Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011 [10] Oct 03 October 3, 2011 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 Tuesday, October 3, 2011 at 7:O0PM in the St. Joseph City Hall. Members Present: Chair S. Kathleen Kalinowski. Commissioners Michael Deutz, John Meyer, Ross Rieke, Gina Dullinger, Joe Dubel. City Administrator Judy Weyrens. Others Present: Mike Miller, Travis Miller, Sue Hennen, Linda Brown Approval of the Agenda: Deutz made a motion to approve the agenda as presented; seconded by Meyer and passed unanimously by those present. Minutes: Meyer made a motion to approve the minutes of September 6, 2011. The motion was seconded by Rieke and passed unanimously by those present. Public Hearing — Variance Request — Bill Nelson: Kalinowski opened the public hearing. Weyrens stated the purpose of the hearing is to consider a variance request to the St Joseph Business Center to allow for one additional business sign. St Joseph Code of Ordinances 52.11 subdivision 10c states multitenant signs; each tenant in a multitenant building may have a flat wall sign the aggregate value of the sign should not exceed 5% of the area of the wall to which it is attached. The property is located at 710 County Road 75 and is known as the St Joseph Business Center. Mike Miller approached the Commissioners and stated that he along with his son have recently opened a Verizon Wireless Store in the St. Joseph Business Center and are requesting a variance for additional signage. The current Ordinance allows each business to have one business sign. Miller stated that in an effort to capture business approaching from the west, he would like to install a second sign on the west side of the St. Joseph Business Center. The current sign is located on the front facing CR 75 which does not allow ample time for customers to anticipate the business and turn. The proposed sign is approximately 22 square feet. There being no one present to speak Kalinowski closed the public hearing at 7:05 PM. Weyrens stated that the Sign Ordinance includes a provision that each business in a multi- tenant facility is permitted one sign not to exceed 50 square feet and the property owner is allowed a monument sign to identify the tenants as well, with a maximum square footage of 100 square feet per sign face. The St. Joseph Business Center does not currently have a monument sign and the property owner has agreed to forgo the ability to construct such in exchange for the second sign for Verizon. The owner further clarified that in the event he intends to construct a monument sign, the second sign for Verizon would be removed. Meyer made a motion to recommend the City Council adopt the findings of fact, granting a variance to St. Joseph Business Center to allow a second business sign for suite #5, occupied by Verizon. Motion was seconded by Deutz. Discussion: Deutz stated he would like to add to Meyer's motion that a future tenant cannot request the same variance. The foregoing of the monument sign will only allow for one additional sign. Meyer amended to read as follows: recommend the City Council adopt the findings of fact granting a variance to St. Joseph Business Center to allow a second business sign for the tenant in suite #5 with the following contingency: a. The property owner has waived the right to construct a monument sign, allowing for a second sign for the tenant in suite #5. b. If in the future the property owner requests to construct a monument sign, the second sign for suite #5 must be removed, prior to construction. c. If a second tenant requests additional signage, the property owner will be required to construct the monument sign and the second sign for suite #5 must be removed. Deutz consented to the amendment and the motion passed unanimously by those present. October 3, 2011 Page 2 of 3 Public Hearing — Preliminary Plat — Central MN Credit Union: Kalinowski opened the public hearing at 7:10 PM. Weyrens stated the purpose of this hearing is to consider the preliminary plat entitled St. Joseph Professional Plat. The proposed plat is located west of CR 133 and south of Elm Street and the request for platting has been submitted by the Central MN Credit Union. Linda Brown approached the Planning Commission on behalf of the Central MN Credit Union. She stated that the CMCU is platting the property for the purpose of selling for development. At this time they have buyer for Lot 1, Block 1 who anticipates submitting a development plan late 2011. There being no one present wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed at 7:15 PM. Meyer questioned if the access issue regarding CR 133 have been resolved with the County Engineer. Weyrens stated she had talked to the County Engineer who was in the process of reviewing the preliminary plat. Previously he did indicate that utilizing a "pork chop" design granting a right in right out only would be acceptable. However, the design of the "pork chop" has not be submitted or finalized. With regard to the engineering comments, Weyrens stated that while there appears to be a number of outstanding engineering items, there is nothing that would prohibit the approval of the preliminary plat as the items would be resolved before final approval. Deutz raised concerns as to whether or not approving the preliminary plat at this meeting is premature. Brown stated that the property owner has a buyer for Lot 1, but it is contingent upon platting of the property. She stated that they can address the concerns of the City Engineer at the time of final plat submittal. Meyer stated he has concerns regarding the lack of proposed improvements for the access road. He stated that in reviewing the plans it appears as the road is planned to be gravel without curb and gutter. Brown stated that a minor portion of the north /south access road would be constructed with the development of Lot 1 and a private drive would be constructed to the east. Meyer questioned where the east access would be located, to which Brown stated that she is uncertain as she has not seen the proposed development plan. She also clarified that the improvements for the plat will be constructed in conjunction of the development of Lot 1. Dubel also questioned the access road and whether or not the section should be paved, complete with curb and gutter. He stated that according to the plans the curb and gutter is needed for managing the storm water on site. He further stated that it appears as though the culvert would be impacted in the road section was not completed. Dubel stated he is of the opinion that the road should be constructed with pavement and curb and gutter to the bulb of the cul -de -sac. Brown responded that the one of the reasons for not constructing the entire road section with curb and gutter is that the development for lots 2 and 3 are unknown at this time and it is unknown where the curb cuts should be placed. Deutz and Meyer stated that this is no different that residential developments, and cutting in a curb later is not a significant issue. Deutz stated that if the developer does not wish to construct the improvements the property could be platted as outlots. When the property is ready to be developed then final platting would be required which would identify the needed improvements. When questioned as to whether or not the final plat will came back to the Board for approval, Weyrens stated that as long as the final plat is consistent with the preliminary plat, the matter does not come back to the Planning Commission. The City Council will review the final plat along with a development agreement memorializing the terms of the platting, outlining expectations. Meyer made a motion to recommend the City Council approve the preliminary plat entitled St. Joseph Professional Plat with the following contingencies: a. The access road will be paved complete with curb and gutter up to the bulb of the cul- de -sac. October 3, 2011 Page 3 of 3 b. The City Engineer shall determine whether or not the bulb of the cul -de -sac needs to be paved and shall be based on storm water management. c. Resolution of all outstanding Engineering items. The motion was seconded by Deutz and passed unanimously by those present. Ordinance Amendment — Single Family Zoning District: Weyrens stated that she has received requests from persons who are active or deployed military requesting relief from the Ordinance as it relates to rental so that while they are serving in the armed forces there home does not sit vacant. Previously the Legislature has extended homestead privileges this same class, creating an exception. The City, is so desired, could follow the same exception regarding rental; however the Ordinance would need to be modified. Weyrens questioned if the Planning Commission would consider an amendment to the R1 Zoning District allowing property owners who could prove they are deployed or on active duty to rent their home for period not to exceed two years. The amendment would still require the property owner to secure an interim use permit, which would have a sunset period and require proof of active duty /deployment. Deutz made a motion to conduct a public hearing to consider and amendment to Ordinance 52.27, RI Zoning District, allowing non -owner occupied rental units for property owners serving in the armed forces. The motion was seconded by Rieke and passed unanimously by those present. Adiourn: The meeting was adjourned at 7:35 PM. d J , dy eyr ns .d istrator 1 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 1