Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout[03] Minutes August 6, 2012 Page 1 of 2 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the St. Joseph Planning Commission met in regular session on Monday, August 6th, 2012 at 7:OOPM in the St. Joseph City Hall, opening with the pledge of allegiance. Members Present: Chair S. Kathleen Kalinowski, Members John Meyer, Ross Rieke, Gina Dullinger, Council Liaison Rick Schultz. Administrator Judy Weyrens. Others Present: Tom Klein, Jordan Onnen, Cory Ehlert Approval of Agenda: Schultz made a motion to approve the agenda; seconded by Rieke and passed unanimously. Approval of Minutes: Schultz made a motion to approve the July 2nd minutes; seconded by Dullinger and passed unanimously. Interim Use Permit Renewals: Weyrens reported that during the Interim Use Permit renewal process for owner occupied rental, two property owners did not qualify for administrative review. While reviewing police records it was noted that the properties at 224 —17 h Ave SE and 29 E Minnesota Street had noise violations. The Commission agreed to address each property independently. 224 — 17 Ave SE: Weyrens stated that the St. Joseph Police Department was called to said property twice in February, 2012 regarding noise from a subwoofer. Property owner Jordan Onnen was present to speak on his own behalf. Onnen stated that he purchased a new stereo system in February and he has since sold the system. Weyrens clarified that the City has not received further incidents. Meyer made a motion to renew the Interim Use Permit allowing an owner occupied rental unit at 224 — 17 Ave SE; the motion was seconded by Rieke and passed unanimously by those present. 29 Minnesota Street East — Weyrens stated that in November 2011 the Police Department responded to a large party complaint at 29 East MN Street. The residents cooperated with the Police Department and the matter was resolved. Property owner Cory Ehlert was present to speak on his own behalf. Ehlert stated that he did speak with the neighbors after the incident and they had discussed behaviors that lead up to the incident. Ehlert stated that he has new tenants for the coming year and has not experienced problems since that incident. Rieke made a motion to renew the Interim Use Permit for 29 Minnesota Street East; seconded by Meyer and passed unanimously by those present. Discussion — Special Use Permit - Parking Requirement 31 Minnesota St W. Weyrens stated that the property owner at 31 Minnesota Street W is seeking relief from the requirement to complete the exterior improvements that are required by a Special Use Permit issued in 2006. A Special Use Permit was granted in 2006 to allow a mixed use development. The approval included execution and recording of a development agreement. In 2009 the property changed hands and the current property owner requested the same special use permit that was granted in 2006. The approval in 2009 included an amendment to the previous special use permit, extending the requirement to complete the exterior improvements by September 2012. The additional time would allow the property owner to determine the viability of the project. Schultz stated that the Council has discussed the request to not pave the parking lot as required in the recorded Development Agreement and referred the matter back to the Planning Commission. The City Attorney has provided the background on the matter and recommendations. Weyrens stated that the attorney has indicated that if the request of the property owner is to not pave any portion of the parking lot, a hearing to amend the special use permit would be required. Meyer questioned the process for determining parking in the downtown business district. Weyrens stated that the parking for the downtown business is calculated based on the requirements in the parking ordinance. The Ordinance allows the Planning Commission and City Council discretion in determining the actual parking using the required parking as the basis. Historically the Planning Commission and City Council have required downtown businesses to minimally provide parking for any residential units and a portion of the business use. The amount of parking required for business use has varied. In the matter before the Planning Commission, 23 parking spaces are required by the Ordinance, and the property August 6, 2012 Page 2of2 owner was relieved of two parking spaces, requiring 21 spaces. Of the 21 spaces, 10 parking spaces were needed for the residential component of the project. Meyer stated that the property use has changed since the original agreement as the project does not have offices spaces, rather a Laundromat and supports considering the matter through the public hearing process. Schultz and Meyer stated that if a hearing is requested the submittal should include a new improvement plan. Rieke made a motion to establishing September 4 as the next Planning Commission date and placing the amendment to the special use permit for 31 Minnesota Street W on the agenda. The motion was seconded by Meyer. Discussion: Kalinowski referred to the City Attorneys response if there are modifications that are acceptable it would not require a public hearing. Meyer confirmed and stated that the hearing would not be needed if a revised plan which includes some paving were submitted. Adam Ripple, spoke on behalf of Mike Deutz. He stated that he is the attorney representing Mr. Deutz who is requesting to move forward without paving any portion of the parking lot. His client has a situation where the Laundromat cannot afford the additional business expense for pavement and is requesting relief. He has already made significant improvements to the property and maintains the existing parking lot. Ripple questioned what is required to move forward. Weyrens reiterated that if the request is to not pave any portion of the parking lot, a public hearing would be required. If the property owner is agreeable to paving a portion of the property, the Planning Commission could consider without a public hearing. Under both scenarios a written request and plan must be submitted and if a hearing is required the $ 400 hearing fee would apply as well. Meyer questioned the parking for the Italian Restaurant and why they were relieved. Weyrens stated that the property owner was required to supply parking for the residential units and a portion of the lower lever which includes the restaurant. The development contains 27 paved parking spaces. Additionally, the developer has additional property which can be converted for additional parking. The motion passed unanimously by those present. Council Liaison Report — Schultz reported that the City Council approved the establishment of a rental housing committee and he currently has four members looking for one additional member. The list of members will be presented to the Council for approval in August. Commissioner Comments: Meyer questioned who enforces ordinances such as the dumpsters at the Italian Restaurant. It was his understanding that they were to be screened. Weyrens stated that she would refer to the Building Official. Adjourn: There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 7:30PM Judy Weyrens City Administrator