Calculation of existing lot coverage to determine if adequate space exists. c. Identification of paved areas and whether or not you intend to pave the areas where the accessory buildings will be stored. d. Narrative to include how many accessory buildings will be located on the property at one time how long you intend to conduct outdoor sales. e. Items identified on the attached Development checklist. The City of St. Joseph encourages business development and at the same time has to balance Ordinance enforcement. The purpose of the Transportation Corridor Overlay Ordinance is to protect the land and building investment of all property owners. Hopefully we will be able to remedy all the outstanding issues so that we can move forward. If you have any questions or need additional information after reviewing the above please feel free to contact me at 320 - 363 -7201 or Ron Wasmund at 1- 800 - 322 -6153. 4:2 Sincerely, CITY OF ST. JOSE Ju y eyrens A istrator cc: Ron Wasmund /Lee Gladitsch, Inspectron Peter Jansky, Police Chief St. Joseph Planning Commission 4:3 City of St. Joseph Required Material Submission Development Plan Applications Completed applications for Development Plans and required fees shall be submitted the City of St. Joseph Zoning Administrator at least 21 days prior to the proposed date of consideration by the City. With 10 days of submission your application will be review for completeness. Only completed applications will be forwarded to the Planning Commission for consideration. 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. Description of Site (Legal Description) YES NO 2. Ten (10) copies, minimum size 11' X 17', of a Site Plan drawn at scale showing: YES NO A. Building location on the lot, drawn to scale; YES NO B. Building elevations; front, rear and side; YES NO C. Building exterior materials and color; YES NO D. Locations of ingress and egress points; YES NO E. Dumpster and solid waste pick -up areas and proposed YES NO screening material; F. Sign location and dimensions; YES NO G. Lighting standard and hood detail; YES NO H. Parking and loading areas identified; YES NO I. Drainage by the use of arrows and /or contours; YES NO J. Screening of heating, ventilation and air - conditioning equipment; YES NO K. Landscaping material including the location, type of plant and size; YES NO L. Fire hydrant and fire lane locations; YES NO M. Utility locations; and, YES NO N. Any other fencing, screening, or building accessories to be located in the development area. YES NO 4:4 Minnesota Home Improvement Special 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, 2004 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 B2, 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 Ordinance requirements regarding the parking area for only one year. 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. Rassier stated 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 —17th Avenue NE to sell used trailers with the following contingencies: 1. The Special Use Permit sunsets on May 1,2005. 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. Ayes: Hosch, Utsch, Wick, Rieke Nays: Rassier Motion carried 4:1:0 4:5 Graeve made a motion to recommend the City Council adopt the following findings, recommending approval of the Special Use Permit for Minnesota Home Improvement. The motion was seconded by Kalinowski. Resolution of finding The request of Minnesota Home Improvement for a Special Use request came before the Planning Commission at a public hearing held on April 5, 2004. The purpose of the hearing was to consider issuance of a Special Use Permit to allow automotive sales in a B2 Zoning.District. St. Joseph Code of 52.31 subdivision 4 (el provides for the following under special uses: New or Used auto dealerships in a B -2 Highway Business District. The property is legally described as: Lot 009 Block 001 Whispering Pines Addition. The request has been submitted by Minnesota Home Improvement — Tom Borresch, 9 17" Avenue 3;E, St. Joseph MN 56374. Notice of this matter was duly served and published. In consideration of the information presented to the Planning Commission and its application to the Comprehensive Plan and Ordinances of the City of St. Joseph, the Planning Commission makes the following findings: The proposed use is consistent with the standards for granting a special use permit, St. Joseph Code of Ordinances 52.9 Therefore, based on the above findings, the Planning Commission makes the following recommendation: Approval of the Special Use Permit to allow automotive sales in a B2, Highway Business Zoning District, contingent upon the following; 1. The Special Use Permit expires on May 1, 2005 unless the property owner requests an extension. If an extension is requested, the property must meet all the standards of St. Joseph Code of Ordinances 52.31 Subd. 5 (a — h), conditions applicable to all special Use permits. 2. Automotive sales will be limited to trailer sales only. , 3. The property owner must conform to all zoning regulations including, but not limited to the Temporary Sign Ordinance. Violation of this Ordinance can result in revocation of the Special Use Permit. The motion passed unanimously. 4:6 RESOLUTION PC- 2003 -01 ST. JOSEPH PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR MINNESOTA HOME IMPROVEMENT TO CONSTRUCT A NEW FACILITY WHEREAS, Minnesota Home Improvement has submitted a request for a special use permit for a 6,000 square foot warehouse facility, and WHEREAS, the applicant has submitted required site plan and building plans for review; and WHEREAS, Section 52.9 of the Zoning Ordinance outlines requirements for the issuance of a special use permit; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the proposed site and building plans. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE ST. JOSEPH PLANNING COMMISSION THAT: The Planning Commission does hereby recommend the City Council of the City of St. Joseph approve the special use permit for Minnesota Home Improvements for the construction of a warehouse facility, contingent upon the following conditions: 1. The warehouse facility can only store materials used by MN Home Improvement or MN Leaf Guard. • DATED THIS 6T" DAY OF January, 2003. - ATTEST: Gary Utsch, Planning Chair Judy Weyrens, Administrator /Clerk 0 4:7 N-11*164"i'. pra_'�. crryOF,5T: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. 4:8 ATTACHMENTS: Request for Planning Commission Action ..................................................... ............................... HearingNotice .................................................................................................. ............................... Findingsof Fact .............................................................................................. ............................... Applicationfor Interim Use ............................................................................. ............................... Applicationfor Variance ................................................................................... ............................... PropertySketch .................................................................................................. ............................... VicinityMap ................................................................................................. ............................... Ordinance 52.21— Transportation Corridor Overlay District Site and Design Standards ...... Ordinance 52.07 Subd. 4 Interim Use Permit ............................................ ............................... Ordinance 52.07 Subd. 3 Standards for Granting Interim Use ................. ............................... 2006 Action establishing Ordinance .............................................................. ............................... 5• Z _ 5: NNEd 5:4 -5 5:6 -8 5:9 -12 5:13 5:14 5:15 -20 5:21 -22 5:23 5:24 -27 4:9 CITY OF ST. JOS H WWW, cityof stjoseph.com - SCANNED Judy Weyrens Administrator Publish: March 27, 2010 8856 Ridgewood Road 4:10 z5 College Avenue North • PO Box 668 • Saint Joseph, Minnesota 56374 Phone 32o.363.72 0 1 Fax 3zo.363.0342 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 applicable zoning district; 2) To allow a use that is presently acceptable but that, with Steve 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 —17th Avenue NE, St. Joseph MN 56374. Judy Weyrens Administrator Publish: March 27, 2010 8856 Ridgewood Road 4:10 z5 College Avenue North • PO Box 668 • Saint Joseph, Minnesota 56374 Phone 32o.363.72 0 1 Fax 3zo.363.0342 City of St. Joseph IN RE: -sauFft-D 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. 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. 4:11 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. 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 By Kathleen Kalinowski, Chair Judy Weyrens, Administrator 4:12 APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL USE PERMIT City of St. Joseph 25 College Avenue N PO Box 668 SL Joseph, MN 56374 Phone (320)363 -7201 or Fax (320)363 -0342 STATE OF MINNESOTA) ) ss COUNTY OF STEARNS ) NAME: tom borresch ADDRESS: 917th ave se st.joseph mn. 56374 PHONE: 2,503,303 Fee $ 4 Q Paid Date I 10 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. Presentzoning of the above described property is: B2 - 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: FX Yes F No we,re currently selling home improvement type products out of the same location 4:13 6. Will the proposed use depreciate the area in which it is proposed? Please explain: F- Yes jx 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: FX- Yes F 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: Fx- Yes r No end road S�gN�D Attached to this application, and made a part thereof, are other material submission data requirements, as indicated. Applicant Signature: G� C Date: 3.15.2010 Property Owner Signature: GAI— Date: 3.15.2010 Date application submitted: Date application completed: Planning Commission Action: F- Recommend Approval F Recommend Disapproval Date of Action: City Council Action: r Approved r Disapproved Date of Action: Date Applicant/Property owner notified of City Council Action: 4:14 City of St. Joseph Required Material Submission Special Use Material Qk* Completed applications for Special Use requests and required fees shall be submitted the City of St. Joseph Zone ator at least 20 days prior to the proposed date of consideration by the City. The twenty days allows the City to review the applica. f�, 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 1. Additional written or graphic data reasonably required by the Zoning Administrator or the Planning Commission as described below: All applications must include a narrative of the Special Use request. The Special Use application must be completed in its entirety including the reasons as to why the Planning Commission and City Councll should approve the request. 2. Site Plan containing the following: - Legal description - Site plan showing parcel & building dimensions - Location of buildings showing square footage, easements, curb cuts, driveways, access roads, parking spaces, off - street loading areas, sidewalks - Landscaping and screening plans - Drainage and erosion control plan with elevations - Sanitary sewer and water plan with estimated use - Soil type and location of wetlands - Proof of ownership 3. Required Fee. $400.00 (If held during a regular scheduled meeting) $800.00 (If a special meeting is required) 4. Payment of Additional Fees. COMPLETE f7 Yes r No fz;L Yes F- No tn1 1 1 b V- , -, � � ,J C r Yes F- No COMMENTS S- io.r..r- d Sf,so���� w,►1 �,�;1Y G � r �( w �-}'► i�'�`'y h► ra- i v r� S Gt-' �7 �-� -+� •j r- -ye-cc_.r_s C-11 s r 1 i�..s„ -.mss rte— c9n,„� wcil 4-0 J t..r --j 1 -.$ F "T - 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: �� Date: 3 ' 15 20 ►fl 4:15 APPLICATION 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 ) 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.) PROPERTY OWNER NAME: 1� Y Le.l l w �1c PROPERTY OWNER PHONE NUMBER(S): I-Lo- > -Z CQ 330 3 310- 3&3 -44-35- PROPERTY OWNER ADDRESS: $ �Q o- _ pS M 1J �%+31 ZONING DISTRICT: _ Z LEGAL DESCRIPTION: 1,1 kA a ,d J I O--'— go -z 61 oc-k 0o 1 S <J , Ni3 i ln,ce{ 0 Q /c 5 PROPERTY OWNER SIGNATURE(S): 5f—C-4-1 � 1 1 -�-p w 1. The request(s) which we desire for our property is/are in conflict with the following section(s) of the St. Joseph City Code: Section: S.Z - •Z Section: Section: 2. Proposed non- conformance(s): —Fo � + i; ? L L �e�� �j-+. 1 - •�� S�zi`C2f� -V.� ►7.,. \ iJ \ jam y 66 O'P-4 1 In i w y �• �. , e I c. ti d s c , -3 S i tr o. •- :A- � _o W (L c1 -..a_ ST _eve S �� td 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 same zoning classification? (attach additional pages as need) � N U �ci 1 Np- j•l�.- w\.r tr..S. ti °^ 5- �-�'i'kj s:t: -�-tis �..� '1 S •�'MC- inS �? o',.�i. -�-�'� w• o.. 4r \,a i �d c .e. --4�- Q., d +s P Lc- y Q.P 11 J o w. b :�-S o.tJ Sc�3�. e ti �`r. ►� \.\ g Z, rY.ao v+t. -�- A• )c w . "S c. j - +... -s_ Gam. �r -' �- v► A �.- O uv �►' �p � [� -+ O 1-+ � i D�/��.J � ��-. 5 a � �. � •vJ ►-� � E7 w �s i �- .(� 1�� 1 � ���n\.__��Ay dG..G.� VYv !'j�� 1� W17V -s Y'� ♦ f/� wh�� N S:r� ��1n '�"G� CJ- P y 0 Y, rn c. \r -Q �+ 1'� i%r�jC S -- A )-a 03. 4.16 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 r Yes fX No W v -4-1-, % 5 ; s rr-1 h k-- -1 � na-, V- Pay - ©,-, ry , sCAAft'D 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 some district under the terms of the zoning code? (attach additional pages as needed) NO tt.d PO-5 f V-3 . 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. (/�,z -v e.. P i-.-u� 3,}�ery r� -rLl� rig-$ t 1.>> -1 � v �4. �`^- ��'► -a'+`- 1'►r �h.-. -�.9- L}o,,,� PL �. ► �O )` � t r &4- - �-1r•e- �) ,... v� Z 3 Y� a.� , v-� c! �`',.� -. ", 1- cam- w e.:r a wsJc� -� . 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�e. ). r �-- e.r -�4- i S in.:.,�- �-� 'r- e;,..✓v� �-1-� <�-�- Lco� -� b....a�"' d.� �� I�.p i..J i�-l� t...� l�s- 1.��� -,n ,1-•� u ,r 1�-u... � --�-tj �X�� -�.-1 o ✓ -Z S - ci vp•, -. 5-•_ c.u� 1) �.:.� �!-c� y-cA- C a-,^ c Q--,9--AJOx> -�u -- jj�v u u ta- (— - 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. '�-�- j �. s T r,r,<.�,� 9 0 � d $ .e�r.5 t. -+� ,� 1 I � ..v -mil. , s �► r. � c...� Op��,.�1 -�.. ,,.: -3- y —�-�7 c! 3 p , c. y s �'�.,� �-► .:,� r 0 O-K9- W i .�-e, 1-• �..r- �-v�e �2c. �. o ,a p r,,.� 2 �'7 ° ZS fc'3' %.. ; , � ---'' Z ms=s � o y _1-v .f ►.Y. }�.�' �1 --.Q.- a..r �S la �.. `% ► )v y �l7 S uY.. -z � o , ►-.� r (by t►-s , c5-� n G� y s l Y'Y� �-dr t cc�'l. j l3 �-n_s . �-e 4:17 Attached to this application, and made a part thereof, are other material submission data requirements, as indicated. Applicant Signature: —� Date: Z Z Property Owner Signature:, �� Date: 3 Date application submitted: USE ONLY Date application completed: Planning Commission Action: (— Recommend Approval r Recommend Disapproval Date of Action: City Council Action: f— Approved r Disapproved Date of Action: Date Applicant/Property owner noted of City Council Action: 4:18 City of St. Joseph W Required Material Submission Variance Material S, 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 j— Yes required by the Zoning Administrator or the Planning Commission as described below: r No All applications must include a narrative of the variance request. The variance application must be completed in its entirety including the reasons as to why the Planning Commission and City Council should approve the request. `v I �_ SSG Yes 2. Requir ee. �- �o.. $400. eld uring a regu ar scheduled meeting) J No 7 $800.00 (If a special meeting is required) 3. Payment of Additional Fees. COMMENTS Flo f c. 10 c- L. - 1 u,,j o J..a -A,"' Fjws i hLSJ C— S wS 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: 6—L ---4-1 Date: 3 ZZ j 4:19 T7 i N �P ^' N S t� q T, 8 I 9 a M C� o 8 D, 1-1 IT I s i J 3f r a �i T r n/ x J ^' N S t� q T, 8 I 9 a M C� o 8 D, 1-1 IT I s i J 3f r a �i 0 f �T 2 T b 0 f �T 2 4:20 � J 6 r v 4. eD co ` 1 /rAl r v L 4:20 DataViewOnline Map Pate 1 of 1 p r. _ x- 1403 1411'I150 -1 ar '�' Q / 1 8619 '1 1404 1414 1514 Q 6 9 % ! ` 8549 v 134 1 8677 1 1408 –3 ` 1 � 14 10 t —' � 8733 ! / 8625 / 21 22 19 20 17 % 1 j 102;,.., 80 104 } 31 106'. 1814 30 27 28 1825 ! } -- 1 8550 ' 1 r ; 108 102 103 104 • 110 r - - _ ; - j y 105 1824 109` 112 — ` 110 109 !c 110 116 113 y 2010 -- 1221 / . 118 :1]17� 118 � i'P`�' 128119 N! 122 119 1211,213 M1 2 125 tl2(51125 128 1717 rj' r 1$06 BAKER ST.E y BAI(ER ST E ' "ER ST E I i - -- 212 Q, �I �, � 204 203 > 204f 1210 201 206 203 > 206 207 � �( OJ EH 003 1 1 212 �'t0 ,216fi2013 210 ��214 � z13 D 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. https://portal.sehinc.com/sehsvc/html/dvo/mapLayout.htm 4:21 3/26/2010 Buffer Map 5 S —631 628 625 620 617 611 614 iz 600 603 606 575 m 537 538 _ 525 526 ELM ST E 516 8646 511 506 8644 1500 ELM 1360 ST E Q p r. _ x- 1403 1411'I150 -1 ar '�' Q / 1 8619 '1 1404 1414 1514 Q 6 9 % ! ` 8549 v 134 1 8677 1 1408 –3 ` 1 � 14 10 t —' � 8733 ! / 8625 / 21 22 19 20 17 % 1 j 102;,.., 80 104 } 31 106'. 1814 30 27 28 1825 ! } -- 1 8550 ' 1 r ; 108 102 103 104 • 110 r - - _ ; - j y 105 1824 109` 112 — ` 110 109 !c 110 116 113 y 2010 -- 1221 / . 118 :1]17� 118 � i'P`�' 128119 N! 122 119 1211,213 M1 2 125 tl2(51125 128 1717 rj' r 1$06 BAKER ST.E y BAI(ER ST E ' "ER ST E I i - -- 212 Q, �I �, � 204 203 > 204f 1210 201 206 203 > 206 207 � �( OJ EH 003 1 1 212 �'t0 ,216fi2013 210 ��214 � z13 D 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. https://portal.sehinc.com/sehsvc/html/dvo/mapLayout.htm 4:21 3/26/2010 ORDINANCE 52 — ZONING ORDINANCE S�gN�D 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: Scope. 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. 4:22 ORDINANCE 52 — ZONING ORDINANCE I :>> 4. 1 -94 Corridor: SCANNED 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. Corner 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. 4:23 ORDINANCE 52 — ZONING ORDINANCE ok a) Free - standing signs shall not be placed nearer than twenty (20) feet from th6C.g1VjMD 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. 3. Development shall be designed to minimize the visual intrusion of all buildings, structures, and landscaping in the viewshed. b) Outside storage/display 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. 4:24 ORDINANCE 52 — ZONING ORDINANCE 2. Fences exceeding four (4) feet in height shall be located in the side a rear yards only. �� o 3. 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 tree /landscaping 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. 1. 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. 4:25 ORDINANCE 52 — ZONING ORDINANCE 3. Scale and proportion. New construction should relate to the dominant $ proportions of buildings and streetscape in the immediate area. The ratio `9EEd 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. f) 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 volume /intensity 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 vegetative /planting 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. 4:26 ORDINANCE 52 — ZONING ORDINANCE S d) The planting screen may be comprised of previously existing vegetation (provided NOD 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. 4:27 Subd. 4. Interim Use Permit. a) Purpose. The purpose and intent of allowing interim uses is: 1. 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) Application, 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: 1. 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. 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: 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. 4.28 e) Successive Applications. Whenever an application for an interim use permit�`� 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) Appeals. 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." 4:29 S��cca c l Use Sfa�/a��S e) Standards. The Planning Commission shall recommend a special use permit an the Council shall order the issuance of such permit if the application confo m ; the specific standards set forth below, as it would apply to the particular use at t�ii --b 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. 4:30 December 4, 2 Page 1 W& 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 Agenda: 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, 403 13t 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 closed 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 Lieser's 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 findings of fact and recommend that the Council approve the Interim Use permit for 4031`' Avenue NE. The motion was seconded by Loso. Rassier questioned the June le 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: Kalinowski introduced Mark Anderson as the newest member to the Planning Commission. Ordinance Uodates: 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 District ■ 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 4:31 December 4, Page 21thl, ■ 52.33 B -3 General Business District S�9�d 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, 3071st 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 52.31, 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 limit 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. Graeve 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 52.12 and recommend that the Council execute the amendments and authorize the same to be published. The motion was seconded by Deutz and passed unanimously. 4:32 December 4, 200 Page 3 of } Weyrens advised the commissioners that they would receive new copies of the zoning ordinances after the first of the year. S BEd Election of Chair: Deutz 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. . Adiourn: Rassler made a motion to adjourn; seconded by Lesnick and passed unanimously. d % 6° J dy yrerSs 6 d ' strator 4:33 L4PA MUNICIPAL DEVELOPMENT GROUP, INC. DATE: May 17, 2006 MEMO TO: Planning Commission, Administrator Weyrens FROM: Cynthia Smith - Strack, Municipal Development Group RE: Potential Zoning Ordinance Amendments w S *ftd 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 parcel 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, protect 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 SWPPP under NPDES regulations (typically one acre or more). 4:34 7 W �amo N E � c c 3 �8 Ta c c a 3 a n V g � o O ° 0 D Q) o .� n � a �T• U") o Go 0o 4:35 Ll 25 College Avenue-NW P.O. Box 668, St Joseph, W56374 (320) 363 -7201 Fax: 363-0342 C ADMURFMATOA Judy Weyrens MAYOR Larry J. Hoscb COU"CD.ORs Bob I.oso Cory Ehlers Kyle Schneider Alan Rassier .�I City of St. 3oseph Public' Hearing The Planning Commission for the ?City of St., Joseph shall -conduct a public 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 requirements of a building and a special use-permit to allow, industrial and office storage.. The property is legally described as: 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 as 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- Special 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 special use permit to allow industrial and office storage has been submitted by Thomas Borresch; 9 — 17"h Avenue SE St. Joseph, MN 56374. Jud Weyrens ministrator Published: December 20, 2002 4:36 0 SCW / D Zw CITY •F ST. JnSErH U11 Ong . College Avenue North • P.O. Box 668 • St. Joseph, MN 56374 Permit Application (320) 363.7201 • Fax (320) 363 -0342 Z- 27 -D.3 Permit Number: d5 "/a Phone Number: '6L y% .ss (if different from above): Parcel ID #: Description: Lot: Block: ated Construction Start Date: Estimated Completion Date: 7- /— 0�3 ess (include City, State, Zip): itect: ng Classification: 'ff 'Z_ Variance Required: &� lal Structure Setbacks: Front Yard:_ Rear Yard: 361 ' 't Side Yard (1): 4 " Side Yard (2): gpe Size: Width: Length: Corner Lot: Yes No_X_ Type of Construction )ensions: Height: - / f I Width: _IQ2 " Depth: Fire Suppression System: Contractor License # ?Phone: �I X7'7 _ Phone: ter^ -Phone: -745"- .upancy. Re 'dential Commercial_ Industrial Accessory Other rvRemodef Addition Demolish Garage: Detached Attached )rage Shed _�,�Deck _ Porch , . Fence . Pool Lower Level .scription of Work: ctrical Contractor: imbing Contractor: `- schanical Contractor: 7ptic Installer: .OW -- 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 lverning this type of work will be complied with whether specified herein not. The granting of a permit does not presume to give authority to )late or cancel the provisions of any other State or local law regulating nstruction or the performance of construction. This permit becomes 111 and void if work or construction authorized has not commenced thin 180 days. Name (Pleas) Print) Date Date Value of Work (including labor): 4/ Qom• Permit Fee: Plan Review Fee: WAC / SAC Charges: Water Meter Fee: State Surcharge: Total Amount Due: Paid Check #: 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, MN 56329 4:37 (320) 293 -5298 — phone (320) 387 -2703 — fax %Alh;4n rl+., r+....., Wu .., o,.a.11— AM .1..1 P..— o;.d. - A-1; -4 r,,..., I I 1 i I w 1 Z 1 J I I � w a ' C rn H I Q I z w 0 I�1 ,OZ I ,Z£ 1 --- - - - - -- .99 r- 1 I 1 I 1 ' I 1 W 0 w U I Q Z Q I Z Z w J �� m OD o i `� x ' � N 1 I � M 1 I ' x w i I N O I IW N� 1 I 1 I i I I Z I 9� m� J 0 m SL W W LJ I I O I L I I I 1 w I I I I I I I O I 0 r 1 i I I I 1 I I I I R� E 4:38 W W O-Z �J Ct W O Z W O I 1 I ,SZ 1 j+ A A I � I � PA ME 1 4 1 � a . c� � r I' Z n ' n-- 1 N ` O I uj � r 1 J' 1 o � ' OC O 4:39 1. Wakt"d 9)WPVdi4e6 PO Box 248 - St Joseph MN 56374 Phone: 320 363.4435 Fax 320.363.4405 To: City of St Joseph 25 College Ave PO Box 668 St Joseph MN 56374 From: Tom Borresch 9 - 17th Avenue SE St Joseph MN 56374 I, Tom Borresch waive the sixty (60) day land use requirement for the address stated: 8856 Ridgewood Ct, St Joseph MN 56374. Date: 4". Z o ! Signature: 6 Print Name: