The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2002 [01] Jan 17 {Book 23} ..- itg of St. Joseph ~ College Avenue NW P.O. Box 668, St. Joseph, MN 56374 St. Joseph City Council (320) 363-720 I January 17, 2002 Fax: 363-0342 7:00 PM CLERK! ADMINISTRATOR 1. Call to Order Judy Weyrens 2. Approve Agenda MAYOR 3. Consent Agenda Larry J. Hosch a. Bills Payable Requested Action: Approve check numbers b. Minutes - Requested Action: Approve COUNCILORS c. 2002 Mayor Appointments - Requested Action: Approve as submitted Bob Loso d. Application for payment #4, Northland V - Requested Action: Authorize Mayor to execute application for payment #4 authorizing payment in the amount of $ 31,112.46 to Larson Cory Ehlert Excavating Inc. Kyle Schneider e. Gambling License Application - Authorize St. Joseph Jaycees to transfer the gambling permit Alan Rassier from St. Joseph Gas & Bait to Amoco Liquor. 4. Public Comments - Each speaker will be limited to three minutes 5. 7:05 PM - Joyce Albrecht, Variance request, minimum exterior requirements in a Highway Business Zoning District. 6. 7:20 PM - Nancy Scott, 2001 Building Official Report . 7. 7:30 PM - Grace View Estates, Bob Herges/Rick Heid - PURD Application issuing a special use permit for the development of the property south of Kennedy School. 8. 7:55 PM - Bob Herges/Rick Heid - request to encroach on a storm sewer easement, Pond View Ridge Phase Six 9. 8:05 PM - Mark Lambert a. PURD Application - Special Use Permit to allow the construction of a 44-unit apartment building. b. Variance Request, maximum height of a building - 5 foot c. Variance Request, Business Sign - 50 foot variance request 10. City Engineer Reports a. Watab Storm Sewer Outlet Repair b. Other matters II. Department Head Reports 12. Mayor Reports 13. Council Reports 14. Administrator/Clerk Reports 15. Adjourn . - itg of St. Joseph l ~ college Avenue NW P.O. Box 668, St. Joseph, MN 56374 (320) 363-7201 MEMORANDUM Fax: 363-0342 CLERK! ADMINISTRATOR Judy Weyrens Date: January 15, 2002 MAYOR To: Honorable Mayor Hosch and Members of the City Council Larry J. Hosch From: Judy Weyrens COUNCILORS Bob Loso Re: Council Meeting, January 17,2002 Cory Ehlert Kyle Schneider Alan Rassier Council Meeting Follow up: At the last meeting the Council discussed a mechanism to assure that Council directive is followed through and reported back to the Council. In an effort to assure that all Council matters are addressed, the City Office staff will be reviewing the minutes from the past six months and compile a list of tasks that need to be completed. Once that list is completed we will determined the outstanding tasks. This list will be forward to all Department Heads, the City Attorney and Engineer and will be reviewed at the monthly Department Head meetings. The tasks will not be removed until it is completed. - Once a month the Council will receive a copy of the list showing the status of the items. ~ INFORMATION REGARDING THE AGENDA Graceview Estates: At the January Department Head (including the John and Joe) meeting we discussed the proposed development projects and the recommendations of the Planning Commission. You will find the Planning Commission recommendations in your packet. While Bob and Rick are pursing the access to County Road 121 and the utility easements that are proposed for field street, the staff discussed the importance of securing the access and easement before the preliminary plat is approved. It seems that when the City approves a plat with conditions, the conditions become less important or are not possible at a later time. The access issue is a major concern and needs to be secured not only to move residential traffic, but to also provide a road for construction trucks so they will not be using the residential streets. John and Joe will both be present at the meeting if you have any questions regarding this. Mark Lambert: I just received this morning (1/15) the revised plan for Mark Lambert's proposed building. His revisions are in reaction to the Planning Commission meeting on January 7,2002. MISCELLANEOUS INFORMATION Friday Fax: In your packet is a Friday Fax that the City receives each Friday during the Legislative Session. The Fax outlines the proposal to cut aid for the Year 2002 and require a . mandatory budget reduction of 2%. If the cuts are made as proposed the City will need to cut the budget by approximately $ 50,000. Miscellaneous: Al Rassier requested information regarding any variances that have been considered by - the Planning Commission and Council allowing a structure to exceed 35 feet in height. Only one case could be found and the minutes have been placed in your packet as FYI. - Reminders: January 29th is the next Intergovernmental Meeting which will be held in Sartell. I have not been notified yet as to the location or the agenda. St. Joseph Chamber: The annual Chamber Dinner is being held on February 1,2001. I have included an invitation in your packet. - ~ - - "'01;)Q) Q)I-<...s::: . ö1) <+:: ¿;:: ¡:: Q) 0 J! ':$ .þ (,) ö1)...... ;;:: ¡:: ~ (,)...... ;:. ¡:: "'0 Q) ;:S..=! 00 o (,) Q) u .S ':$ Q) ~ ¡:: ':$~O ........ .S "'0 ......... ...... Q) (1j (1j 00 (,)......... (1j Q)0,..o I-< .:;: "'0 OJ) 0 0 1d' Q) I-< .S 0 0 0 dOOO S 000 ¡:¡ ·õ ::a (1j -.:t lr) lr) ;:s ¡:: ¡:: :> 00..... ..... o (1j ~ ~~~ ~:::::::.,...- ~ (1j Q) O.........s::: (1j ...... Q) ':$ Q) S"'O<Ê ~~"'O 00·..... ¡:: <t: g. (1j Q) ¡:: ¡-... ¡-... ,--: I-< 0 1.0 0.. ¡-... 0.. 00 ........~..¡::; 0\ I 0\10\ 0\(,)(1j , lr) ,00, V) 0'\ 0'1""""'1 t"-4 \0 ~ c-r) ,......( 00 9""""'f """""" 0 ,......( I I I I = 0 ...... ~ lr) ¡-... 0.. ..... o Q) 0.. ;:. ~, ;:: g .~ ...s::: CU .........s::: (,) Õ ':E-<~ ~.... 'û^ ~ .". = ¡:: ;>, Q) Q,) Q,) ;:s (,)...... Vj Vj 0...... ;:. (") .... Q,) U......... Q).... '+-< o .. 0 I-< <I) ¡:: 0 . Z ~ £'::9 ¡g t t ._ ~ ~ ]¡:: ..... . ~ (1j~ ~ w....<I) Q,) 0 U <I) ;:so ..c:..... ¡::..... <I) <I) N <I) .=.......s::: <I)<I)C<:f<l) ..0 OJ) (1)- OJ) .... \0 Q) (,) ~ ..... ..ê S..ê !:I .~·S o:! æ 10-< 0\ ':$ ~ -;:::: > <.).~ <.) E-< .... U) E-< o 0\ ;>, ~.(,) u5 1:: U) ~ U) ..c: 0 o:! ç ~~ ,..oQ)§~ ~~s~ _¡;¡~~ .. "'0 Q) 0 o:! 0 (1j..... o:! (1j -.S <I) ~ ~~U 5 ~QE-<Q ~<.....:!....., ¡;;;¡ "'0 \0 ...... e ã~.B..ê = ...s:::..................... rJ'J í3 ¡:: J! 'õ ...... ...... .,g 00 "'0 § ..::¡ § ~ ',p 0·..... I-<~ (1j ...-t 1ti 0.0 ~ ~ ~ ;:. Õ (1j ~ ~ 00 <I) Q)...... 00 0 .þ ...... .þ 00 "- (1j U) ...... ...- ::. 0 U) ,A< OQ);>(,) o:! ...... .s ~ en ~ <"I"\. ~ 0 ....., "'1""""'1;.-.( 'U ~ 0 11) CI.:I Q)O ...s::: ~'" > ¡¡'So:! ...s::: ¡:: ....... Z <I) ..... C'1 ¡:: r.LI ......~;;::¡:: ¡:: f;:lr)¡::...... ......... 0 (,) 0 <I) ¡:: ...... ~..... <I) ......... ...... ;:I ..... """ <I) (1jö1);3',p <I)¡::;::E g:¡ "':;.)::j 'õ¡::o~ OJ)~...... ~::r:......U) ~u~ <¡¡'S ~¡¡'S~ ~]..ê'(i) ~ UO~< sJ!...... § '9¡-... C'1000..... 80)3 u :::::: ~~N~ ;:s .£ "'0 0 00 (1)...... (1j gp ~.s ~.- Q) Q) 0"8 ¡ß~ .......... ro 1-1 ~ Q) ö1) 0.. "'0 ,..0 Q) Q) ...... "'0 I-< .... ¡::;>,,..o(1j ¡-... ¡-...¡-... .-(,)¡::¡:: ~~o..o.. '+-(;..::::: 0 0 ;:>-. _.' I I Q) O',p',p \0 t'-- o:! ¡:: ~ ~ . ~ o....::¡..::¡ 0'\ 0'\ ;::E ~ < Q ~ ..ê .S .S 0'\ 0'\ ~ ..J. ~ rA p."......;:.;:. ~ ~ ..........C'10 ~ ~--.>_- --- -- . t:: .§ Ó .9 ::E ~ ~ u u r<') ~ ~ 0 :-~-.-- -,~ --. - > > '" t:: t:: t:: 0 ~ ~ u ,:;:C~~" ,~~~::Cc-, ;J iSf;-c~c ;::¡ ;::¡ iS~~~~~ fi} ~:s;~'c-' !=i- !=i- ~ ;:I 0 '" '" C/) 0 = = .~~;'l-~ C/) C/) ...... 0 J.. IIIIIIIIII¡------'- 0 0 0 0 ~{~-i¡ II> N 0 -..- ~ ~ .-, ~;:;.,=:-,--=----:-~ 0 0 0 0 ...... \0 0 ~~t~~~ ~ ;g; ~ ~ C~é~_'cc 0 0 r<') "'" 0 N r<') + 0 ...... 0 ...... i;:~~~-~~ 0 0 + + 0 + + c¡:t--~c~~ 0 0 J.. 0 0 J.. -= ~o . I:'- 0 "'ãle-? 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~g~- 0 0 6 0 q 6 O_<:::;g;S:::; II> II> II> II> II> II> II> 0 II> II> II> 00 II> ~~":'j ...... "'" ...... ...... N ...... ...... ...... I:'- ...... q~~!-~ """ """ """ """ EA EA EA """ EA EA EA EA EA EA EA EA EA - Eã~~~j JIIIIIiI(; ~.- -:E:< ~~=='~ c:f :cc-= ~----"- 'ce'c:~ :'C" ~~~ ~~" -~2~.--.~ ~-.> 00 00 '10-(_:~ :: 0\ 0\ 0 ~:;-:-h- 0 0\ 00 0\ :"QJ--cC; 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0 0 0 0 0 0 I 0\ I 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ I I 0 .:B~~c:' 0 0 0 0 0 I II> I 0\ ~~,-~~ .- 0\ I I I 00 00 N I I I 0 I 0\ ...... ...... ...... I \0 I:'- I:'- ...... ...... I _:¢:.--c' 0 II> 0 , ...... ...... I I I _'~--cC- ...... ...... I I , I I:'- ~ ...... N r<') N I 00...... Qj~~~ I I 0 0 ...... ...... I -~<c' I I I I 0 ...... ...... ...... I:'- 0\ ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... II> \0 I:'- 00 0\ n ;¿~ -~.:-:; w ",¡"¡;":- ê :/ot';.è. ã .~~- ~ Q,F~< .§ ~~",.-"c~ ~ r<') :¡::.- ;=--~;¥- ;~:n S ~.-~~'- t:: ~;» '" t:: 4-< ..... ~ ~ '" ~ '" ~ 0 0 0 Q--~-; 0 .... ø'~:;c :9 .§ ~ :<P . '" 0 '" ..... "0 0 -= 0 .D .5 0 t:: N 0 t:: .~ .5 .tJ ~ 0 ëiJ ~ ~- ~~J-.; ~ ü ....., ..... t---~- ;:I «j t:: ..... t:: 8 ..... ;:I ~ o::¡ :>4 u E-< ::E t:: o::¡ _c·~: c _;~_< -= ..... p.. 0 ::E ~ u 0... ~:.:c- c~_'_c_-: u 0 ~ ~ Q '" Q- '" ...... S u o::¡ '" C/) ::2 ::E «j ~ ;;, ¿ ~ Q.i-~ - \¡:¡;(c.- ~~- .8 ;>, S Q. '.- s :3 .~ E e>-¡ -~~~-; 0 t:: 0 "0 -$-c ..... ëiJ S t:: 0 ~ t:: 0 0 0 .D ~ ~ ¡. ~., ~ ~ ::E :§ ~ -= -= -= ~ 0 .... -~.~ -=~-'-:;- Q Q ~ E-< E-< U o::¡ U .---:.- - 0 ...... ~ ~ ...... 0 8- 0...... 0 .b ...... "rJ} ~- .b < U) 'It U)-- C/) ~~ -~- ~ u.¡ ....., ~ u.¡ ....., ';:.-' Õ C/) '" õ C/) '" ~ '" ~ ,=,- '" Il) u.¡ N 0 0 ~~(i¿; ...... u.¡ Il) ;:I ....., Ê t:: ;:¡ ~~~ "ê- ~~;~ ê c Il) c -r/} ....., 0 Il) :§ v ~-'~ !!) u.¡ :§ ;:. ..... ;:. ... u.¡ -_~--,C"" Z ~ < 0 û5 ..... U) < < ~,,-~. ª~~:-,,, ....., ....... .... 0 Z N C/) N N !!) ... - - ....., -S -= '" 15 '"d- ;:. II> II> II> = -~~2-__ '" "0 0 ~ ~ 0 '" Õ ~ 0 < ~-- ~ < !!) ! õ ~ ~ c fl~: u.¡ .- < ~ = Il) I I ->.- £:Jt¿ c '" ;:. 00 II> ...... \0 r<') 0 ..... Il) Il) ::r: ::r: < ...... N N ...... N .- ~'- ~ 2 ;:. ........ ã c- oo ...... ...... r<') r<') ...... :_a.;/- ~i:' õ < "0 "0 "0 Õ C'~;i- U 15 Õ :§ Õ Õ ...... e-- \0 , ,,-- -~ -~~-.. r<') r<') I "'" I:'- 0 "'" \0 ...... ...... 0 ...... N ...... ...... "'" ...... r<') ...... r<') r<') ...... ~_L - . -- ---~ -=- -=~- <-~- =- e .Q ~-'i ~ :e- ''¡:: _--c,.._ -_ _. _ ~..: ~~~-'-- --~ .~ -~'~c-_-- ~-<, - Jõ: - - . e~ . ~ ~- .... -. '- ~i-~-=-' "'J.._~'" ~..: 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ ;;.>/ 0 0 0 ~~+c" ~~ - 0 0 0 .~~, 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0 I 0 0 0 ce- ~-c~-;~- , ~ è- è- I , I ::-L-= ~ ;>, § 0 ö.o ~ 00 0\ c U ....., u 0 ~ I ~~ 0\ ~ÙJ,' ;:I = Il) 0 U Il) ::E "3 ;:I 0 - 0\ .... '7 < C/) C/) 9 9 Q 0 -..... -,~._-~ < ....., ...... < U) 0\ -~ 0\ I 00 I I 0 '«.¿:-',-' 00 cJ, .;., ~ 6 I ~ B',:,< r-r) 0 00 r<') r<') II> '~è-:> 0\ 'I""""> 1"""'Ì - r-r) ...... ...... N N - N N N N ...... N N - . .. :>-< <1) '" ¡::: <1) u ~o o ",r<) ~ + O(/}O ~o~ 000 tr) 0 tr) 1""""'C ?"""'C 1""""'C 1""""'C "'7 "'7 "'7 "'7 - - - 0 00' , ,\0 r- N I I IN \000- r<) "-< . ¡:::'" ~ Š <1) <1) . -~§ ~ ¡::: o:s o:s ¡:l; o:sE-<::;E û5 S u (/) ¡:::.;!! ::;E ª .~ S ..g OÇQ~ÇQ ....- '" o:s N~N ~tr)....-tr) 5 ~ ~ ~ :>:r:t;:r: <"d~"d - "'...... 0<0 0-"'" - N- r<) - r<) - o I . '1""""1 6 = z = I N ~ RESOLUTION REGARDING ENFORCEMENT OF HOUSING REGLUA TIONS WHEREAS, The City of St. Joseph currently has in place an ordinance authorizing the revocation or suspension of a rental license in the event of a detennination that illegal or unlawful activities are occurring upon the rental premises; . WHEREAS, as a matter of policy, the City has not considered revocation or suspension of a rental license for a violation of the City Noise Ordinance until the occurrence of a second violation within the license period; WHEREAS, this practice has failed to effectively eliminate noise violations at rental properties, especially during the months of April and May; WHEREAS, the City Council has detennined that a change in this policy will promote the peace, comfort and repose of the citizens of St. Joseph; WHEREAS, the City Council has also made a detennination that the owners of rental properties have allowed occupancy by a number of tenants in excess of that pennitted by the zoning of the property or otherwise pennitted under the City Housing Ordinance; and WHEREAS, The City Council finds that occupancy by tenants in excess of the specified number creates risk or injury to the occupants, a disruption to adjacent properties, and other adverse consequences to the health, peace and repose of the citizens of the City. THEREFORE, the City Council hereby resolves: 1. For the rental license year commencing in August of 1996, it shall be the policy of the City of St. Joseph that any ordinance or statutory violation occurring at leased premises . may result in suspension or revocation, even if the violation is the first violation during that license year. Immediate notice of the violation shall be provided to the property owner and the City Clerk shall expedite the hearing of the matter to bring it before the City Council as soon as pennissible under the law. 2. That it shall be the policy of the City Council to suspend or revoke the rental license for any property where it is detennined that the owner has knowingly pennitted occupancy in excess of that pennitted under ordinance, or has failed to make reasonable inspection or take reasonable steps to assure that occupancy in excess of the pennitted number does not occur. 3. That the City Clerk! Administrator is directed to provide a copy of this Resolution to all landlords applying for rental license for the 1996-1997 rental year. This Resolution is adopted by the City Council for the City of St. Joseph this 11 th day of July, 1996. CITY OF ST. JOSEPH Mayor Clerk! Administrator . . Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the City Council for the City of St. Joseph met in regular session on Thursday, January 3,2002 at 7:00 PM at the St. Joseph City Hall. Members Present: Mayor Larry Hosch. Councilors Bob Loso, Cory Ehlert, Al Rassier, Kyle Schneider. Administrator/Clerk Judy Weyrens. Others Present: Monte Eastvold, Rick Heid, Bob Herges Approve Agenda: Loso made a motion to approve the agenda with the addition of Computer Purchase request and Cable Commission request. The motion was seconded by Rassier and passed unanimously. Consent Agenda: Loso made a motion to approve the consent agenda as follows: a. Approve bills payable, check numbers 30600 - 30678 b. Approve the minutes of December 20, 2001 with corrections c. Increase the sewer rates from the current $ 1.35 per 100 cubic foot to $ 1.40 per 100 cubic foot. The change will be effective for rates January I, 2002, billed March 15, 2002. Discussion: Ehlert questioned if the sewer rate increase is based on the existing utility rate schedule. Weyrens responded the increase is based on the adopted utility rate schedule. However, as the costs from St. Cloud are increasing the rate schedule will be reviewed. A revised schedule will be presented to the Council upon completion. Therefore, their may be an additional sewer rate increase needed this year. The motion was seconded by Schneider and passed unanimously. Public Comments to the Agenda: No one present wished to speak. . Equipment Certificates - Monte Eastvold: Monte Eastvold of Juran & Moody appeared before the Council to present the necessary documents to issue Equipment Certificates (bonds) to fmance the purchase of a loader and auger and fmance a portion of the ladder truck. Eastvold stated that Equipment Certificates are a financing mechanism used by municipalities to purchase equipment. Equipment Certificates are not affected by levy limits as the repayment of the bonds are excluded in levy limits. Weyrens stated that in researching financing methods available, the issuance of Equipment Certificates is the most economical method at this time. Further, while the City does not intend to levy for the repayment of the bonds, should a fmancial need arise the City may levy the annual payment. The fIre truck purchase will be repaid according to a schedule submitted by the Fire Board. Payment of the loader will be included in the budget. Rassier questioned if the issuance of Equipment Certificates has an impact on the maximum debt limit for St. Joseph. Eastvold stated that debt limits only apply to General Obligation Bonds so the certificate issue before the Council will not affect the maximum bond limit of the City. Further, Eastvold stated that while municipalities are limited to the amount of Equipment Certificates that can be issued, the limit is based on the calendar year. Therefore, if the City needed to issue Equipment Certificates again next year they would not be limited due to the issue before the Council at this time. Loso made a motion providing for the issuance and sale of $ 245,000 General Obligation Certificates of Indebtedness of 2002 and levying a tax for the payment thereof; the motion was seconded by Rassier and passed unanimously. Eastvold stated that due to the small bond issue, he is proposing a negotiated bond sale with Juran and Moody purchasing the bond issue. The bonds will be over a five (5) year period and as such there will not be a call provision. If a call provision is added to a five (5) year bond the interest rate would increase. Loso made a motion to sell the $ 245,000 General Obligation Certificates ofIndebtedness to Juran and ---. Moody based on the following: - .¡' The certificates will be payable to US Bank Trust National Association as paying agent and . registrar. .¡' The certificates will bear interest as follows: 2003 - 2.75%; 2004 - 3.50%; 2005 - 4,00%; 2006 - 4.20%. .¡' Interest is payable on June 1,2002 and semiannually thereafter. The certificates will mature or be subject to mandatory redemption on December 1 in the years and amounts as follows: $ 60,000 in the years 2003 through 2005, inclusive and $ 65,000 in the year 2006. The motion was seconded by Schneider and passed unanimously. 2002 Licenses: Loso made a motion to approve the following licenses for the year 2002: 1. St. Joseph Liquor Shoppe - Cigarette 2. St. Joseph Recreation Association - On Sale Non Intoxicating Liquor 3. St. Joe Gas & Bait - Cigarette 4. La Playette - Cigarette and Amusement (9 devices) 5. American Legion - Cigarette, Amusement (5 d(!1.Jices) 6. Loso's Pub - Cigarette, Off Sale Non Intoxicating. Amusement (9 devices) 7. Sal's Bar - Cigarette, Off Sale Non Intoxicating, Amusement (10 devices) 8. El Paso - Cigarette, Amusement (J 0 devices) 9. Loso's Store - Cigarette 10. SuperAmerica - Cigarette 11. St. Joe Saints - On Sale Intoxicating 12. St. Joe Amoco Liquor - Cigarette 13. Bo Diddely's - On Sale Non Intoxicating 14. Casey's - Cigarette 15. College of St. Benedict - On Sale Non Intoxicating, Strong Beer, Amusement (4 devices) The motion was seconded by Rassier. . Ayes: Hosch, Ehlert, Loso, Rassier Nays: None Abstain: Schneider Motion Carried 4:0:1 Easement Release Request - Rick Heid: Rick Heid appeared before the Council to request authorization to encroach on a storm sewer easement in Pond View Ridge Phase Six. Heid stated that he is working on designing a home to be constructed on Lot I Block I Pond View Ridge Six. The northern edge of the property has a 20 foot storm sewer easement and an additional 25 foot natural gas easement. After the easements are deducted from the front footage, the build-able lot has a ITontage of 60'. The customer who purchased the lot needs an additional eight (8) feet. Frontage along 12th Avenue SE. Heid stated that he would be willing to install a concrete wall to the frost footings along the garage. This concrete wall would serve as shoring should the storm sewer need to be repaired. Heid stated in his opinion that the City will have adequate area to work on the storm sewer pipe should the need arise. City Engineer Joe Bettendorf recommends retaining the 20' easement to allow the Public Vlorks Department has enough room for maintenance and repair of the pipe. The Council was in agreement to revie\v this matter at the next meeting when Bettendorf can be present. Ehlert questioned if the property owner would need to sign a release of liability should the garage or home become damaged during repair of the storm sewer pipe. Heid reiterated that he is seeking an encroachment of the easement, not release or vacation. MAYOR REPORTS Transportation Workshop: Hosch reminded the Council of the Transportation Seminar sponsored by the St. Cloud Area Planning Organization on Monday, January 7,2002 at the Holiday Inn. COUNCIL REPORTS SCHNEIDER No report ~~ -- . EHLERT Revolving Loan Funds: Ehlert questioned the status of the Community Revolving Loan Program as presented to the Council in 2001. Weyrens stated the EDA Consultants are working on this matter and will report back to the Council with additional information. Patrol Car Idling: Ehlert questioned the status of the patrol cars idling while vacant. Police Chief Jansky responded that he has taken care of the situation and instructed Officers that in mild weather the cars should not be left running. Jansky stated that once the cars are equipped with the computers, the cars will need to be idling during extreme weather. RASSIER Council Requests: Rassier questioned who follows through on Council requests and directives, and if the Council could receive an update with each Council packet. Ehlert stated the Council at one time kept an agenda item entitled Old Business and items would not be removed until resolution. Weyrens stated that she will work on a format to keep the Council informed as to the follow up from Council meetings and activities the Council should be aware of. LOSO No report. ADMINISTRATOR / CLERK REPORTS Request to Paint Council Chambers: Weyrens stated that the Cable Commission has approached the Maintenance . Department to paint the wall in back of the dais in the Council Chambers. When filming persons against a light colored wall, the people become difficult to distinguish. Loso indicated that the City should hang maps and other items from the former Council Chambers. The Council also proposed the painting the City logo on the back wall. Computer Equipment: Weyrens requested the Council authorize the expenditure of up to $10,000 for the installation of a computer network system to serve both the City Offices and Police Department. Weyrens stated that she has discussed the matter with Jansky and he concurs the system needs to be updated. The networking of both offices would allow for electronic data sharing. Loso made a motion authorizing the expenditure of up to $ 10,000 for the purchase and installation of a network system for the City Office and Police Department. The motion was seconded by Schneider and passed unanimously. Adjourn: Schneider made a motion to adjourn at 8:10 PM; seconded by Rassier and passed unanimously. Judy Weyrens Administrator/Clerk . ~SBi 1200 25th Avenue South, P.O. Box 1717, SI. Cloud, MN 56302-1717 320.229.4300 320.229.4301 FAX architecture . engineering . environmental . transportation · December 27, 2001 RE: St. Joseph, Minnesota 2001 Northland Plat Five A-STJOE 0105 14 Honorable Mayor and City Council c/o Ms. Judy Weyrens City Administrator City of St. Joseph P.O. Box 668 St. Joseph, MN 56374-0668 Dear Mayor and Members of the City Council: Enclosed please find Application for Payment No.4 for this project. · We reviewed this application and it appears to be in order. When payment is made, sign all copies and distribute as follows: Larson Excavating Contractors, Inc. SEH City of S1. Joseph If you have any questions, please feel free to call us. Sincerely, ~ / ~ (-=r·· . QPh R. Bettendorf, P.E. I . ~ect Manager djg Enclosures c: Maynard Klever, SEH W:\s.joe\OI05\specsIAPL-O.doc · Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc. . Your Trusted Resource . Equal Opportunity Employer CC ~ ~ W 'J?èftrJ.?1-rJ.*rft. ~ 0 i2Q ti 0 I- 000000('.1 ('.I 0) '<I' 00) 0) Ü ~ ~ ..J ~ CC« --- --- 0.. r---C\J wCC o~ :E I- 0 ZZJ: U . SOw rJ OüCf) ~ 0 w oooooC\JO 0 0 oC\J r--- ~ U) "'- -Ç) W I- 00000(")('.1 C'! C'! NO::> ~~'d' > <C .. OOOOO~"; ..... ..... ~,....: (") 0 . \ 01- Y7w.Y7w.Y700) 0) 0) 0) <0 C\J~N ~ ü: z (")C') M C') (") 0) '<I' M ,... I- O~ Y7 " ai ai cr5ò r-.: <D ,... ~ 1-0 CO « '<t '<t '<t '<t~ (")0 ~ -.J ~:E It) It) It) Ll') W. It) lD ,... \ Q.. O:<C Y7 * Y7 Y7 Y7Y7~ 0 0 ........ Z ;¡: <:;) « -.J 000000 Q) ~ ~.£2 ! W w W J: >- ::)rJ. 000000 OC\J <\I C ctI l- I- l- I- :I: I- 00000"; ~ OQ)e « « « ([ ø ¡:: E Q) o E 0 0 0 0 ~ Z ::¡ 0> ;iú'.s Z 0 <C o <\I E .~ ::¡Q.. ~ 0: ~ o (f () 0 :I: 0 « .~ _::¡ ::::I 0 I- (f <\I §.~ e C\J (fQ) 0 '<t '<t . e CC o Q) - W 000000'<t M C') (9 (f E '- c: :I: I- OOOOOOC') N Ñ « Q.. ::::I OOOOOON (f Cf) Z M C') Q) (f 0 ::::¡ ~ Y7Y7Y7Y7Y7Y7 M '<t '<t -.J ~ E 1-0 '<t LtÎ LtÎ 0.. LtÎ -.J « éé ùj2 Z2 * ..... W<c ,.... Y7 0 1-0 2 Y7 LL. «u >- a: Ou <C 0 I-<C 0..; I- z~ en~ U Wo: :E¡:: « 20 0: lli;¡: I-Z I- « z 0: a: ~ 0 ØO 0 U «LL. OOO<.D<ON<O <0 <0 It) It) I- o'<tor---r---(")Ll') ex) ex) Z o";o~M~ex) C') C') ~ '<I'(")O::>lDr---OC') ,.... ,.... 0 '<1'00'<1'<0(")"'" a> a> 1-2 ~__-~Ñ~w a) 0> 0) W. Y7 Y7 Y7 Y7 0> In In . ~« It) * V'T V'T 0: "0 I- Q) z>- 000000 > C 01- 000000 .- 0 aooN""":""': Q) "0 .- u- uQ)u I- lD<.DOC\J~ Q) .- Q) Z '<I' <D ~§:c « (") ë <\I § ~ 0 Q) C U E Q) C >- Q) .- <\I.J:)"O ;;..: omOO::><DN c.Q)~ N__(1)I1)T"""(1) if) > '- ro Mr'o";C\Ì~ ::¡ <\I ::¡ W__WT"""L.{)Q o.c:U Y7 ~~(") "S; ....... .f: cñ 0 Y7 Y7 Y7 ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ D.ët5E u5 ~8g~ Cf) CC 000 c¡; .~ § ~ ([ 0 ZZZZwJ: 0 I- ::>::>::>OCCü 55ü(f I- ü OOOl-ü« ~ Q> (l) ~ ü « Q..Q..Q.. «w .- "0 .c 0> « CC EC-;;;e ([ I- Q)::¡CD. I- Z U Q) .2 "0 Z r--- 0 1- C ........- 0 0 ~ o 0 <\I <\I Ü t5 "0 .2' (f ü '<I' r--- (") ~ (9 û) <\I -'<: :a >- (9 <D N J:Z '=00.0 Z lD 0 J: Q..- 0 §:::=ro¥ ¡:: Z (") Q.. '<t wI- Z 2 <.D W 0Cf)« °CC- üü=Q) « lD (f) ci 00> Z "O-::¡> > - r---Z 0 u?"J« 0 e:..ww Q) 1- - 0 «mO z o .~ 1= ««~Q.. C Q) C U üOCC ~2 "J I- OlD-.J>- 0> C .- -'<: XCCO r--- - ¡-: oti)w 0.. .- ::: Q) '- ~o Z ë: mC\J¡::1- W ~ ~O e>~ wO~ x::> Cf) W wLL.Z Q) <\I 2 U 1-1-([..,j(9W = ZüZ 00 LL. 000 OOW« CC9w "OQ).c:Q) 0'<1'0 0 >- en c.c:u.c: ro-.J « ~>-Cf) W OOLL.ã:~l-ml- :J-(f)- Cf)lD-.J J: .ü >- 0.. (f)l-cc 0 ZZ-.JwCCl-en« Q)Ei5.c ~;:?O wq¡-: I- ,-« 22~I-OZ2æ ¡:: .g £ .~ 0 0: «Ü-.J -.J'<tJ: (f)Q..(f) 0 - -u«J:«ww 0 0: ~~CC2~¡t1-1- m 0 LL. W W Z ci a: 22WJ:«Cf):3-.J en 0 0 . 0 0 OO~~üZ«~ 2 0: 0 Z Z I- 0 ¡:: I- U llillio::>~~bw >-w 0 w w w « Uo:« (f)(f)ü201-1-§ 0:1- w Ë 2 > U <C- "..J 2 0 ::::¡ wwo: 2 -.J 2..J z« 2 0 0: "'zl- ü 2~ 0.. o;¡:z w (,,)'<I'lD<.Dr---o::> <CI- m u 0.. c.. 0: 0 I- <.D<D<D<.D<O<.D ~ =>0 :I: 0 ~ W c.. « o..OU - . en I- UI- en 0: « . January 11, 2002 City of St. Joseph 25 College Ave. N. St. Joseph, MN 56374 RE: St. Joseph Jaycess The St. Joseph Jaycees are requesting to move their current premise permint now located at St. Joseph Gas and Bait to Amoco Liquor. This will not be an additional site for gambling operations. All gambling activity at St. Joseph Gas & Bait will terminate upon . the approval of this request from the City of St. Joseph and the Gambling Control Board. The St. Joseph Jaycees will continue to conduct gambling activity at Sal's Bar and Grill. Please contact me at 252-2902 if you have any questions. Sincerely, C/-~~\:¿À- ~ \. Jon P. Rist Gambling Manager St. Joseph Jaycees Page 1 of 3 7/01 Minnesota Lawful Gambling FORBOARDUSEONLY LG214 P . P 't A I· t' Check # Amount . remises erml pp Ica Ion ---------- -------- Expiratation date Class of Permit Premises Permit Fee During 2nd year of Check one Two years organization license Ii] Class A - Pull-tabs, tipboards, paddlewheels, raffles, bingo $400 $200 o Class B - Pull-tabs, tipboards, paddlewheels, raffles $250 $125 o Class C - Bingo onlyOR bingo and pull-tabs when total gross $200 $100 receipts does not exceed $50,000 per year o Class D - Raffles only $150 $ 75 Organization Information Organization name (as it appears on documentation filed with Organization license number Minnesota Secretary of State or Internal Revenue Service) St. Joseph Jaycees B-03011 Name of chief executive officer (cannot be your gambling manager) Daytime phone number, including area code Deedra Deuhs 320-363-7721 Gambling Premises Information Name of establishment where gambling will be conducted Street address (do not use a P.O. box number) . Amoco Liquor 21 W. Birch St. City & county where gambling premises is located-OR-,TownshiP & county where gambling premises is located if outside city limtls. St. Joseph Stearns Cnty Is the premises located within city limits? Yes IJ No 0 If No, is township: 0 Organized o Unorganized o Unincorporated Does your organization own the building where the gambling will be conducted? DYes GJ No If no, attach (1) the appropriate lawful gambling lease form, and (2) the sketch of all leased areas with dimensions and square footage clearly defined A lease and sketch are not required for class D applications. Name of legal owner of premises Address City State/Zip Deutz Investments PO Box 634 St. Joseph MN 56374 Address(es) of Storage Space of Gambling Equipment List all locations where used and unused gambling product is stored. Do not use a P.O. box number. (Attach an additional sheet if necessary.) Address City State/Zip ___~~__~~__~_~!_~~_~_~~_____________________________~~~__~_~~_~l?_~________~~_~_~ª~~__________ __2_4-_~~__~_i~_çlL~_t~______________________________~t~__)_ºß_~P_Q______}1~__2~3]_g__________ .- 8484 County Road 75 St. Joseph MN 56374 LG214 - Premises Permit Application Page 2 7%~ . Bingo Occasions for Class A or C Permits If applying for a class A or C permit, enter day and beginning/ending hours of bingo occasions (indicate A.M. or P.M.). No more than ten bingo occasions may be conducted per week. An occasion must be at least one and one-half hours, not to exceed four hours. -ºªy Beqinninq/Endinq Hours Dav Beqinninq/Endinq Hours Dav Beqinninq/Endinq Hours _____ __________ to __________ _____ __________ to __________ _____ __________ to _________ _____ __________ to _________ _____ __________ to __________ _____ __________ to _________ _____ _______ to ________ _____ _________ to __________ _____ __________ to _________ _____ _________ to __________ Noon Hour Bingo Only Q-ªY Beqinninq/Endinq Hours Dav Beqinninq/Endinq Hours Dav Beqinninq/Endinq Hours _____ _________ to __________ _____ __________ to __________ _____ __________ to __________ _____ _________ to __________ _____ __________ to __________ _____ __________ to __________ _____ _________ to __________ Gambling Bank Account Information Bank name Bank account number* First State Bank of St. J h Bank street address City State/Zip code 400 4th Ave. NE St. Jose h MN 56374 . * New organizations: The account number may be obtained and submitted to the Gambling Control Board within ten days after you receive your premises permit. Name, address, and title of members authorized to sign checks from the gambling account. The organization's treasurer may not handle gambling funds. Name Street Address City Zip Code Title Deedr Acknowledgment Oath Gambling site authorization I declare that: I hereby consent that local law enforcement officers, I. I have read t~is application and all information submitted the board or agents of the board, or the commissioner to the board IS true, accurate, and complete; of revenue or public safety or agents of the 2. all other required information has been fully disclosed; commissioners may enter the premises to enforce the 3. I am the chief executive officer of the organization; law. 4. I assume full responsibility for the fair and lawful Bank records information operation of all activities to be conducted; The board is authorized to inspect the bank records of 5. I will familiarize myself with the laws of Minnesota the gambling account whenever necessary to fulfill governing lawful gambling and rules ofthe board and requirements of current gambling rules and law. agree, if licensed, to abide by those laws and rules, including amendments to them; Organization ~icense autho.rization 6. any changes in application information will be submitted I her.eby authonze the Gal!lbl~ng ~ontrol Board to to the board and local unit of government within ten days mod~:fY the c.lass of organrzatlOn ~Icense to. be . of the change; and consIstent With the class of premIses permlÍ bemg applied for. 7. I understand that failure to provide required information or providing false or misleading information may result . ~'" r . \ ". , ,. in the denial or revocation oft~e licen:e. ~~~~~i?A~"~~~~ïg~;;~;Ÿ~~t;ig~----------------- ----l~-lº.:~º-~a~-------- LG214 - Premises Permit Application Page 3 of 3 7/01 · Local Unit of Government Acknowledgment and Approval If the gambling premises is within city limits, the city must sign this application and provide a resolution. On behalf of the city, I hereby acknowledge this application for lawful gambling activity at the premises City of St. JoseDh located within the city's jurisdiction, and that a Print name of city resolution specifically approving or denying the application will be forwarded to the applying organization. Signature of city personnel receiving application Title Date If the gambling premises is located in a township, both the county and township must sign this application. The county must provide a resolution. For the township On behalf of the township, I acknowledge that the organization is applying to Print name of township conduct lawful gambling activity within the township limits. A township has no statutory authority to approve or Signature of townsh ip official acknowledging application deny an application (Minn. Stat. 349.213, subd. 2). Title Date For the county On behalf of the county, I hereby Print name of county acknowledge this application for lawful gambling activity at the premises located within the county's jurisdiction, and that a resolution specifically Signature of county personnel receiving application · approved or denying the application will be for- warded to the applying organization. Title Date The information requested on this form (and any premises permit, aU of the information that you have attachments) will be used by the Gambling Control Board provided to the Board in the process of appl)~ng for your (Board) to determine your qualifications to be involved in premises permit will become public except for your Social lawful gambling activities in Minnesota, and to assist the Security number, which remains private. If the Board does Board in conducting a background investigation of you. not issue you a premises permit, all the information you You have the right to refuse to supply the information have provided in the process of applying for a premises requested; however, if you refuse to supply this permit remains private, with the exception of your name information, the Board may not be able to determine your and address which \\~ll remain public. qualifications and, as a consequence, may refuse to issue you a premises permit. If you supply the information Private data about you are available only to the following: requested, the Board will be able to process your Board members, staff of the Board whose work assignment application. requires that they have access to the information; the Minnesota Department of Public Safety; the Minnesota This form may require the disclosure of your Social Attorney General; the Minnesota Commissioners of Security number. If so, your Social Security number \\~ll Administration, Finance, and Revenue; the Minnesota be used to determine your compliance with the tax laws of Legislative Auditor, national and international gambling Minnesota. Authorization for requiring your Social regulatory agencies; anyone pursuant to court order; other Security number is found at 42 US.c. 405 (c)(i). individuals and agencies that are specifically authorized by state or federal law to have access to the information; Your name and address will be public information when individuals and agencies for which law or legal order received by the Board. All the other information that you authorizes a new use or sharing of information after this provide will be private data about you until the Board issues Notice was given; and anyone with your consent. your premises permit. When the Board issues your Questions? Call the Licensing Section of the Gambling Control Board at 651-639-4000. If you use a TTY, you can call · the Board by using the Ì'vfinnesota Relay Service at 1-800-627-3529 and ask to place a call to 651-639-4000. This form wiU be made available in alternative format (i.e. large print, Braille) upon request. 2002 Mayoral Appointments All terms are one year in length unless otherwise noted. Three year terms begin in January and end in January of the cited year. . Acting Mayor Bob Loso APO Executive Committee Mayor Hosch APO Full Board Mayor Hosch, Planning Commission Chair Gary Utsch, Bob Loso Building Inspector and Compliance Officer Nancy Scott, AIISpec Services Cable Commission 3 year tern - 3 member commission 2000-2003 Tom Nahan 2002-2005 Noreen Loso Central MN Transportation Alliance Mayor Hosch Economic Development Authority 6 year term, 5 member authority 1997-2003 Mayor Hosch 1997-2002 Bob Loso 2001-2007 Ross Rieke 2000-2006 Bruce Gohman 1999-2005 Mike Deutz Emergency Services Director Ordinance No. 27 Steve Schirber Fire Advisory Board Dave Theisen Cory Ehlert Judy Weyrens St. Joseph Township Appointment Joe Bechtold Fire Chief Annual Election, Council confirmed Dave Theisen Assistant Fire Chief Randy Torborg Fire Marshall Dave Theisen Forester Mike Sworski Healthy Community Partnership Mayor Hosch Cory Ehlert Health Board Ordinance No.26 3 year term, 3 member board Thomas Newton MD . 2001-2004 Randy Torborg 1999-2002 Ken Twir 200-2003 Hiring Committee Mayor Hosch Bob Loso Cory Ehlert Kyle Schneider AI Rassier Orderly Annexation District Planning & Mayor Hosch Zoning Authority Joint Planning Committee Mayor Hosch (Orderly Annexation) Gary Utsch Marge Lesnick AI Rassier Official Depositories First State Bank of St. Joseph US Bank Smith Barney Shearson Prudential Securities Dane Bosworth Juran & Moody (MJK) Official Newspaper - Legal Notices St. Joseph Newsle@der except construction/improvements Official Newspaper - Legal Notices St. Cloud Times construction & improvements Park Board 3 year term, 7 member board 1999-2002 Lonnie Abbott 1999-2002 Bruce Berghorst 2001-2004 Jennifer Wirz 2000-2003 John Walz . 2000-2003 Marjorie Lesnick 2001-2004 Chuck Muske I Park Board Liaison Kyle Schneider I Planning Commission 3year term, 9 member commission I 2001-2004 Mike Deutz 2000-2003 Kurt Schneider I. i 2002-2005 S. Kathleen Kallinowski OSB I ! 2000-2003 Marjorie Lesnick [ 2001-2004 Jim Graeve I 2002-2005 Gary Utsch Planning Commission Voting Liaison AI Rassier Police Commissioner Ordinance No. 21 Mayor Hosch Properties Number Official Ordinance No. 31 City Engineer Rental Housing Inspector Steve Hagman Safety Coordinator Dick Taufen St. Cloud Economic Development Larry Hosch Partnership ; SCEDP Alternate Municipal Development Group St. Cloud Area Planning District Board Mayor Hosch I SCAPD Alternate Bob Loso Sales Tax (half cent) Mayor Hosch I ! Cory Ehlert Judy Weyrens Stearns County League of Cities Mayor Hosch Representatives Bob Loso Weed Control Commissioner Mayor Hosch Assistant Weed Control Commissioner Mike Sworski Affordable Housing Drafting Committee Cory Ehlert , , St. Cloud Area Chamber of Commerce Mayor Hosch i I St. Joseph Recreation Association I Cory Ehlert ! Kyle Schneider i I I ! . . Extract of the January 7, 2002 Planning Commission Meeting William Nelson, Variance Request Exterior Requirements in Highway Business Zoning District Page 1 of2 · Public Hearing - Variance Request, Subway Foods: Chair Utsch opened the public hearing at 7:05 and stated the purpose of the hearing is to consider a 100 percent variance on the exterior requirements for property in the Highway 75 Business District. The variance is being sought to allow an 8' x 10' accessory building to be constructed without meeting the exterior requirements. St. Joseph Code of Ordinances 52.22 Subd. 7 (c) states acceptable building materials shall include brick, stone, tip- up concrete panel, decorative concrete block or glass. Wood siding, plastic and other combustible materials are not listed as acceptable, and shall not be used for building exteriors. The request for variance has been submitted by William Nelson, PO Box 42, Long Prairie MN. Joyce Albrecht spoke on behalf of William Nelson. Albrecht stated that she had an 8' x 10' metal shed erected at the Subway site during the summer to be used for storage of lawn equipment. Before the building was erected she stated she contacted the Building Official and was told she could install the shed as it is placed today. After the shed was installed she received a letter stating that the building needed to rneet exterior requirements. Therefore, Albrecht stated she is applying for a variance. Rassier stated that he does not object to the storage building, but feels the building should meet the exterior requirements. Albrecht responded that had she been aware of the requirements she would have erected a building that met the Ordinance requirements. Deutz questioned if the building was built on site or if the building was prefabricated; and if the building is placed on a cement pad. Albrecht stated that the building is prefabricated and is not placed on a cement pad. Deutz stated that he is not against the aluminum building, but is not sure that the building meets the intent of the Ordinance. Deutz further stated that it is his understanding the Highway Business Zoning District was created to ensure the Highway 75 corridor would be developed aesthetically. · Graeve questioned Albrecht whether she would be willing to modify the building to meet the minimum requirements. Albrecht stated that she felt she complied with the Ordinance when she discussed the matter with the Building Official and at this time the only remedy is to purchase a new building. The current building cannot be modified. Although Schneider empathized with Albrecht, in his opinion the building needs to be modified and suggested the Commission consider allowing Albrecht until June 2002 to modify the building. Utsch closed the public hearing at 7: 17 PM. Rassier made a motion adopting the following resolution of finding, denying the variance request of William Nelson. The motion was seconded by Lesnick and passed unanimously. · Extract of the January 7, 2002 Planning Commission Meeting William Nelson, Variance Request Exterior Requirements in Highway Business Zoning District Page 2 .of 2 Resolution of Finding . The request of William Nelson for a variance came before the Planning Commission at a public hearing held on January 7,2002. The purpose of the hearing was to consider a 100 percent variance on the exterior requirements in the Highway 75 Zoning District. The variance is being sought to allow an 8' x 10' accessory building to be constructed without meeting the exterior requirements. St. Joseph Code of Ordinances 52.22 Subd. 7 ( c) states 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. The property is legally described as follows: Lots 13, 14 and the west 31 feet of Lot 15 Block 2 Loso's 3rd Addition, located at 217 County Road 75 West. 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 follo\ving findings: The proposed development is not consistent with the standards for granting a variance as stated in St. Joseph Code Ordinances 52.8 subd. 8. Therefore, based on the above fmdings the Planning Commission makes the following recommendation: Denial of the 100% variance on required exterior building material. The Commission further recommends the property owner be allowed to keep the building until June 1, 2002 allowing the property owner time to explore at alternative solutions for storage. . - - CITY OF ST'-JOSEPH , ~j--<¡ 25 College Avenue North PO Box 668 ~~~ 1 . St. Joseph, MN 56374 (éi1 1·,lûð /1- 320-363-7201 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION Applicant: '4"'" Ce A-\ 'ú reck+-! ....) Address: f O. !3D)( /30 / J h 5037 LfTr1' P 12 /r ,- e. ml 5'~3l/7 Telephone (W): '3Cc,'?J-777' Telephone (H): 1- 3;;D.- 73;)- d d Jd, Conditional Use Permit Vacation of ROW/Easements )( Variance Non-conforming Use Permit Planned Unit Development Rezoning Sign Subdivision TOTAL FEE $ Date fee received Date application received . PETITIONER MUST PROVIDE THE FOllOWING · A list and mailing labels of all property owners within 350 feet of the boundaries of the property. (This information must be obtained from the Stearns County Auditors Office) · Twenty-one full size folded copies of detail site plans. 1 · Payment of all associated fees must be made in full when application is made. ;// ~l.i'O · Copy of full legal description. · Narrative of project scope. Vé This application must be completed in full and be typewritten or clearly printed and must be accompanied by all information and plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, you should confer with the Planning Department to determine the specific ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application. A determination of completeness of the application shall be made within ten business days of the application submittal. A written notice of application deficiencies shall be mailed to the applicant within ten business days of application. This is to certify that I am making application for the described action by the City and that I am responsible for all City requirements with regard to this request. This application should be processed in my name and I am the party whom the City should contact regarding any matter pertaining to this application. I have attached a copy of proof of ownership (either copy of Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title, Abstract of . Title or purchase agreement), or I am the authorized person to make this application and the fee owner has also signed this application. ~IOlAtl ~dJ- \&- \ ~ - 0 \ . Sign ure of Applicant Date Signature of Fee Owner Date REICHERT & NELSON BUSINESSES 221 LAKE STREET SOUTH . LONG PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA 56347 320/732-2222 LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF ST. JOSEPH SUBWAY LOTS 13, 14, AND THE WEST 31 FEET OF LOT 15, ALL IN BLOCK 2 OF LOSO' S THIRD ADDITION, TO THE CITY OF ST. JOSEPH MINNESOTA. WHERE AS; THE UNDERSIGNED, AS OWNER OF SAID PROPERTY, HEREBY GIVES TO JOYCE ALBRECHT, THE RIGHT TO APPLY FOR A VARIANCE, ON SAID PROPERTY. VARIANCE TO CONSIST OF PLACING A SMALL METAL BUILDING ON THE NORTH EDGE OF LOT FOR THE PURPOSE OF STORING LAWN EQUIPMENT. WILLIAM B. NELSON/OWNER ~¡f ø~ ¿- DATED THIS 10TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2001. Locally owned and operated .J,..... ~.- ·..!!.i.Y '4\þ:.'''' .. ;.;~~~~~'. '. ..~:;,>:.' ';,...". r 3IJ'..Ø· ......... -. :::~.., ----....-.. .-.---- c>'....._ L ,,-" --.---- -.,------ --- . );{.. DATE STREET . r - - ~.. - ~T - - - - - ( Q¡ . ro , I ~....,~~ ..":.... '""'.- J ( ..., \ ~ I . ' -7 ~ J---=)'.~~~'~-''':'''-'''''' -'=.'='- I ~...~.~. . ..,-.- . ..~~_. .. ¡ . I I I ,~o PAIIIII<INGI I ! · 6/GN WI WANOICAJDPED ¡ .etL,.,.. &"I"MeOt.. &kiN ·.H.ßT ALL ~ICASLE IlllEQUIIV!MENT& W~IC~ FAI<.ING 8T ALL -- .. LOA¡,')I~ AIlœA.. eT~JII'E A& .' I eMOu.N '. .~. - -4'..S· It 4'-12'" CONe. PAC> WI . .' fDItO&T 1IOOT1NGr- HE &TfII1JCT. '.. J PUta. 'I"'YP. · ALl- EN1'IQANC!1 \ . -.---. EXIT POOR&.. 6EE PWCi I ., PICK-UP WINDOW o _ _ ~+--- .. CONCIOETe &1PEW6Lt<I . ~ -"_ iy ~.. " ~\ . I' ,. , &TUe OUT ELECTRICAL 1::8 ~.~~_::,~_~-ø· . --..-t.-- 29'..,,· : ~IT FOR fD'YLON -. ~ ¡ . ¡ I' J I I I .. L I ! 2 .PY~ON &f6N I I I ____ _. _.___,_ J 0=- L 1 ' L_ -1 .. I . - --. = - -- . -.-a ...... ..... _ - - ! - - HIGHWAY 75 .. ..,' · 2tN" . . ~ .:- ÿ. - . . -6,~ <.: ~ .-.:., ~~ 'i~~:' , - . ';".' ""'?:"'~;;'-':"': ..... ..', ." t:~ i..,:'~_'..;/.;,;,'\~.:' .... '~i'''' ;.':..., '.. . . ~./ Jan 08 02 OS:37~ AllS~ec Services 3203872703 p.l . Memo To: 51. Joseph aty COuncil From:: Nancy Scott, Building InspecOOr' Datec January 8, 2002 Rei Subway Accessory Buildng The follOlNing is a summary of the issue regarding the accessory building that SubWay has constructed: · After the building was constructed Ms. Weyrens brought it to my attention and asked that I . send a letter to the business to infonn them of the need for a building pe\1Tlit At that time I was unaware that all accessory buildings, even those under 120 square feet, require a building permit În the City of St Joseph. This was clearly my mistake and I should have been aware of this requirement I had previously received two phone calls from residen1s regarding accessory buildings that I had mistakenly stated that a pe¡mit was not required. One of those residents was Councilman Ehlert and the second was the manager of Subway, When I was contacted by the manager of Subway she did not indicate hcrw the property was zoned, · I sent the above mentioned letter to Sub'way and was contacted by the manager. She indicated to me that she had called me previously and I had told her that a building permit was not required. I explained to her that I had been mistaken and the zoning ordinance does require a building permit She índìcated she would get the site plan together and we arranged to meet and secure a building permit for the project · I met 1Mth the manager c Subway to issue a building permit and during the zoning revi9\N I discovered that the shed 'M:)uld have to foIlCM' the exterior requirements, i.e. brick, stone, etc. since it was located in the Highway 75 Business District The manager then said she would have to talk to the owner of the property regarding the matter. · I was contacted by the oVvOOr Of the property regarding the exterior requirements and related to him that he was free to apply for a variance asking to be excused from these requirements. At no time did I tell either the 0'M'\er. or the manager. that a variance VIaS not required. The property OIM'Ier indicated he was famiüar with the variance process and he would have to acœss the necessity of the accessory building versus the costs involved in applying for a variance. I have had no further contact from anyone regarding this building. . 1 Draft December 19, 2001 Page 1 of3 · Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the Planning Commission met in Special Session on Wednesday, December 19,2001 at 7:00 PM in the St. Joseph City Hall. Members Present: Chair Gary Utsch. Commissioners S. Kathleen Kalinowski, Marge Lesnick, Kurt Schneider, Mike Deutz, Jim Graeve. Council Liaison Al Rassier. Administrator Clerk Judy Weyrens. Others Present: Bob Herges, Rick Heid, Tom Herkinoff, Linda Brown. Approve Agenda: Deutz made a motion to approve the agenda with the addition of Commissioner announcements; seconded by Lesnick and passed unanimously. Bob Herges, Rick Heid - Graceview Estates Preliminary Plat: Utsch stated that he along with the City Engineer, City Administrator and Public Works Director met with the developers to review the proposed development. The following is a list of issues raised at the public hearing along with possible resolutions. CONCERN RAISED AT HEARING POSSIBLE RESOLUTION The proposed development will create additional traffic 4th, 5th and 7th Avenues will be posted with seven ton through residential neighborhoods. weight restrictions. Construction delivery vehicles cannot access seven ton roads. Rather than extending 4th Avenue SE, 5th Avenue SE could be extended. This change would not move traffic straight through to County Road 75 and people may choose an alternate route. · A temporary construction road should be installed adjacent to Lot 5 Block 8 Residents on 95th A venue requested the developer The developer has already changed the plan to change the design so that similar style of homes will be construct bay homes adjacent to 95th A venue rather adjacent to their property. than the original design where Town homes would abut 95th Avenue. Access to County Road 121/College Avenue South The developers do not own the property that abuts should be required. County Road 121 Therefore, they cannot construct a road from the proposed development to County Road 12I. However, the property owner, (College of St. Benedict), has agreed to allow a temporary construction road. The City Council and Planning Commission have agreed that an east/west corridor (Field Street) needs to be constructed at the southern edge of the proposed development. However, the construction ofField Street will not occur until at least 2006. Park Dedication Fee The Park Board will be meeting to discuss allowing the developers to pave walking trails and connect the · trails to Klinefelter park in lieu of payment of the . Park Dedication fees Draft December 19,2001 Page 2 on The Commission spent considerable time discussing access to County Road 121(College Avenue South). Herges · stated that he and Heid recently met with the College of St. Benedict to discuss access to County Road 121. The College is in the process of selling a portion of the property in question for a commercial building. The proposed access to County Road 121 has the potential of benefiting the commercial project. Therefore, Herges stated that he and Heid are trying to come to an agreement with the College. At this time the College is in the process of appraising the land and once the appraisal is completed they will meet again with the College of St. Benedict. Herges is hopeful that they will reach an agreement with the College. Deutz questioned if the City has the authority to condemn property for the purpose of providing access roads. Weyrens stated that although the City does have the that authority it is hoped that the College and the developer will come to an agreement. Schneider questioned if the City could give the developers a deadline as to when they have to have the access completed. Weyrens stated that the issue before the Planning Commission at this time is the preliminary plat. It is important to make sure the road connections are planned and secured within the development. After the preliminary plat is approved the developer will come back to the Planning Commission requesting fmal approval of the fIrst phase of the development. The Planning Commission could consider limiting the number of homes to be built before the access to County Road l2l is complete. Berges stated that if they owned the property to County Road 121 they would build the access in the fIrst phase. However, since they do not own the land they have no right to construct the proposed road. Graeve stated that the road to County Road 121 is crucial in making the downtown area easily accessible to residents of this area. Rassier made a motion to recommend the City Council adopt the following Resolution of finding, approving the Preliminary Plat for Graceview Estates; the motion was seconded by Kalinowski and passed unanimously, Resolution of finding The request of Bob Herges and Rick Heid for a P.D.R.D. application and rezoning request came before the Planning · Commission at a public hearing held on December 3, 200I. The purpose of the hearing was to consider a preliminary plat, P.U.R.D. application issuing a special use permit to develop approx. 91 acres with mixed housing; and to rezone the property from current Agriculture to R-l Single Family. The property is located south of Baker Street and West of 7th Avenue SE/95th Avenue. The property is legally described as: The Southeast Quarter of The South East Quarter (SW 'I. SE II.) of Section Ten (10) in Township One Hundred Twenty -Four (124) North, of Range Twenty-nine (29) in Steams County, Minnesota, LESS AND EXCEPT; The North 66 feet thereof AND ALSO LESS AND EXCEPT the East 30 feet thereof. The Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter (NE '!. NE 1/4) of Section Fifteen (15), in Township One Hundred Twenty-four (124) North, Range Twenty-nine (29) West n Steams County, Minnesota, LESS AND EXCEPT: Commencing at The Northwest comer of said NE 1/4 NE '!.; thence East on an assumed bearing along the North line of said NE '!. NE '!., a distance of 500 feet to the point of beginning of the land to be described; thence South 00 degree 09 minuets 26seconds East parallel with the West line of said NE '!. NE '!. a distance of 1330.93 feet to the South line of said NE '!. NE II.; Thence North 89 degree 57minutes 43 seconds East along said South line ofNE '!. NE 'I.; a distance of 819.95 fee to the East line of said section; thence North 00 degree 10 minutes 42 seconds West along said East line a distance of 1330.38 feet to the Northeast corner of said Section; Thence West along the North line of said Section 819.47 feet to the point of beginning and there terminating. AND The Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter (NW '!. NE '!.) of Section Fifteen (15), in Township One Hundred Twenty-four (124) North, of Range Twenty-nine (29) West in Stearns County, Minnesota, LESS AND EXCEPT: That part of the NW 'I. NE '!., of Section IS, Township 124, Range 29, described as follows: Beginning at the NE Corner of said Quarter-Quarter, said Point being south 89 degrees I I minutes West, 1320 feet from the NE Corner of said Section; Thence along the East hne of said Quarter-Quarter, due South 3 I 0 feet; thence South 89 degrees II minutes West 250 feet; thence due north 310 feet to a point on the North line of said Section; thence along said North line North89 degrees II minutes East, 250 feet to the point of beginning. · Draft December 19,2001 Page 3 on . The request for preliminary plat and P.U.R.D. development has been submitted by Bob Herges and Rick Reid; 25 N 11th Avenue, St. CloudMN 56303. 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 fmdings: The proposed development is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan and meets the requirements of the St. Joseph Code of Ordinances. Therefore, based on the above fmdings, the Planning Commission makes the following recommendation: Approval of the P.U.R.D. application granting a special use permit to allow for the development of91 acres with mixed housing and to rezone the above mentioned property from Agricultural to R-l Single Family. Approval is contingent upon the following: 1. 4th, 5th, and 7th Avenues are posted as 7 ton roads 2. The northern access to County Road 121 will be moved to Lot 5 Block 8 3. The property abutting 95th A venue will be developed with Bay homes rather than the proposed Townhomes. 4. The Park Board approves the Park Dedication Fee - allowing the paved walking path to meet the park dedication requirement. 5. A temporary construction road will be installed at the access mentioned in #2 above. 6. Only phase one of the development can be approved without a paved access to County Road 12I. It shall be the responsibility of the developer to come to an agreement with the adjoining property owner for access to County Road 121. If an agreement cannot be reached the developer should notify the Planning Commission. 7. Approval of the City Attorney and Building Inspector . 8. Approval of the City Engineer - meeting all the requirements detailed in a letter dated November 28,2001 (See exhibit "A") Lesnick made a motion recommending the City Council mapping the northern County Road 121 extension to Graceview Estates on the Official Transportation Map; and, if the developer cannot reach an agreement with the property owner the City will construct the road within the means available to municipalities assessing affected property owners. The motion was seconded by Deutz and passed unanimously Miscellaneous: Graeve reported the Fruelingsfest planning will begin on January 14,2002 at the St. Joseph Community Fire Hall. The theme for the 2002 event is "Celebrate Historic Baseball." Adiourn: Deutz made a motion to adjourn at 8:30 PM; seconded by Lesnick and passed unanimously. Judy Weyrens Administrator/Clerk . EXHIBIT "A" ~SeJ 1200 25th Avenue South, P.O. Box 1717, S1. Cloud, MN 56302-1717 320.229.4300 320.229.4301 FAX architecture . engineering . environmental . transportation . November 28, 2001 RE: St. Joseph, Minnesota Graceview Estates SEH No. A-STJOE 0205.00 14 Mrs. Judy Weyrens CI erkl Administrator City Of Saint Joseph 25 College Avenue North PO Box 668 St. Joseph, Minnesota 56374-0668 Dear Judy: I have reviewed the preliminary plat for Graceview Estates and have the following comments: . Preliminary Plat 1. Fifth Avenue SE connects to East Baker Street leaving a jog with streets coming in from the north. This street should be relocated to èonnect directly with Fourth Avenue SE or Fifth Avenue SE. 2. There is no park shown on the plat. The City must determine if Klinefelter Park can handle the additional pressure from this development, or if additional park space should be provided. 3. When Klinefelter Park was purchased, a 66 foot wide access easement was also provided from Seventh Avenue SE to the park. The easement is south of and adjacent to the north line of Section 15-124-29. It is imperative that this access be maintained: If it is not provided with this plat, we will continue to have only one vehicular access to the park, with all of the traffic coming to the park via the Cloverdale area. 4. The vicinity map is incorrect. 5. A paved vehicular access to each retention pond must be provided. Retention ponds should be shown as Outlots and be dedicated to the public. This way the City can operate and maintain all ofthe ponds uniformly. The dedicated area must have room for a 12-foot shelf around the top of the pond for maintenance vehic1es. 6. Suitable easements must be provided for all utility lines. All such easements must be accessible by vehic1e. 7. Right-of-way must be provided for the lift station site on East Baker Street, to be reconstructed in 2002. The site should be 100feet deep by 150 feet long, with the long side adjacent to East Baker Street. The east line of the site should abut Seventh A venue SE. An additional 50 feet of temporary construction easement all around the site will also be required. . Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc. . Your Trusted Resource . Equal Opportunity Employer Mrs. Judy Weyrens November 28, 2001 Page 2 8. Right-of-way must be provided across the northeast comer of the Palmersheim property for · Seventh A venue SE. This should be provided now, to ensure that the integrity of the site design is maintained. 9. An easement should be provided for the construction of sewer and water lines from the plat to County Road 121. 10. A second road access should be provided to the development from the west. This road should connect County Road 121 and Fifth A venue SE, and be as close to Kennedy School as possible. 11. A temporary road should be constructed from County Road 121 to the development until the permanent access can be constructed. This would be primarily for construction vehicles. This will take the pressure off of the existing residential streets during development of the plat. 12. The tight curves in the south end of the plat wil1likely create sight distance problems for people bacldng out of driveways, especialJy in the winter. Grading and Drainage 1. The preliminary grading plan is incomplete and must be resubmitted. The revised plan must show I-foot finished contours for the entire site, and include pad elevations (garage floor) and lowest level floor elevations. Type of structure must also be shown, with codes defined in the legend. Typical street sections must also be provided. 2. In the hydraulic summary, the peak outlet flows for Ponds 2, 4, 5, and 8 are too large for the pipe · sizes shown. Inlets to each pond should be designed with a drop structure so that the incoming flow enters at the bottom of the pond. This wilJ prevent erosion of the side slopes, which are difficult to protect in granular soils. 3. The overflow for Pond 4 appears headed for property outside the plat. Overflows are not necessary provided that runoff from events greater than the 1 DO-year design event has somewhere to go without damaging structures. Ponding on lawns and streets can be tolerated for a short time if we have runoff from a storm exceeding the 100-year event. 4. Ponds 7 and 8 must hold the 1 OO-year event without an outlet, in case we do not have Field Street constructed by the time this portion of the plat is developed. 5. The outflow for Pond 9 should be zero. We do not have enough room in the drainage system east of the plat for additional flow from this area. Emergency overflow is alJ that can be accommodated. 6. Top of casting and invert grades should be provided for alJ structures. Sanitary Sewer 1. Top of casting and invert grades should be provided for alJ structures. 2. Provision for a sanitary sewer pipe from the south end of Elena Street to County Road 121 should be included in the submitta1. This pipe should be constructed as a part of the development. · Mrs. Judy Weyrens November 28,2001 Page 3 · Water Main 1. Provision for a water main pipe from the south end of Elena Street to County Road 121 should be included in the submittal. This pipe will be 12 inches in diameter and should be constructed as a part of the development. 2. No water main sizes were shown. Essentially, a lO-inch main should be constructed on Fifth A venue SE from East Baker Street to Elena Street, then along Elena Street to Seventh A venue SE, and then along Seventh A venue SE to the south end of the plat. All other mains should be 8- inches in size. 3. An 8-inch loop should be constructed from Building 70, east along the south side of Pond 2 to the cul-de-sac between Buildings 43 and 44. 4. Hydrant and valve locations will be reviewed with the construction plans. This concludes my remarks. Please call if you have any questions. Sincerely, · SHORT ELLIOTT HENDRICKSON INe. mdh c: Dick Taufen, City of St. Joseph Tom Herkenhoff, Brown Herkenhoff Bob Herges, Developer Rick Heid, Developer Amy Schaefer, SEH \\sehsc3\sccv\stjoe\0205\corr\112801·}·gracview plat review.doc · Extract of the December 3, 2001 Planning Commission Meeting Public Hearing, Bob Herges/Rick Heid - Graceview Estates Page 1 of4 · Bob Herges. Rick Heid - Graceview Estates Preliminary Plat: Chair Utsch called the hearing to order at 7:00 PM and stated the purpose of the hearing is to consider a preliminary plat, P.U.R.D. application to develop approx. 91 acres with mixed housing, and to rezone the property from current Agriculture to Rl Single Family. The property is located South of Baker Street and West of 7th Avenue NE/95th Avenue. Legally described as follows: The Southeast Quarter of The South East Quarter (SW If.. SE If..) of Section Ten (10) in Township One Hundred Twenty -Four (124) North, of Range Twenty-nine (29) in Stearns County, Minnesota, LESS AND EXCEPT; The North 66 feet thereof AND ALSO LESS AND EXCEPT the East 30 feet thereof. The Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter (NE If.. NE 1/4) of Section Fifteen (15), in Township One Hundred Twenty-four (124) North, Range Twenty-nine (29) West n Stearns County, Minnesota, LESS AND EXCEPT: Commencing at The Northwest corner of said NE 1/4 NE If..; thence East on an assumed bearing along the North line of said NE If.. NE If.., a distance of 500 feet to the point of beginning of the land to be described; thence South 00 degree 09 minuets 26seconds East parallel with the West line of said NE If.. NE If.. a distance of 1330.93 feet to the South line of said NE If.. NE If..; Thence North 89 degree 57minutes 43 seconds East along said South line of NE 'I. NE If..; a distance of 819.95 fee to the East line of said section; thence North 00 degree 10 minutes 42 seconds West along said East line a distance of 1330.38 feet to the Northeast corner of said Section; Thence West along the North line of said Section 819.47 feet to the point of beginning and there terminating. AND The Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter (NW If.. NE If..) of Section Fifteen (15), in Township One Hundred Twenty-four (124) North, of Range Twenty-nine (29) West in Stearns County, Minnesota, LESS AND EXCEPT: That part of the NW II. NE If.., of Section 15, Township 124, Range 29, described as follows: Beginning at the NE Corner of said Quarter-Quarter, said Point being south 89 degrees 11minutes West, 1320 feet from the NE Corner of · said Section; Thence along the East line of said Quarter-Quarter, due South 310 feet; thence South 89 degrees 11 minutes West 250 feet; thence due north 310 feet to a point on the North line of said Section; thence along said North line North89 degrees 11 minutes East, 250 feet to the point of beginning. The request for preliminary plat and P .U.R.D. development has been submitted by Bob Herges and Rick Heid; 25 N 11th Avenue, St. Cloud MN 56303. Bob Herges stated that he and Rick Heid recently purchased property frorn St. Benedict's Monastery to develop with mixed residential housing units. The property contains approximately 91 acres and is located between south of Kennedy School, south of Baker Street East and west of 95th Avenue. Herges stated that in an effort to provide quality development, he hired a landscape designer to plan the development. The proposed development has been named Graceview Estates. At this time Herges introduced landscape designer Rick Harris. Harris stated that he has worked in over 250 communities providing planning services. Harris presented some basic information on planning and discussed how he prepares a development. The process used by Harris includes integrating the characteristics of the community while maximizing the use of the land. Harris stated that when he plans a development, a typical design has 32% less streets, larger lots and provides for significant side and front VIews. Graceview Estates has been designed as life cycle housing, housing for all levels of living. The development will include bay homes, townhomes, single family homes, multiple family homes and senior units. The development includes ten ingress/egress with an average lot size is 14,253 square feet. Chair Utsch opened the floor for questions and comments. Art Budde of 1 06 - 7th Avenue SE stated that he is pleased with the concept of the housing development and types of housing. However, Budde questioned why the extensions of 4th and 5th Avenues do not match the existing street · alignment. In his opinion the lack of a four way intersection will create poor visibility. Therefore, the streets should be aligned to match. Budde also questioned if access to County Road 121 will be provided. Extract of the December 3, 2001 Planning Commission Meeting Public Hearing, Bob Herges/Rick Heid - Graceview Estates Page 2 of 4 Herges stated that the plat has been redesigned eliminating the extension of 5th A venue and a four way intersection has . been created at 4th A venue. This change has been made as a result of input received from the public prior to the public hearing. Bettendorf stated the long tenn plans include a connection to County Road 121. Bettendorf further stated that he had the plan reviewed by a traffic engineer and he is recommending that a second ingress/egress to CR 121 be provided near Kennedy School. The development is large and traffic needs to be moved efficiently to major roads. Herges stated that he and Rick Heid do not own the property that connects to County Road 121. However, they did meet with the property owner, (College of St. Benedict), and they are not supportive of extending a road through their property. Steve Schirber of 301 52 - 95th Avenue questioned if the new development plans include the reconstruction of 95th Avenue, and will the City require access to County Road 121 before construction can begin. Utsch stated that the Planning Commission and City Council will be meeting in December to discuss the Transportation Plan for St. Joseph and the need to establish the east / west route planned for south of the proposed development. Bettendorf stated at this time there are no plans to reconstruct 95th A venue. It would be prudent to install utilities simultaneously with the installation in Graceview Estates, the City Council has discussed the island of property on 95th Avenue that is still in St. Joseph Township and the process of annexing those properties. At the time of annexation utilities wilJ be available and the street will be improved. Herman Gangl of 30084 - 95th Avenue questioned the future alignment of 95th Avenue ifthe street is improved. It is his understanding that the current road is off center and the road will be moved. Bettendorf stated that when the road is improved or reconstructed, the road will be placed in the correct location. Without completing survey details and viewing the property the exact location ofthe road cannot be determined. Bettendorf stated he will review the matter. Kathy Salzer of 1 31 - 4th Avenue SE questioned the amount of traffic that will be generated by the proposed housing development, both during construction and after the homes are constructed. Salzer questioned how traffic will be . controlled during the construction season and after the development is completed. Utsch reiterated the City Council and Planning Commission will be meeting on December 17th to discuss the future roads. The Planning Commission understands the need to establish connections to County Road 121 and construct an east / west corridor at the southern end of the development. Bettendorf stated the City could require the developer to provide a temporary road for construction traffic. This road should be connected to County Road 121. The temporary road could be installed at the same location the traffic engineer is requesting a second ingress/egress. The developers will need to negotiate an agreement with the College of St. Benedict as they are the owners of the property which abuts County Road 121. Mike Philip of 30018 - 95th Avenue questioned the future street design for 95th Avenue from Baker Street East to the Palmersheim property, what accommodations have been made regarding the natural gas line and if a holding pond or storm sewer is planned for the area being developed. Bettendorfresponded that the developer and City are aware of the gas line and have made provisions for it in the design. The easement for the gas line prohibits any construction in the easement area. As far as surface water and drainage, the development is engineered with stonn sewer/catch basins and the surface water will be drained to the existing holding ponds as well as the new ponds proposed in the development. Bettendorf further stated the housing development has been planned with catch basins. Brian Donna)' of 202 - 7th Avenue SE reiterated the need to provided alternate ingress/egress for the development and encouraged the Commission to require a road to County Road 121. Bob Kroll read a statement concerning planning and the need to consider public input in the decision making process. Bettendorf stated that he agrees with the need to involve the community in the planning of the development and that is the purpose of the public hearing. All testimony received at this meeting will be considered before a decision is made. Rick Schultz of 30054 - 95th Avenue questioned the design of the proposed development. Schultz stated that it is his opinion that comparable housing should be constructed adjacent to the existing housing stock. Therefore, the rental . units proposed adjacent to his property should be changed to single family homes. Extract ofthe December 3, 2001 Planning Commission Meeting Public Hearing, Bob Herges/Rick Reid - Graceview Estates Page3 of 4 · Herges stated the area adjacent to the 95th Avenue is proposed to be upscale attached housing. The homes are not rental units, rather town homes. The proposed value of the attached housing will exceed the value of the existing house stock adjacent to the proposed development. Art Budde of 1 06 - ¡th Avenue SE restated that he would like the Planning Commission to require an access to County Road 121 and questioned the rationale for requiring an ingress/egress to County Road 121 adjacent to Kennedy School. Bettendorf responded that when determining the location of roads there is a minimum distance that must be considered. The City's transportation plan has always included an east/west corridor running parallel to the proposed development. The City placed the two accesses using the original one planned. Further, it is important to construct roads where they will be used. A portion of the property retained by the College of St. Benedict is in the process of being sold for a commercial use. Therefore, the proposed road near Kennedy School would no only serve the housing development but the commercial development as well. The Planning Commission may consider using this proposed road as a temporary construction road as well. Mary Ann Graeve of 619 Minnesota Street East questioned who owns the property referred to as Field Street and how close will proposed development and roadway be in relation to the existing wetland. If the proposed development allows for surface water to drain into the wetland there is a possibility the wetlands will become contaminated. It seems to be a common trend for people to use chemicals in lawn care and if proper drainage is not provided it could be detrimental to the residents ofSt. Joseph. Graeve stated that when making decisions the City needs to look at the quality of life and how the proposed development will affect the lives of the residents of St. Joseph. Bettendorf stated that the College of St. Benedict owns the property referred to as Field Street. The current construction plans for County Road 121 include providing water and sewer lines in the same area. Therefore, it is certain the City will be able to secure the necessary right-of-way for the construction of an east/west corridor. As far as the surface water drainage, the development will be drained with holding ponds and storm sewer outlets so that the wetlands will not be disturbed. · Herges stated that he has been researching the possibility of internalizing the sanitary sewer system and water for the proposed development in the event that an agreement cannot be reached with the College of St. Benedict. In discussing this matter with his engineers, it appears as though it would bea feasible alternative. Therefore they may not have to use the proposed Field Street. Jean Marthaler of 139 - 7th Avenue SE questioned the ingress/egress for the development and who will have the [mal authority if the access to County Road 121 is required. Marthaler also requested the developer be required to provide a temporary road for construction vehicles. Marthaler also questioned the depth of the proposed holding pond that to be located near 4th Avenue SE and Baker Street East. Bettendorfresponded that the Planning Commission will review the testimony presented at this meeting and make a recommendation to the City Council; at which time the City Council will make the final decision. As far as the depth of the pond, it is proposed to have a maximum depth of six feet. Gladys Schneider of 118 - 3rd Avenue SE stated she is not opposed to the development and is impressed with the presentation. However, Schneider questioned if anyone has considered the affect the development will have on the current City water supply and storage capacity. The residents have recently paid for a new water storage facility and she does not feel that she should have to pay for another tower in the near future. Bettendorfresponded that the City has recently purchased additional sewer capacity / conveyance ITom the City of St. Cloud. Therefore, the City will have a sufficient sewer capacity for many years. The City will have to begin researching an additional site for a second water storage facility and land for additional wells. The cost of the future improvements will be paid for by hookup fees for all new developments. In 1986 the City implemented water and sewer hookup fees and these fees have paid for many improvements to the utility systems. The City Council will be reviewing the current fees in the upcoming months to assure that the fees collected will cover the future utility expenses created by the growth the City is experiencing. Duane Giada of 29772 - 95th Avenue questioned the proposed east/west extension referred to as Field Street and the redesign of 95th Avenue. The proposed housing development vacates a portion of the existing 95th Avenue realigning the road around the proposed development. Gaida questioned the need for the realignment. · Bettendorfresponded that the road referred to as Field Street is proposed to be located south of the wetland area near the existing gas shelter. Extract of the December 3, 2001 Planning Commission Meeting Public Hearing, Bob Herges/Rick Reid - Graceview Estates Page 4 of 4 There being no additional testimony Kalinowski made a motion to close the public hearing at 9:10 PM; . seconded by Deutz and passed unanimously. The Commission agreed to discuss the testimony received on December 19, 2001 at 7:00 PM in the St. Joseph City Hall. At that time a recommendation will be forwarded to the City Council. Chair Utsch will meet with the City Engineer, Attorney, Developers Rick Hied and Bob Herges and City Staff to review the items of concern and present the information to the Planning Commission on December 19,2001. . . UJ./14/02 1,:43 FAX 320 229 4301 SED -T ST JOSEPH @001 Ar5aJ 1200 25th AVGl'lue South, P.O. Box 1717, St. Cloud, MN 56902-1717 320.2211.4300 320,229.4301 FAX aTl:hitectuTe . engi71uTiTZ( . envírDm'lItl/lI.l1 . tralttþoTtatioll . January 14.2002 :FE: 8L Joseph, Minnesota Graceview Estates SEH No. A~STJOE 0205.00 14 Mrs. Judy Weyrens Clerk/Administrator City Of Saint Joseph 25 CoUege Avenue North PO :Box 668 St. Joseph, Minnesota 56374-0668 Dear Judy: I reviewed the revised. submittals for Gracevžew Estates. and have the following comments: Preliminary Plat 1. The i$!)ue of how ponding sites should be bandIed on thís development is still umesolved. I see two options: a. Have the land comprising the ponding site dedicated to the public as outlots and plant prairie grass as we did by the fire hall, Prairie grass establishes wen and maintenance is minimal since it does not have to be mowed It does, however have to be burned off every four years or so to maincain the quality of the plantings, and there win be times the City is asked to . corne out and remove trash_ We do get some treatment of the water as it soaks into the ground, b. Have the land comprising the holding ponds be part of the common area or private property aod dedicate an easement over it for drainage purposes. Since this would be a patt of a green space or yard, we would plant regular grass that can be mowed with the adjacent land. We wîJl still have a maintenance responsibility. but mowing could be covered by the association or group :r;esponsible for common areas. My experience is that grass is hard to establish. Once it is estabJished, an extended period of wet weather can submerge the grass and kin iL What you have left is a mud hole. Either way, since there are so many ponds in this development, I would like mOre design effort put into them So we have someiliing that enhances the development instead of an eyesore. The developer could do this. or we have the resources in house to do it as well. 2. The interior drainage and utility easements need dimensions and bearings. 3. A north-south dimension is needed on the lift station easement. 4. Provide easement for sewer and water from the development ro County Road 121. 5. Provide right-of-way for a road from the development to County Road 121 (south of Kennedy School). It is important this a~s be available now so construction traffic can enter and leave the site from Counly Road 121_ While (here will be times during the reconstrucûon of County Road 121 that this access will be dosed. we hope [0 keep it open as long M possible. In addition (0 construction traffic for the public improvements, we wiIl have significant trllck traffic as homes are being built. The first phase is a large development. It includes 27 single family homes. 28 patio homes. and 50 town homes. This traffic would not occur simultaneously, since . Short Elliotl Hendrickson Inc:. . Your Trusted Aesource . EquaJ Opportunity Employer 01/14/02 17:43 ~~ 320 229 4301 SED -T sr JOSEPH @002 Judy Weyrens January 14,2002 · Page 2 we don't want homebuilding 10 biart until the fIrst layer of asphalt has been placed, Still, we don't want all of this construction traffic on Our adjacent residential streets. Grading and Drainage 6. TypIcal sections were not provided as requested in my original review. 7. In the hydraulic summary, peak flows are still too high for several of the outlet pipes (ponds 5 and 8). Several pipelines do not show sizes. Provide 1 foot of freeboard for ponds 3, 6. 7, and 8. 8. Design drainage area 1 along 95th Avenue as it was in the original submittal. to carry the drainage south of Callaway into the development. 9. As I stated in my original cQmments, ponds 7 and 8 wiII need to hold the 100 year event since Field Street will not be placed until at least 2006. Sanitary Sewer 10. The revised plan!; show a lift station serving the south end of the development as an alternate to going to County Road 121. This should be deleted. We do not want to carry this additional flow into OUT existing system to the north, nor do We want to maintain another lift station. As I stated earlier, the easement for the utilities to County Road 121 should be in place before the development goes forward. The easement is also needed to properly loop the water system, Water Main · 11. Change pipe size of water main from de.velopment to County Road 121 to 12-inches. 12. As { stated in my previous review, construct an 8~inch loop from Building 70, eas[ along the south side of pond 2 to the cul-de-sac between buildings 43 and 44. I am still reviewing the building pad elevations, but the general grading appears to be satisfactory. This concludes my remarks. Please call if you have any questions. Sincerely, SHORT ELLIan HENDRICKSON me. JOB ph R. Bettendorf, P.E. 'ty Engineer djg c; Dick Taufen, City of St. JOSèph Tom Herkenhoff, Brown tlerkenhoff Bob Herges, Developer Rick Heid, Developer Amy Schaffer, SEH ......\~J,.v,:uJ5lç",,\OJ 140h·ny.l¿o: · - VICINITY MAP AND NARRA TIVE FOR CRACEVIEW ESTATES - . , ¡ l_"_,~-....-"""~,,,-._,,,,,",,~,,,^~.^,.>,,,,,,,,,_o;.;,=,,~,,,,:~-~ >-'''''='_'!C-;'~'''''''-'Y:~,~_",,-''o>.'_~_''~_'':'_____''''__~'_,__,,'':c.._'>,~'>-"~*~_""'~'~"''''''''''''-''''''"'><=,''<'''''=-''-<'''~'''^'''_;.;o,,,,.,,_<-=_,,,,,,,,~c__,__,-""".-,=_'»'",,, ___~""~,__-,"""'.>,'<'-O;-''''",--:,,,.,,,,,,,.,,>,;,:___,,,,,>,,:-',,-'_______-_0'='___,.''-_~j' :___.,.'_o·'"~' ^ C_''- .', _"",_,_,_" ,,' ". . <_--__"'Ox~~ ~ ~ -"~·ÔC~_·"_;_^_'C~ 0-'--"'-,"'0.-0_ '_'.<'C'-;<_""> --·c-,;_,-_c;_··~_-~_·c_ ",.,,__,o,,~-,-;,o-i--" ""....- =~"""'=. H"... "'-"'~ ~ OR GRACEVIEW ESTATES ~ -: i VICINITY MAP F , . - , -- - ~ < í , , , ¡ " 1 I j 1 ~ ! , i : I 1 .~ j I 1 j ! 1 KENNEDY SCHOOL . ¡ .î 1 , ~ :1 j ! ! ; ~ ,- - ¡ ----- --- -- ~ I 1 1 ! , I , , 1 E' 1"-600' ¡ I SCAl . i I f I , I i , I _ . . . Creating a Beautiful Family Community: GRACEVIEW ESTATES Developers: Pond View Ridge LLP GRACE VIEW ESTATES will be a Residential Community that exceeds the living standards of what is known as "subdivision living" as would be commonly found in the surrounding area. This preliminary plat offers single- family residential homes, bay homes and multi-family homes, which consist of 6-plexes, 10-plexes, and 40-unit apartments. The specific summary of numbers of different areas of homes are found on the preliminary plat. CREATL."fG A NEIGHBORHOOD... Recent newspaper articles on "cluster", "new town", or "neo-traditional" development enforce our resentment of "suburbia" as we know it today, with its homes perfectly aligned against featureless streets. We present the answer to these concerns by using the latest techniques in design. What makes a" neighborhood" environment as opposed to the isolation of" cookie-cutter" subdivision? When you drive or walk through older urban communities there is a different feel than a modern subdivision. Obviously one . difference has to do with architecture and landscaping. CaVING OF SINGLE F ~"IIL y This is a new concept of housing developed in 1994 which has been very successful in the midwest and many other states (in Texas over 1,000 coved lots are under construction), now with over 24,000 homes under construction or in the design phase. Even though this concept is quite new, coved communities are being built in Centerville, Woodbury, Albertville, St. Michaels, Lino Lakes, Wyoming, Hutchinson, Winsted, and Elk River with over 3,000 new coved lots proposed currently in Watertown, Stillwater, (Hanover), Otsego, North Branch, Dayton, and Buffalo. The homes in Graceview Estates wind independently and form "curves" of their own! These methods also provide much better views from within the homes. Today, design techniques combined with new materials contribute to a much larger feel and a higher quality look than a same size home of just a few decades ago. Think of" coving" as a method to make better use of the space that is available, a more efficient layout of land and paving. What is a "coved" lot? A coved community combines the advantages of" cul-de-sac" feel, and enhanced views, while at the same time substantially reducing the visual impact of paving. This softens the visual impact of garage doors and reduces the lineal feet of roads. - Home fronts provide an open welcoming feel into the community, with a more generous distance from the curb. - Views constantly change as you drive, bicycle, or walk through this development. ... ... . Each home front has a particular dimension which MUST be held to. THE FEEL OF A.~ ESTATE SIZE LOT Instead of homes being a steady 100 feet apart, front to front, the distance between home fronts meander up to 250. Compared to a conventional layout on this site, our coved development has approximately twice the standard average front yard area. n is the setback from the street that provides the" feel" of a large lot, NOT the lot width. If all homes are placed at the same setback you cannot get a sense of scale, thus there is no illusion of larger lots. Since all "coved" lots meander, and the street winds through with little relationship to a constant setback, the sense of scale is enhanced. We are providing an average lot size of 14,674 square feet for the single family residential lots. COVING AS THE NEXT STA.~DARD In the past year Coving has gained national attention in newspapers, articles including the New York Times. Magazines such as C.E.News, Professional Surveyor, Urban Land, NAHB's newsletter, Professional Builder, and a feature show to 40 million viewers on HGTV's Dream Builder show are an example of some. In a very short time period, the excitement and broad acceptance of Coving as a higher standard of development has been tremendous. BayHomes: While Professional Builder Magazine coined "BayHomes" as "New Urbanism with a View", we like to think of . BayHomes as a large departure from the New Urbanism movement. The similarities are that the BayHome have a porch and rear garage, however BayHomes offers much more... BayHomes differ in many areas to New Urbanism or Traditional Neighborhood Design. First, the homes do NOT have a street in front, instead there is a large green parkway with a walk system that connects the neighborhood together. Homes have a traditional porch, but the main living areas, interior wall and window placement encourage the actual use of the porch and large social areas adjacent to it. Multi-Family: These homes offer affordable living with a difference. The" rear" of the home is architecturally redone to appear as a front with a porch and walk system to blend into the adjacent BayHome area. There is plenty of open space and views from within these homes. Conclusion: The plan speaks for itself. Under PUD regulations, what we are presenting must be built as represented. We hope that the City ofSt. Joseph will be as excited as we are about this neighborhood. - - ·. . Request Vacation Easements of City of 81. Joseph (Document No. 853134) That part of the Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 15, Township 124 North, Range 29 West of the 5th Principal Meridian, Steams County, Minnesota, described as follows: Beginning at the Northwest comer of said Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter; thence Easterly along the North line of said Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter, a distance of66.00 feet; thence Southerly, parallel the West line of said Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter, a distance of 31 0.00 feet; thence Westerly, parallel with said North line, a distance of 13.00 feet; thence Southerly to a point on the South line of said Northeast Quarter of the Northeast quarter, distant 33.00 feet East of the Southwest comer of said Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter; thence Westerly along said South line to the Southwest comer of said Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter; thence Northerly along said West line to the point of beginning. Beginning at the Southeast comer of that certain tract of land described in Book 244 of Deeds, according to the files of the Steams County Recorder; thence South 00 degrees 26 .. minutes 33 seconds East on an assumed bearing along the East line of said Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter to the Southeast comer of said Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter; thence South 89 degrees 40 minutes 37 seconds West along said South line, a distance of 119.00 feet; thence North 00 degrees 26 minutes 33 seconds West, parallel with said East line, a distance of 66.00 feet; thence North 89 degrees 40 minutes 37 seconds East, parallel with said South line, a distance of20.00 feet; thence North 34 degrees 34 minutes 05 seconds East, a distance of 120.67 feet; thence North 00 degrees 40 minutes 46 seconds East, a distance of 856.41 feet more or less to a point on the South line of that certain tract ofland described in said Book 244 of Deeds, Page 587; thence North 89 degrees 42 minutes 54 seconds East along the last described South line, a distance of 13.00 feet to the point of beginning. - - > ¡ Q Õ :: g ~ . @ Õo ;¡ IN'~ ~.. Õ ~ Õ 0 '-1 i N'~ ,., . N Î[lj Ii,!' J¡~I!I1¡f Ii; j .:t..j~ ~f' t'I "'''',j.. .'. -.. ;¡ 'ðf Š !t",:::¡; -1" i3 !' a B1 t .a.õ õiõ . __ ,¡JI ¡i" .Ii" ,1"1 ¡ , . r II "II! ,,,.' j'I' ." ¡ . .11' .:.; I d'' .1· r. Ii! ! l":J. ~~JI:; S!.'~hj.§h ~"I I ,- . ._, . "'" . h-¡ '!": ·¡'·'~.'I. I'" ·fil; ';Ij' II!!¡¡'N "JI ,.t, I...' .J." ,,,; I!.! . !~!¡' lo~1 :.I!,I¡.'1t '" i -~! 11 &I:I~":>ßh¡~õ!I'¡ I,¡~ , ' ¡!'i"~' 'I 'J' " .." . !/ z. . ~õ.....11,ªh.i ! Ii! 3 diªm¡: iUS .m ~ ~ ~i i2iSi~ ~~z:::!r;d~~ U3~~~¡¡.uå . a ~~ O.o!a.&~Þ ~~ --T"-----T- - : ~~ I I 5~z I CC;:o I ", i S1 .:: ~ e !1š 8 '" "'t;j 0 § ~ '" '" ~H ª~ U o¡! · . o. Ii ~ t ~ ~ B ~ JI J i II I ~ z I ¡i 11 t .!,I. . IQ" - t: I;: D " - õ ~~¡; ~ !'fi~ ~a .: ~I ~¡ § ~¡š ~¡¡ ~~~ :::â I I~~ ~~ a ¡g::~ '" ~~_:2¡Q - - - ~~3~¡;Hi7~ 7 U TT.. -------- ~hl U:lo~ mil 'o':;ï. .iáä¡~~Há~§ I I I I I ~~~Io~w - C'Of '"'., . Qg~ I ~~~ IIII! . ,.., ,¡ I ,.,.. . " ---~ "11 h, n_;- , ;__~ '1'1 'I' I I _ . , '0 ¡,! is I j ~I "~, , -">0., ".' ',i, ,¡¡~¡ - . !' j~,: '" -, - "I" . ~ a.. zoo I c::Sû / ~ -""¡!J. oUV'! I ~~ 0 · Utsch made a motion to recommend the Council deny the five (5) foot variance request and accept the following findings: RESOLUTION OF FINDING The request of Mark Lambert for a five (5) foot variance on the rnaximum height of a building came before the Planning Commission at a Public Hearing held on December 3,2001. The purpose of the hearing was to consider a variancè with regard to the construction of a 44 - unit apartment building. The variance request is to allow a five- foot (5') variance on the maximum height allowed, or the construction of a three story building. The property is legally described as follows: Lot 1 Block 1 Indian Hills Park Plat. St. Joseph Code of Ordinances 52.16 subd 7 (a) states, "No building hereafter erected or altered shall exceed 2 Y2 stories or shall it exceed 35 feet in height, except as hereinafter provided. In consideration of the information presented to the Planning Commission and its application to the Comprehensive Plan and Ordinances of the City of 81. Joseph, the Planning Commission makes the following fmdings: FINDING: The proposed plan is inconsistent with the following provisions: 8t. Joseph Code of Ordinances 52.8 subd a states: That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applying to the property in question as to the intended use of the property that do not apply generally to other properties in the same zoning district. The exceptional or extraordinary circumstances · must not be the result of actions taken by the petitioner. St. Joseph Code of Ordinances 52.8 subd. b: states that the literal interpretation of the provisions of this Ordinance would deprive the petitioner of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district under the terms of this Ordinance. 8t. Joseph Code of Ordinances 52.8 subd. c: states that granting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by this Ordinance to other lands in the same district. St. Joseph Code of Ordinances 52.8 subd. d states that the proposed variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property, or diminish or impair established property values within the surrounding area, or in any other respect impair the public health, safety or welfare of the residents of the City. 8t. Joseph Code of Ordinances 52.8 subd. e states that the condition or situation of a specific piece of property, or the intended use of said property, for which the variance was sought, is not of so general or recurrent a nature as to make reasonably practicable the formulation of a general regulation for such conditions or a situation. · RESOLUTION OF FINDING . The request of Mark Lambert for a PURD application requesting a special use permit came before the Planning Commission at a Public Hearing held on December 3, 2001. The purpose of the hearing is to consider a P.U.R.D. development plan to construct a 44 unit apartment building under a special use application and to consider a fifty foot variance on the size of a business sign. The proposed development is to be located on the following described property: Lot I Block I Indian Hills Park. St. Joseph Code of Ordinances 52.19 subd. 4 provides for a special use permit to develop multi family dwellings over 12 units through the PURD procedural process. St. Joseph Code of Ordinances 52.14 subd. 12( a) allow for business signs provided that the area on one side shall not exceed fifty square feet. The proposed plat has been submitted by Mark Lambert, 101 - 5th Street, Suite 910; St. Paul MN 55101. 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: St. Joseph Code of Ordinances 52.9 subd. (a) states: Will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, morals, comfort, convenience or general welfare of the neighborhood or the City. Finding: The entrance as proposed on the submitted site plan may be detrimental to public safety. St. Joseph Code of Ordinances 52.9 subd (e) states: 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. . Finding: An adequate drainage plan has not been submitted St. Joseph Code of Ordinances 52.9 subd (h) states: 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. Finding: The entrance as proposed creates a potential for traffic interference. Therefore, based on the above findings the Planning Commission recommends denial of the application. Before resubmitted a site plan the following information should be submitted: 1. The road access should be placed as in accordance to the Developer's Agreement, allowing for one common entrance. 2. A revised and complete drainage plan 3. A complete curb and gutter plan 4. Plans for fencing Utsch stated the Commission needs to address the variance request for the maximum height of the building. Rassier made a motion to recommend the Council approve the five (5) foot variance as requested to allow for a 40 foot, 3 story apartment building. The motion was seconded by Deutz, Ayes: Rassier, Deutz Nays: Utsch, Kalinowski, Lesnick, Schneider, Graeve, Deutz Motion Fails 2:5:0 . Extract of the January 7, 2002 Planning Conunission Meeting Mark Lambert, PURD and Variance Page I of5 ~. Public Hearing, Mark Lambert, Variance request: Chair Utsch called the hearing to order at 7:20 PM and stated the purpose of the hearing is to consider a variance request with regard to the construction of a 44 - unit apartment building. The variance request is to allow a five-foot (5') variance on the maximum height allowed, or the construction of a three story building. The property is legally described as follows: Lot I Block I Indian Hills Park Plat. St. Joseph Code of Ordinances 52.16 subd 7 (a) states, ''No building hereafter erected or altered shall exceed 2 1Iz stories or shall it exceed 35 feet in height, except as hereinafter provided. The proposed plat has been submitted by Mark Lambert, 101 - 5th Street, Suite 910, St. Paul MN 5510I. Utsch stated the Planning Commission at the Decernber 3,2001 meeting conducted a public hearing to consider a PURD Application issuing a special use permit to construct a 44 unit apartment building. During the public hearing it was noted that the building would exceed the maximum height of 35 feet and the property owner would need to make application for a variance. Therefore, this hearing is considering the same plan submitted on December 3, 200 I. The testimony taken at this time must be related to the height variance as the Planning Commission closed the public hearing on the PURD Application on December 3, 200I. Mark Lambert spoke on his own behalf. He stated that he is proposing to construct a 44 unit apartment building on Lot 1 Block 1 Indian Hills Plat. Lambert stated it is his opinion that the building is attractive and will be a nice addition to St. Joseph. The apartment unit will provide affordable housing for future residents of St. Joseph. As stated at the public hearing on December 3,2001, the site plan includes a caretaker unit in addition to the 44 unit apartment complex. ,. Lambert stated that the elevator shaft proposed for the building needs the height of 40 inches, thus requiring a variance. Further, Lambert stated it is his opinion that ifhe would birm the building, not exceeding the 35 feet in height from the grade, he could construct the proposed building without a variance. City Attorney John Scherer stated that according to the St. Joseph Code of Ordinances, the height is based on the average grade of the property. Lambert expressed frustration with his site plan approval as in his opinion the project is being jeopardized by the proposed road between Lots 1 and 2, Block I of Indian Hills Park Plat. Lambert re-iterated that the proposed building will assist the City with affordable housing and provide for senior housing. He assured the Planning Commission that he is planning a quality building that meets the needs of 81. Joseph. At this time Chair Utsch opened the floor for comments and/or questions. Chris Vance of 515 Fir Street East questioned the market being sought by Mr. Lambert. He questioned if the building is being constructed to include seniors why does it not include a community room or any gathering spaces. Vance stated it is his opinion that the outside appearance of a building does not determine the quality of building being proposed. Vance also questioned if the Planning Commission is going to require Mr. Lambert to construct a fence around the property to serve as a buffer. He further stated that he had a conversation with Mr. Lambert regarding the fence at which time Lambert stated he would install a fence conditionally. Vance stated that in his opinion a fence is necessary to limit the shining oflights into the existing homes on Fir Street. Matt Chouinard of 522 Fir Street East questioned what action needs to be taken to assure that fencing would be a requirement of the project. Chouinard stated that he concurs with Vance that fencing is crucial for the existing neighborhood. Without fencing the lighting from the proposed building could become a nuisance. Mel Butkowski of 502 Fir Street East stated that when he purchased his property he did not know that apartment buildings were being proposed adjacent to his property. Butkowski stated that based on the plans submitted, the west side of the building will extend higher than the existing homes on Fir Street East. It is his opinion that the . apartment building will eliminate the view from the existing homes and when he purchased his home the Extract of the January 7, 2002 Planning Commission Meeting Mark Lambert, PURD and Variance Page 2 of 5 advertisement stated "a lot with a view". Butkowski stated that he does not want to look out his window and see an · apartment building. Carol Butkowski of 502 Fir Street East requested the City review the procedure used when mailing notices to property owners of a rezoning, special use or variance request. She stated that they were in the process of building their home when the property owned by Mr. Lambert was rezoned from Highway Business to Multiple Family. The notice was mailed to the builder and he did not forward the infonnation. Joel Heim of606 Fir Street East stated that he too was unaware the property in question was rezoned from commercial to multiple family. Heim stated the he would prefer a commercial development over a 44-unit apartment complex. Lambert stated that he was willing to meet with the neighborhood to try and reach a compromise but did not feel they were interested in working together. He further stated that the building will be terraced into the hill and the plan submitted has taken a unique parcel of property with development constraints and turned it into affordable housing. Utsch closed the public hearing at 7:40 PM City Engineer Amy Schaefer presented the Council with the following information regarding the proposed apartment complex: ../ The elevation of the proposed apartment complex is 1103 and the existing homes at Fir Street East and 5th Avenue SE are at 1130. Therefore, the first homes along Fir Street and 5th Avenue will sit below the elevation of the apartment complex. ../ The grading plan submitted is incomplete and a portion of the drainage is on property not owned by Mr. Lambert. ../ The east / west road between lots 1 and 2 have not been established ../ The site plan provided includes an access for Lot 2 which is not part of the proposed development. · ../ Curb and gutter plans are incomplete ../ The proposed northerly access presents a potential safety issue as the entrance is at the top of a crest thereby limiting visibility. Utsch stated it is his opinion that the building should be lowered approximately ten (10) feet and the access at the top of the hill should be moved south with one access serving both properties. Schneider questioned whether or not the plan submitted is not realistic for the site proposed. Schneider further stated that sometimes a plan does not fit a specific parcel and the property in question has many constraint. He questioned Lambert if he wasn't aware of the constraints before he purchased the property. Lambert stated that he was aware of the property constraints but believes the site plan submitted can be modified to meet the City requirements. While he could construct four buildings on the site, it is more economical to construct one. It is for this reason that the housing is affordable. The lower unit cost fOI constructing one building is passed on to the consumer. As far as lowering the building, Lambert stated that it is cost prohibitive to lower the building significantly but he will review the plan. Rather than lower the building Lambert stated that he would be willing to resign the roof line, lowering the building. Graeve questioned whether or not the building could be moved further into the hill west and south. Lambert responded the building could be moved some but it would not be enough to make a significant difference in the height. Deutz questioned the order in which the Planning Commission should consider the requests of Lambert. Scherer responded that it does not make a difference if the Commission address the variance first or the PURD application. When making a decision the Commission must determine if the requests meets the standards as outlined in the St. Joseph Code of Ordinances. Scherer stated that while the plan can be modified to make some adjustments, he would caution the Planning Commission from approving the plan contingent upon a modified plan. The Commission as well as the residents should have the opportunity to review the revised plans. Scherer recommended the · Extract of the January 7, 2002 Planning Commission Meeting Mark Lambert, PURD and Variance Page 3 of 5 · Commission review the material that was presented at this time and make a decision based on the submitted material. Scherer questioned whether the Fire Department has had an opportunity to review the plan. From reviewing the elevations their may be a concern that the frre trucks cannot access the entire building. The Commission agreed to refer this matter to the fire department. Schaefer discussed the northern access with the Planning Commission. Schaefer stated that the access submitted on the plan should minimally be moved south 60 feet. Schaefer presented the Commission with factual information on stopping/sight distance (the speed the car is traveling and how fast they will be able to stop) as driving south, down the hill. Based on stopping distances a car traveling 45 mph would end 100 feet further south than the access provided on the proposed site plan. Larnbert responded that the sewer lines have already been installed and if the road is moved too far south the sewer lines will have to be relocated. Utsch stated that he has had the opportunity to review the Developer's Agreement regarding the Indian Hills Park Plat and the City does have the opportunity to require one common access for both lots I and 2 Block One Indian Hills Park Plat. Lesnick concurred with Utsch and stated that she believes that safety is a major concern and if the access is moved to where the Planning Commission originally planned, safety would not be jeopardized. Rassier stated that he believes the road should also be installed as originally requested by the Planning Commission, even if the City has to pay for a portion of the road. Utsch clarified that if the access to Lambert's property is not a public road the City would not have any liability to pay for the construction of such. Upon being questioned for the recommendation of the City Engineer, Schaefer responded that it is her recommendation that the plan based on the following: 1) potential safety hazard of the proposed ingress/egress to the site; 2) insufficient grading plan; 3) insufficient curb and gutter plans; 4) provide a plan that indicates a buffer. · Rassier made a motion to recommend the City Council approve the PURD Application granting a special use permit to allow the construction of a 44-unit apartment complex. The MOTION DIED FOR A LACK OF A SECOND. Utsch made a motion to recommend the Council adopt the following findings; recommending denial of the of the PURD Application requesting a special use permit to construct a 44-unit apartment complex. The motion was seconded by Lesnick. RESOLUTION OF FINDING The request of Mark Lambert for a PURD application requesting a special use permit came before the Planning Commission at a Public Hearing held on December 3, 200I. The purpose of the hearing is to consider a P.U.R.D. development plan to construct a 44 unit apartment building under a special use application and to consider a frfty foot variance on the size of a business sigu. The proposed development is to be located on the following described property: Lot I Block I Indian Hills Park. St. Joseph Code of Ordinances 52.19 subd. 4 provides for a special use permit to develop multi family dwellings over 12 units through the PURD procedural process. St. Joseph Code of Ordinances 52.14 subd. 12( a) allow for business signs provided that the area on one side shall not exceed fifty square feet. The proposed plat has been submitted by Mark Lambert, 101- 5th Street, Suite 910; St. Paul MN 55101. In consideration of the information presented to the Planning Commission and its application to the Comprehensive Plan and Ordinances of the City ofSt. Joseph, the Planning Commission makes the following [mdings: · St. Joseph Code of Ordinances 52.9 subd. (a) states: Will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, morals, comfort, convenience or general welfare of the neighborhood or the City. Extract of the January 7, 2002 Planning Commission Meeting Mark Lambert, PURD and Variance Page 4 of 5 Finding: The entrance as proposed on tlte submitted site plan may be detrimental to public · safety. St. Joseph Code of Ordinances 52.9 subd ( e) states: 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. Finding: An adequate drainage plan has not been submitted St. Joseph Code of Ordinances 52.9 subd (h) states: 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. Finding: The entrance as proposed creates a potentialfor traffic interference. Therefore, based on the above fmdings the Planning Commission recommends denial of the application. Before resubmitted a site plan the following information should be submitted: 1. The road access should be placed as in accordance to the Developer's Agreement, allowing for one common entrance. 2. A revised and complete drainage plan 3. A complete curb and gutter plan 4. Plans for fencing Utsch stated the Commission needs to address the variance request for the maximum height of the building. Rassier made a motion to recommend the Council approve the five (5) foot variance as requested to allow for a 40 foot, 3 story apartment building. The motion was seconded by Deutz, Ayes: Rassier, Deutz · Nays: Utsch, Kalinowski, Lesnick, Schneider, Graeve, Deutz Motion Fails 2:5:0 Utsch made a motion to recommend the Council deny the five (5) foot variance request and accept the following findings: RESOLUTION OF FINDING The request of Mark Lambert for a fIve (5) foot variance on the maximum height of a building came before the Planning Commission at a Public Hearing held on December 3, 2001. The purpose of the hearing was to consider a variance with regard to the construction of a 44 - unit apartment building. The variance request is to allow a fIve- foot (5 ') variance on the maximum height allowed, or the construction of a three story building. The property is legally described as follows: Lot I Block I Indian Hills Park Plat. St. Joseph Code of Ordinances 52.16 subd 7 (a) states, "No building hereafter erected or altered shall exceed 2 ~ stories or shall it exceed 35 feet in height, except as hereinafter provided. 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 fmdings: · Extract of the January 7, 2002 Planning Commission Meeting Mark Lambert, PURD and Variance Page 5 of5 FINDING: The proposed plan is inconsistent with the following provisions: · 51. Joseph Code of Ordinances 52.8 subd a states: That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applying to the property in question as to the intended use of the property that do not apply generally to other properties in the same zoning district. The exceptional or extraordinary circumstances must not be the result of actions taken by the petitioner. 5t. Joseph Code of Ordinances 52.8 subd. b: states that the literal interpretation of the provisions of this Ordinance would deprive the petitioner of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district under the terms of this Ordinance. 5t. Joseph Code of Ordinances 52.8 subd. c: states that granting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by this Ordinance to other lands in the same district. St. Joseph Code of Ordinances 52.8 subd. d states that the proposed variance will not impair an adequate supply oflight and air to adjacent property, or diminish or impair established property values within the surrounding area, or in any other respect impair the public health, safety or welfare of the residents of the City. St. Joseph Code of Ordinances 52.8 subd. e states that the condition or situation of a specific piece of property, or the intended use of said property, for which the variance was sought, is not of so general or recurrent a nature as to make reasonably practicable the formulation of a general regulation for such conditions or a situation. · Utsch stated the Commission needs to address the variance request of Mark Lambert. The public hearing on December 3, 2001 also considered a fifty (50) variance on the size of a sign to allow a temporary leasing sign. City Attorney Scherer stated that rather than granting a variance on the size of a sign, the Council should consider granting an extension of the maximum days a temporary sign can be displayed. Deutz made a motion to recommend the Council allow Mr. Lambert to display a temporary sign stating "Now Leasing" for a period oftwelve months, subject to extension. The sign cannot exceed 50 feet. The motion was seconded by Lesnick and passed unanimously. · Extract of the December 3, 2001 Planning Commission Meeting Public Hearing, Mark Lambert, 44 Unit Apartment Complex Page 1 of3 Mark Lambert. Proposed 44 Unit Apartment Complex, PURD Hearing: Chair Utsch opened the hearing and stated · the purpose of the hearing is to consider a P.U.R.D. development plan to construct a forty four (44) unit apartment building under a special use application and to consider a fifty (50) foot variance on the size of a business sign. The proposed development is to be located on the following described property: Lot 1 Block I Indian Hills Park. St. Joseph Code of Ordinances 52.19 subd. 4 provides for a special use permit to develop multi family dwellings over 12 units through the PURD procedural process. St. Joseph Code of Ordinances 52.14 subd. 12(a) allow for business signs provided that the area on one side shall not exceed fifty square feet. The proposed PURD application has been submitted by Mark Lambert, 101 - 5th Street, Suite 910; St. Paul MN 55101. Mark Lambert spoke on his own behalf. Lambert stated he plans to construct a 44 unit apartment building and a care taker unit. The apartments will be considered high end market rate, three stories in height - complete with elevators. The building will be three stories high. The majority of the units in the proposed apartment complex are one bedroom units with sorne two and three bedroom units. Lambert stated that he understands the City has an option to construct a road between Lot I and Lot 2 of Block 2 and his site plan provides for such. However, the site plan submitted does not use that access. Rather, an ingress/egress has been provided in the north-east corner of Lot One. Lambert stated the elevations of the land make the site plan difficult to plan. Therefore, he believes he has designed the best plan based on the characteristics of the land. Chair Utsch opened the floor for questions and comments. · Mel Butkowski of 502 Fir Street East stated that he is against the proposed apartment complex as it abuts a residential neighborhood. He further stated that when he moved into his home the property proposed for development was zoned Commercial and questioned when the zoning classification was changed and if the property owners should have been notified. Weyrens stated that the property was rezoned in June or July of2001 from Commercial to R3, Multiple Family. All property owners within 350 feet of a proposed zoning change are mailed a notice. However, when homes are under construction, the builder is typically listed as the property owner and that is whom the notice is mailed to. Lambert responded that the proposed building will be terraced into the hillside with the roof line extending approximately five to ten feet above the hill. The grade difference is significant and the residential neighborhood should not notice the impact from the apartment building. The proposed building will provide upper end housing, not student housing. Allan Gwost of 407 Gumtree Street East stated he was opposed to the proposed 44 unit apartment complex as it will detract from the view of the existing homes and create additional traffic that could create a public safety issue. Lambert responded that under the present zoning classification he could construct three 12 unit apartment buildings without approval trom the Planning Commission or City Council. Aesthetically one unit may fit into the neighborhood better than three units. As far as the traffic concerns, the traffic will not go north through the housing development, rather it will go south to County Road 75. Utsch stated that when the Planning Commission reviewed the preliminary plat for Indian Hills Park, one access was provided and that was located between Lots I' and 2. The City is trying to limit the number of accesses to Northland Drive as it s a primary street and safety is a major concem. With this in mind, the City has already denied a property owner the right to access Northland Drive. Finally, in regard to the rezoning of the property in question, a public hearing on this matter was conducted in June. City Attorney John Scherer stated that the City is working on alternative transportation plans for the Northland area. One possibility is to re-open 1 sl Avenue NE near the feed mill. Opening this road would alleviate some traffic through · the Northland Addition. Utsch stated that the Council and Planning Commission will be reviewing this matter on December 17, 2001. Extract of the December 3, 2001 Planning Commission Meeting Public Hearing, Mark Lambert, 44 Unit Apartment Complex Page 2 of3 Chris Vance of 516 Fir Street East stated objection to the proposed apartment complex. He stated that \vhile the property O\vner states the building is not intended to provide student housing it has the appearance of such. In fact, · the proposed building looks similar to a hotel. Vance questioned why the site plan does not include any playground equipment. It is his opinion that if families were looking to rent an apartment they would want some kind of playground equipment. Lambert responded that he is willing to install playground equipment for the tenants but will wait to see the ages of the tenants and plan the equipment accordingly. Vance further questioned if any screening is included in the site plan. Lambert responded that he will consider some type of screening if that is what the neighborhood is requesting. Tim Muske of 506 Fir Street East questioned the time schedule for the proposed project. Lambert responded that he plans to complete the dirt work in April/May with framing to begin sometime in May. If everything goes well the completion date should be sometime in August. Muske expressed concern for the safety of the neighborhood children during construction. Children are drawn natural1y to construction work and requested that Lambert provide some type of fencing during the construction. Matt Chouinard of 522 Fir Street East expressed concern regarding the proposed ingress/egress and requested that the location be reconsidered. Randy Marchand of617 - 5th Avenue HE stated objection to the proposed apartment complex. Marchand stated he is concerned with the amount of traffic that will be produced by the apartment complex. The intersection at Northland Drive and County Road 75 is already a hazard and a signal light should be installed to help move traffic in a safe manner. Marchand is also concerned that the proposed apartment complex will be occupied with students and he does not want to deal with issues related to student rental property. Joel Heinen of 606 Fir Street East questioned the rezoning of the property. Before he built his home he checked the zoning of the surrounding property and it was either residential or commercial. Heinen questioned the process used · for rezoning the property in question. Heinen further stated that if apartments are constructed he would rather see 36 units than 44. Weyrens reiterated that the rezoning hearing was conducted in June of 2001 and if a property was under construction at that time, the hearing notice was mailed to the builder. Many times the City does not know who the owner of the home is until the home is occupied. It is up to the builder to notify their customer of any proposed land use changes. City Attorney John Scherer stated that the height of the building will need to be verified. If the building exceeds 35 feet a variance will need to be considered, which will require a public hearing and property owner notification. Scherer further discussed the common access referred to by the Planning Commission. When the Council approved the Developer's Agreement for the Indian Hills Plat, it included a provision whereby the City would have to pay for the road between Lots 1 and Lot 2 unless the road is needed for the development of the adjoining lots. The City has one year to decided to construct the road and one additional year to build the road. The reason for the language in the Developer's Agreement is that before a property owner can be assessed the City must be able to show increased value to the property being assessed. It is questionable whether or not it would add value as the property already was assessed for Northland Drive. There being no further comments or questions Utsch closed the public hearing at 9:50 PM. Deutz questioned Lambert if he is willing to provide screening acceptable to the neighborhood, and ifhe is willing to install playground equipment. As far as the access, Deutz stated that in reviewing the elevations the building could be moved further west, which would lower the building and allow for use of the intended ingress/egress between Lots I and 2. Lambert responded that he is willing to screen the property and would prefer fencing if the neighbors request such. As far as playground equipment, he will not purchase equipment until he knows what market he has secured for tenants. Additionally, Lambert stated he was not sure the building could be moved as the elevations of the property make the site difficult to develop. · Extract of the December 3, 2001 Planning Commission Meeting Public Hearing, Mark Lambert, 44 Unit Apartment Complex Page 3 00 . Schneider questioned the proposed ingress/egress and stated it was his understanding that the property would only be allowed one common ingress/egress to Northland Drive. The decision was made being mindful of public safety issues. Also, as stated earlier the City has already denied one property owner the right to access to Northland Drive. Scherer requested that the City Engineer prepare a traffic study that will assess the impact of the proposed ingress/egress. Utsch stated that it is his understanding the following issues need to be resolved before a decision can be made: I. Safety of the proposed ingress/egress 2. Can the property be required to use one common ingress/egress? 3. Can the developer move the building to the west addressing some of the concerns of the adjoining neighborhood? 4. City Staff should review the Ordinance reqarding maximum height and schedule a public hearing as necessary. Utsch will meet with the City Engineer, City Attorney and City Administrator to review the above concerns and report back at the next Planning Commission meeting. The Commission agreed that they would consider this matter on December 19, 2001 if all the requested information is available. Deutz made a motion to table the PURD application of Mark Lambert to January 7, 2001; seconded by Rassier and passed unanimonsly by those present. . . 1 SUMMIT MANAGEMENT, LLC. 101 East Fifth Street, Suite 910 . St. Paul, Minnesota 55101-1808 (651) 224-4741 (651) 223-5318 (fax) Mark W. Lambert, President Direct Dial (651) 223-5493 January 14, 2002 Mayor and City Councillors City of 8t. Joseph, MN 56374 Re: PURD - The Bluffs of 8t. Joseph Dear Mayor and Members of the City Council of 8t. Joseph: Enclosed please find 13 copies of a revised site plan for the proposed development. Pursuant to the Planning Commission recommendations, I have made some significant revisions to the site plan: 1) reduced the roof pitch from 5/12 to 4/12 thereby reducing the overall building height by 2 feet (I will still need a 3 foot variance for the 38 foot / 3 story building) ; . 2) lowered the building pad elevations by another 3 feet (from 11 03 I to 11 00 I); 3) moved the access road into the apartments approximately 70 feet further south to a location rated for approximately 40 mph traffic just above the newly installed water and sewer lines and at a location which is acceptable to the City Engineer; 4) created a 20' level access area around the building for fire protection purposes in response to Fire Chief Dave Theisen's request; 5) depicted the storm water pond and piping in response to the City Engineer's request; I 6) added a 4 foot chain link fence along the North property line in response to the neighbor's request. I believe these changes represent a significant compromise to the Planning Commission and neighborhood concerns regarding the overall appearance of the building and location of the access driveway. I have deleted any notations regarding the access to Lot 2, thereby leaving that issue for future discussion. . ...."':#. . For planning purposes, I would again request that the issue of the Northland east/west public road be resolved as part of this approval process. If you have any additional questions, please feel free to contact me at your convenience. Very Truly Yours, SUMMIT MANAGEMENT, LLC. ~h/~- Mark W. Lambert Enclosure . I . St. Joseph Volunteer Fire Department ST. JOSEPH, MINNESOTA 56374 Office of the Chief To: St. Joseph City Council and Planning Commission I have reviewed per your request, Mr. Lambert's proposed plans for Indian Hill. These apartments would be a great addition to St. Joseph. However I have one major concern. After reviewing the elevations on the south side of the apartments, it has a very steep or 3 to 1 grade. It would make that side of the building inaccessible to fire department aerial ladder trucks. This would slow the process of rescue from the upper levels of the building. My suggestion would be to possibly remove fill form the north side of the building and . lowering grade to make to make it more accessible should the need happen. David A. Theisen, Fire Chief 1-11-2002 ~'~A~ : 2 / .i ,¿',' . CITY OF ST. JOSEPH 25 College A venue North . PO Box 668 St. Joseph, MN 56374 320-363-7201 / . DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION .. \ \ ) Applicant: sunnnit Management, Inc. Owner: M. W. Lambert Revocable ,Trust ! Address: 101 E. Fifth Stret, #910 Address: / - J St. Paul, MN 55101 Telephone (W): (651) 223-5493 Telephone (H): ·Conditional Use Permit Vacation of ROW/Easements X Variance Non-conforming Use Permit Planned Unit Development Rezoning X Sign 100 sq. ft. total X PURD per 52.18 subd. 4 Subdivision TOTAL FEE $ 500.00 Date fee received Date application received . PETITIONER MUST PROVIDE THE FOllOWING · A list and mailing labels of all property 'owners within 350 feet of the boundaries of the property. (This information must be obtained from the Stearns County Auditors Office) · Twenty-one full size folded copies of detail site plans. · Paym~mt of all associated fees must be made in full when application is made. · Copy of full legal description. · Narrat.ivßpfproject scope. This application must be completed in full and be typewritten or clearly printed and must be accompanied by all information and plans required by applicable City Ordinance proVisions. Before filing this application, you should confer with the Planning Department to determine the specific ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application. A determination of completeness of the application shall be made within ten business days of the application submittal. A written notice of application deficiencies shall be mailed to the applicånt within ten business days of application. This is to certify that I am making application for the described action by the City and that lam responsible for all City requirements with regard to this request. This application should be processed in my name and I am the party whom the City should contact regar.ding any matter pertaining to this application. I have attached a copy of proof of ownership (either copy of Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title, Abstract of :Title or purchase agreement), or I am the authorized person to make this application and the fee owner has also signed this application. . ~;7~/- ..~~- ~ß~Ä/ "'Signature of Applicánt .. . Dare ·~r~;~~--· /I/9/ð/ Signature of Fee 6wner· . .., Date ' , . I· This section to be completed by City Staff I PROJECT NAME: " +- LOCATION: xxx Nort i LEGAL DESCRIPTION: I ( ( Lot 1, Block 1, Indian Hills Park, Stearns Count, MN LOT SIZE: 3.7 acres/161,172 square feet f PRESENT ZONING: R-3 REQUESTED ZONING: R-3 REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION: SETBACK REQUEST: REASONS FOR REQUEST: AREA REQUIRED BY REQUESTED BY VARIANCE . ORDINANCE PETITIONER REQUESTED F Front Yard 35' 35' N'/~ide Yard 42' 20' south side 22' south side N Rear Yard 40'- 40' Open Yard Parking Accessory Bldg Size Lot Coverage ¡..:j',::'; (1'h;-. ? 1/? . :1 !":;-.(')r; es 0.5 stories STAFF NOTES: . · PURD SUBMISSION REQUIREl\1ENTS "THE BLUFFS" OF ST. JOSEPH NOVErvfBER 8, 2001 52.12, Subd. 4a): . Vicinity Map - See Plans 52.12, Subd. 4b): Not Applicable 52.12, Subd. 4c): Applicant proposes to construct a 44 unit market rate multifamily apartment building, together with a rree standing caretaker unit. The project will consist of 17 - 1 bedroom units, 24 - 2 bedroom units, 3 - 3 bedroom units, and a caretaker patio home. There are 24 garages and over 100 combined parking spaces. Each unit is distinctive in quality and nature in that some will have balconies,. some will· have washer and dryers, and some units will be larger than others. We estimate the occupancy of the building to be about 60 residents and approximately 60 vehicles for those residents. The building will be constructed steel siding, pitched roof, and with extra landscaping details for art overall· attractive appearance. The caretaker unit is provided on-site for additional security and improved management. · 52.12, Subd. 4d): Construction will begin in early 2002. 52.12, Subd 5e}: This PURD is in the public's interest in that a 44 unit building is more economical to construct, more affordable to its residents to operate, and more aesthetically pleasing, than say 4 - 11 unit buildings (which would be allowed under existing zoning). · r 4 ~ ~ ~ ~ i , inw-N I /' I <z Þ: , !t!~~z /' /. t t- ,~.,. e::-UN I ~~¡,¡¡:: ZL'eOL 3 liLt ,BODOO S : I I ) 0 ~ NOll:>3S t I L 3N V I L MS 3I..J11 1 SV3 -{._._ - - _., .__. _..... _., u___... .....__.. _. _..... __. .... ......_.._.... .....n..:. / ___---- .,...............--....nn-...----...·, r OI'IL" . ., r...·............._..·..............,~ ~D·L££ i: 1. .. :: . I :..\~" . . , / ¡ CI ..',.... ~ lN31^13SV3 ! : ;' : ì . 1 ~i t\ 3~Vt~,v'èla : ¡ ¡ I ' C' I \ I , ¡ '\ " , . I I' I : , : ~ : , I .-----.-----, , I It' f , I I I I I It: : I I I I . ~ I ~ ~. : I ! I : : ! \ I I : : : /. : , : : : 'I' I ' , 'I .."......... .........-.... I WI' I.' \' I ' , I I ··T········-···..·-······· I I I .._ ; I 'I 1 :r : : :g : O~ O~, ¡ I : I 0 t \ ~:~ .: /" i t ~ I } I ,10 en, Q , \ -" I .. 1- &0 I _ I I I Oil, I - I It) , , % i I ~¡ H2 rr'J! g .:-- i \ ~, I en I II" ; : ~ -' I 0 , : , () ¡ I 10:: ! : -'< . I I I I W' I Z " . , II: III) I I \ U1:,'" t : _, en : >- , : I '''' , 'I." I") ,<Z . 'ft' 0 ' · : '" : I ,.: : !l:æ I ' .- .....""..\ .,...... II ......, A;,.. ~ ,., -._. " : Q I , - ,: I ç- .-' ", " . 'Is ~ I ' ø.. \ ~. ¡ i / ,.... ..... ¡ ;: ~ I ~ I .AI I oot ¡ a I :', . G I- ~ ~ I -. I......· I .... I I " \ ."" 91';":3 ,,2:t,ID.IO N ·....,,,..../....~1 Šz 1-' Q' lor! \ . ..: "'" I " : .,-............................................,.. ,.:!, 0 <" I ~ ¡:. I Y + 1·..'ëië'ëi9·~:; t-----.----=r~ ¡.;. 1111 0 \ fI\. I I ....- ,. ,/ r~""··"-··_··""··"_·_·""··""···"""···"·····"···: ).. u ~ ~ I ...... \ .~ I ./ \1)." or' ,.¡. I r L-- !. -:- _ I- III ... ... \ ' i ~lts /. 9 I r::.... I'~ D '. " - I ' èi <" I;"'"" : ~ 7~ 0 II( \, i ~ : cr ct: H ~ .. ".r " Q' iii: /_ I ..... 1:2~. ...J OJ ¡ tt tt' ¡ ~ ,... I ~~ < I ~ :..... \>" 10 : I I. '0 loot : . It I Hi.. \ t""ù ¿ : / ~ I C,) ¡ 1... ¡ i 0\ 'ó ø( , ¡ 0 I H I ~ I i '&:J If! 1 ¡ /ã I > I 1;..... i I DC I I .:" I I lOa : : i '("" :; I .- : I .... . I I : rD ;z ""', 1 , ... t I :.,.... Y.I .." I . I w'" I . U I . t I I u:.... I C) I :: ,"': : n ¡ I ~ .-¡i I I is ! ~ W ! ..- I I C ~IIJ i Iš~ : < I W i I o¥ ! ~ ~ t ¡ o¥ "N ! ~ I ~ / , . I :=J I I- r.. ' I : I =. . I ~~ ~~ 0· I ~$ ¡ ~ IN ¡:: i I II.! ..q- '1::< < 1 ,< ./. .-... I -J N I ~ ~ <,,". ¡ A ¡ , i' ,.., . z, .~~ :1------------ I o~ ~" '" ." ~~ ".o~ I :s I 0 :0:<5 v.~ I ...., ". I C --1, ~ I )-0 , -. :' i' ....: >- c..:" I,t....· "10\ ,>- 09 : II) ~ l- I . I' ""'" I .....< ~J- ....;> I . ....~ I I I· I to: - I- I<-;¡ . '(' I I u..:! . : 0 I l- I I· I· .'-':""1'- ~ d~~::I 11)1- 0, I I 101- r : :!: I cr' ~ '0...10 "¡.... I I ... ::I \>~! ¡ .. ::I '10 . ¡ ..... I 0 I I 't f. ',t I co \, 2 -d. \.... L,...... '(Sf' Z ¡ \ j 90'ltC ...í.f: tt t:t' I ¡__._._.....m..L.....5!~..I....~.....J '~'-T-' ' - -------- - ~ 0 I o I ¡ 0 ... I II~~·+'ON~·IH.L~ON-·T >--; ·_·--·ër::~:·~·3^~~a·-aNV'~:u:lÒN '3":.00 ',;(.~~'~~ : .--. ~ >-,-' I . ~ 0 t ---, -------- .... I I r ï r··.. -....- -..-. .-...-.. šõ~¿¡:~--·_·..-·.. .......--..... ..... .......--. -£' t:šËii ·..··r ..~.. --ëïr' --.... i I . I I I 0 I I I 0\ ! ' "" ¡, I . I Q L wI-: ' I \ I: - CI~ . I I' !. . <' . < ! . ~, , } Z . I I I ..:-:.---------- I ~., I g< 0: I ~ ....., I"" <re, I ., I 0 I I w_: I' I \)..- i ¿; í I 1-1' 1 (f.) ¡. -::: ': I Z I 4J I' f; 09 : I w· ~ I I -;::::. ~.-! 0 , c: I ..... Ie" I I-- 1....1 ------------ ¡ ..- + It! \f\ I ¡ / t:) ( I C/)\ I' -". ~ I ! Q; I· !. '~t.. ,\ N . a¡ b ~" : N ~ tr! j IS! I L.... I,...J IC-¡ ~..J . I- II: :; : CD ' I I ~ - r, lID ...... I' 'It U - , I . ~ I" ._ . N < ., . 0 I ------------ !'It Þ") . 0 ¡ f W l- I I '~A 0 I cr¡ ,I VJ . U I : v# ~ -- N : I ' «,.,,- I I' en : I CIJIO ~ I· U) : 10 : f 0 I I: z :' VJ 00( I . I 1"'\ : I. I -Z. ...J I l 1-.:1 ! . ¡ D~ I Os I :E . , I- In J ------.........,..---: I.:' Wr'1:E!J~ I 4. :. '"7." : I f-IOW 11:11) . / \ t Dr.: I ' >- en I- ~ I" / ~ ~ I v,' I .. (f)-If) In --' " U ....' I ~! I z >- >- Z5 >- .,,( Or: \T I I Q (f):E1f) .~ , I , " I I- ;:¡ :z: ....', -J In p.:..o ì '. i·····.. I « t:>I-W ~o .-- ,ID : : \ I- Z 00( I- II) ~ " :z. i i \ t· I Z ïr 0 ~ I" C " : :! I, I !!! c( z 5 >- N " \ :' SL"9£:2:: i· D: W « 123: t .... ,.. "1"\' ., ~o Lrr . ..___..________....____n.___.......__..... j I 0 ID, \ 0::0 _. ."' ..., 11 .. , \.... ........................... .... ............. r--t'-.........-.--- '-"' .....N .....:~"::'.. -~·M':ooÑ-·"".:-·_·...:· "'" . OL NOI!:>3!> t/L3N ý/IMS 3N11lS3M ,......\{ ,. " i? ~ffi8 JMrJY' . , '" "", " ::1 - f- ~ .., ~ ',."," I \ Q/·C'!~ AI. ..71 .11_nn N ..,.. D:. ~'>- ... ""0'1 ..... '-'- .. ....'" '. ..... . . ..... . .', .. N . I . \ P _ qpJR_.8111 1 II J:) II J t:r: Zo ::JO o r:æ º 00 Ow æIÜ 0<') w, 1Ü<fJ -W 'u ú) <fJ« I- æ <n WO- Z " U<fJ « u..J O-~ >:: ~'----- ----- ----- IU ~C _____ _____ _____ :----. _____ ~ ~§ 3/\/210 ONt77 -L 2ION~_ _____ _ o Zr: u..J 00 æ 00 wæ o \.J ú) '1lw z ~ .m ~ _ ,>n« " :;}. ~~ .-.~ - - ---------- - - ---------- - , æ I- 5ú! « '" c~ . ð ~ « ,~ ... . a·, : -'wt: _ _ _ « ·Z uDo _ _ ~ ~ _ -/ .1 / : / / I / ?-- if,' /, I : I / I , / , /, -- 0 / --~ J I f~ Oð~ I . 3 .. ,. / 8 ¡ I "3 » ~9 " / / ' / ~ L - , ~5> F~' ~ · ; ~~~, / o;z: . , - - cw~ - - .~. ;;VllJ.IIWt I- . ' ~~. 3«11.. wil..l- I ,<~ w ' ¡¡: in _ / ~ ~ ~' , ~,~ ~ ;, I ~(~ 0" > ~ '" / . ~ .,.....- Q) 2: / I / ill I' ~ / ~ / 8 / ~ ~ I / , ~ ~ ' æ Z / U æ ;z: 0 / 0 N :r U ~ , . N 3 't' . / , = U, iJ oc{ U, , w c < ' / , æ Wo .. I , ~ ~ 'W~~ ./ 0 N W, ' -I «W)Z. N U ,1I)r:QZ -I ;z: _ '::11-0 / . . '7 W -I;Z:;z:u~ II)w ..... _~ ~ U> I- " «iõll)w..... r W- W I- II)ZU "/ lit II..~ 0 ~. WWWZoo II) U '11.. 0 U æ -I ' ,.a m ,.Qo <aux I' / ': E~ ~ M~al- øimfu~m~ ..Q ð :;;~n. ~ "c~,. / ~'øO~~~~ ~u~~m~w 'II..~Wo...3oc{WW ·o...wU æll)¥ W OLO-Z ææO WI- . . ~S~æoWwuuo~tm-lll)l-~ L - - " " - '- - - - - I -IUII)~zt~~~II)«~Gm"fuw ~)::I ~æll..uuæuz II)~OO l-æooiõUW o~OIl..WO W ' ~o."' '~.wa~uuu~~~ ' .. .u~>-.o. -w>- au~_;¡: ~ ··ï 03~'UU~'. w> ~:roc{)1I.. " ~wO«,. .~m.", · "",Um , , 'r III . .~..,."'~_ . . -=!:!~-- - , ---------- - , ,,,..... m_ ---------- - - ---------- - , ---------- - - - . '. ¡ L . ( " J 1 u 9 N , . , I'" P . I . 1 P ~ , , , .. J P Jg ~ . . .. J. . I. . . . II J:> fi J . - . - 1 L . . - t:rtQJ ~6¡)ouo:J1ll ~O--60-U :(IJuOld 0 N Z. Z. « z « -l « -l !L -l !L !L æ æ æ 0 O. 0 0 O? O' -l~ -lÒ -l~ ! IL.: IL.,¿ u.... ! .. O' ... '" O~ i I-~ z1;; i lJ). O~ æ~ L_. æ~ _ III -~ UIii I;¡! u...~ W~ : 1-1;1 lJ)1;I ill 0 N N : . . . . , f' . L , ( . , ¡ U S N '" . , - ~ ' ;fo. n I .~i !: '" .. , , i.r 0 .. ;) 11:JJ P , . I . 1 P . 'Zn ....-- II:; ~ , , , " W J e . q ~ ,. . . m ~ " .iU Ii IJ n U'" ~J . 0 II » . 'u 1 " J > ñ J 6 . !PI ~I"n ;¡~P, , , Ii "'. ~ , t· . II 1; ·noJ ~a9"HO :]1I.l to-60-U ~1ilOld C C Il Il « I- < '" Q Z Q '" Il IJ III IJ Il III III I: III III : I- :¡:ifi N < N I- ::J - 0 ill ::J III III :¡: f IL Il :¡: '" IL .. I ~. 'fir f " I " ¡ 'i ~ 'i I . :I ~ .: " I- 5 ~ ~ ~ I æ . I- 0 ::::J Z 0 ~ ú) Z Z 0 I- 1-'" 0 ....oJ I- « «.... :¡:" « > ILZ ~~ " > W. I- -J? WO ú) I W'- W -J'- . W.' I-~ 3 " ~ æ~ z;:, '" o Iii Z «Iii æ~ 0 W~ u-M I- æ~ « > Wo -J,', W' ¡., I-~ >l I~ III 01-.... U .... o :¡:z Ill: ~ -< Il uw ~~ ¡r:Z¿ æ~ « IlIII <III., 10 Q QIl Ill- ~~~ III 10 ILU Q U U C '" III III « III N :. NIL IL jjj iii . Il Il Q ... IL - .. .. 0 0 Il Il < < I- Q '" Q Z 10 Il III III < III Il III ¡! ?i >l III I- Ü ~ IZ Z I- U ::i ::! uW Il ::> iii g ~ 8~ ¡¡¡ II: IL 10 IL .... D!~ III ~ . ~~ :..I! æ ~ ~ U " « l- lL () .... « <" W ..~¡ 1-:0: ~ {jº N'" Z ~~ 0 Q< :¡:.... I- « >. W~ -J , W¡., '" " 1-'" U-Iii W;¡! -J~ ",I- ::>Z QUI :::J> ~UI !<g Q- i U J I U I UDl U· I U j U· " I ~! r ! ~ .¡ , ì ~ t I > .¡ , ;! ~ .! .: .. !!' ¡¡ > .. . II i ~ t- t- . '. . . - =='1'. T"'!'!~~ - - . SSE' ¡:=¡;¡; - , ~ ~15 -==aIE ~~S: .. ~!!!!. ~- ~~ ~~=-= -.--=.- ~;::~.. f,J... ~_ .~ .~= .):K_ ~Jä~¡; I ,-4J;.~ E..'¡"''''''' ~ . .:' :a.l1tH; , f'!~fi:= ~ ..--J ~c> ~-~~,~. / i .-- CITY OF ST. JOSEPH DEVELOPER AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this 30th day of October, 2001, by and between Dorian Davidson and John Meyer, hereinafter collectively called the "Developer", and the City of S1. Joseph, Minnesota, a municipal corporation, hereinafter called the "City". . WIT N E SSE T H: WHEREAS, the Developeris the Owner of certain Real Property known as Indian Hills Park, which is legally described on Exhibit A, (hereinafter called the "Property") attached hereto and made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, the City's Code of Ordinance requires the Developer to provide for the construction of certain public improvements, and for the financing of said improvements; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration ofthe mutual covenants expressed herein, IT IS HEREBY AGREED AS FOLLOWS: 1.0 CITY CONSTRUCTED IMPROVEMENTS (Intentionally blank.) 2.0 DEVELOPER CONSTRUCTED IMPROVEMENTS 2.1 Plan B Improvements. The Developer agrees to construct those improvements itemized below, hereinafter know as Plan B Improvements: Construction of holding ponds, installation of sewer and water service. . The Plan B Improvements itemized above shall include all necessary appurtenant items of work as determined by the City. 2.2 Completion Deadlines. The Developer agrees to proceed with said Plan B Improvements . entirely at its expense, and to complete said improvements within the time specified in the specifications, or within 12 months of the date of this agreement if no time is stated in the specifications, unless an extension is granted by the City for good cause, (which shall include delays resulting from meeting requirements of Section 2.3 below). 2.3 Engineering Services. The Developer will retain an engineer to prepare complete construction Plans and Specifications for Plan B Improvements. The engineer shall: (a) Prepare a Preliminary Estimate and Layout of Utilities and arrange for soil borings and/or such other subsurface investigations as the City may require. (b) Prepare complete construction Plans and Specifications. As Plans and Specifications are being prepared, copies shall be available for review and comment by the engineer. The City, by staff and the City Engineer, shall approve final content of the Plans and Specifications. (c) Secure all necessary pennits including those required by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, the State Health Department, the Department of Natural Resources, or any other regulatory agency that has jurisdiction. (d) Prepare the Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EA iN), if necessary, and any . other related environmental documents, reports, or studies as may reasonably be required by the City. An EA W is not currently required nor anticipated for this proj ect. (e) Provide all necessary construction staking and related survey work. (£) Prepare record drawings on reproducible mylar sepia and an electronic copy. The reproducible mylar sepia record drawings and electronic copy shall become the property of the City. (g) Prepare and submit such other final documentation as the City may require. The City Engineer shall: (a) Provide such City project standards, including special details and specifications, as the City may require. (b) Review Plans and Specifications. (c) Provide a City Representative for resident construction observation throughout the construction period. (d) Conduct a final inspection and review fmal construction documentation. . 2 . (e) Recommend Acceptance ofImprovements to the City. 2.5 Cost Escrow. The Developer shall bear the cost of the above noted City Engineering Services and shall, upon execution of this Agreement, place in escrow with the City cash, bond or irrevocable letter of credit in the amount of$10,000.00 which shall be applied to the payment ofthe cost of said services. Should the above amount exceed the cost to the City, the City shall return to the Developer all unused funds, including accumulated interest. Should expense to the City exceed the above amount, the Developer shall reimburse the City for all additional costs before the improvements are accepted by the City. 2.6 Contractor Retention. Upon approval of the Final Plat, the Developer shall contract with a contractor for the construction of the Plan B Improvements (hereinafter the "Contractor"). The Contractor selected by the Developer to construct and install any Plan B Improvement shall be qualified and competent to perfonn the work and have adequate [mances to perfonn. The City reserves the right to require evidence of competency and adequate financial status of any such Contractor, and prohibit a Contractor who fails to provide such evidence from undertaking work on the improvements. The construction, installment, materials and equipment shall be in accordance with approved Plans and Specifications. 2.7 City as Third Party Beneficiary. The City shall not have any direct contractual .- relationship with the Contractor, but shall be considered a third party beneficiary to the contract entered between the Developer and the Contractor. The City shall not be liable to the Contractor for the Developer's breach of a duty to the Contractor. 2.8 Easements. The Developer shall make available to the City, at no cost to the City, all pennanent and temporary easements necessary for installation and maintenance of Plan B Improvements. 2.9 Insurance. The Developer shall provide evidence of Comprehensive General Liability and Broad Fonn Property Damage Insurance including contractual coverage in the amount of at least $1,000,000 per occurrence and $1,000,000 aggregate. The Developer's insurance certificate shall be in a fonn approved by the City, and shall be delivered to the City at least three days prior to the commencement of any work on the Plan B Improvements. The City and the City Engineer shall be named as an additional insured on such policy by endorsement. Such insurance shall remain in full force and effect through the end of the warranty period described in Section 2.11. The Developer shall cause each person with whom Developer contracts for the construction and installation of any Plan B Improvements to provide evidence of insurance coverage in accordance with the City project standards issued under Section 2.4.· The Developer shall, (or if all construction contracts are under the control of one Prime Contractor), the Prime Contractor shall provide evidence of Owner/Engineer Protective Liability coverage in accordance with these standards in lieu of the Developer . insurance certificate. Evidence of insurance shall be provided before any construction whatsoever begins on the Plan B Improvements. 3 2.10 Perfonnance Security. Prior to the actual construction of Plan B Improvements pledged . to be constructed by the Developer, the Developer shall post with the City a bond, irrevocable letter of credit or dedicated escrow account (the "Security") in the estimated amount of 1.25 times the responsible bid accepted for construction of such improvements, conditioned upon the faithful construction of the improvements according to the Plans and Specifications, and final approval of the City Engineer, and the tenns of this Development Agreement. As the improvements are partially completed, the Developer may request the City to release a portion of the Security representing the cost of the completed improvements as determined by the City Engineer, but at all times there shall be Security in an amount of at least 125% of the estimated cost of the unfinished improvements. If the construction contracts are under the control of one Prime Contractor, the Prime Contractor may provide the perfonnance security required by this section. 2.11 Warrantv Bond. The Developer shall fully and faithfully comply with all the tenns of any and all Contracts entered into by the Developer for the installation and construction of all Plan B Improvements and hereby warrants and guarantees the workmanship and materials for a period of two years following the City's final acceptance of the Plan B Improvements. In addition to the Security required by Section 2.7 herein, the Developer shall post a warranty bond, warranting the condition of the materials and workmanship of the improvements for a period of one year following the City's final acceptance of the Plan B Improvements. If any claims are made in writing within the warranty period, the bond shall not be released until such claims are resolved. If the construction contracts are under the control of one Prime Contractor, the Prime Contractor may provide the e warranty bond required by this section. 2.12 Labor and Materialman's Bond. Upon execution ofthis Agreement, the Developer shall also provide the City with a labor and materialman's bond, guaranteeing the payment of all workmen perfonning labor or services, and all supplies or materialmen providing materials for the Plan B Improvements. This bond shall not be released until the Developer has provided the City Engineer with proof of payment of all laborers and materialmen in the fonn of release, signed receipts, or lien waivers. If the Developer contracts with a single Prime Contractor, and all construction contracts are under control of the Prime Contractor, the Prime Contractor may provide the laborer and materialmen bond required by this section as long as the Prime Contractor agrees to waive any lien rights for the labor and/or material provided by the Prime Contractor. 3.0 FUTURE IMPROVEMENTS (Intentionally blank.) 4.0 GENERAL TERMS AL'ID CONDITIONS 4.1 Attorney Fees. The Developer agrees to pay the City reasonable attorney's fees, to be . fixed by the Court, in the event that suit or action is brought to enforce the terms of this Agreement. 4 . 4.2 Proof of Title. The Developer hereby warrants and represents to the City, as inducement to the City's entering into this Agreement, that Developer's interest in the Development is fee owner. Prior to execution of this Agreement, the Developer shall provide the City with a title opinion prepared by a licensed attorney and directed to the City stating the condition oftitle ofthe property, or other proof oftitle acceptable to the City. 4.3 Binding Effect on Parties and Successors. The terms and provisions of this Agreement shall be binding upon and accrue to the benefit of the heirs, representatives, successors and assigns of the parties hereto and shall be binding upon all future owners of all or any part of the Development and shall be deemed covenants running with the land. Reference herein to Developer, if there be more than one, shall mean each and all of , them. This Agreement, at the option of the City, shall be placed on record so as to give notice hereof to subsequent purchasers and encumbrances of all or any part of the Development and all recording fees shall be paid by the Developer. 4.4 Notice. Any notices permitted or required to be given or made pursuant to this Agreement shall be delivered personally or mailed by United States mail to the addresses set forth in this paragraph, by certified or registered mail. Such notices, demand or payment shall be deemed timely given or made when delivered personally or deposited in the United States mail in accordance with the above. Addresses of the parties hereto are as follows: . If to the City at: City of S1. Joseph, P.O. Box 668, St. Joseph, lVlN 56374 If to the Developer at: Box 797 St. Joseph,lVlN 56374 4.5 Acceptance of Improvements. The City will accept said improvements or portions thereof, upon certification by the City Engineer that, to the best of his knowledge and belief, the improvements have been completed in conformance with the terms of this Development Agreement and all documents incorporated herein by reference. 4.6 Incorporation of Documents by Reference. All general and special conditions, plans, special provisions, proposals, specifications and contracts for the improvements furnished and let pursuant to this Agreement shall be and hereby are made a part of this Agreement by reference as if fully set out herein in full. 4.7 Indemnification. The Developer shall hold the City and City Engineer harmless from claims by third parties, including but not limited to other property owners, contractors, subcontractors and materialmen, for damages sustained or costs incurred resulting from plat approval and the development of the Property. The Developer shall indemnify the City for all costs, damages or expenses, including engineering and attorney's fees, which the City may payor incur in consequence of such claims by third parties. . 4.8 License to Enter Land. The Developer hereby grants the City, its agents, employees, officers and contractors a license to enter the Property to perform all work and/or inspections deemed appropriate by the City during the development of the Property. 5 4.9 Street Cleaning. The Developer shall promptly clean any soil, earth or debris from streets . in or near the Development resulting from construction work by the Developer or its agents or assigns as often as necessary and as directed by the City for public safety and convenience. In the event the Developer fails to clean the streets within 48 hours of the direction of the City, the City may undertake the work and seek reimbursement from the Developer, or alternatively, assess the cost against property owned by the Developer within the City. 4.10 Erosion Control. The Developer shall comply with any erosion control method ordered by the City for the prevention of damage to adjacent property and the control of surface water runoff. As the development progresses, the City may impose additional erosion control requirements if in the opinion of the City Engineer such requirements are necessary to retain soil and prevent siltation of streams, ponds, lakes, or other adjacent properties, or of City utility systems. The Developer shall comply with the erosion control plans and with any such additional instruction it receives from the City. All areas disturbed by the excavation and backfilling operations shall be reseeded forthwith after the completion of the work in that area. Seed shall be rye grass or other fast growing seed to provide a temporary ground cover as rapidly as possible. All seeded areas shall be mulched and disc-anchored as necessary for seed retention. The parties recognize that time is of the essence in controlling erosion. 4.11 Site Grading. (a) No building permits will be issued until site grading for the development phase . plans are submitted for the lot requesting the permit, and approved by the City. The site grading plan shall contain such information as may be requested by the City Engineer. (b) No certificate of occupancy shall be issued for any building until such time as the lot has been restored to final grade and other specifications of the site plan have been met. For winter conditions, where the building is ready but the final landscaping cannot be completed until spring, an escrow shall be deposited with the City until the final grading can be checked out. (c) Provision shall be made when site grading for any future road or cuI de sac on any lot(s ). (d) The following special grading requirements shall apply to the lots as identified: Lots 1 and 2 Block 1 No building permit will be issued until a grading plan for the entire block is submitted and approved. The site grading, including ponding, must be completed before a certificate of occupancy is issued. All costs associated with the review and approval of site grading plans and as- . builts will be the responsibility ofthe property owner. The City shall require a 6 . cash deposit, the amount to be determined by the City Engineer, and must be submitted with the grading plans prior to review. Lot 1 Block 2 No building permit will be issued for Lot 1 Block 2 until a grading plan for Lot 1 is submitted and approved. The site grading, including ponding must be completed before a certificate of occupancy is issued. All costs associated with the review and approval of site grading plans and as- builts will be the responsibility of the property owner. The City shall require a cash deposit, the amount to be determined by the City Engineer, and must be submitted with the grading plans prior to review. Lot 2 Block 2 No building permit will be issued for Lot 2 Block 2 until a grading plan for Lot 1 is submitted and approved. The site grading, including ponding must be completed before a certificate of occupancy is issued. All costs associated with the review and approval of site grading plans and as- builts will be the responsibility ofthe property owner. The City shall require a cash deposit, the amount to be determined by the City Engineer, and must be . submitted with the grading plans prior to review. 4.12 Certificate of Compliance. This Agreement shall remain in effect until such time as Developer shall have fully performed all of its duties and obligations under this Agreement. Upon the written request of the Developer and upon the adoption of a resolution by the City Council finding that the Developer has fully complied with all the terms of this Agreement and finding that the Developer has completed performance of all Developer's duties mandated by this Agreement, the City shall issue to the Developer on behalf of the City an appropriate certificate of compliance. The Acceptance of the Improvements contracted in accordance herewith by the City does not constitute a certificate of compliance and does not release the Developer from ongoing duties or responsibilities arising under this contract. The issuance of a Certificate of Compliance does not release the Developer or any Surety from warranty responsibilities arising under Section 2.11 herein. 4.13 Park Contribution. The subdivider shall contribute $1,692.49 to the City Park Fund in lieu of a dedication of land for parks, with payment to be made upon execution of this Agreement. 4.14 Certificate of Occupancy. The City shall not issue certificates of occupancy for any building within the Development until the building has been connected to sanitary sewer .- and water and the streets in the Development have been constructed to the point of having a gravel base. The granting of a certificate of occupancy by the City shall not be --- 7 deemed an acceptance of any Plan B Improvements or a waiver of any of the City's rights . under this Agreement 4.15 Reimbursement of City's Costs. Developer shall reimburse the City for all costs, including all reasonable engineering, legal, planning and administrative expenses, incurred by the City in connection with all matters relating to the negotiation, administration and enforcement of this Agreement and its perfonnance by the Developer. Developer shall also reimburse the City for any add-to-construction costs related to the installation of street lighting within the Development. Developer shall also be responsible for the cost of acquiring and installing street signage consistent with that used in other recent developments within the City. Such reimbursement shall be made within 14 days of the date of mailing the City's notice of costs. If such reimbursement is not made, the City may place a hold on all construction or other work related to the Development, or refuse the issuance of building pennits until all costs are paid in full. The City may further declare a default and collect its costs from the security deposited in accordance with Section 2.5 of this Agreement. 4.16 Renewal of Security. If any escrow account or bond deposited with the City in accordance with this Agreement shall have an expiration date prior to the Developer's obligations hereunder being complete, the Developer shall renew such security or deposit substitute security of equal value meeting the approval of the City at least thirty (30) days prior to the expiration of such security. Failure to post such alternate security or renew such security shall constitute a default and the City may place a moratorium on all construction or other work related to the Development, refuse the issuance of building . permits, and declare the entire amount thereof due and payable to the City in cash. Such cash shall thereafter be held by the City as a security deposit in the same manner as the security theretofore held by the City. 4.17 Plat Dedication. Upon approval and execution of this Agreement, the City shall approve the final plat provided it otherwise meets the requirements of the City's Ordinance governing Subdivisions. If the Plat contains the dedication of an easement, the use of property within the area of an easement is specifically restricted by prohibiting the construction of any structure or fence, planting trees or shrubs, or storing of personal property within the area of the easement which could delay, restrict or impede access within the easement area by a person or vehicle. 4.18 Additional Terms. The following additional tenns are being made a part ofthis Development Agreement to continue in force and effect as though they were dedications of the Plat, unless according to their terms are intended to terminate earlier. The requirements of this section must be satisfied before the issuance of any building permits: (a) Developer shall construct the holding ponds designated in the Final Plat of Indian Hills Park, including seeding, in accordance with the Plans and Specifications approved by the City. Final lot grading need not occur until a lot is developed. (b) No building slab for any structure constructed within the Development shall be - lower in elevation than 1085.0 feet. 8 . (c) Developer shall acquire the necessary permit needed to install sewer and water within the old railroad right-of-way. (d) The water main on Northland Drive will be 10 inches in diameter and extended south to the south line of the Plat, to be connected to a 16-inch trunk water main which will be constructed at same time in the future. (e) Access to Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, shall be at a point where the line separating the lots abuts Northland Drive. Cross-easements for ingress and egress for the lots shall be granted to facilitate this common entrance. Additional access approaches . to Northland Drive shall be permitted only if approved by the City as part of a development site plan. (f) The road located on the plat between Lots 1 and 2 of Block 2 shall be constructed, per approved plans, before the issuance of any building permits. 4.19 Adoption of Ordinance bv Reference. The provisions of Chapter 5 of the St. Joseph Code of Ordinances are hereby adopted by reference in their entirety, unless specifically excerpted, modified, or varied by the terms of this Agreement, or by the final plat approved as approved by the City. 4.20 Grant of Option. Developer hereby grants the City the option to acquire an easement for . street and utility purposes over, under and across the following described area of the Property, The southerly 33 feet of Lot 1, Block 1; and The northerly 33 feet of Lot 2, Block 1. The terms ofthe option are as follows: (a) The option will terminate one (1) year from the date of this Developer's Agreement; (b) The option shall be exercised by the City by written notice to the Developer or the owners of Lots I and 2, Block 1, prior to the expiration ofthe option period, (c) Construction of a street within the area of the easement shall commence within one (1) year of the exercise of the option, or the easement shall be considered null and void. Execution of a construction contract by the City shall be deemed the commencement of construction. (d) Upon exercise of the option, the City shall pay additional consideration of $210.00. . (e) The City shall assume the cost ofpreparing the document granting the easement. 9 (f) The Developer, or Property Owner ifnot the Developer, shall execute and deliver . the document granting the easement to the City within ten (10) days of receipt. (g) The City shall not assess Lots 1 or 2 of Block 1 for any costs associated with construction of any street or utilities within the area of the easement, unless and except: (l) If any portion of either lot lying west of the east 70 feet thereof use the street for access; or (2) If any portion of either lot directly COIlllects to sewer or water utilities installed within the easement. (h) The DeveloperlProperty Owners shall also grant a temporary slope easement to City during the period construction occurs within the easement area. (i) The option may be waived by the City, by Council resolution, prior to its expiration. m The location ofthe area which is subject to the easement may be relocated by mutual agreement of the parties. (k) If development of Lots 1 and 2 of Block 1 occurs prior to exercise of the option, for purposes of setbacks and area, a road within the easement shall be considered . to exist. The City shall review any development plans and consider variance requests in light of the potential use of the area subject to the option. Signed and executed by the parties hereto on this S'Ý-\ day of A ;J'i1J.e,wv{L¿''/ , 2001. ATTEST CITY OF ST JOSEPH By flJiu. /JnitdJ BY~~ß , ) . ty <l1erk 1 ayor (SEAL) DEVELOPER: r 'æ r/l .~/ ' ~ /Ðrl, A ì ULf, ,vV}; \ Derían Davidson v I John M::¡J ø(Þf - . 10 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) 4IIÞ )ss . COUNTY OF· STEARNS ) On this.~ day of ~¡)ß/)1/J hØ ,2001 before me, a notary public within and for said County, personally appeared Larry Hosch and Judy Weyrens, to me personally known, who, being each by me duly sworn did say that they are respectively the Mayor and the City Clerk of the City of S1. Joseph, the municipal corporation named in the foregoing instrument, and that the seal affixed to said instrument is the municipal seal of said corporation, and that said instrument was signed and sealed in behalf of said municipal corporation by authority of its City Council and said Mayor and City Clerk acknowledged said instrument to be the free act and deed of said corporation. .~~&u~ Not IC . e MARY REBER GENEROUS STATE OF MINNESOTA ) NOTAR:PUBLlC:MINNE.~O~~"" F )SS. My CommISSion E:q¡:re¡;J:1f'h .:>1, """J }J COUNTY OF STEARNS ) ~ 20'"~~2:::";'.' .. I . . On this ¡sr day of W' , before me personally appeared Dorian Davidson and John Meyér, to me known to be the same person described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that they executed the same as their fYee act and deed. . 5) /1.'¿~ THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY: . John H. Scherer - 13076X e. JUDY ANN WEYRENS . . . . . NOTARYPUBUC-MINNESQTA RaJkowski HansmeIer Ltd. . ..' My Commission expires Jsn. 31. 20C5 11 Seventh Avenue North '''''_ _. . P.O. Box 1433 St. Cloud, Minnesota 56302 Telephone: (320) 251-1055 N:\city\s~oe\2001\Indian Hills Park . 11 . The following is a transcript of the minutes from August 16, 200 I dealing with the Indian Hills Developers Agreement. John Meyer and Dorian Davidson were present to discuss the agreement. Weyrells: Maybe I can say, we've been working with John and Dorian and Joe and John to get the developers agreement and to work out the issues worked that we talked about. The easement for the east west road connecting. We've got a lot of that language together. We don't have it all finalized yet. John and Dorian had a chance to review the developer agreement. Joe just got it late this afternoon, some of their corrections. So any action that you take tonight, we would just ask that it would be contingent upon final approval from Joe and John. Weyrells: We are not going to redraft that, and John if you want to address how we're going to do that road. Meyer: As far as the agreement? Weyrells: yeh Meyer: Part of the development agreement, there is an attachment to it, that states that the city has an easement - 12 month option to attach an easement to that property for a road and there is another 12 month period to get the road constructed. Based upon the easement, it can be inacted on if that is actually the route coming off of Gumtree. Hosch: And that easement is right between lots I and 2 correct? Meyer: Yes. Hosch: That's pretty much the same discussion that we had on the preliminary. Meyer: lt's exactly the same plans, there have been a few alterations, brought up to date on the plans we are in the middle of the developers agreement, I would guess in the next day or two that would be finalized and agreed upon. Weyrefls: It is a standard fonn that you've seen, the only difference is that because the fonn is for primarily for residential . therefore there are some changes or proposed changes for commercial. Rassier: And then this letter that we talked about wi\1 be attached to the developers agreement? Meyer: It's actually part of the developer agreement. Rassier: OK Loso: I move for approval of final plat, and then at our next meeting or whenever we meet about this again, we wil1 deal with the developer agreement. OK? Does that sound fair? Meyer: Yeh. Rassier: Second Meyer: The plat will be finalized and the developers agreement will be approved at a ..... Weyrefls: We can't file the final plat though until the developers agreement is ready to be signed. So, is that going to hold you up at all? Meyer: That would hold us up. We want to get sewer and water going Weyrells: If we can get it worked out by the 29th of August, the developer agreement? Hosch: That's thirteen days. Weyrens: Is that going to be a problem? Meyer: Is there a reason that there has to be a comment, or comments on the developer agreement? I mean if it's with the attorney and with the city engineer and city staff and developer, if it's all agreed upon, in the developers agreement, . would that not be acceptable? Hosch: I think that is something the council needs to see and approve. And a motion needs to be made on that. Meyer: OK Hosch: I mean, we do meet on the 29th where we can have a chance to review it . Weyrens: We also meet on the 22nd too if we can get it turned around. That would be next Wednesday. Rassier: We also meet on the 20th. Hosch: The nnd would allow us, I think, to have some better dialogue too. We're going to be pretty fiJled on the 29th. Weyrens: Is that feasible do you think John? J'YJeyer: I haven't seen the letter yet so.. .But yeh lJ1eyrens: OK J'YJeyer: So we're shooting for the nod? Rassier: \\'hat time? Weyrens: Well, we have a meeting at 5:30 that day, so we could do it after the budget portion, or before, \\'hichever way you want to do it. Rassier: Well, that's why I'm asking Hosch: Probably before. Weyrens: OK then, right away at 5:30. Meyer: You brought up the 20th. Is there an opportunity of doing it on the 20th? Weyrens: There is no way we'd be able to because, (Rassier breaks in, I've got something at 4:30, I can't remember where it . was) John's not even in the office. 111 eyer: Pardon Me? Weyrells: John Scherer wasn't in the office today. Ehlert: Did we....I don't believe we had the developer agreement when we approved the Northland Addition. Weyrens: You haven't, you've always, what we've done before is, authorize the Hosch and clerk to execute it upon all your contingencies and motions that you have made. So, as long as we make sure we get all the road easement taken care of, you know, and we get the engineering and legal requirements made up, it is what's in your ordinance book to the canned the developers agreement, but if you want to see it's fine, there's not a problem with that. Ehlert: So did we see Northland Addition's Weyrells: No Ehlert: The road easement is what we've talked about. ¡f1 eyer: Yes Ehlert: The attachment is on Block I, Correct? JI1 eyer: Block I. Yes Ehlert: So, Block 2 will remain with a culdesac in it. Meyer: Yes. Hosch: Would you consider amending the motion Bob to, for the clerk and Hosch to execute that, With all contingencies . met? Approved by our city engineer and attorney? Loso: Well, ya, fine, that's fine. . Hosch: I mean, I don't have a problem with the council addressing it on the 22nd either. Rassier: We're only talking a week away. Hosch: Yes. Meyer: A week, but, we've been doing this for...... Hosch: It probably won't happen for a week anyway, to tell you the truth. For our attorney and engineer to go over it and get all, everything done with it. I mean, weather it's the councilor myself. Bettendorf. How much in advance ofa meeting do you need for review so you're all comfortable with it? Hosch: Just enough time to go over and read it. And then, address any concerns. Rassier: It only takes 10 minutes to read it. Bettendorf I haven't seen all your comments, but there is quite a list, as I Understand. Meyer: Well, you took a residential development agreement and tried to incorporate it into a business development. And they are like white and black different. Bettendorf. There really wasn't that many changes that were made though. Unless there is something you need, I can get at it Monday and Tuesday. You know I need those two days. Hosch: So you mean, it doesn't... I think it would be better just to go in rront of the council anyway. Rassier: It's going to take you (Joe) two days and I'm sure it's going to take John at least one day. Hosch: So, it probably won't be executed till Wednesdayanyways. . Rassier: Even if the Hosch and the engineer did it, I mean your talking that kind of time line to get everybody together anyway. Ehlert: Joe, your recommendation would be what then? You want a chance to review all their questions and address them? Bettendorf Well I think we should do that before the agreement is signed. And I'd assume some of them would be for John Scherer. Meyer: Uhhh, not really. Bettendorf They are a11 related to engineering issues? Meyer: Yeh. Bettendorf. OK Davidson: Those issues Joe that you already addressed in your letter. He didn't take your letter, he didn't have the privilege of having your letter before him when drafted it. He didn't see your language. Bettendorf OK Meyer: There was a whole section that we wanted to eliminate because it had to do with residential. There was a whole like section 3.1 and there was probably A through E that had all everything to do with housing, housing, housing. And we wanted to wipe that pretty much that whole section out. Bettendorf. I don't see that being an issue if John is going to be around on Monday and Tuesday, between to two of us we should be able to get that fixed and out here for us, so. . Rassier: Well, either way that about the time it's going to take. Meyer: Wednesday. Yes. Rassier: No matter what So, I mean, we might as well as look at it as a council, if it's going to take that kinda of time anyway. Hosch: Would you like to restate your motion Bob, for the record? . Loso: Original motion for approval of the final plat, and to look at the developer agreement on the 22nd. Hosch: That was seconded by councilor Rassier. There is a motion and a second on the floor, is there any further discussion. None being so, all those in favor signify by aye, The motion carried unanimously. Note: The developer's agreement was approved under the September 6, 2001 consent agenda without discussion. . tit ....581 1200 25th Avenue South, P.O. Box 1717, 51. Cloud, MN 56302-1717 320.229.4300 320.229.4301 FAX architecture . engineering . env ironmental . transportation . December 12,2001 RE: St. Joseph, Minnesota Pond View Ridge 6 SEH No. A-STJOE 0003.00 14 & 30 Ms. Judy Weyrens City Clerk! Administrator City of Saint Joseph 21 NW First A venue P.O. Box 668 St. Joseph, MN 56374-0668 Dear Judy: I pulled the record drawings for Pond View Ridge 4, and compared these to the proposed grading plan for Pond View Ridge 6. The easement on the north side of Lot 1, Block 1, includes 25 feet for the gas line, and 20 feet for the storm sewer. If we were to give up 8 feet of the storm sewer easement for building purposes, this would put the building approximately 3 feet from· the outside edge of the 24-inch storm sewer pipe. This is not acceptable. My recommendation, is to retain the entire 20 feet of easement so the public works staff have room for maintenance and repair of the . pIpe. Sincerely, ~ GsJh R. Bettendorf, P.E. City Engineer djg c: Dick Taufen, City of St. Joseph e.:.....,.-'- -....p.::1S\:J.:..ii..;;:iL.\f:JJ:~·¡ìi æ\'ic"·~·.j~~, It Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc. . Your Trusted Resource . Equal Opportunity Employer ! I I H ---- o c: b ZZ::> -- e :i!= I [ H - e- · X :.!!! 5 I ¡ ..J ~ ~~ i - ~ly \J) ~2" ~c~ ill " 0' ;;;';<:::è;)':/{·" :, n - , : .<z:,h~:.:i\ }~,: ~~ ;_.:; - ~ ,õ._~_~--, :~'~. .,-~--- .j" ~ ill '" I - > N I ........"" " I "XJCI ,ø an, .1~-... , n ~ I ~.-1 Z ~~ () ~ IL , ......... ~ \ --1 ::1:: , , :ti '.."1 ..:;- {".¡ cr.: ,..! .: 0::: ---I I -';'" I ( r;:Ó¿<1? :~~. ~ ~i5i ::¡:: I .,-{- :;:: * · I--B9L~ ;¡::~::: 5': -.::-- ~ -, (..! : J~~ ~b ".' '_.~ ("01 : ~I I' f<!L-~_! ~~::: -;;í ~ L", .,_. d . f j ..... C,) ...z· ...::- , ! %'i~d ~ä ~Ê ~tj ~~i ::¡:: I L.ì;,~~·HI~ ~II 'f~ :z <..) I 0' ll.! it') t>Ìi&fu (§ ~¡ I - u.! I ~: (t) "::;: I ~ · > :() :i~~~ II ~,~ n'ê I '%~~~ii ¡ Ji-'!!:.J :,: ffi ,'. ,~::,' !\''Ó ~H.IZ¡ ~i I-<fi! ¡,'3 ,"",~-,. ~I ~i~; , '~ I ~......,,~... I I , --oL'l~ 3.1£.%0.'_- , '-~::f' , ..........., t/IMJHl;lO./IM I , ~t~"""'/ *JllJ3IIr1~--" }1tJ'1èi èE·U:13.::EiNfT'¡ -~ ~ . I i I~~I ~Š ~ ~ ~~E I ...j. h~ ,t ~k r,¡1 ¡ ¥~9~ =¡ . ~~~ ~S~!~~¡ j.J hi'" ~!i ~ ." ~~ ~ ~ ii sU § .': ~j¥£ . h~ o ~ d~~ i I. I ~"I I ..¡ ÎI!i !i . 0 !. \ .:.~.:. ,.:...t{..ti~ ..:.':'':''$..ti..t'i..t. I '.:...:. J { i · W ~miu ~i~i~i~i~i~ ~ ~HIi Ii ~ i In .mam .;mmm; J .mJJ ùl 9 i§~~ i§~~~~~~ i§~~~§m;;~ i§ ~§~~ I'll Jdn 18 ZBÐ2 18:85:27 Vid FdX -} 328+363+8342 Administrdtor Pdge 88Z Of 88Z ._._1\ ·-W'~ ....~·_..--::7 -Friday Fax- " - LMC - 1"'lf'MnfN;"""",,,,(';rn.,.. 'i1i,'" "ltlIlnlif~If!' v''n.fif'i)I'.''¡ A weekly legislative updatefrom the League of MinneSOla Cities January 10, 2002 1) "Excc~" Aid Rcduction-cssentially · Thc pay 2002 "cxcess" aid reduction rcduces the rcvenue increase for cities that applied to LGA is carried forward, as a proposed rdatively large levy + aid growth for permanent aid reduction applied to a 2002. city's levy + aid revenue base for pay · Applied to any city where the Pay 2001 2003 for levy limit purposes. However, the reduction cannoL exceed 6% of a to Pay 2002 levy + aid increase is cit y's payable 2002 adjusted net tax greater than 4.5 percent. The 4.5 percent factor is equal to the 3-year statewide capacity (lax base). average annual growth ra.te in · The Pay 2002 "excess"aid reduction households plus inflation. applied to the market value homestead · Cities with populations less than 1,000 credit reimbursement is carried forward, are exempt from the excess levy cut. not as an aid reduction, but as a levy reduction applied to the Pay 2003 levy · A city!s "excess" aid reduction equals + aid revcnue base for levy limit the difference between its actual purposes. This levy reduction cannot increase in levy + aid for Pay 2002 and exceed 6% of a city's payable 2002 an increase equal to its previous 3-year adjusted net tax capacity. average annual growth rate in · The Pay 2003 "excess" aid reductions . households plus inflation times 1.25. can be restored as a levy increase if · If a city's 3-year average annual growth voters approve the increase. rate in households plus inflation is less 2) Uniform aid reduction (all cities) than the 3~year average annual change in inflation (2.95%), then the city's rate · For payable year 2003, the uniform aid will equal the. average inflation rate.. reduction rate will be 1.7% of 2002 · The "excess" aid re-duction is applied adjustcd net tax capacity. firslto LGA, then if necessary to the 3) Maximum cut--thc combined aid reduction market value ho mestead credit of both the "excess" aid reduction and the reimbursement. "uniform" aid reduction cannot exceed 6% of 2) Uniform Aid Reduction-essentially reduces the city's 2002 adjusted net tax capacity. aid to all cities. 4) Eliminate City Police / Fire Amortization For aids paid in 2002, the cul is equal to Aid · 2 percent of each city's levy + LGA · If this additional aid cut results in a total Aid Reductions for Pay 2003 ¡ State FY aid reduction greater than 6% of ANTC, 2004: then the marginal reduction amount aLLributable to the amortization aid 1) The "excess" aid reduction for Pay 2002 is would be added to the city's LGA extended La Pay 2003 aids. grand fathered base. · LGA reductions in Pay 2003 will first 5) Statutory inflation for LGA is also be applied to thc grand fathered LGA eliminated in aids paid beginning in 2004. base amount. . For more information on cily le~islative issues, contact any member of the Lea~ue of Minnesota Cities lnler~overnmenlal Rela1ions team. 651.281.1200 or BOO.925,1122 Jdn 18 2BB2 18:84:44 Via Fax -) 3ZB+3&3+ß342 Administrator Pa!J~ 881 Of 002 ._.1\ '.~ "\ .........--., -Friday Fax- ~",. LMC - 1""'1PU\nfMia~(ffiM - Çit¡·.,., ptl)fJl\l(ffl"!' 'i,'j,.\'t:YH(~ A weekly legislarive updlllefrom rhe League of Minnesota Cities January 10, 2002 The Big Fix approximately $14 million. These two changes are not effective until pay 2004. Today, the governor unveiled his supplemental The proposal also include.s a 5-cent incre.ase. in budget recommendations to balance the state's gas tax and an automatic indexing of the gas budgct. We are currently trying to analyze the tax for future years, which will raise an impacts of the proposal. While we wait for a c.stimatc-d $199 million in FY 2003. To convert draft of the supplemental budget legislation, we the gas tax increase into a general fund are relying on the Department of Finance and revenue, the proposal rwuces the statutory Departl'11ent of Revenue descriptions of the dedication of the motor vehicle sales tax, which proposal. What follows is a brief, preliminary will save $194 million in general fund description of the proposal. revenues. However, this means that the gas tax For the remainder of the current biennium, the increase will only provide $5 million in new proposal includes a drawdown of the stale's transportation revenue this biennium. $653 million reserve, $700 million in spending In the future, cities will also fed the pinch on cuts, $397 million in lax increases and other legal service and automobile repair costs. The one-time changes in eJo.:penditures. The proposal sLate sales lax will be extended to those also includes actions in the next biennium to purchases beginning in 2003. Although lhe city balance the ongoing structural budget deficit. share of that tax increase has not been Cities will feel the pain. Of the $700 million in estimaLed, the combined impact of the sales tax . state spending cuts for the remainder of this changes will increase state revenues by an biennium, ciLies will shoulder $214 million of estimated $604 million for the 2004-05 the lotal. The city share includes the direct biennium. The. governor has also proposed reductions in LGA and market-value extending the sales tax to school purchases. homestead credit as descríbed below and One small positive note-the LGA payments La reductions in the tax increment financing grant cities will actually be accelerated. Instead of program of $129 million. Although the TIP paying LGA in July and December, each city granL program was dramatically reduced, $38 would receive 1/4 of the total in March, V4 in million ~r year will apparently be preserved July and the remaining lh on December 15. for FY 2004 and 2005. This change could modestly bendit each city's Although the budget materials do not directly cash flow situation-assuming they still receive address levy limits, it appears that the governor LGA will extend levy limiLs into the future. In City Aid Reductions addition, cities affected by the "excess" aid reduction as defined below would be required Note: We have not yet seen detailed estimates La seek voter approval to replace the loss of of the impact of these cuts for individual cities. n'e l1ill make that information available as revenue. soon as possible. In addiLion to the cuts in LG A and market value Pay 20002/ SLate FY 2003: homestead credit reimbursement, the governor eliminates cit y police and fire amortization aids There are Lwo components to the aid cuts-- and Lhe sLatutory inflationary increase in LGA an "excess" cut and a "uniform" cut. that has annually increased the appropriaLion by For mOlo infolrnation on cil>' legis1alive issues, contact any mernbes of the Le.ague of M innesola Cilies InlergovernrnenuJ Relalions learn. . 651.281.1200 or 800.925.1122 Upon the opinion of the 81. Joseph City Attorney reviewing Ordinance 52.14 8ubd. 9(a), the large rock formation . bearing the name of Resurrection Lutheran Church in the :front yard of the facility represents an identification sign and any additional sign(s) will exceed Ordinance 52.14 Subd. 9(a). Therefore, Resurrection Lutheran Church is requesting a Variance of 24.3 I square feet to construct an additional identification sign for the facility. The request has been submitted by Resurrection Lutheran Church, 610 County Road 2, 8t. 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 a Variance as stated in 81. Joseph Code of Ordinances 52.8 a-e. Therefore, based on the findings above, the Planning Commission makes the following recommendation: Approve the Variance of 24.31 square feet to construct an additional identification sign on Resurrection Lutheran Church property. Chair Klein closed the hearing at 7:20 p.m. Boysen requested that the Planning Commission consider refunding the $150.00 application fee to Resurrection Lutheran Church. Boysen stated that the fee could be used more constructively for the church community. Boysen also stated that other churches in the community have constructed signs in the past were net required to go through ¡ . an application process. He suggested that the City of St. Joseph require all churches in the community to follow the same regulation in the future. I Ehlert stated the application fee for a Variance is set by the City Council. The fee covers administration and publications that are required by state law. Ehlert stated that Carlson would research the costs incurred by the City and see if a compromise could be made. Schneider stated that the Planning COffiffiission cannot forgive the fee and that the City Council would need to take action on his request. .' ;. ; Utsch.stated that. fo~giving or reducing. aq ~BRlicatio~ fee V¿ll set a b~d preced~nce for the City and he requested that Planmng CommIssIOn be very careful m recömmendmg thIS to the CIty Councd. Ehlert stated that he would approach the City Council with the request to waive the Variance fee made by Resurrection Lutheran Church. Variance. W. Gohman Construction: Chair Klein opened the hearing at 7:20 p.m. and stated the purpose of the hearing is to consider issuance of a Variance. The Variance is being requested to allow a structure to exceed the maximum allowable height of 2 1/2 stories or 35 feet. S1. Joseph Code of Ordinances 52.23 Subd 6 states that any portion of a structure shall not exceed 2 11 stories or 35 feet in height. The property is legally described as all that part of Lot One (1), Block Two (2) of Roske Addition, lying Easterly of /-the following described line: Beginning at the Southwest comer of Lot 1, Block 2, Roske Addition; thence North I 89029' 58" East 42 I. 64 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence North 000 04' 23" East to th~_North line of Lot I, Block 2, Roske Addition and said line there terminating, according to the plat and survey I \ - thereot: now on file and of record in the Office of Stearns County Recorder. September 7, 1999 Minutes Jim Muellenbach spoke on behalf of W. Gohman Construction. Muellenbach stated that the proposed facility has a . roof peak height of 4L6 feet. The Ordinance states that any portion of the building cannot exceed 35 feet in height and W. Gohman Construction is requesting a Variance of 6.4 feet. Muellenbach -explained that the peak would be surrounded with windows to allow for natural light to filter down through the building. The peak is located in the center of the building and does not represent the entire roofline. The main roofline will be 28' 4" in height, which shouldn't create a fire hazard Graeve stated that the new fire rescue equipment is more then adequate to handle the proposed facility. However, the building will be much higher then any building in the area. In his opinion, St. Joseph will have to grant variances to all future buildings that want to exceed the City's height restriction and St. Joseph will no longer look small town. Utsch stated that they're not proposmg a second floor over and above the Ordinance. The actual main roofline falls under the Ordinance requirements. The decorative peak is the only portion of the structure that exceeds the Ordinance. Carlson clarified the Height Ordinance for the audience and Planning Commission. Carlson informed the Planning Commission that the W. Gohman Construction public hearing also involves a Variance request to the Sign Ordinance. Due to the increase in the dimensions of the sign after the publication of the notice, the petitioner will have to re-publish a notice and the Planning Commission will hold another public hearing for this matter at a future date. Graeve moved to table the public hearing on the Variance request to the Sign Ordinance until a future Planning Commission meeting; Seconded by Ehlert and passes unanimously by those present Chair Klein amended the public hearing to eliminate the Variance request to the Sign Ordinance from the September 7, 1999 ~ublic hearing. . Ehlert made a motion to recommend the City Council approve the following resolution of finding; seconded by Lesnick and passed unanimously by those present. .... Resolution of Finding The request ofW. Gohman Construction for a Variance came before the Planning Commission at a public hearing held on September 7, 1999. The purpose of the hearing was to consider the issuance ofa Variance. The Variance is being requested to allow the height of the bank facility to reach 41.4 feet at the peak. 8t. Joseph Code of Ordinance 52.23 Subd. 6 states that any portion ofa structure in the Highway 75 Business District shall not exceed 2 Yz stories or 35 feet in height. The request has been submitted by W. Gohman Construction, 30618 County Road #133, 8t. 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 finding: The proposed use is consistent with the standards for a Variance as stated in St. Joseph Code of Ordinance 52.8 a-e. Therefore, based on the finding above, the Planning Commission makes the following recommendation: Approve the Variance of 6.4 feet to construct the facility to the height of 41.4 feet. - Chair Klein closed the hearing at 8:00 p.m. - September 7, 1999 Minutes Page 3622 . September 16, 1999 c. Terry Schmid property - Authorize the final plat subject to approval by the City Engineer, Attorney and Public Works Direc.tor. (This item was not discussed at the meeting due to lack of infonnation) d. Borgert property - Weyrens stated that the Council needs to approve the lot split for the Borgert property and issue a certificate of compliance. Loso made a motion to authorize the certific:ate of compliance for the lot split on the Borgert property. Ehlert made a second to the motion and the vote passed unanimously. 12. Bank Purchasel Roske Property- Scherer reported that the only change in the purchase agreements is that Gohman is no longer the purchaser. First State Bank is now the purchaser. L()so made a motion to approve the purchase agreements; seconded by-Ehlert. The motion passed unanimollsly. 13. Variance Requests a. Resurrection Lutheran Church Sign - Carlson reported that the Resurrection Lutheran Church submitted a variance request for the construction of an additional sign. The ordinance states that only one identification sign not exceeding 35 square feet is allowed. They currently have a rock with their name on it that counts as a sign. The sign they would like to construct is 50" x 70" and will be used to advertise their church services. The Planning Commission found that the proposed use is consistent with the standards I . for a variance and recommend approval of the variance of 24_31 . Ehlert stated that this is a justifiable use to allow the variance. Ehlert also stated that Gene Boysen requested that the $150 fee be waived. The Planning Commission recommended that the City Council decide this based on the cost to administer the variance. Loso made a motion to approve the variance but not to waive the fee. Niedenfuer seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. b. Height of the First State Bank of St. Joseph - Cartson. reported that Gohman Construction submitted a variance request for the construction of the First State Bank facility to reach 41.4 feet. The Ordinance states that any portion of a structure in the Highway 75 Business District shall not exceed 2 % stories or 35 feet in height. The Planning Commission found the use consistent with the standards for a variance. They recommended approval of the Variance of 6.4 feet to construct the facility to the height of 41 .4 feet. Bruce Gohman showed the Council a color schematic of the sign and the building. He reported that the site plan looks great and that the landscaping and rock should complement the look of the entire area. Loso made a motion to approve the variance, Twit seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. 14. Tuition Reimbursement Policy - Loso stated that the policy reflects what the Council discussed. Loso made a motion to approve the tuition reimbursement policy and insert it into the personnel policy. Ehlert seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. 15. Mayors Report- Hiemenz reported that there will be a bill coming in for $250 for an incident with the Police Department. An independent investigation was done and it was determined .- that it would be cheaper to pay for the claim than to contest it. - - itg of St. Joseph -z5 College Avenue NW P.O. Box 668, St. Joseph, MN 56374 (320) 363-7201 MEMORANDUM Fax: 363-0342 CLERK! Date: January 14, 2002 ADMINISTRATOR Judy Weyrens To: Honorable Mayor Larry Hosch and Members of the City Council MAYOR From: JUdYwe~ð1 Larry J. Hosch COUNCILORS Re Increase in marK t valuation Bob Loso Cory Ehlert Please find to follow the 2000 Market Sales Ratio for residential homes. City Assessor Ollie Kyle Schneider Lesnick provided the following information. Based on the 2000 sales Ratio a residential Alan Rassier home will see an average increase of 10% on their taxable market value. This increase does not reflect any improvements to the property. Commercial property will see an average increase of 7 percent. This year there will be a slight change in the process for the Board of Equalization and Review. Rather than carry all the property cards to St. Joseph for the Board of Review . meeting, property owners will be required to schedule an agenda time. The cards that will be mailed to all property owners will notify them of this change. The City Office will coordinate agenda times for that meeting. If a resident attends the meeting without calling the office they will still have the opportunity to speak, but will be taken last. The meeting has been scheduled for April 3, 2002 at 6:30PM. . , ST. WENDEL TWP . 21 90.41% . 5.08% 127% SAUK CENTRE TWP 7 96,03% -1.07% 106% SPRING HILL TWP 0 r 0.00% #DIV/O! 97% WAKEFIELD TWP 29 86,50% 9.83% NONLAKESHORE 17 87.63% 8.41% 123% - LAKESHORE 12 84.71 % 12.15% 127% ZION TWP 0 0.00% #DIV/O! 94% - 2000 SALES RATIOS 2000 RES SALES Increase Neighborhood TWP OR CITY Number Ratio Needed Adjustment ALBANY CITY 25 87.40% a.70% 100% AVON CITY 27 84.28% 12.72% nonlakeshore 22 84.74% 12.11 % 102% lakeshore 5 76.84% 23.63% 102% BELGRADE CITY 9 86.71 % 9.56% NBHD 44.05 4 84.97% 11.80% 97% NBHD 44.10 5 93.28% 1.84% 94% BROOTEN CITY 16 87.92% 8.05% 75% NBHD 46.00 10 89.18% 6.53% 75% NBHD 46.05 6 80,88% 17.46% 65% COLD SPRING CITY 40 89.03% 6.71% 126% EDEN V ALLEY CITY 1 85.07% 11.67% 129% ELROSA CITY 2 90.66% 4.79% 75% FREEPORT CITY 9 92.33% 2.89% 132% . GREENW ALD CITY 3 83.97% 13.14% 92% HOLDINGFORD CITY 15 94.47% 0.56% 130% NBHD 58,10 3 95.80% -0.84% 110% NBHD 58.15 12 94.06% 1.00% 126% KIMBALL CITY 10 79.43% 19.60% 148% LAKE HENRY CITY 3 68.05% 39.60% 92% MEIRE GROVE CITY 0 0.00% #DIV/O! 85% MELROSE CITY 33 88.39% 7.48% 116% NEW MUNICH CITY 2 62.08% 53.03% 95% PAYNESVILLE CITY 39 86,10% 10.34% 106% PLEASANT LAKE CITY 2 68.90% 37.88% 108% RICHMOND CITY 26 90.98% 4.42% 114% ROCKVILLECITY 12 82.52% 15.12% 116% ROSCOE 0 0.00% #DIV/O! 105% ST. AUGUSTA CITY 16 86,77% 9.48°/~ 125% ST. ANTHONY CITY 0 0.00% #DIV/O! 92% --..\ ST JOSEPH CITY 54 85.37% 11 .28% 107% Non Rentals 53 84.97% 11 .80% 107% Rentals 1 85.37% 11 .28% 112% annex 2 90.42% 5.07% 112% ST MARTIN CITY 8 90.18% 5.34% 119% ST. ROSA CITY 0 0.00% #DIV 10! 97% ST STEPHEN CITY 17 87.03% 9.16% 124% . SARTELL CITY 173 88.87% 6.90% 119% SAUK CENTRE CITY 57 84.74% 12.11 % 100% SPRING HILL CITY 2 146.35% -35.09% 92% WAITE PARK CITY 88 84.20% 12.83% 115%