Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003 [01] Jan 29 I I I I I I January 29, 2003 i Page 1 of 7 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the City Council for the City of St. Joseph! met in special sessio~ on Thursday January 29, 2003 at 6:00 PM in the St. Joseph City Hall. i Members Present: Mayor Larry Hosch. Councilors AI Rassier, Ross Rieke, Dale Wick. Administrator Judy Weyrens Plannina Commission Members Present: Chair Gary Utsch. Commissioners S. Kathleen Kalinowski, Marge Lesnick, Jim Graeve, Mike Deutz, Kurt Schneider. Council Liaison AI Rassier. i Mayor Hosch stated the purpose of the meeting was to review proposed ChangeJ to Zoning Ordinance I 52. Mayor Hosch turned the floor over to planning consultants Cynthia Smith-Strack and Joanne Foust: I Foust stated that the Planning Commission has been in the process of reviewing the Zoning Ordinances since September 2002. The following is a summary of proposed changes: ' , Definitions _ a number of new definitions have been added to clarify sections within the ordinance. These I include but are not limited to; billboard, church, conditional use, daycare-home, duplex, dwelling, attached dwelling, detached dwelling, easement, fioodplain, floodway, fioor area ratio, hydric soils, hydrophytic vegetation, impervious surface, intensive vegetation clearing, kennel, land disturbing activities, manufacturing - heavy and light, manufactured home park, modular home park, modular home, non - building, ordinary high water level, I parking lot, planned unit development, principal use, property owner, public waters, recreational vehicle, , screening, semi-public use, shore impact zone, shoreland, street frontage, use-accessory, use-incompatible, use- special, vacation, waterbody, watercourse, watershed and zoning district. Board of Appeals _ By statute the City is required to establish a Board of Appeals. This section now clarifies'that the Planning Commission acts as the Board of Appeals. i . I Variance _ Clarifications have been suggested to note a variance may not be granted for land "use", per staté statutes as well as notes the variance requested must be the minimum needed to proceed and granting the I variance will not be detrimental to the ordinance or other properties. Requirements for a majority of the Planning Commission to approve is also noted vs 2/3 vote. I , , Interim Use Permits _ This is a new section which is consistent with state statutes which allows the city to issue an "Interim Use Permif' rather than a conditional use permit. Difference between the two are as follows: ' » Interim Use Permits are for a limited period of time to be specified by the Pc and CC while Condition Use Permits transfer with land ownership. I » Interim Use Permits allow for a use that is presently acceptable but may not be acceptable in:the , ' I Amendments to the Ordinance Including Rezoning -IF the request to rezone property is consistent with the comprehensive plan, a public hearing is still held, however the applicant on longer needs 50% or greater of the adjacent property owners signatures to proceed with the request. I I Non-conforming uses (Section 52.12) - This section has been added to allow construction on single lots of record which were platted prior to the ordinance taking affect. It notes, however, that if two or more adjacent lots are under the same ownership, they must be combined rather than allowing construction on two non-conforming lots (e.g. Below minimum lot size andlor width). I, I Planned Unit Development - This section has been expanded from the previous Planned Unite Residentia! Development (PURD) to PUD to allow planned unit developments for commercial and industrial developments. PURDs continue to require a minimum 20 acres for development. PUDs for commercial/industrial uses do not have a minimum size. I I , General RequirementslParking Provisions - The current Ordinance does not include regulations for curb 'cuts. Proposed language required curb cuts to be a minimum of 40' from the intersection of two street of residential district and 60' from street Intersections in commerciallindustrial areas. Curb cuts would aiso be required to be 5' from property lines. Residential properties would be limited to one curb cut no morT than 24' in width. : I Parking Lot Standards _ Additional parking lot standards have been included such as the limitation of signage. Requirement for screening of parking iots from residential areas. Definition of parking space and driving lane I future. <do e-,''-''f'' January 29, 2003 Page 2 of7 standards in parking lots, requirements for drainage and surfacing, striping, circulation, maintenance and lighting. A parking lot is defined as 3 or more spaces. Special and Temporary Signs - This section specifies regulations for special and temporary signs including the size (max. 64 sp. Ft.), duration of time they may be located on site (30 or 40 days), illumination, wiring and anchors. This section also addresses subdivision development signs, real estate signs, campaign signs and advertising signs or billboards. Accessory Buildings - Square footage of accessory buildings is proposed to be limited to 1,350 sq. feet or 10% of the lot area in R-1 and R-2 Districts. Similar exterior building material is proposed for the accessory and principal structures, as well as similar roof pitch and a maximum sidewall height of 10'. Fencing, Screening, Landscaping and Storage - It is suggested the City incorporate language from Ordinance 57 into the zoning ordinance relating to fence requirements. References to decorative masonry landscape walls are also included. A notation that landscaping in city easements is not encourages and may be removed at the applicants' expense for utility work is also included. A requirement to construct a fence with the finished side abutting neighboring property is also included. Ordinance 57 would be repealed upon adoption of the revised Zoning Ordinance. General Building and Lot Restrictions - Three significant amendments are proposed to this section; (1) No galvanized or unfinished steel or unfinished aluminum building exteriors would be permitted, except in the Agricultural District, (2) A requirement that buildings in all Zoning Districts maintain a high standard of architectural and aesthetic compatibility with surrounding properties; and (3) Dwellings in the R-1, R-2 and R-3 Districts would be required to have a minimum roof pitch of 4:12 with each roof shingled or feature an approved material. Each dwelling would be required to be 22' wide and be placed on a permanent wood or concrete foundation. Independent Sewage Treatment System Provisions - This is a new section which is proposed. It requires properties to connect to the municipal systems when it becomes available, references Minnesota Rules relating to independent sewage treatment systems (ISTS) and requires properties with ISTPs to provide evidence of compliance prior to issuance of a building permit to expand the building. Dwelling Unit Restrictions - This section has been expanded to clarify that garages, tents or accessory buildings may not be utilized as an independent dwelling unit. It also requires that dwelling have direct access to a public street. Outdoor Storage and Refuse - Outdoor storage regulations including items exempted form the section (e.g. clothes lines, lawn furniture, ect.), permitted location of outdoor storage, and restrictions against the storage of refuse and waste materials are noted within this section. Moving of Buildings - This section specifies requirements for the moving of buildings in or not of the community as well as within the city. It defines legal dimensions and weight which require a permit and the application process. Adult Entertainment Establishment Zone - This section has been expanded to address the sale or dispensing of intoxicating liquors and prohibits the employments by or entrance of the facility by individuals under 18 years of age. Home Occupations - A new section has been has developed to specify permitted and special home occupations. This section notates that requirements to operate a home occupation business including number of employees on the premises, signage, parking and percent of the square footage of the home that may be used for business purposes. Agricultural District - Kennels - Additional requirements for kennels located in agricultural districts have been included such as screening form residential uses, setbacks from property lines and enclosure of pens or corrals. Residential Rental Requirements - Additional requirements including the need for adequate off-street parking, sufficient ceiling height, ventilation and fire escapes are referenced in this section. I I Residential (R-1) Performance Standards - These requirements are proposed to be updated to require a I greater setback for accessory buildings which are adjacent to a public right-of-way, limit the height of buildings to 2 Y, stories or 35' and allow site coverage of 30% of the lot areas. I I I i I , January 29, 2003 Page 3 of 7 Sign Regulations _ Regulations for signs have been include,d .as ª subdivision within! each zoning dlstric;, wit~ applicable requirements and performance standards noted. " I , I Yard Cover _ The proposed ordinance would require owners to provide a lawn or cover vegetation within three months of receipt of a certificate of occupancy. This section also prohibits grass form exceeding 6" in height. I Accessory Uses in Multiple-Family Residential Districts - This section Includes additional requirements for' the height and size of accessory buildings including garages and storage buildings in multiple-family districts. I , , Multiple-Family Residential District Requirements - Other proposed amendments to the multiple-family I residential district includes building height restrictions of 40' and the requirement to submit development plan for new multi-family developments. I I Manufactured Home Parks _ State statues require cities to provide areas for manufactured home parks. This section Includes regulations for new manufactured home parks including required application materials, I performance standards (land size, street design, open space, parking, landscaping, utilities, record keeping and specific lot requirements for manufactured homes). ' Central Business District (B-1) - Proposed changes to this section include (1) expansion of the types of 1 businesses permitted in this district, (2) inclusion of site coverage requirements of 90%, (3) incorporation of sign regulations within this section, and (4) specification of development plan contents. ! I Highway Business District (B-2) - Proposed changes to this section include (1) modification of permitted arid special uses within the highway commercial district, (2) specification of requirement and conditions for the I Issuance of special use permits, (3) the inclusion of a minimum lot size of 10,000 square feet and lot width of 100 feet, unless platted prior to 1950, (4) maximum site coverage of 60%, (5) footing and building exterior I requirements for new facilities, and (6) incorporation of applicable sign regulations within this section. ' General Business District (B-3) _ This is a proposed new zoning district for concentrated general business and commercial activities. This section includes a list of permitted and special uses, accessory use standards, I performance standards Including let sizes, setback, height requirements and site coverage and other general' requirements. This section also specifies development plan contents and sign regulations. : I Light Industrial District (L 1) _ This section has been amended to (1) expand the list of permitted used to include additional types of manufacturing businesses, (2) include minimum lost size requirements ot one acre and I minimum lot width of 100 feet, (3) increase side yard setbacks form 10 feet to 25 feet, (4) include other regulations such as parking lots, loading docks, building exterior and footing requirements, screening regulations, lighting, landscaping and sign regulations, (5) Development Plan requirements are also specified. Educational- Ecclesiastical District (EE) - This section has been amended to (1) Include grade schools, high schools and vocational schools as permitted uses within this district, (2) identify permitted accessory structures, (3) include performance standards relating to building height, setbacks, site coverage, screening, lighting, I landscaping and parking and (4) identify Development Plan requirements. 1 : I Public District _ This is a proposed new zoning classification for public facilities. This section includes I performance standards such as setbacks, height requirements, site coverage, parking lots and signs. I , Surface Water Managements - This is a proposed new section which is intended to protect wetlands, woodlands and natural habitat areas. This section includes Information relating to its applicability, surface water manag~ment approval procedures, surface water management standards, plan requirements, plan review procedure, site I dewatering requirements, waste and material disposal, tracking, drain inlet protection and site erosion control. This section also identifies design standards for detention facilities and watershed and groundwater management ::::. Preservation and Woodland Protection - This is a proposed new section, lhiCh limits developmeJon slopes greater than 12%, includes standards for soil erosion and sediment control and encourages preservation of existing trees. I Shoreland Overlay District _ This is a proposed new section which is designed to protect and enhance th~ quality of surface waters by promoting the wise utilization of public waters, watercourses and related land I resources. This section specifies the (1) applicability, (2) shoreland classification system, (3) permitted sues, (4) special use, (5) accessory uses, (6) lot area requirements, (7) setback requirements, (8) height requirements, (9) i'·;p,b.,.,J. . .,. ........".J January 29, 2003 Page 4 of 7 surface coverage requirements, (10) special requirements for commercial uses, (11) other general requirements, (12) the notification procedures to the DNR, (13) Planned Unit Developments within the Shoreland Overlay District and (14) conversions to Planned Unit Developments. The following is a summary of questions/comments discussed during review of the proposed amendments to Zoning Ordinance No. 52. Question/Comment AnswerlResponse Schneider questioned if the park dedication fee Foust stated the park dedication requirements are should be higher for PURD developments as the included in the Subdivision Ordinance not the density is typically higher than a standard housing zoning ordinance. The Commission will be development. reviewing the Subdivision Ordinance within the upcoming months. Deutz questioned if the revised Ordinance will Foust clarified that the new Ordinance will require require all residents/property owners to connect to all property owners to connect to municipal water and sewer once it becomes available. services as soon as they are available. Residents will be allowed to maintain well systems for irrigation only. Weyrens clarified that the Sewer Ordinance allows a property owner a period of fIVe years to connect to sewer services if the property owner can certify that the septic system is new. Hosch questioned the proposed landscaping The Commission clarified that when the changes provision requiring landscaping to be completed were recommended it was intended to allow within 3 months of the issuance of a certificate of additional time for CO's issued after November. occupancy (CO). Hosch stated that if a property The Ordinance will be amended to allow property owner received a CO in October it would be owners receiving a Certificate of Occupancy impossible to have landscaping established within between November 1 and May 15 until August 1 to 3 months. have established vegetation. Hosch questioned the proposed revision to PURD Smith-Strack stated the intent of the revised PURD standards whereby it states that a PURD can be Ordinance is to allow for a Commercial PURD as developed with only single family housing. Hosch well as housing. The intent of a residential PURD stated that if a PURD can be developed without a will remain to provide a mix of housing. mix of housing all developers will request to develop as a PURD making the R1 regulations obsolete. Hosch requested the City consider allowing owner Smith-Strack and Foust recommended the Council occupied rental units in R1 districts without and Planning Gommission consider removing the completing the Special Use process. Hosch stated owner occupied rental provision from the Zoning it is his opinion that regulating if a property owner Ordinance and include the provision in the rental can rent a portion of their house is over regulation. housing Ordinance. Foust stated that most cities do not include rental licensing in the Zoning Ordinance. Utsch stated that the Planning Commission is recommending the Ordinance be amended to require an interim use permit for owner occupied rental units so that thev can be limited to the I I I I I I -'-"~~,--,,<,.,''''''~''~'''- Hosch requested the Council and Planning Commission consider requiring a 500 foot buffer if a multi family unit is constructed over 2 Y, stores that abuts a residential zoning district. Hosch stated that the City needs to protect the residential neighborhoods and would encourage the inclusion of a buffer. Hosch questioned if the Planning Commission intended to relieve the exterior requirements of the B2 Zoning District. The current Ordinance includes a provision that 50% of the exterior must meet specified standards, while the proposed amendment reduces the exterior requirement to 25%. Schneider questioned if the Ordinance regulating Manufactured Home Parks shouid be amended to include a park dedication fee. Graeve auestioned if the Ordinance could be I January 29, 2003 Page 5 of 7 , ! propertyolNner making application for the interim ¡ use. Once a Special Use Permit is issued it I remains with the property and is transferable. ì If the Ordinance is amended to allow owner I occupied rental units in a R1 zoning district, they become permanent rental licenses. Utsch stated that if the Council is willing to enforce the ' Ordinances and hold the property owners accountable resulting from a rental license he many reconsider the Special Use provision. I ì It was agreed to by consensus that an owner occupied rental unit would be permitted in a R1 Zoning district by issuing im interim use permit. Further, the City Attorney and Planning Consultahts will review alterative language to allow rental units in a R1 area provided that the dwelling unit does not create a separate unit divided by walls. ' Deutz stated if a multifam'¡ly unit is constructed I screening is required that the screening can serVe as a buffer.: I Utsch stated that requiring a 500 foot buffer would not be practicable in a PURD development and I does not see the need to create a large buffer I zone. Hosch responded that he only used 500 feet as an example and would consider a smaller buffer but feels strongly that a buffer is needed. Rieke stated that he does not believe that constructing multifamily units creates a situatioh where the City must protect something. i Those present agreed to revise the current setback requirements in a R3 Zoning district to require a 50 foot front and rear yard setback if a multifamily I structure abuts a residential district. ì I The proposed amendment will be revised to re~ain the current percentage of exterior requirements. Smith-Strack stated this! matter will be included in the subdivision ordinance. . I I I Smith-Strack stated that most Cities require both a -c_,'" '. " ,,' '."' I ' , I I I I _L ," January 29, 2003 Page 6 of 1 amended to require walkways and trails in all park dedication fee and walking paths in all new developments in addition to the park dedication fee. developments. Weyrens stated that Joe Pfannenstein requested City Attorney Sue Dege stated that State Law does clarification if it was the intent of the City to prohibit not allow amortization of advertising signs and she billboards and amortize non conforming signs as will make the necessary corrections to the current stated in the current ordinance. Ordinance. Utsch stated that the Planning Commission is recommending the Ordinance be amended to prohibit billboards within the City limits. Rieke expressed opposition to such and requested the Council and Planning Commission reconsider the prohibition. Schneider questioned the inconsistency of the Faust stated that was an oversight and both requirements of regulating gasoline service stations sections will include the same language. between the B3 General Business District and the L 1 Light Industrial Zoning District. Smith-Strack stated that Mark Lambert could not attend the meeting but has several concerns with the proposed zoning amendments. The Council and Planning Commission agreed to review the concerns of Lambert. They are as follows: Ordinance Response Request 52.14 Subd. 5(g) All parking lots shall Requested this provision be Action: Request denied be screened and landscaped from revised to pertain to R1 or abutting residential uses or districts by R2 Zoning Districts only. a wall, fence or denseiy-planted compact hedge or tree cover not less Consider revising the than four (4) feet nor more than (8) provision to only require feet in height. screening around the perimeter of the property. Manufactured Home District (MHD Request: Exclude or exempt Action: Request accepted, the Ordinance not numbered, new existing Manufactured Home amendment will be modified Ordinance). Abolish RM Zoning Parks. before the public hearing. District and require design standards for all new Manufacture Home Parks. Manufactured Home District - Request: Include a listing of Action: Request accepted and Provision 13: Detailed description of what will be required for language will be added referring maintenance procedures and grounds maintenance to the nuisance Ordinances such supervision. as weeds, snow removal and junk car. A disclaimer will be added: Such as but not limited to. Performance Standards for MHD: Request: Revise to allow for Action: Internal Roads will be a Provision 5 (I): Ail internal streets shall 24 foot roads with no minimum of 24 feet with no I I I I I I .__^._,~""",c·.·_~··.._~__..."..·." ...._,,'"_,.._, I January 29, 2003 Page 7 of7 I be a minimum of 30 feet in width from parking or 36 foot roads with parking allowed on internal i face-of-curb to face-of-curb. parking. streets. Provision 5(iv): Dead-end streets shail Request: Revise to allow Action: Provision will remain as is be prohibited cul-de-sacs but with a site plan a cul-de-saC may be lacceptable. I Provision 8: Patio Required. Each Request: Revise to reduce Action: Provision will be revised manufactured home lot shall have a patio requirements to 9 x 15. to require a patio with a minimum four-Inch concrete patio with minimum of 150 square feet with no one dimensions of 9 feet by 20 feet. side being less than 9 feet. Provision 9: Requiring a common Request: Clarification if a Action: Sidewalk will only be walkway. sidewalk will be required on required on one side of the both sides of the road. roadway. , i Provision 15: A properly landscaped Request: Allow relief if Action: Provision to remain as area shall be adequately maintained topographical features drafted with no change. around all public area, adjacent to ail provide screening. roadways and on each manufacture home lot. I Ordinance 52.19 Subd 11: Requires Request: Remove the word Action:' Draft will be amended'to the development be compatible with complementary. remove the word complementary. and complementary to adjacent land i I , uses. I Ordinance 52.22 Subd. 6 (e): Rear Request: Revise to exclude Action: Provision to remain as yard setback shall be ten (10) feet R3 from the 35 foot setback drafted not excluding R3 from from the lot line, 35 feet if abutting a requirement. said requirement. I residential district. I I Adiourn: Deutz made a motion to adjourn at 8:30 PM; seconded by Lesnick and passed unanimously by those present. ~ct;' ~ Ju Weyrens dministrator , 1 I THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK I I