HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001 [07] Jul 16
1
I
1
I
,
I
I
July 16,2001
Page 110[5
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the SI. Joseph City Council and Planning Commission met in jbint
session on Monday, July 16, 2001 at 7:00 PM in the St. Joseph Community Fire Hall.
City Council Members Present: Mayor Larry Hosch. Councilors Bob Loso, AI Rassier, Kyle Schneider
and Cory Ehlert (arriving at 8:30). City Administrator/Clerk Judy Weyrens. '
,
Plannlnq Commission Members Present: Chair Gary Utsch. Commissioners S~ Kathleen Kalinowski,
Marge Lesnick, Mike Deutz. Planning Commission Secretary Chad Carlson. I
Others Present: Art Reber, Marie Reber, Elmer Rakotz, Bill Wasner, Steve Fra~k, Joyce Stock, Paul
Reber, Doug Inselman, Miriam Ardolf OSB, Gladys Schneider, Donald Schneider, Sister Kara Peters i
OSB, Sister Paula Revier OSB, Ken Hiemenz, Brenda Hommerding, Glenn Hommerding, Judy ,
Bruemmer, Shaun Christen, Colleen Murphy Cooney, Timothy Cooney, Bill Elfering, Janie Brownie, Larry
L Brownie, AI Maleska, Linda Muske, Dan Muske, Brad Zimmer, Cara Zimmer, Kay Lemke, Dorothy I
Court, Nel Pfannenstein, Bruce Meyer, Marge Wagner, Kevin O'Leary, Jill O'Leary, Tom Ellenbecker, I
Mark Winter, Kelly Winter, Bill Lowell, Amy Lowell, Nancy McDarby, Madeline Beaumont, Keith Grube~,
Cathy Opoien, Kyle Opoien, Robert Pfannenstein, Kelly McCann, Tim Borresch,' Sally Pitzen, Dan 1
Murphy, Mark Zwolinski, Jane Schulzetenberg, David A borgen, Marlin Eich, 8rùce Austin, Ervin Goebel,
Don Burgett, Addy Burgett, Neil Loso, Dana Steffens, Patricia Dahl, Shelly Thomas, Dave Thomas, Joyce
Meyer, Nettie Pfannenstein, Andy Lahr, Terese Kruger Lahr, Dorothy Anderson, Bob Wagern, Dick Stock,
Joyce Stock, Mary Hiltner, Loren Loso, Don Warner, Jan Warner, Clarence Fischer, Chuck Potter, Mark
Schloesser, Doug Peterson, Jan Peterson.
Mayor Hosch opened the public hearing at 7:00 PM and stated the purpose of the hearing is to accept 1
testimony regarding the proposed zoning changes recommended by the Planning Commission. Hosch
stated that all persons wishing to speak may do so and will be limited to 5 minutes. '
I
Administrator/Clerk Weyrens clarified the following items: I
1. Property is taxed based on valuation, not the zoning classification. Therefore, changing
classification from residential to commercial does not automatically increase property i
taxes.
2. Property rezoned will be allowed to continue the current use and will be grandfathered'
As such the property can be sold and continue to be used in the grandfather status. 1
However, if the property is destroyed beyond 50%, the property could not be rebuilt under
the grandfather status unless approved by the Planning commiision. I
Mayor Hosch opened the floor for comment and requested that all persons speaking state their name and
address. In an effort to allow input on all proposed zoning classifications, testimony will be taken on each
area separately. To follow is a summary of testimony received.
Area #1 - Property located south of Minnesota Street between 2nd Avenue NW and sth Avenue NW.
Proposed zoning change from R1 Single Family to R2 Multiple Family. i I
Tim Borresch of 11 - 3'" Avenue NW: Encouraged the Commission to leave the zoning classification as it
currently is zoned. Borresch expressed concern for the considerable amount of, traffic that is generated
on County Road 2 and questioned if adding additional rental is appropriate. I I
Mary Niedenfuer of 202 - ff' Avenue NW: Requested the zoning remain R1. She stated the homes I
along Minnesota Street are some of the older homes in SI. Joseph and they should be preserved. Other
communities preserve the older housing stock and convert them to unique shops. I
Utsch responded that the Planning Commission felt that changing the property to R2 would be ¡
the highest and best use for the property. The rear of the property is the campuslmonastery of
SI. Benedict so it seems to be logical to zone that property for rental. .
July 16, 2001
Page 20f5
Elmer Rakotz of 605 East Able Street: Questioned the need to have additional rental and stated that the
City should instead be encouraging single family homes.
Shelly Thomas of 400 Cypress Drive: Encouraged the Commission to leave the zoning as R1. Thomas
indicated that R21R3 create additional burdens on the City and taxes are already high enough. She
further stated the City should spend time trying to relieve the tax burden on single family home owners.
1
At this time Mayor Hosch presented the Commission and Council with a petition from the residents of Ash
Street East encouraging the Council to retain single family zoning. The residents of Ash Street East have
been trying to keep their neighborhood in tact, and the number of rental properties in the area are working
against these efforts.
Area #2 _ Property located south and abutting County Road 75. Proposed zoning change from
current R1 Single Family to Highway Business.
Marline Eich of 220 Birch Street East: Questioned what happens to the property in the proposed zoning
area if the home is destroyed.
Weyrens clarified that the property owner would need to receive Planning Commission/City
Council approval before reconstruction.
Ken Hiemenz of 316 Minnesota Street East: Questioned how the City plans on providing ingresslegress
to the properties in question and the purpose for the change.
Hosch stated it is his opinion that the best use for property adjacent to County Road 75 is
commercial. Both sides of County Road 75 have already seen considerable commercial growth.
Rassier concurred with Hosch and stated it makes planning sense to zone property abutting
County Road 75 as commercial, as the development is already occurring.
I
Hiemenz stated it was his understanding the City did not want to create a St. Cloud Division Street. By
promoting commercial growth along CR 75 it will do just that. Hiemenz encouraged the Council and
Commission to review the St. Cloud Area District Plan before making any decisions.
Utsch stated that in reviewing the zoning map, the Commission reviewed the Comprehensive Plan and
Zoning Book. The proposed changes include a review of the entire City. Utsch stated it is his opinion
that St. Joseph cannot remain a small town and it is better to be proactive in planning than reactive.
Highway 75 has the highest traffic flow, therefore and it should be developed commercially.
Kay Lemke of 33 West Ash Street: Stated that 12 homes are affected by the proposed zoning
modification. As property owners wish to sell their homes they may be limited or unable to sell their home
because of the inability to rebuild the home if destroyed. She also questioned how long before the City
would zone the next block south as Highway Business.
Area #3 _ Property located north of Clinton Village and south of the Milllstream Monastery House.
Proposed zoning change from current R1 Single Family to R3 Multiple Family; and property
located on Old Highway 52 from current R2 to R3.
Kevin O'Leary of 612 Birch Street West: Read a prepared statement encouraging the City Council to
encourage a strong community base, which comes from strong neighborhoods who are in turn residential
home owners who have a vested interest in their home. He further stated it is his opinion that the
respolJsibility of the Council and Commission should be to the common good of the St. Joseph
community residents who have a vested interest in their home. Finally, O'Leary stated that in his opinion
the City has more than enough rental units.
S. Kara Peters of 104 Chapel Lane: Peters spoke on behalf the Monastery of St. Benedict and stated
that she has concerns with the proposed rezoning. The Monastery would like to sustain the Millstream
Monastery House area and not develop the above mentioned area with high density.
1
I
I
1
i
,
,
July 16, :2001
Page ~ of5
S. Miriam Ardolf of 104 Chapel Lane: Ardolf stated that the Colleges are at a level where growth is Jt
anticipated. Both Colleges have added campus housing to help alleviate the saturation of student rental
properties in the neighborhoods. Therefore, there may not be a need to plan for a significant amount of
R3 Multiple Family housing.
Colleen Murphy of 337 Cypress Drive: Murphy read the Minnesota Statute regarding the process for I
rezoning property and requested the proposed zoning modifications go back to the Planning Commission
for review. !
Sally Pitzen of 304 Old Highway 52: Pitzen cautioned all present, both audiencØ and Council/Board
members, from assuming all R3 is student housing and encouraged the Council to leave the portion on
Old Highway 52 R3. Pitzen stated that she currently lives in a townhouse on Old Highway 52 and the!
majority of the building is filled with professionals who work in and near the community. There are not
many market rate apartments in SI. Joseph and increasing the density along Old Highway 52 will only i
encourage student housing. i
Deutz stated that the property on Old Highway 52 is already being used as R3 so the zoning I
should reflect the use. The recent area Affordable Housing Study completed indicated that Sf'.
,
Joseph needs to provide additional market rate rental units. The proposed zoning modifications
provide the perceived need. Graeve concurred with Deutz and stated that the five area Cities!
support the results of the Housing Study and there is a need for rental throughout the region.
Tara Tollefson of 129 _1h Avenue NW: Tollefson clarified that the City cannot discriminate when it
comes to housing and does not have control whether or not a unit is student rental.
Tim Cooney of 337 Cypress Drive: Cooney questioned the definition of a family and also inquired about
the number of market rate rental units the City has available, and where these people are employed.
I
Larry Brownie of 615 Birch Street West: Brownie stated that he moved to SI. Joseph because of the
small town atmosphere. He questioned why a City cannot stop growth as many times growth carries a
considerable cost. He also stated it is his opinion that the Affordable Housing discussion is not worth i~.
Steve Frank of 606 Birch Street West: Frank stated that he has been asked to speak on behalf of his i
neighborhood and the following comments are a reflection of a neighborhood meeting. i
I
· While the City met all legal requirements, Frank indicated that due to the large impact of the
decision, residents should have been given a greater length of time to respond.
· MN Statutes require that rezoning decisions be supported by evidence that indicates a
rational decision with the burden being on those who want to make the change.
· SI. Joseph does not have an HRA, and redevelopment includes a provision which includes
the necessity to have a governmental agency such as the HRA. I
· The property owners in Clinton Village purchased their property knowing that the vacant field
was zoned R1.
· Questioned conflict of interest on the Planning Commission.
· Questioned the validity of the Housing Study completed by Admark stating that it may be
flawed. .. I
· The SI. Cloud Area Joint Planning Committee indicates that SI. Joseph meets the goals of
Affordable Housing. ! I
· Large multiple family units may cause a tax burden on the residents of SI. Joseph. !
· Recent changes in the State Law may lower the amount of taxes that can be collected from
multiple family units. I
· The main benefactors from bringing apartments into SI. Joseph will be the apartment i
developers, some business such as convenience stores, fast food places and bars.
Dan Murphy of SI. Cloud: Questioned whether or not the School District was contact as additional
housing may create an additional burden on the City. !
'ihi""~ ·'1'>-.,.l" ~,,p ~ ';,",~.'0 ...;....
July 16, 2001
Page 4 of5
Glen Hommerding of 701 Birch street West: Questioned why the City needs growth and what benefit
there is to the residents of Clinton Village if the property is rezoned to R3.
Deutz stated that the City does not have a need for the additional R3 but needs to plan where it
should go. As far as taxes Mark Lambert, owner of the Campus Villa P.partments, pays the
highest taxes in St. Joseph.
Dave Borgen of 104 _ Ifh Avenue NW: Questioned how the rental unit on the CDmer of 6th Avenue NW
and Minnesota Street was approved. He routinely has to pick up garbage and beer bottles and does not
wish this to be expanded in the neighborhood.
Nettie Pfannenstein of 208 East Ash street: Cautioned the Council in rezoning a neighborhood from
single family to multiple family. Ash Street neighbors have been fighting to keep the neighborhood, as
there are many rentals on Ash Street. Annually they have to worry about parties and garbage. Once the
neighborhood is converted to rental it is hard to convert back. St. Joseph has plenty of rental units and
they should require the colleges to provide additipnal housing.
Dave Thomas of 407 Cypress Drive: Requested the City install a swimming pool in the area proposed to
be zoned R3.
Area #4 _ Resurrection Lutheran Church Property, Kennedy Elementary School and St. Joseph
Parish Campus. Proposed zoning change from the current Public to Educational and
Ecclesiastical.
1
Ken Hiemenz of 316 East Minnesota street: Questioned why the zoning change is proposed, as the
current E & E Ordinance applies to the COllege/Monastery of St. Benedict. Further, areas being changed
would become non-conforming uses. Hiemenz also questioned if the Commission is recommending to
change all the religious properties to E & E. I
Carlson responded that the City currently does not have an Ordinance that controls property
zoned public. It is his understanding that the Ordinance governing Public includes a provision for
schools. Rassier stated that the Planning Commission concurred that the properties in question
would best be govemed by the E & E Ordinance, as some type of land controls should be in
place.
Area #5 _ Buettner Industrial Park Lot from current Industrial to Highwa;~ Business
Ken Hiemenz of 316 East Minnesota street: Stated it was his opinion the EDA Board improved the
property with the understanding that it would be industrial in nature. Hiemenz further stated that Highway
Business has a more restrictive land use than Industrial and that may limit development.
Area #6 _ Property located at 514 East Minnesota Street. Proposed zoning change from current
R1 to R2.
Nancy McDarby: Questioned why the Council/Commission is requesting to change a property from R1 to
R2. While the property surrounding this one parcel is R2 there is no rule that the property must be zoned
to match the adjoining properties. Maybe the City should consider rezoning the surrounding properties
R1. McDarby stated it is her opinion that the neighborhood has enough rentals and Minnesota Street
may not be the best place for student rental.
Elmer Rakotz: Stated he too agrees that the neighborhood has enough rental and maybe the
surrounding property should be rezoned to R1.
Their being no one further wishing to provide testimony, Rassier made a motion to close the public
hearing at 9:00 PM: seconded by Loso and passed unanimously by tho,se present.
1
I
I
I
July 16,2001
Page 50f5
I
: I
Mayor Hosch stated that the Planning Commission and City Council will review the testimony received;
and make a decision on the proposed changes. At this time it is anticipated that a decision will be made
at the August 2, 2001 City Council meeting.
The meeting was adjourned by consensus at 9: 15 PM.
~
'. ,,"'.,,' '."..;:;,\:>",;.",;C; '",.'··Jú:';":·'.~.' :"''1'
1
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
I
I