Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011 [11] Nov 07 November 7, 2011 Page 1 of 4 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the Planning Commission for the City of St. Joseph met in regular session on Tuesday, November 7, 2011 at 7:OOPM in the St. Joseph City Hall. Members Present: Chair S. Kathleen Kalinowski, Commissioners Mike Deutz, John Meyer, Rick Schultz, Gina Dullinger, Ross Rieke, City Administrator Judy Weyrens Others Present: Todd Edstrom, Debbie Niemeyer, Dona Lamphere, Cory Ehlert, Sandy Klocker, Grey Wojtowicz, John Pearson, Chuck Zwilling, David Vee, Melissa Koubsky, David Olson, April Osendorf, Bob Faundeen, Ron Spencer, Tom Klein Approval of the Agenda: Deutz made a motion to approve the agenda; seconded by Meyer and passed unanimously. Minutes: Schultz made a motion to approve the minutes of October 3, 2011; seconded by Deutz and passed unanimously. Public Hearing — Ordinance Amendments — 52.07: Weyrens stated a public hearing notice has been published with the intent of amending the following Ordinances: a. Ordinance 52.07, Administration — Amendment revises variance guidelines to match legislative changes. b. Ordinance 52.27, Single Family Residential — Amendment adds provision for interim use for military personnel. c. Ordinance 52.31 B1, Central Business District — Amendment includes adding drive thru businesses as permitted uses. d. Ordinance 52.32 B2, Highway Business — Amendment includes adding drive thru businesses as permitted uses and modifies building exterior material. e. Ordinance 52.33, General Business — Amendment includes adding drive thru businesses as permitted uses and modifies building exterior material. Kalinowski opened the public hearing at 7:04 pm to consider the amendment to Ordinance 52.07. Administration, Variance regulations. There being no one present wishing to speak to the amendment, the public hearing was closed. Weyrens clarified that the amendment is being requested to revise the guidelines for granting a variance to mirror MN Statute as amended in 2011 by the Legislature. Deutz made a motion to recommend the Council approve the amendment to Ordinance 52.07 revising the variance guidelines to match legislative changes; seconded by Schultz. Discussion: Meyer stated the Ordinance should be written so that it is gender neutral. The motion passed unanimously. Kalinowski opened the public hearing at 7:08 pm to consider the amendment to Ordinance 52.27 which would allow exclusion to the owner occupied rental provision. Cory Ehlert, 42712"' Ave SE, approached the Commission as a representative of the St Cloud Association of Realtors. He stated they are testifying in favor of the amendment revision but would like it expanded to also include people of the military that have been deployed or reassigned domestically to a different community. It is not their intent to increase the number of rentals in the community. It is their intent to help home owners undergoing hardships. The Association has four primary concerns with the current ordinance: • Believed to be a large infringement on property rights • Creates an obstacle of sale of homes • Impact on home ownership and title potential mortgage and disclosure requirements for sellers • Negatively impacts property values and the City's tax base November 7, 2011 Page 2 of 4 Ehlert stated the St Cloud Association of Realtors is asking for modification of the R1 rental Ordinance. Considering the changing needs of housing and the college's requirements of housing on campus they believe it is time to reinvestigate. The current Ordinance leaves bad options for people that have job loss hardships or have had to relocate which are: • Fire /Short sale of property • Foreclosure • Vacate Property All of which decrease the value and tax base of the City. It is not their intention to increase rental properties, but to provide alternatives for home owners in these situations. Bob Faundeen, St Cloud, stated that the National Association of Realtors has supported property ownership and the rights that go with it. When purchasing a property the owner receives a bundle of rights including the fundamental right to rent the property. To restrict that right is restricting the citizens. Todd Edstrom, Sartell, stated he represents his client, 524 l Avenue NE, which worked at the area ROTC. They bought home for $213,000 in 2007 and recently sold the home for $165,000. They marketed the property for sale and lack of interest in the property lead the property owner to consider renting the property. However the City Ordinance prohibited him from renting his property and he was forced to sell the property at a reduced price. If his client could not have sold his property, he would have been forced with letting the property go into foreclosure or consider a short sale. With being an Officer in the military, financial irresponsibility is frowned upon and could affect his military ranking or status. He further stated that his client is not behind in any payments but lives in Kansas and is renting a home there as well as paying his mortgage here. The house is closing this Friday, but the client is bringing a lot of money because of the bad situation. He stated he is not here to increase rental in St. Joseph but wants to examine the property rights of the people. April Osendorf, 604 3' Ave NE, stated she is in the military and currently stationed at Virginia Beach, Virginia. She stated she was fined for having someone live in her house and maintain it while serving on active duty. Paying her mortgage and renting a place where she is stationed is a financial obligation she cannot afford. There being no one further requesting to testify, the hearing was closed at 7:18 PM. Meyer made a motion to temporarily table the discussion on the amendment to Ordinance 52,27 and the public hearings on the remaining Ordinances to allow the agenda item for April Osendorf to be considered. The motion was seconded by Deutz and passed unanimously. April Osendorf — Appeal on Rental matter: April Osendorf appeared before the Commission to discuss a recent compliance order she received regarding her property at 604 — 3 Ave NE. The compliance order cited that she was in violation of the rental ordinance and she received an administrative ticket, which she has paid, for the same violation. Osendorf stated that she does have a relative living in her house as she is serving active duty in the Military, stationed in Virginia. Deutz made a motion to postpone further action on the property of 604 3 Avenue NE until the final resolution of the 52.27 Ordinance amendment; seconded by Meyer and passed unanimously. Resume discussion of the amendment to Ordinance 52.27 — RI Single Family: Rieke inquired since the possible Armed Forces portions of Ordinance 52.27 is in question, is now the time to take a look at the structure in live form of the full Ordinance? Does this need further discussion beyond the meeting at hand? November 7, 2011 Page 3 of 4 Meyer stated he has always had concerns with the section of the Ordinance that is in question. With the decreasing amount of student housing along with the current economic environment, he believes the rental portion needs to be analyzed but it is more than can be accomplished at one sitting. Rieke stated there has been a long process to best manage our City's unique situation, and so far the current ordinance has been an effective tool. At the same time changes are happening and need to be considered. Meyer stated ordinances are not made to be set in stone; they need to be able to change with the times. The R1 Ordinance has been in place for 11 years. Deutz stated he would like to act on the military personnel portion of the Ordinance. The remaining of the rental part of the ordinance can be revisited in the future. Schultz agreed that it one portion would be cleared up without delay. Rieke stated if the Interim Use Permit seems too cumbersome and needs to be changed, that would affect a larger portion of the Ordinance. Meyer stated if they change it to active and /or deployed Armed Forces; is it being narrowed too much? Deutz stated he believes the Armed Forces should be a separate section of the R1 Ordinance. The rest non - military portion would stand on its own. He feels the verbiage should include more than just active duty or deployed; moving due to military job opportunity should be included. Schultz stated he would like to see a better description of the wording of who is all being encompassed by this amendment. Deutz made a motion to recommend the City Council approve the amendment to Ordinance 52.27 granting exclusion to the owner occupied rental provision for those serving active duty or deployed in the Armed Forces, and table discussion to remove or broaden the rental provision. The motion was seconded by Meyer. Discussion: Rieke stated if the Planning Commission has a position how the rental situation should look, it should make sure it moves forward with discussion. Schultz agreed R1 needs to be worked on. He stated as city liaison he would the information back to the City Council and they could decide what form the discussion should take and who should be involved. He stated he would like to see city staff come back with a template to start the reassessment. Deutz questioned what kind of template the city staff should work towards. Schultz stated to move forward city staff would be asked by the Planning Committee to look at the League of Minnesota Cities, Northfield, Mankato, Sartell, etc. to see what other Single Family Rental Ordinances look like. City staff would then come back with a draft to the Planning Commission while he (Schultz) is communicating with the City Council. Deutz stated that past public hearings regarding this issue have brought in more residents in favor of not having rentals. Kalinowski stated she believes everyone is in agreement to look at the Ordinance more broadly. The motion passed unanimously. Kalinowski opened the public hearing at 7:39 pm to consider the amendment to Ordinance 52.31, 52.32, and 52.33 removing the provision to secure a special use permit for drive -thru businesses and to correct inconsistencies in Ordinance 52.31 regarding when Planning Commission approval is needed for development. There being no one present wishing to testify to the proposed Ordinance Amendments, Kalinowski closed the public hearing at 7:40 pm. . Deutz made a motion to recommend the City Council accept the Ordinance 52.31, 52.32 and 52.33 amendments; seconded by Rieke and passed unanimously. Ordinance Amendment — Parking Pads: Weyrens reported that the City Council has requested that the Planning revisit drafting an amendment to the parking ordinance regulating parking pads and where they can be located. Weyrens presented the Commission is copies of past minutes whereby the Planning Commission has forwarded a proposed amendment only to have it rejected by the City Council. Schultz stated the Council is looking for guidance from the Planning Commission as to what is too much /little governance on people's yards and all aspects of the parking pad. He stated the Council is looking for a definition of parking pad. Rieke states he believes there are two parts to the parking pad; what does the parking pad look like in and of itself and what are the impacts when it is used. He November 7, 2011 Page 4 of 4 questions how to make parking pads look good themselves and with what gets parked on them. Schultz states the enforcement of the Ordinance is the origin of the problem. Meyer made a motion to table the Parking Pad Ordinance to get a copy as it is written today for further discussion; seconded by Rieke. Ayes: Kalinowski, Rieke, Dullinger, Schultz, Meyer Nays: Deutz Abstain: None Motion Carried 5:1:0 Ordinance Amendment — Chickens: Weyrens stated she had a request to look at the Chicken Ordinance again. Kalinowski asked that the new information from the League of Minnesota Cities be incorporated into what was presented a year ago to the City Council and revisit the matter on another agenda. Council Liaison Report: With regard to changing the rental provision in the R1 Zoning District, Schultz stated he is open to ideas in regards to having a discussion prior to having a public hearing. How should we obtain information and who should the discussion include? Deutz stated he is not in favor of opening up Owner Occupied Rentals. He stated other cities such as Brooklyn Center has an ordinance similar to St. Joseph's. Rental properties that are not owner occupied and have landlords that are not part of the community are hard to manage and cause the most problems. Meyer stated he does not disagree with Deutz. He believes short term rental may give people the choice of renting so they don't have to walk away from the property. Schultz stated he believes a conversation needs be had as a result of rental landscape changing because of rules handed down from the colleges. A conversation does not mean anything has to be amended; only that the transformation of the rental opportunities is examined on an ongoing basis. Rieke stated he agrees with having an ongoing conversation. Kalinowski questioned if staff could pull research together on some of the cities in similar circumstances. Schultz asked that Chief Pete Jansky and Public Works Director Terry Thene be questioned as to what the increased cost of safety issues, concerns, maintenance and clean up of what may happen if there are changes. Adjourn: Meyer made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 8:10 PM; seconded by Deutz and passed unanimously. lb ,a C J • We rens 0_,,,t/aei,a • , inistrator