Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1994 [07] Jul 05 - Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the Planning Commission - for the City of st. Joseph met in regular session on Tuesday, July 5, 1994 at 7:00 p.m. in the st. Joseph City Hall. Members Present: Chair Hub Klein. Commissioners Marge Lesnick, S. Kathleen Kalinowski, Dan Nierengarten, Kurt Schneider, Andy Brixius. Council Liaison Ken Hiemenz. City Attorney John Scherer. Secretary of the Commission Judy Weyrens. Others Present: Bud Reber, Leanne Walsh, Kathy Scheil, Oda Larson, Stanley Larson, Bob Loso, Igor Lenzer, Michelle Lindell, Eileen Hemmesch, Elizabeth Doyle, Pat Montagne, Winnie Montagne, Cheryl Josephs, Kent Simon, Cheryl Wesely, Ingrid Johnson. Public Hearinq - Nuditv Ordinance Amendment: Chair Klein called the hearing to order at 7:00 p.m. The purpose of the hearing was to allow citizen input on a proposed amendment to Zoning Ordinance No. 52 of the st. Joseph Code of Ordinances. The ordinance amendment would restrict nude dancing to industrial areas or place additional restrictions distancing the activity from residential areas. The purpose or intent of the ordinance would be to prohibit secondary effects such as preserving the quality and vitality of neighborhoods, curtailing the depression of property values, restraining increased criminal activity and slowing the spread of sexually transmitted diseases. Linda Sniezek provided written testimony which requested the Planning Commission add language to the proposed draft prohibiting Child Pornography. Sniezek stated that we have to protect children and make sure that there can not be any exploitation of children. Additionally, she states that st. Joseph should make such consequences severe and make it known that the city of st. Joseph will not tolerate such activity. Hiemenz made a motion to recommend the City Council authorize the City Attorney to revise the proposed amendment to include language prohibiting child pornography. The motion was seconded by Kalinowski. Ayes: Klein, Kalinowski, Lesnick, Brixius, Nierengarten, Schneider, Hiemenz. Nayes: None. Motion Carried 7:0:0 City Attorney John Scherer presented a "Report of the Attorney General's Working Group on the Regulation of Sexually Oriented Business." This study supports regulating such activities. Mr. Scherer requested that this document become part of the official record of this hearing, and will be on file in the City Offices. The Commission questioned Mr. Scherer on the distance allowed between such establishments. Mr. Scherer stated that the City must provide a place for such activities, being careful not to be too restrictive. The Hearing was closed at 7:17 p.m. - Kalinowski made a motion to recommend the City Council accept the amendments to the nudity ordinance as presented, with the above - revision, prohibiting child pornography. The motion was seconded by Hiemenz. Ayes: Klein, Kalinowski, Lesnick, Brixius, Nierengarten, Schneider, Hiemenz. Nayes: None. Motion Carried 7:0:0 steve Dehler - Parking Lot Plan: Chair Klein acknowledged the absence of Mr. Dehler, but stated that this issue needs to be resolved. Therefore, this matter will be discussed at this time. Klein stated that he had the opportunity to call Hardrives and discuss what options are available for installing a hard, dust free surface. Hardrives did indicate that Class II is not considered a dust free surface. Schneider stated that he would like some closure to this issue, if his parking lot is not acceptable, then he should be informed that he is in violation of the Ordinance. Additionally, if the Ordinance is not correct then that issue needs to be addressed to prevent this from happening again. Hiemenz stated that he checked with Meridian Aggregates and they stated that Calcium Chloride could be used to settle the dust, but that would be a temporary solution. Commissioners generally agreed that the Ordinance regulating parking lots needs to be clarified and amended to specifically list the hard surfaces that would be acceptable. Bob Loso questioned whether it would be advisable to wait until the issue at hand is resolved before amending the ordinance. With regard to the Linnemann Inn parking lot, Mr. Scherer presented the following alternative: The City Offices could be directed to inform the property owners that the surface is not acceptable and it must be removed and a hard surface installed in its' place. This action should allow the property owners a reasonable period of time for completion. Klein made a motion to not accept the parking lot surface of the Linnemann Inn as "dust free". Additionally, this motion requests that the Council authorize the City Offices to send notice to the property owners stating the surface is not dust free and must be removed. The motion was seconded by Hiemenz. Ayes: Klein, Kalinowski, Lesnick, Brixius, Nierengarten, Schneider, Hiemenz. Nayes: None. Motion Carried 7:0:0 Kalinowski made a motion to recommend the City Council amend Ordinance 52.13 subd 5(b) to specifically define a hard surface, authorizing the City Offices to contact the City Engineer to ...... determine what is an acceptable hard surface and relay this information to the City Attorney, and schedule the public hearing - for August 1, 1994. The motion was seconded by Brixius. Ayes: Klein, Kalinowski, Lesnick, Brixius, Nierengarten, Schneider, Hiemenz. Nayes: None. Motion Carried 7:0:0 Minutes May 16 & June 6, 1994: Hiemenz made a motion to approve the minutes of May 16 and June 6, 1994 as presented; seconded by Lesnick. Ayes: Klein, Kalinowski, Lesnick, Brixius, Nierengarten, Schneider, Hiemenz. Nayes: None. Motion Carried 7:0:0 Public Hearinq - City of st. Joseph: Chair Klein called the hearing to order at 7:45 p.m. The purpose of the hearing is to consider a special use permit to allow an advertising sign on property currently zoned Industrial. Zoning Ordinance No. 52.13 Subd. 10(a) of the st. Joseph Code of Ordinances defines an advertising sign as, "a sign which directs attention to a business, profession, commodity, service or entertainment which is sold or offered on a premise other than that on which the sign is located." Furthermore, "Advertising signs or billboards may be constructed and maintained, pursuant to a Special Use Permit, Industrial (I ), and or Agricultural (A) . No advertising signs or billboards shall be constructed or maintained on property subject to any other zoning classification than that specifically allowed herein." The property is located at 500 Second Avenue Northwest and legally described as follows: Section 010, Township 124, Range 029. 8.53A S800' x 800' of E2NE4 lying N of TH52, 8.53 Acres. The request for special use has been submitted by the City of st. Joseph. Bob Loso spoke on behalf of the Ci ty of st. Joseph. Loso stated that the City would like to construct a sign to identify the location of the Wastewater Plant, Maintenance Department, Boy Scout Troop 84, and Shannon's Upholstery. The sign would be constructed of red cedar with routered lettering. Shannan's Upholstery would be charged an annual rental fee for this advertising. Lesnick made a motion to recommend Council approval of the Special Use Permit as presented by the City of st. Joseph. The motion was seconded by Nierengarten. Ayes: Klein, Kalinowski, Lesnick, Brixius, Nierengarten, Schneider, Hiemenz. Nayes: None. Motion Carried 7:0:0 Stearns County HRA - Cheryl Josephs: Cheryl Josephs appeared before the Commission and spoke on behalf of Stearns County HRA. Ms. Josephs stated that since the last time they had been before this Commission, they have been working on acquiring Outlot A for an ingress/egress for the proposed development. Outlot A is still under private ownership; and if an agreement cannot be reached with the property owners, HRA is prepared to acquire the property ...- through eminent domain. The Planning Commission at there May 2, 1994 meeting stated that they would not make a recommendation on the special use permi t - until the Fire Chief has accepted the plan and an ingress/egress has been secured. Ms. Josephs is requesting that the Planning Commission make a determination on the Special Use Permit at this time, contingent upon obtaining the ingress/egress. Kent Simon, archi tect for the project, discussed the current layout. Mr. Simon stated that all the setbacks and ordinance requirements are being adhered to with the proposed layout. Additionally, the proposed layout is the most efficient use of the property. Ms. Josephs also stated at this time that the uni ts proposed for st. Joseph are part of a 20 unit project throughout Stearns County. Stanley & Oda Larson questioned how the Commission could approve a pi an that incl uded ingress/ egress over private property. Oda stated that when they bought the property, they were told that the property in question at this hearing would be developed into townhomes. Igor Lenzner, attorney representing HRA, discussed the methods of obtaining ingress/egress to the property and assured the Commission that within 90 days HRA would have adequate ingress/egress to the proposed development. If a settlement cannot be reached with the property owners, HRA has condemnation powers and will exercise this right. Michelle Lindell spoke on behalf of the residents. She requested that the Commission refrain from making a decision unti I the easement issue has been resol ved. Ms. Lindell stated that the residents also have the following concerns: * Effect on home values in the neighborhood * Safety concerns about the children The residents are requesting that HRA consider reducing the number of units; thus allowing a driveway on the property which will house the units. Cheryl Wesely discussed the impact of allowing the area known as Outlot A to be used as an ingress/egress. The outlot currently serves six residents. While the parents do not encourage children to play in the outlot area, it happens. Allowing the outlot to be used as an ingress/egress for the proposed apartment units, would increase the traffic tremendously on the outlot, creating a hazard for the children. Scherer discussed with the Commission the procedure involved in making a decision and the al ternati ves avai I abl e. Based on the criteria of Ordinance 52.8 subd 4, the Commission must determine if the proposal fit within the guidelines and state the findings which support the decision. The Planning Commission can take one of two actions at this time: l. Defer a decision until the condemnation is complete 2 . Resolve the matter and recommend a decision to the Council at this meeting. After reviewing the plan as submitted by HRA, see exhibit A, the Commission determined that it did not meet all the criteria. Therefore, Kalinowski made a motion to recommend that the City Council deny the Special Use request of Stearns County HRA based on the following: 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: 1. st. Joseph Code of Ordinances 52.8 subd 3(b): The Planning Commission shall consider possible adverse effects of the proposed conditional use and what additional requirements may be necessary to reduce any adverse effects. Finding: The increase in traffic would jeopardize the safety of the neighborhood. 2. st. Joseph Code of Ordinances 52.8 subd 4: The Planning Commission shall recommend a special use permit and the Council shall order the issuance of such permit only if both the Planning Commission and Council find that such use at the proposed location: (see exhibit b) Finding: a) The proposal WILL be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, morals, comfort, convenience or general welfare of the neighborhood or City. Finding: b) The proposal WILL NOT be harmonious with the general and applicable specific objectives of the comprehensive plan of the City and this Ordinance. Finding: d) The proposal WILL be hazardous or disturbing to existing or future neighboring land uses. Finding: e) The proposal WILL NOT be served adequately by essential public facilities and services, including streets, police and fire protection . . . Finding: g) The proposal WILL involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property, or the general welfare because of excessive production of traffic.. Finding: h) The proposal WILL NOT 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: k) WILL NOT conform to specific standards of this Ordinance applicable to the particular use. 3. st. Joseph Code of Ordinances 52.8 subd 5: If the Planning Commission recommends denial of a special use permit or the Council orders such denial, it shall include in its recommendations or determination findings as to the ways in which the proposed use does not comply with the standards required by this Ordinance. Based upon these findings, the Planning Commission recommends denial of the Special Use Permit that would allow for the operation of a R-2 use in an area zoned R-3. The motion was seconded by Lesnick. Ayes: Klein, Kalinowski, Lesnick, Brixius, Nierengarten.. Schneider, Hiemenz. Nayes: None. Motion Carried 7:0:0 Adiourn: Lesnick made a motion to adjourn at 9:30 p.m. ; seconded by Brixius. Ayes: Klein, Kalinowski, Lesnick, Brixius, Nierengarten, Schneider.. Hiemenz. Nayes: None. Motion Carried 7:0:0 ~dýd~S udy Weyrens Se cre tar y of the Commission,