Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1990 [09] Sep 04 MINUTES OF THE ST JOSEPH PLANNING COMMISSION SEPT. 4 1990 Members Present: Hub Klein, Chairman; Ken Hiemenz, Dan Nierengarten, Bob Loso, Art Budde, Sr. Kathleen Kalinowski OTHERS PRESENT: Rachel Stapleton, City Clerk; John Scherer, Dick Cox, Linda Viehauser, Fred Honer, Elmer Rakotz, Dave Puchalla, Mark Lambert, Wm. J. Lorentz, John L Gamades, Janet L. Gamades, Jerry Norby, Sr. Judy Schaffer, Dan Schmitz, Tony Pelzer, Becky Macleod, Hugo Weyrens, Jennie Peterson, John Anderson, Kathy Kresbach, John \~elsch, Lawrence Rennie, Marie Rennie, Rose Reber, Steve Frank, Dave Hollander, Steve Dehler, Joe Miller, Mr. Peter Van Heel, Mrs. Peter Van Heel, Herman Schneider, Dianne Gohman, Joe Gohman, Regina Hollerman, Ben Hollerman, Greg Kacures, Leander Zipp, John Eich, Margaret Eisinschenk, Mark Gottwalt, Len Walz, Betty Walz, Bill Cearny, Margaret Eich, Bernie Evans, Corky Kacures, Glen Duetz, John Kierzek, Art Reber, Art Hiemenz, Judy Weyrens. PUBI~IC HEARING: Hub Klein called the meeting to order and opened a Public Hearing to consider an amendment to zoning ordinance No. 52.4 of the St Joseph Code of Ordinances. The proposed amendment defines "family " " number of persons as any living together 1n a room or rooms comprised of a single housekeeping unit and related by blood, marriage, or adoption, or any unrelated person who resides therein as though a member of a family. Any group of persons not so related but inhabiting a single house shall, for the purposes of this ordinance, be considered to constitute one family for each three " The ordinance currently allows five persons. unrelated persons to constitute a family. The proposed amendment allows rental units currently holding a valid rental license to retain allowance, if there 1S no lapse or revocation of the license. Hub Klein asked for comments. Linda Viehauser spoke for the landlords association, stating that the association wants to work with the community so that there is harmony between the community residents, students and landlords. The landlords association feels the reduction from 5 to 3 tenants 1S not the solution as there will be the same number of students looking for housing, it will be more expensive for the students, landlords would need more housing to meet the increased demand and 3 can cause as many problems as 5. The association feels the real issue is noise and suggests a strict uniform lease and publication of a list of landlords so that neighbors would know who to contact if there 1S a problem. Viehauser stated that students should be held responsible for noise violations, not the landlords. Dick Cox appeared before the commission on behalf of the landlords association. He disagreed with the current ordinance because it singled out student tenants and felt it was not good policy to sanction landlords for actions of tenants. Cox passed out a suggested n01se ordinance that proposed shared responsibility of violations with the tenants and landlords. He stated the landlords association is willing to purchase a decibel meter and give it to the city for enforcement purposes. He also suggested that the schools play a role in disciplinary action against n01se violators in addition to ci ty action. Q. Sr. Kathleen: \'lha t group of landlords does the landlords association represent and do they meet regularly? A. The landlords association represents those landlords who are licensed and registered with the city and meet when problems arise. nill Cearny appeared before the comm1SS10n saYIng there IS a lack of communication and the landlords association should \',ork \., it h t.he city, tenants and school officials; whoever has a concern and make students aware that they could be part of the problem. Q. Sr. Kathleen: Does the college have a legal right to discipline students not on school property? A. John Scherer: Only for certain legal offenses, usually drug or alcohol related. Dick Cox stated that a private universit.y or college has more latitude than a public university. . The suggested ordinance on p. 9 holds the tenant primarily responsible and secondarily the landlord. John Scherer reminded him that that IS how the ordinance currently reads. Both tenants and property owners could be held criminally liable. Dave Pucha1la suggested that all off campus housing be coordinated with the university and the city. He suggested a $100 registration fee to be lost if violations occur , then the student \.,ou1d have something to lose too. Elmer Rakotz appeared before the commission stating that the students should be ticketed, not the landlord. If the students got the fines then there would be less parties. Bob Loso voiced concern over being able to write citations for everyone attending very large parties. Steve Dehler said the demand for housing may or may not go up \'i'Ì th strong enforcement of the ordinance because of the difficulty in checking the exact number of persons living in a place because of privacy laws. He questions how police will enforce 3 if can't enforce 5 . Bob Loso stated if the ordinance passes, the demand for housing will go up, it will promote apartment growth in the city 1n R3 areas and will place the rentals out of neighborhoods. The commission is concerned about the citizens and how they feel, not the landlords. Sr. Kathleen said trying to solve the problem with communication instead of a new ordinance would be much more effective. Bill Lorentz spoke before the commission and explained that requests for assistance from the landlords to break up loud parties would not be considered as a violation. He also said that students are not the only n01se violators. Lorentz also explained that at one noise violation, the city clerk and the landlord are notified and at the 2nd violation, the landlord receives a letter from the city clerk stating when the land lord can appear before the city council to defend his license. He also recommended that the landlords abolish kegs completely 1n their leases, as keg parties are a big problem. Steve Dehler explained to those 1n attendance that the former ordinance .. allowed 3 violations in any period and the landlord could lose his/her license. It was changed to two violations in a school year period, June 1 to June 1. Linda Viehauser voiced concern that if 1. n one school year she evicted one set of tenants for violations and the next set of tenants also violated the ordinance, she could lose her license. John Scherer explained that the landlord could lose his/her license after only one violation. John Anderson appeared before the commission and suggested working at reducing friction between renters and residents. Reducing tenants from 5 to 3 1S not the answer, saY1ng that 3 people can have just as big a party as 5. Steve Frank spoke 1n favor of the new ordinance. He felt that the city could end up with a lot of rental units and no long term residents, and " student ghetto " He encouraged a area. looking at the total package of reduction in tenant number per house, strict police enforcement of ordinances and a keg ordinance. Bill Cearny stated that there could be a student ghetto area if student housing 1S isolated in one area. He feels it 1S good for the community for students to live 1n neighborhoods. Dan Nierengarten said that spreading rental housing around makes it harder to control. Hub Klein called for recommendations on the hearing. Bob Loso made a mot.ion to close the hearing and table the discussion for a future date. Þ10tlon seconded. Ayes: Hub Klein, Ken Hiemenz Dan Nierengarten, Bob Loso, Sr. Kathleen, Art Budde Nayer,: None Motion carried 6 to O. After a brief recess, Hub Klein called the public hearing to order. The purpose of the hear:ing 1S to allo\'l citizen input on a proposed amendment to zoning ordinance No. 52 of the St Joseph code of ordinances to a 11o\'l rezon1ng of an area lying north of County Rd 75 and south of the railroad tracks, excluding the mobile home resident district. The area 1S curreutly zoned industrial. Rachel Stapleton explained that the purpose of the hearing 1 S to allow for business on Cedar street and to re-evaluate the area behind there for business, industrial or R-3 zon.lng. Hub Klein asked for comments and asked if everyone \'las familiar \vi t h the area. Dave Hollander asked if the ordinance change 1S gOlng to include all the property along Cedar Street? The comm1SS10n responded that it will include all the property along Cedar Street which 1S currently zoned Industrial. t<Ja rk Lambert passed around aerial maps of the area being considered. Steve Dehler asked \'lha t the difference was between being zoned industrial and commercial. Hub Klein explained that with industrial there could be almost anything put 1n there and could end up with some awful odors \'lhereas \vi t h commercial you are kind of limited as to \1ha t you can put there. Steve Dehler then <lsked if any kind of building In an industrial area requIres a special use permit and if the comm1SS10n didn't \'lant that particular business then could the comm1SSlon just turn down the request? John Scherer explained that denial of a special use permit requires a finding or justification. Dianne Gohman expressed concern over Mark Lambert's placing of a student housing apartment building ln that area. Bob Loso stated that the outlook for the area north of CSAH 75 1. S pretty much for business. Hub Klein said that the city has had chances of getting some businesses and just hasn't had places for t.hem. He then asked John Scherer to explain further. John Seherer stated that the city was eoncerned with having " piece-meal" of the and industrial development rezoning area there 1S very slow or nonexistent. He said as the area .1 S zoned now, sellers could only sell their residences as a residence or find some one to develop it as industrial, which would be difficult because of the size of the lots. He also said that rezoning could lncrease the property values as the 0''/ner8 could sell as residential, commercial or R-3. He said there are pros and cons on both sides. Ben Hollerman stated that if Mr. Lambert starts building apartment houses, that 1S not gOing to increase t.he value of their properties. He also said that other businesses would 1nerease the property value more than student housing \'/ou1d. He spoke in favor of leaving the zoning ordinance as it lS. John Scherer stated that there has been very little rezon.1ng done ln the city. Joe Miller asked the difference on taxation on property ln an industrial or commercial zone. John Scherer said that the tax rate is based on current use, not just the zoning. Joe Miller then asked how to get a conditional use permit. John Scherer explained it involved coming before the planning commission then the city council and proving that the proposed use lS not gOlng to cause any major problems in the area. He then explained that commercial 1S a light business- like what you see downtown and R-3 lS multiple housing. Dave Hollander asked if it 1S all zoned commercial, would Mark Lambert be able to construct apartments? Rachel Stapleton said it would be permitted under a special use permit. Dianne Gohman expressed concern over the possible extension of Date Street and being assessed for it. The COmmiSSion doubted that Date Street would be extended, but said there was no guarantee. Art Budde asked if the objections raised \vere to Nark Lambert's plans for the area or to the reZOIl1.ng completely. Hub Klein said the hearing 1.S for rezon1.ng, not Lambert's plans. Dianne Gohman stated she was against the rezon1ng. Ken Hiemenz stated that if the COmmlSS1.0n approved the recommendation for reZOn1.T1g, then automatically there would be an R-3 area. Steve Dehl(~r said that the plallning COmm1.SS101l did not want to start spot zon1ng In that area. He said the commlSS10n wanted to take a look at that area and see if there can be a sensible way of handling this small area of our city, \vh i c h could make it better. Dianne Gohman stated she \vould rather have a factory back there than the student rental. Bernadettp Van Heel said she didn't want the neighborhood changed. t>la rk Lambert. stated that his plans only represented 10 per cent of the land being discussed and that with the industrial zon.1ng there, it 1S not a residential neighborhood. Lambert also stated that the neighbors In that area have to realize that it's not a residint.lal neighborhood, it's an industrinl neighborhood. He said that 1n the future it wi 11 bp a b \1 Sl tl e s s devel0pmpnt and it may look odd nOlv but ,yon ' t. 1n the future. He D.sked that the COmmlSS1.0n designate his three lots R-3 as he feels that. it a very good use for that land, Davp Hollander stated that he would like the comml. s S 1 on to re-zone everything commercial. If a landowner has a need for a diffprent type of 7.0n.1ng, .1 t should be up to him to corne before the COmmlSS1.0n to request the needed changes. Art Budde made a motion to close the hearing and to table the discussion for a future date. Ayes: Hub Klp.1n. Ken IIiemenz, Art Budde, Bob Loso, Sr. Kathleen Kalinowski, Dan Nierengarten. Nayes: None. ~1 0 t ion carried. 6 to 0 There was a question raised as to hON long to table the discussion. It. \va s explained that the commission could table it indefinitely. If no recommendation was made within 60 days, the city council could take action. Art Budde made a motion to adjourn. Bob Loso seconded. The meeting was adjourned. Respectfully submitted, .-- IC ' /:é.C£~<- ' ~'-- ···:i.v/;",- ,;/ Teresa Kruger-Lahr, Secretary