Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout[04] Rezoning - Orderly Annexation Area TOWNSHIP OF SANT JOSEPH CITY OF ST.JOSEPH PO BOX 585 PO BOX 668 St.Joseph MN 56374 St.Joseph MN 56374 320-363-8825 320-363-7201 Jweyrens@cityofstjoseph.com MEETING DATE: February 9, 2016 AGENDA ITEM: Rezoning—Urban Expansion PREVIOUS JOINT PLANNING BOARD ACTION: In 2010 the City,Township and County entered into a Memorandum of Understanding that changed the land use authority from Stearns County to the Joint Planning Board. The changes were made in an effort to simply process and to allow decisions to be made at the local level. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: At the same the Memorandum of Understanding was executed, it was the intent to rezone all undeveloped property in the Orderly Annexation Area to Urban Expansion. For some unknown reason Stearns County did not have the correct boundary for the Orderly Annexation area, and the northerly section was omitted. It was discovered in 2011 and the hearing was supposed to have occurred, but again for some reason was not completed. When Ross Huls made application for rezoning it was noticed that the Zoning had not been completed and the Joint Planning Board authorized the conducting of the public hearing to rezone the property as intended in 2010. The rezoning would make all undeveloped property Urban Expansion. Stearns County Environmental Services has prepared an exhibit illustrating the differences between the various zoning classes and urban expansion. As question has also been raised about what impact the rezoning has on taxation. Jeff Johnson, Stearns County Assessor clarified that property is not assessed on Zoning, rather it is on how the property is being used. In the packet of material is information from IPS who is working on leasing property from Walz to operate solar gardens. Solar gardens are not allowed in the UE area, but would be allowed by Conditional Use in the Commercial Area. Just as a reminder the hearing at this time is not about the solar use, site plan or conditions, it is about the rezoning. ATTACHMENTS: Request for Action Public Hearing Notice Stearns County Staff Report Comparison between zoning Exhibits illustrating area Planning Districts applicable (St.Joseph Comprehensive Plan) Letter of requesting reconsideration of Rezoning,Walz property Stearns County Planning Minutes—Amending Land Use Plan, due to error St.Joseph City Council minutes clarifying error REQUESTED JOINT PLANNING BOARD ACTION: The Joint Planning Board is a recommending body to the St.Joseph Township Board and St.Joseph City Council. The Joint Planning Board can either act on the matter or if based on the testimony need additional information,the matter can be tabled. If action would be taken, it would be to make a recommendation to the Joint St.Joseph Township Board and City Council. (Note: draft findings will be emailed by Monday) This page intentionally left blank TOWNSHIP OF SANT JOSEPH CITY OF ST.JOSEPH PO BOX 585 PO BOX 668 St.Joseph MN 56374 St.Joseph MN 56374 320-363-8825 320-363-7201 jweyrens@cityofstjoseph.com Notice of Public Hearing NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Joint Planning Board of St. Joseph Township and the City of St. Joseph will be conducting a public hearing on Tuesday, February 9, 2016 at 7:15 PM in the St. Joseph City Hall, 25 College Ave N. The purpose of the hearing is to consider a request for rezoning approximately 1320 acres to Urban Expansion. The rezoning includes 1100 acres from the current Agricultural 40 (A40), 83 acres from the current Commercial and 137 acres from the current Educational/Ecclesiastical. The request for rezoning is in accordance Section 4.10 of the Stearns County Land Use and Zoning Ordinance 9439 and according to the Memorandum of Understanding between the City of St. Joseph, Township of St. Joseph and Stearns County. The property under consideration lies within the City of St. Joseph—St. Joseph Township Orderly Annexation Area and is part of Sections 4, 5, 8 and 9 of St. Joseph Township (124/29). The property lies northeast of I94, south of the St. Joseph/St. Wendel Township Line and west of the current city limits and UE zoning district. Publish: January 23, 2016 Proposed Rezoning Area .. . .__. . .... _..._ -----.__.. _._. . . - �- �,rp -_ .__• - _ . . . . _ .. _.. .____ . _.. �� _ �.., - - � . -,y _ ur�a+ _ _ � . �� Rezoning Area , S�. _ . le�p�li � ,.,,;.,,u, 1�+� -..- ,, ; ,. .y` 1 1 - �-;r^ - . ,� � , .. ._ . . ,�, .-. _ _ . . s . ... 4 . � _ � � ��i f 4'... � �a� „,l ( :,���<�„�w ._ . l. _ _ : _ _ _ .. ii39 � � i , REQUEST FOR REZONING A-40, Commercial and Educational/Ecclesiastical rezoned to Urban Expansion PARCELS: See the enclosed table for a list of the affected parcels Project Location/Description of proposal: The request under consideration is to rezone approximately 1100 acres from the Agricultural 40 (A-40) district, 83 acres from the Commercial district and 137 acres from the Educational/Ecclesiastical (EE) district, all to the Urban Expansion (UE) district in accordance with Section 4.10 of Stearns County Land Use and Zoning Ordinance #439 and according to the Memorandum of Understanding between the City of St. Joseph, Township of St. Joseph and Stearns County. This would rezone the entire area west of St. Joseph, within the Orderly Annexation Area, to Urban Expansion, with the exception of the Tiremaxx and Huls property which are to remain Commercial. Background In 2010 Stearns County adopted a new zoning ordinance, Ordinance #439. That ordinance included a new Urban Expansion Zoning District, which was intended to encompass all land that was subject to an Orderly Annexation Agreement (OAA). When the new zoning map was adopted with Ordinance 439, it did not rezone the entire St. Joseph Township/City of St. Joseph OAA area to Urban Expansion, but left a large area zoned A-40. At the January meeting, the Joint Planning Board decided to move forward with a public hearing to consider rezoning the area within the OAA to Urban Expansion (UE), as was originally intended. Location The property proposed to be rezoned lies within the City of St. Joseph —St. Joseph Township Orderly Annexation Area and is part of Sections 4, 5, 8 and 9 of St. Joseph Township (124/29). The property lies northeast of 194, south of the St. Joseph/St. Wendel Township Line and west of the current city limits and UE zoning district. AdjacentAreas—Zoning (See enclosed zoning map) North (St. Wendel Township): A-40 East: Urban Expansion district and City of St.Joseph South: A-40 West: A-40, Urban Expansion district and City of St.Joseph AdjacentAreas—Uses (See enclosed aerial photo) North: large lot residential, agricultural East: City of St.Joseph, parkland South: agricultural West: agricultural, large lot residential FEEDLOTS There are 2 registered feedlots within the area under consideration. - Joseph and Theresa Johnson, parcel 31.20653.0000, registered for 35 animal units - Norbert, Delbert and Delroy Bechtold, parcel 31.20687.0006, registered for 326 animal units, with a maximum allowed number of 440.5 animal units If the properties are rezoned to Urban Expansion,the feedlot will become non-conforming. They would not be allowed to expand beyond the number of animal units they are registered for. They also could not change animal type. In the Urban Expansion District, properties 19 acres or greater are allowed up to 9.9 animal units. RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT OPTIONS Both the A-40 and Urban Expansion Districts allow development at a density of 1 home per 40 acres. Purpose statements for the Urban Expansion,A-40, Commercial and EE zoning districts 9.15.1 Purpose (Urban Expansion district) The purpose of this district is to enable the orderly and efficient staging of urban services, including wastewater, water, electric, gas, roads and communications in those areas where cities and townships have entered into an orderly annexation agreement (OAA). Urban services are extended more efficiently and land use patterns are more coherent when cities can grow without being hindered by large lot residential or commercial development. Residential development may only be allowed at a low density, not to exceed one residence per forty (40) acres and agriculture is the primary and preferred land use until annexation. This district is intended to meet the goals of the Stearns County Comprehensive Plan by limiting barriers to efficient growth of cities and encouraging joint planning between cities and townships and is specifically directed by the following Stearns County Comprehensive Plan goals: A. Manage the impacts of growth and development on the County's rural character (Land Use Goal 3). (1) Deter premature development in rural areas and in urban expansion areas around cities (Objective 3). B. Use existing infrastructure and resources efficiently(Land Use Goal 5). (2) Coordinate infrastructure expansion with development; and encourage development where the infrastructure is adequate to serve that growth (Objective 1). 9.3.1 Purpose (A-40 District) The purpose of this District is to preserve the agricultural and rural character of land within the A-40 District. This district is applicable in areas where agriculture is the predominant and preferred land use, as described in the Comprehensive Plan, and agricultural protection, including crops and animal agriculture, is the foremost goal. However, the A-40 district has a secondary goal of providing flexibility not allowed in the A-80 and A-160 districts by allowing for development where agriculture has limited viability. The A-40 district is used in proximity to growing cities and areas away from cities where agricultural resources and practices are intermixed with other uses. Residential land uses are limited to a density of one residential dwelling per forty (40) acres. This district is intended to meet the following goals of the Stearns County Comprehensive Plan: A. Preserve highly valued farmland for agricultural pursuits (Land Use Plan Goal 1, Objective 2). B. Protect agricultural soils and other agricultural resources by regulating non- agricultural land uses in areas with agricultural soils (Natural Resources Plan, Goal 3, Objective 1). C. Maintain suitable boundaries for urban, rural residential and agricultural areas (Land Use Plan Goal 2, Objective 1). 9.10.1 Purpose (Commercial district) The purpose of this district is to promote the concentration of a wide range of commercial and recreational establishments into a general commercial area to service local residents and the traveling public. This district meets the following Stearns County Comprehensive Plan goals: A. Manage the impacts of growth and development on the County's rural character (Growth and Development, Goal 3). (3) Identify appropriate areas for commercial, industrial, and non-farm rural residential developments (Objective 2). B. Future Land Use Map, Commercial. Primarily low intensity service and retail that does not demand a high level of wastewater treatment, sited where the transportation system has adequate capacity. Generally applies to existing developed areas. C. Enhance the ability of local retail and commercial businesses to sustain small city and town center commercial areas (Economic Development Goal 1, Objective 7). D. Assist businesses with job retention and expansion opportunities (Economic Development Goal 2, Objective 1). E. Focus development in and adjacent to cities, not between them. Specifically, the extension of a strip commercial development pattern along MN 23 should be avoided (Minnesota Highway 23 Corridor Policy Area). F. Allow the greatest degree of flexibility in this area in considering land use changes to commercial/ industrial use, provided that impacts on roads and infrastructure are minimized (Southwest Policy Area). 9.12.1 Purpose (Educational Ecclesiastical district) The purpose of this district is to provide for the preservation and management of historically significant educational or ecclesiastical institutions that are located within the County. This district implements the following Stearns County Comprehensive Plan goals: B. Future Land Use Map, Public Semi-Public. Includes county parks and state/federal wildlife areas, college campus, and similar large institutions. . . No development except institutional or recreational /open space uses B. Continue to expand the non-agriculture employment base, including service providers, manufacturing, and retail capacity. The County has a diverse set of industries, some of which are closely related to natural resources (such as the granite products industry) and some of which are more closely related to the population base (such as medical facilities and institutions of higher education) (Economic Development Policy 6). Compatibility with Comprehensive Plan: ➢ Future Land Use Map: Urban Expansion district The Agriculture category is described as: "Areas anticipated to be annexed and provided with municipal services during the time frame of this plan. Also includes areas under Orderly Annexation Agreements. Variety of land uses to be determined through joint city-township planning. Residential uses remain restricted until annexation occurs. Limited commercial/industrial uses may be considered." ➢ Policy Area: Metropolitan Area, 194 Corridor and Agricultural/Limited Growth Area ❖ Metropolitan Area: The multi-county St. Cloud Metropolitan area will continue to attract a substantial portion of the region's jobs and population growth. It will also be the location for most major transportation projects, as planned and programmed by the St. Cloud Area Planning Organization (APO). This policy area generally encompasses the boundaries established by the 2000 St. Cloud Area Joint Planning District plan, with some adjustments to the "ultimate service area" for wastewater treatment. Policies: 1. Support and update the policies of the Joint Planning District plan regarding regional coordination of services 2. Support extension of coordinated, centralized wastewater treatment to the ultimate service area. 3. Protect the ultimate service area from premature subdivision by limiting large- lot residential development. 4. Support transit improvements, including the Northstar Commuter Rail extension. ❖ 1-94 Corridor: Extends west from St. Joseph to the County's western boundary, including a series of cities with diverse and growing economies — St. Joseph, Avon, Albany, Freeport, Melrose and Sauk Centre. The limited access nature of the interstate means that development is concentrated at city interchanges. The interstate runs south of the cities, and in many cases development is now extending southward around the interchanges. Collectively, the cities provide a broad range of housing, employment, commercial and recreational facilities for the corridor's population. There is increasing interest in transit improvements to link the cities and connect them to the St. Cloud metro area. Policies: 1. Focus development in and around the corridor cities, including reasonable urban expansion areas that take advantage of existing highway interchanges but do not overburden them. 2. Discourage non-agricultural development between cities to preserve the area's rural character. 3. Emphasize and support the shared role of corridor cities in meeting commercial, employment, recreational and housing needs. 4. Emphasize 1-94 as a transit corridor and work to provide enhanced transit service. ❖ Agricultural and Limited Growth Area: The largest policy area, including all land not included in other policy areas. Agriculture remains the predominant and priority land use throughout this area, with additional complementary development where infrastructure can support it. Most small cities in this area will continue to grow within their current boundaries but will require little land for expansion. Policies: 1. Emphasize the importance of animal agriculture to the County economy by treating it as a priority land use in this area (compared with residential or other nonagricultural development). 2. Allow complementary agriculture-related commercial or industrial uses in limited quantities. These uses are most appropriate where served by major highways, including Minnesota Highways 4, 55, 15, and US Highway 71. 3. Allow additional flexibility in residential development through the use of a "conservation overlay" approach (discussed on page 3-22 and in Chapter 10, Implementation Plan). SUMMARY • Based on the Joint Planning Board's findings of fact, make a recommendation of approval or denial to the City Council and Township Board. Attachments: Affected parcels spreadsheet Use comparison table(allowed uses in A-40 vs. UE) Aerial photo Zoning map o � ° y O o 0 y C U O O CIA 0 0 ca Cd cn cn 0 O 2 ,4 z Y n U a) > g ozcn Cd O O cd cd W Q m y 'C cN ^C -0 � Q. cdcd cz O , W C O U O Q rel rw C7 x w ti o 0 a a1 U Q rel rw U O U Cd 0 � � O O - U N C O to cd a) a) U cn cncn I cn 0 y a c0 cd sU. r rz cn n � � U � � ,� � � � � � � .� � ray � � � •� 0 Cd cn V U v C 4? O f� E W w W a a a _o v� _0 3 Aa U C7 C7 U Q W w O O N N "o O O O -g g y S. cd � U a. OQ _ cdLn �+" N N U y U •� Cd cn cl ll +l N bA v .� •0 con 0 0 � O v O a b�A sU. bA O On tn U 9l Cd U tU+ Cd Cd U N N •��' N �"' r+U-I 'fl'i U N UI •U cn cn 03 bA �. y U O O CIA U Q W w CJ x � N � U � N � v U U U N � � �?, N cd O O U yU c� U bbA U O cn cn rzcn U O O I.Clll O O ll �_ CdCd cn N a o cn ci U yEn Cd o O Q N U U O cd M M p U 0 ° by U O O U cn rz O U y O O N V cn rz N N 0U ~ U N U cl Cd cn NCOO O v' -N U N U ,fir v� c/� C x O CA H o o o U U CJ xCtdo ti as W U Q W Q W 4. CJ x � � U N by O y Jbi) bo cN 'Cd Cd o o cdo Cd O a� '-Cy C� Y Y O �� C6 (dcn Cd O Y cd • Cd Cn Cd bo ' 'n Cl °' o �. Cd cn Cd U Cd y y N Ov N VI Cd 'C cd a� bA t O O N cn UO O ycay Cd 0un Y o CJ -4 — o o � o 0 u. o o I O U NO rr Cdaj �• ^� 'C N • +-U Cd _� S••i N O by N q) 'd$� c 1 U -- >1a. cdcn a. bo Cd U .0 0 N Cd >, —c'sa. bi) Cd cd n O v y O y cd O O +C� O bq ` VcnU sem. O Q" aj L% 'Wendel t a r Johnson feedlot J t Bechtold feedlot ,t ' . r % � W E 1 inch 1,667 feet St. Joseph-St. Joseph OAA rezoning Scl'� = o zaoeEo 1,120 1,E80 2,240 "11`� Area proposed to be rezoned to Urban Expansion Feet lfiis map is made available ov au"as W'Wm,without express or impliedwarmvtyof arty sort iucludiug,spedit.11y,arty impliedwa� ties �BtB. ��29�2��6 of 5tness for a particular purpose,warranties of merchantability,or wa�ravties relating to the.—mg or completeness of the database 1 `t♦♦♦t►t►t►t►Ot►Ot►Ot►�O����t►�t►�O�� • - -�0���� t•���t•���t•���t►���t►���t►���t►�O�►�O���O���tlt►tlt►tlt►tlt►t•�O���O� ��00000000000000000000000000��00000000000000000000000000000000� ♦000000000000 ♦000000000000000 ��t•���0���0���0���0���0���►t•�N�O���O���O���O���O���O�t•���0� ��t•�0�0�0�0"WA0�0�0�0�0�0�►t•�O�O�O�O�O'IVA O�O�O�O�t•�O�O� X000000000000►0000000000000�0�0�0, �000000�00000000000000��000000000000000��000i0� ►�O���OC►���t•���t•���t•����V � Wt•���t•������t•�t•. ►0000000^000�00000000000t �0000000000000t; 0�000�►000000000000000000000t( �0000000000000t; `��►0000000000000000000�0� �000000000000000�v���000000000000000♦ ►00000000000000000000i0►000000000000000 �00000000000►0000000 �000000000000000000000�►000000000000000 `NWA ►0�0�0�0�0�0��►�0 �0� ��►�0�0�0�, ►�0�0�0�0�0�000� ♦�__S00®00e ►000000000000000 ♦o000�wv►0000000 900 ♦OOOOOOO<!00000000 0000♦►00000000 00000000000000,,►000000000000000tt `000000000000►000000000000000tt ��0000000000��000000000000000�1 1 �00000000�►000000000000000t! -. ���0�0�0�►�0�0�0�0�0�0�0�0 �00►00000000 �0 OMNI ZO jWaite�/ 1 jPark JosephAgricultural District A-160 Municipality Residential Manufactured Home(RMH) Bio Rural Townsite(RT) Agricultural District A-40 Residential District R-1 Scenic River District(SR) IN Proposed Rezoning Commercial(C) Residential District R-5 Transition District T-20 1 Educational/Ecclesiastical(EE) Residential District R-10 Urban Expansion(UE) Industrial(1) Residential District R-20 Area proposed to be rezoned from A-40, EE, Commercial to UE Date: LU AND SE District Two Portion of District ‘Developed’ Approximate Location District Two occupies an area in the northwestern St. Joseph/St. Joseph Township, northwest of the existing corporate limits. The approximate boundaries include:  A roughly triangular shaped area north of I-94  South of CSAH 75  West of the proposed CSAH 2 re-routed corridor Total Acres in District: 668 acres in District Number of Acres Platted: 110 acres subdivided; 558 non-subdivided Number of Acres with Potential Development Considerations: 167 acres (hydric soils and flood plain/shoreland) Subdivided Ac.Non-Subd. Ac. Areas of Stability and Areas of Change: A large portion of this district has been characterized as having potential for change over the scope of this plan. The area includes parcels adjacent to the proposed re-route of CSAH 2, Leaf Road, Interstate 94 and CSAH 75. Areas of change are sites where the city expects to direct resources (either new development or redevelopment, public and/or private resources) as available and/or requested. Land area not labeled as ‘change’ or ‘stability’ are not expected to be serviced by municipal utilities in the near term, however, conditions leading to utility extension and/or subdivision can change. Prominent Features Prominent features within Planning District Two include I-94, CSAH 75, proposed CSAH 2 rerouted corridor, Leaf Road, South Fork Watab River, and gently rolling hills. Existing Land Use Existing land uses primarily include low density rural residential, low density commercial, and agricultural uses. Proposed Future Land Use Substantial portions of this district have been identified as ‘areas of change’. Future investment, public and private, is expected within this district during the scope of this plan. The location of the CSAH 2 re-route within this district make future land use planning extremely important. The city has an excellent opportunity to provide for substantial ‘gateway’ commercial and industrial development within this district. Commercial, mixed commercial/high density residential and industrial development will be clustered around high functioning intersections and developed as cohesive entities suitable for the ‘gateway’ nature of the interchange. The ‘gateway’ nature will be defined by inclusion/incorporation of public gathering spaces, courtyards, open space preservation and similar design principals in future developments. Portions of this section with good access and visibility from I-94 and/or CSAH 2 are guided toward future commercial, mixed commercial industrial, and industrial. Future development patterns will respect the mobility function of I-94 and CSAH 2; therefore, the development of future collector streets is imperative. Commercial and/or high value industrial nodes will be afforded excellent access from collector streets. Commercial, mixed commercial/industrial, and industrial development will be clustered around meaningful intersections with collector streets. Nodal development will provide for urban development as cohesive entities capable of creating and sustaining the ‘gateway’ nature of the interchange. The ‘gateway’ nature will be defined by inclusion/incorporation of public gathering spaces, courtyards, open space preservation, uniform landscaping, and similar design principals in future developments. 2008 City of St. Joseph Comprehensive PlanChapter 4, Page 28 LU AND SE To provide for prudent timing and cost-savings, the EDA supports the city’s proactive participation in providing municipal utility services to this area and collector street development in conjunction with the county’s acquisition of right-of-way and construction of CSAH 2. This means the city would work with property owners to proactively initiate improvements; however, the city would be reimbursed over-time by development fees. 2008 City of St. Joseph Comprehensive PlanChapter 4, Page 29 LU p cn �o �� W ai °�� -a)c �> I �cEo c�"- p w Q c o m O O cn E+ j U v L w U J O cn }' a) � c O cn O x W Q u)(6 a) W Q (6 p (6 2 (n N (z E a) a) III p 7 z J E cn 0 cn W Q L U_ p x J W J c'EvU)oQ)O0) N W Q p W Q N 72 -2 >,c� o �� �o Z U Z w pQo i i O c E c._ c6 L _ z Q o O°� O a) Ln p w LU p p W p w Ir W � r 1 O cn cn a� cn O W W W DC C) Cf) :, � 4- 0 L� a .- �; f) J z z w w ��,�coCL�_-=� -0 cu Wp a w w ac oc W �c0>:�-Wa)0-o M� z Cc o� z z W Q,._ E Q�� � o- w J � o o o Z O Z �m ���>`� �� a 7)o 00_0 c w.o o w LcQ`�ca°.�ca�0 a) �2 Q z m� Z ~ p Z ~ oo o a) (D c ��'� O J p z Z w J w Q x pC c m o M Q- - ° cn Q U _ U = C� p LU G L�•�O,oc6 — M(Da�L .0aa) w m Z0 _ = E m� o�Q w O w _ w o —�4-cn co O W W U Z U > O :EW E E a c�>O a) -0cnmUS — c cnLi_0: �0 (1) 70 ZZ�m- 0-oo0 o Zv �m i z w r Cf) I 1 I I I I I 1 I 1 � ❑ cn I I ❑ I � � w I I TI O I I I EIIJE I I I I II I I -------------+ --- --- -- — ---- --� —-------- — — --- — --- ----- 1 I I I I 1 I , I I � , � , I I I --- -----------------------------------+--------- -- - ---- ---- - _------------------r ------ -- --------------- I I , I I I I I I I I i I I I I I I I i 1 1 ' 1 I --------- -----+-------------------------------+-- ------------------------------------- - - I 1 I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I ❑ I I I 1 I I I 1 I I I 1 I I 1 I I I , I I - -- ------------- ------- -------------+----------- I I I I 1 ' I I I 1 1 1 I I 1 I I I I I � I I I I I I I I I , - - - - - - - ----------- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -L - - - - - - - I � I � I � I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I �- - - II -------- ---------- I I I I I � I I I I I I I � I I I I I I 1 1 I � � I � � I � � I I I I I I � � I I I I I I I I I I I I I � � I -------------------- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - + - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - + - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -� - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I --------------------I----------�----------I------------ - - - - I I 1 ' 1 I I 1 1 I 1 I 1 I ' 1 I I I 1 1 I I I I I 1 I 1 I I I I 1 I 1 1 1 I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I 1 I I I I 1 I I I I I 1 I ------L-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1i..................' I I ' II L .................. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ------------- - - - - - - -�I I- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - rt - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I - - - - 1 , I 1 I I 1 1 1 I I 1 1 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 I I I I 1 I I - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - 1 ' 1 1 ------------------ 4 ------------------ -------------------- L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -L ------------------ ------------------ J - - - - - I 1 1 I I 1 1 I 1 1 1 I I 1 I I 1 1 I I 1 I I I 1 1 I I 1 I I I 1 I 1 1 1 1 I I I 1 I I 1 I I I I 1 I I I I II 11 I I I I I I u6p°Z 6uiuuDId\uDIddwoO\dow\uowwoo\]OPJS\S\ld\.'d 3 IJ H3S Wd �Z°82'Z IIOZ/b1/9 LU AND SE District Three Portion of District ‘Developed’ Approximate Location District Three occupies an area north of the existing corporate limits. The approximate boundaries include:  North of CSAH 75 and existing corporation limits (north of Northland Plats)  West of CSAH 133 th  South of 320 Street Total Acres in District: 1,760 acres in district. Number of Acres Platted: 331 acres subdivided; 1,429 not subdivided Subdivided Ac.Non-Subd. Ac. Number of Acres with Potential Development Considerations: 452 acres (flood plain/shoreland, wetland, public water, hydric soils, and slopes greater than 15%) Areas of Stability and Areas of Change: Areas of stability and areas of change have been identified within this district. Portions of the district occupied by Millstream Park and the South Fork of the Watab River in the vicinity where it flows under CSAH 75 have been identified as areas of stability wherein the planning emphasis will be focused on protecting existing development from intrusion by incompatible uses. Areas identified with potential for change include those parcels adjacent to the re-routed CSAH 2 corridor and areas adjacent to the future east-west arterial roadway especially in the vicinity of CR 133. Areas of change are sites where the city expects to direct resources (either new development or redevelopment, public and/or private resources) as available and/or requested. Land area not labeled as ‘change’ or ‘stability’ are not expected to be serviced by municipal utilities in the near term, however, conditions leading to utility extension and/or subdivision can change. Prominent Features Prominent features within Planning District Three include CSAH 2 North, CSAH 3, South Fork Watab River, future northern east-west arterial roadway, Millstream Park, and the Wobegon Trail. Existing Land Use Existing land uses primarily include agricultural and low density rural residential uses but a few industrial uses are also present. Proposed Future Land Use Portions of this district have been identified as ‘areas of change’. Future investment, public and private, is expected within this district during the scope of this plan. Future land use within this district is substantially impacted by a future east-west arterial roadway corridor. The pace and timing of development within this district is subject largely to the establishment of the roadway corridor. Roadway and right of way corridor establishment and construction will likely depend on regional funding assistance and participation by land owners as subdivision is contemplated. Future land use is expected to be a mix of residential, commercial, and industrial use types and intensities. Future commercial use is anticipated in clusters adjacent to major intersections. The development type/style will be complimentary to roadway corridor functions and existing development. Future industrial uses are expected in areas adjacent to existing industrial uses (light and heavy industry). Future residential uses are expected to vary in density (R-1, R-2, R-3, R-4) within this district. Residential uses with higher intensities (R-3, R-4) will be primarily suitable adjacent to existing or future commercial or light industrial uses, employed as a transition between said uses and low density residential uses. 2008 City of St. Joseph Comprehensive PlanChapter 4, Page 30 LU AND SE Residential uses, especially multiple family uses, providing superior open space, a clear public benefit (i.e. affordable housing), or superior on site amenities (i.e. unique scenic or recreational amenity or facility) in perpetuity may be allowed on-site density transfers or increases as provided under a planned unit development. 2008 City of St. Joseph Comprehensive PlanChapter 4, Page 31 O N Qo SOME MINE— �r ♦ I � �111�♦ Id I NONE am a mill am ON Mrs am 0 M7 ■■ ■Y YY �� ■ i ��. � �. ■■ ■� �" ■1■■ VIII ■ 11111 �� �■ ■■ ■� ���■■1■ ■/t1►� MINIM0 16 MAN - - - - - Zmw ■■ IF NJ I4 ,,1 NO 11�UllII ■■ �ll i. ���Illlllu :■■■■r� �i ■� ■� `�� •:i�%..•��■ �: =111 II 1i 11111u �■ 1�����1� --- ■■ ��■■y�\!! !!� ���.: �.;� ... �-, 11111111111 ��■1 ��F AN - �1���1� ■ ■1 am ■ ■ . •• • ,il �"•, x!11111► �:1 !�u �I ,11 ■ - ■■■u -r 11._,1111 111 1 IN ■SII ■ ■■ ■, . � :� : ■ ��� .,��� ```' 1M •�i�l�� 11 111,1 ; Ill�ll�n � � � ... ■ jolom _ �.I.I.�.a.I.. MENS ���� ��: ■� J 'fi- � "' ��� � �I■■1111■■ � �� � ■i ■Jam A■■■� ��■u■■ ■■■■■■ ■■■■■�■ ■■■ ... _ �■ =��i- JL_ ■ ' � � :�/ 11 � iii■■■i �. ��■ Y �i/ice ■■■■ ■! am ■ =1 ---- OEM ■ _ — ����■� `111■11■11� ■ ■■ � I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I__ ----------- r - - - - - - - - - I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I - - - - - - I I I I II I I I I I I I I I I NOTE: This map is neither a legally recorded map nor a survey map and is not intended to be used as one. This map is a compilation of records, information, and data gathered from various sources and is to be used for reference purposes only. SEH does not warrant that the Geographic Information System (GIS) Data is error free, and SEH does not represent that the GIS Data can be used for navigational, tracking, or any other purpose requiring exacting measurement of distance or direction or precision in the depiction of geographic features. The location of future roadways are subject to change and not necessarily indicative of preferred alternatives. ■ OPEN SPACE EDUCATIONAL - PUBLIC CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT/ NEIGHBORHOOD ORIENTED MIXED USE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL COMMUNITY ORIENTED MIXED USE PUD _ VEHICULAR ORIENTED COMMERCIAL _ HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ORIGINAL TOWNSITE RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL _ LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ---- CITY LIMITS ANNEXATION AREA N 0 1000 2000 MAP 4-6C ST. JOSEPH PLANNING DISTRICT 3 ST. JOSEPH, MINNESOTA Innovative Power Systems February 9, 2016 Subject: Effects of Rezoning on Solar Projects in Stearns County In 2013 the Minnesota legislature passed the Solar Jobs Act with a new community-based program that allows homeowners, municipalities, and local companies to join and purchase their electricity from a centrally located solar farm in their neighborhood, called a "Community Solar Garden". As electricity is produced by the Solar Garden, local subscribers are provided significant electricity savings each month. Our Minnesota based company, Innovative Power Systems, has been approved to build a Five Megawatt Community Solar Garden on a plot of land owned by the Walz family here in Stearns County (PID is 31.20691.0002). Due to proximity of utility substations, local electricity loads, quality of land, as well as many other factors in the development of these projects, finding suitable locations for Solar Gardens is difficult and often impossible in certain regions. As a result, the site in discussion and on the attached maps is irreplaceable. The local community will benefit significantly from our proposed Solar Garden. Since the project can be subscribed to by any homeowner, school, municipality, or company, those potential subscribers would be denied lower electricity rates if the project can't be built due to zoning restrictions. In addition, the community would be denied the environmental benefits of using electricity from non-carbon burning energy sources. Disrupting plans to bring clean energy to the county would be a detriment to everyone. It has recently come to our attention that the site and region that includes our solar garden was erroneously left out of the Urban Expansion District. Under current zoning, our Community Solar Garden site is permitted by Stearns County through a Conditional Use Permit. If the proposed zoning change takes effect, our Community Solar Garden could not receive a Conditional Use Permit from the County, and the issue would be outside the jurisdiction of the City. An opportunity for the City of Saint Joseph, its residents, and Stearns County is about to be eliminated without appropriate considerations. Community Issues to consider: 1 Innovative Power Systems • Community schools would not be able to subscribe to renewable energy in the region (note, current subscribers to our Solar Garden include public schools in Holdingford, St. Cloud, Paynesville, and Annandale); • Local homeowners would not be able to subscribe to renewable energy; • The City of Saint Joseph would not be able to subscribe to renewable energy. Zoning Issues to consider: • Rezone the region after a Conditional Use Permit has been issued by the County for our solar garden; • Exclude the parcel from the Urban Expansion District; • Offer an interim use permit; • Missed opportunity to support the State of Minnesota mandated renewable energy standards and renewable strategic plan; • Annexation into the city to allow permitting. As a result, we are asking that the City of Saint Joseph refrain from their rezoning plan until all issues relating to renewable energy and Community Solar Gardens have been considered. 2 Image courtesy of USGS Earthstar Geographics SIO © 2016 Microsoft Corporation IMPROVE EXISTING ACCESS ROAD PROPERTY LINES UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC TO SOLAR ARRAYS SOLAR ARRAYR T . 9 4 LEAF RD. EXISTING OVERHEAD ELECTRIC PROPOSED COMMUNITY SOLAR GARDEN WALZ PROPERTY - STEARNS COUNTY " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " Be ch told fee dlot Jo hnson fe edlo t I N T E R S T A T E H W Y 9 4 1 A V N W 2 A V N W I N T E R S T A T E H W Y 9 4 B I R C H S T W C O R D 2 ELM ST E 1 2 5 A V I 94 T O C O R D 75 C O R D 3 6 A V N W ELLEN RD A S H S T W C O L L E G E A V N 3 A V N W C H A P E L L N CO RD 75 W 325 ST NORWAY RD CYPRESSDR L E A F R D T E R R Y R D CO RD 51 1 1 9 A V S U N R I S E R D F R O N T A G E R D R A M P R A M P K A R L Y N R D 1 0 2 A VOLDCOLLEGEVILLERD C O R D 75 C O L L E G E V I L L E R D 18 17 16 15 7 8 9 10 6 4 3 5 31 32 33 34 St. Wendel St. Joseph St. Joseph This map is made available on an “as is” basis, without express or implied warranty of any sort including, specifically, any implied warranties of fitness for a particular purpose, warranties of merchantability, or warranties relating to the accuracy or completeness of the database.Date: 1/29/2016 St. Joseph-St. Joseph OAA rezoning µ 0 560 1,120 1,680 2,240280 Feet 1 inch = 1,667 feet Area pro posed to b e rezon ed to Urba n Expa nsion 01.00351.0100 01.00351.0100 01.00351.0100 St. Joseph Waite Park Rossier Lower Watab Watab 1919 2020 2121 2222 2323 77 88 99 1010 1111 66 44 33 2255 3131 3232 3333 3434 3535 3636 3030 2929 2828 2727 2626 2525 ST WENDEL TWP ST JOSEPH TWP Date: 1/5/2016 St. Joseph Township This map is made available on an "as is" basis without express or implied warranty of any sort, including specifically, any implied warranties of fitness for a particular purpose, warranties of merchantability or warranties relating to the accuracy of the database. Agricultural District A-160 Agricultural District A-80 Agricultural District A-40 Commercial (C) Educational/Ecclesiastical (EE) Industrial (I) Municipality Protected Lake Residential District R-1 Residential District R-5 Residential District R-10 Residential District R-20 Residential Manufactured Home (RMH) Rural Townsite (RT) Scenic River District (SR) Transition District T-20 Urban Expansion (UE) ± Area propo sed to be rezon ed from A-40, EE, Commercial to UE Proposed Rezoning Planning Commission Minutes October 20, 2011 Page 14 AI Rassier commented that based on the Brockway Township's recommendation and the fa�t that this property is abutting residential property he was in favor of the rezoning. Moved by AI Rassier to recommend approval of this request (Donald Diehl)to the County Board of Commissioners, to rezone approximately 112.12 acres from the Transitional 20 (T-20}zoning district to the Residential 5 (R-5)zoning district. Seconded by Bob Long. LeRoy Gondringer commented that it appears that the applicant has no intention af ever developing that North 44 acre parcel and that would remain farmland. The only reason the applicant would rezone all the property would be to get additional building credits, to transfer somewhere else and Mr. Gondringer did not think that was a good situation. He felt that at the very least that 40 acres could be excluded from the rezoning. Motion failed with a 2-6 vote; Bob Long and AI Rassier voted for the motion. Bemie Koopmeiners, Mike Merten, Jeff Bertram, LeRoy Gondringer, Brian Junkermeier and John Greer vated against the motion. Moved by John Greer to recommend denial of this request (Donald Diehl) to the County Board of Commissioners, to rezone approximately 112.12 acres from the Transitional 20 (T-20)zoning district to the Residential 5 (R-5)zoning district. Seconded by Brian Junkermeier. Motion failed with a tie (4-4) vate. Bemie Koopmeiners, Jeff Bertram, Brian Junkermeier and John Greer voted for the motion. Bob Long, Mike Merten, LeRoy Gondringer and AI Rassier voted against the mvtion. There was discussion on considering rezoning approximately 74 acres of the requested 112 acres, leaving the top 40 acres inT-20. Maved by AI Rassier to recommend approval of rezoning approximately 74.24 acres (south of 438�'Street)of the Donald Diehl request, to the County Board of Commissioners, from the Transitional 20 (T-20)zoning district to the Residential 5 (R-5) zoning district. Seconded by LeRoy Gondringer. Motion carried with a 6-2 vote; Bob Long, AI Rassier, Bernie Koopmeiners, Mike Merten, Jeff Bertram, and LeRoy Gondringer voted for motion. Brian Junkermeier and John Greer voted against the motion. 4. To consider an amendment to Ordinance #393, Stearns Countv 2030 Comprehensive Plan. The request is to amend the Future Land Use Plan Map, Fiqures 3.4 and 3.5, as thev relate to St. Joseph Township. The proposed amendment would modifv the Orderlv Annexation Area boundary to match the Orderlv Annexation Aqreement(OAA) between the Citv of St. Joseph and St. Joseph Township and desiqnate the land within the OAA boundar�as Urban Expansion. Jen Buckentine explained that this request is to fix a mistake, as the Orderly Annexation Area boundary that the County shows on our Comprehensive Plan map is wrong. The request is to amend the Future Land Use Plan Map, Figures 3.4 and 3.5, as they relate to St. Joseph Township. The proposed amendment would modify the Orderly Annexation Area boundary to match the Orderly Annexation Agreement (OAA) befinreen the City of St. Joseph and St. Joseph Township and designate the land within the OAA boundary as Urban Expansion. This area was shown as Urban Expansion upon the adoption of the Comprehensive Plan in 2008. The area was mistakenly amended later 14 Planning Commission Minutes October 20, 2011 Page 15 that year. This map change will correct the OAA boundary and make all land within the OAA boundary Urban Expansion. The City and Township joint planning board has also reviewed this request and they are in agreement with this to make it correct. Moved by LeRoy Gondringer to close the public hearing. Seconded by Bernie Koopmeiners and motion unanimously carried. Moved by Brian Junkermeier to recommend approval of the amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map, Figures 3.4 and 3.5, as they relate to St. Joseph Township, to the County Board of Commissioners. Seconded by LeRoy Gondringer and motion unanimously carried. 5. Ordinance Amendments — Floodplain and Miscellaneous corrections Jen Buckentine noted that there are 3 categories of Ordinance amendments being considered. The first one is the feedlot changes and the Planning Commission actua{ly reviewed and recommended approval last month. The second group of changes is for the Floodplain changes and this is as a result of changes that FEMA and the DNR have done to the County's floodplain maps. With these new updated changes and data the floodplain maps will be much more accurate and usable. As a result of the changed maps, the DNR drafted changes to the County's ordinance which the County is required to adopt in order to still be part of the flood insurance program. The third group is for miscellaneous changes that staff has found over the past few months that are needed to clean up sections of the ordinance. The first change is eliminating a duplicate definition for "expansion" in the ordinance. The second change is in the section for second home for supportive care, where we require the applicant to submit a letter from a medical professional as to the condition on a form provided by the County. The County does not have a form so the proposal is to eliminate that language and the applicant can use their own doctor's form for that. Another change is in Section 7.8 — Drinking Water Supply Management Areas- to remove the map (appendix) that shows those areas because the State Health Department changes that map every 2-3 months and staff uses the current map. The only change would be the map would not be part of the Ordinance. Under sign regulations (Section 7.24.5C) the change would be to clarify that no off-premise sign shall be located closer than 1300 feet distance from any other off-premise sign. This is to clarify that there will be 1300 feet between "billboard" signs. In Section 9 — Residential District (R-5 District) the proposed language would make the R-5 district consistent with all the other zoning districts; R-10 up to A-160 regarding permitted, provisional, interim, conditional or accessory uses, etc. An addition is proposed to Section 9.11.6C, to add "temporarv" concrete or asphalt mixing facility to Interim uses in the Industrial District. The next change is to change Section 9.14.4A (3) — Permitted Accessory Uses and Structures, change maximum overall height to twelve (12) feet instead of thirteen (13) feet, to be consistent with the height limit in the manufactured home district. Moved by Mike Merten to recommend approval of the proposed amendments/changes to the Ordinance to the County Board of Commissioners. Seconded by LeRoy Gondringer. John Greer had a comment on the proposed feedlot changes approved last month. He felt the last line under Compliance, "Unresolved violations relating to a pollution hazard at an animal feedlot are not subject to this provision" was ambiguous. He questioned which provision, as there are two separate provisions in that paragraph. 15 October 6, 2011 Page 2 of 6 Loso questioned what bonds go away with the action taken at this meeting. Estvold stated the 2003 fire hall issue will be gone. The 2006 improvement bond will stay on the books for two more years. He also stated that part of the proceeds from the new bond which includes the 2006 (bond call date of 2014) go into an escrow account and are invested. In February 2014 the escrow is released and will pay off the balance on the 2006 issue. The city will start making payments on the new issue at that point. Loso made a motion to adopt the Resolution No. 2011 -023 to execute the contract providing for the sale of $2,335,000 General Obligation Bonds. The motion was seconded by Wick and passed unanimously. Loso made a motion and to authorize the sale of the Series A bonds to Northland Securities. The motion was seconded by Symanietz and passed unanimously. Clarification on OA Boundary: Weyrens stated that Stearns County Environmental Services is requesting a recommendation from the City and Township regarding the zoning of property added to the Orderly Annexation Agreement in 2006. At the time the OA was amended, St. Joseph Township requested the City include the remaining property Township property to the north in the OA. While the property was added to the agreement and recorded at Stearns County, the zoning of the property was not amended to Urban Expansion. All property, with the exception of the industrial park, is zoned Urban expansion and the added property is currently zoned A -40. Weyrens stated that the wrong map was used by Stearns County for the orderly annexation area. Wick made a motion to recommend that Stearns County amend the Zoning Map to include property north of Minnesota Street in the OA to Urban Expansion. The motion was seconded by Symanietz and passed unanimously. Discussion: Frank questioned if this recommendation changes how property owners can utilize their property. Weyrens stated that action on this matter only changes the zoning and all land use matters are managed by the Joint Planning Board. If the map is not amended one section of the OA would have different regulations. Mayor Schultz questioned who gets notified when the public hearing is conducted. Weyrens stated that all property owners whose zoning classification will change from A-40 to Urban Expansion will receive a notice and have an opportunity to address the Stearns County Planning Commission. Frank questioned how many property owners would be affected and if someone was concerned about the zoning change where they would bring these concerns. Weyrens stated approximately 12 properties will be affected and if there is an objection, Stearns County would ask the joint bodies to discuss it and forward a recommendation. Loso questioned if this amendment is based on the City of St Joseph 2006 map. Weyrens stated it is based on an Orderly Annexation amendment that the City of St Joseph had recorded and the property owners were notified in 2006 that they were a part of this Orderly Annexation. Preliminary Plat — Professional Plat: Weyrens stated that the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed Professional plat which is a replat of the Buettner Business Park. The property owner is requesting to subdivide and plat to accommodate the sale of one parcel that is proposed for fast food. The proposed plat is located in the northwest intersection of CR 133 and CR 75, directly across fro Coborn's. Weyrens stated the Planning Commission discussed the access road which divides Lot 1 from Lots 2 & 3. The preliminary plat indicates that road will extend north and south with a cul -de -sac at the end. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the plat with the understanding that the road, with the exception of the cu -de -sac would be paved completed with curb and gutter. Weyrens further stated that many of the preliminary engineering items are still outstanding but should be resolved shortly. Linda Brown, engineer for the property owner, approached the Council to discuss the preliminary plat. Brown stated that while the property owner, Central MN Federal Credit Union, is seeking preliminary plat approval for the entire plat, the design for infrastructure has centered on Lot 1. At this time Lots 2 & 3 do