Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005 [11] Nov 02 www.cityofstjoseph.com CITY OF ST. JOSEPH St. Joseph City Council November 2, 2005 6:30 PM St. Joseph City Hall- Lower Level Conference Room Administrdtor Judy Weyrens 1. Call to Order 2. 6:30 PM Water and Sewer Rates MdYor Richdrd Carlbom 3. 7:15 PM Discussion on expansion of Orderly Annexation Agreement Councilors AI Rdssier Ross Rieke Renee Symdnietz Ddle Wick 4. 7:45 PM Adjourn 00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 St. Joseph City Council / Planning Commission and St. Joseph Township Board and St. Joseph Township Planning Commission November 2, 2005 8:00 PM St. Joseph Community Fire Hall 1. Call to Order 2. 8:00 PM Public Hearing, Expansion of Orderly Annexation Agreement 3. 8:30 PM Land Use Management within the Orderly Annexation Area 4. Adjourn File 2.)' College Avenue North, PO Box 668 . Sdint. Joseph. Minnesotd )'6)74 Phone ,2.0.,6,.]2.01 FdX ,2.0.,6,.0'42. Administrdtor Judy 'Weyrens MdYor Richdrd. Cdrlbom Councilors AI Rdssier Ross Rieke Renee Symdnietz Ddle 'Wick www.cityofstjoseph.com CITY Of ST. JOSEPH Public Hearing City and Township of St. Joseph The City and Township of 81. Joseph will meet in joint session on Wednesday November 2, 2005 at 8:00 PM at the 81. Joseph Community Fire Hall, 323 - 4th Avenue NE. The purpose of the hearing is to amend the boundaries of the Orderly Annexation Agreement and to add language to the same agreement outlining the terms for future annexation. The proposed changes can be viewed at the 8t Joseph City Offices, 25 College Avenue North, 81. Joseph MN 56374. All persons wishing to speak will be heard and oral testimony will be limited to five minutes. Written comments may be forwarded to the address listed above. Judy Weyrens Administrator City of 81. Joseph Anna Reischl Township Clerk 81. Joseph Township. Publish: October 21,2005 2.) College Avenue North' PO Box 668 . Sdint. Joseph. Minnesotd )6')74 Phone ,,2.0..,6".72.01 Fdx .,2.0..,6.,.0.,42. I I I JJ. Willenbring (Retired 1988) Jaso~ Bartlett Kirby, Dahl Mark~McKeon Nancy Melgaard Paul Wocken Dani61 Zimmermann I I I , I t WILLENBRING, DAHL,WOCKEN & ZIMMERMANN ,PLLC ATTORNEYS MS ANNA REISCHL 200 HILL ST W ST JOSEPH MN 56374 I September 21, 2005 I RE:' St. Joseph Township/Ame;ndment to City of, St. ,Jo.seph Orderly Annexation Agreement , Our File No.:' 1405-058 " ! I i i I Dear Anna: 1 Anna, I have reviewed the proposed language containing the amen ment to the St. .Joseph Township/City of St. Joseph Orderly Annexation Agreement which' would add a 'sub-section' (C) of the Agreement. I' The language I would suggest is modified. from the original draft. I have underlined new language and lined through language to be delet~d. I "Qualification . for Annexation: The City ,and' Township I' mutually agree that, unless both the Township and City mutually a~ree to consider a specific annexation request, III property w~llnot be annexed unless all three of the criteria stated below are' satisfied unlcss both thc Tmmohip and City mutu:llly agree' to conoidcr a opccific I annelEation requcot.. ' .' . ' '. i. A petition for annexati~n has been received and~ithe,~ I 100% of the property owners have petitioned to do so, or the subj ect . property has completed the he'a:ring process! as hereinafter' set forth, with approval of the proposed I' annexation being obtained from both the City and, Township; and i 2. The property'requesting annexation is contiguous to the: City Limits;, and' . " 3.' The City eaT!: extends water and sewer services to subject pr~perty. , ' the I I I I 3] 8 Main Street. P.O. Box 417. C()ld Spring, MN 56320 (320) 685-3678 FAX (:320) 6854021 . ; Ms. Anna Reischl September 21, 2005 Page 2 In the event that the City and Township mutually agree to consider an annexation request that does not. meet -Ehe all three (3) criteria. established above, at least 60% of the affected property owners must submit a petition for annexation. In that event, a joint hearing of both the Town Board and the City:Council shall be called to consider and act on the petition. The petition for annexation shall . not be approved unless both the Town Board and the City I Council, voting as separate bodies, approve the petition I seeking annexation." I The above modifications clarify but do not expand ,what I underJtand the agreement of the parties to be. As I. understand it, once! the Town Board has approved the proposed language, it would then be submitted to the st. Joseph City Attorney and the City of St. Joseph for final approval, after which a joint hearing will be scheduled and after which. the Orderly Annexation Agreement will be amended. :Once the Town Board has considered the above language, please give me iyour direction and I will proceed to the next step. . Very truly yours, KD/ds cc: Matt Symalla Jerome Salzer Jeff Janssen PLLC I I I I ! t January 25, 2005 Page 1 of 2 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the City Council for the City of St. Joseph met in joint session with the City of St. Joseph Planning Commission, St. Joseph Township Board and St. Joseph Township Planning Commission on Tuesday, 25, 2005 at 8:00 PM in the St. Joseph Township Hall. St. Joseph City Council Present: Mayor Richard Carlbom. Councilors AI Rassier, Dale Wick, Ross Rieke, Renee Symanietz. City Administrator Judy Weyrens. City of St. Joseph Plannina Commission Present: Chair Gary Utsch. Commissioners S. Kathleen Kalinowski, Marge Lesnick, Bob Loso, Jim Graeve, Michael Deutz. St. Joseph Township Board Present: Board Chair Joe Bechtold. Supervisor Jerrome Salzer, Township Clerk Ann Reischl. St. Joseph Township Plannina Commission: Matt Symalla, Ralph Eiynck, Jeff Jansen. Bechtold opened the meeting and stated the purpose of the meeting was to review the possible extension of the Orderly Annexation Agreement. City Planning Commission Chair Gary Utsch stated that the City Council and Planning Commission reviewed the service areas identified in the current Orderly Annexation Agreement and prepared a revised service area map for discussion purposes. The map was updated to reflect current City boundaries and to move to the current year any property where development is actively being discussed. In addition, the service area has been expanded to include all property abutting Interstate 94 north of County Road 2 and south of County Road 75. During discussion of the proposed amendment of the Orderly Annexation Agreement the following items were discussed: ~ Property included in the Orderly Annexation areas must be completely within the boundary as one parcel cannot be covered by two separate agreements. Before completion of the amendment, boundary lines will be verified. ~ Before the Orderly Annexation Agreement can be amended, a public hearing will be required. As in the past, St. Joseph Township will mail hearing notices. The hearing will be joint, with the City present. Each jurisdiction will take action at their next regularly scheduled meeting. ~ For simplicity purposes, all property contained in the Orderly Annexation Area will receive notice of the public hearing. City and Township Administration will find a suitable location for the hearing and establish a meeting date. ~ Concern was expressed regarding property west of Interstate 94 and if the City will be annexing that area in the near future. City Representatives responded that they have no immediate plans to develop property west of 1-94. In fact, the City Water Filtration Plant will be constructed in St. Joseph Township, as the City did not want to extend services under the Interstate. It was the consensus of those present to accept the proposed changes to the service area as presented. Those present also discussed the need to update the verbiage in the agreement regarding under what circumstances property could be annexed. The Township expressed frustration with a neighboring jurisdiction that is in the process of annexing property that is not contiguous to their boundary. Bechtold stated the purpose of the Orderly Annexation Agreement was to provide for continuous development upon the request of the property owners who desire municipal services. The Agreement should not allow for island annexation because a specific developer is willing to pay the cost to extend services beyond an area that does not need or desire services. January 25, 2005 Page 2 of 2 Those present agreed to amend section 7 the Orderly Annexation Agreement adding the following provisions as sub-section (C): Qualification for Annexation: The City and Township mutually agree that property will not be annexed unless all three of the criteria stated below are satisfied, unless both the Township and City mutually agree to consider a specific annexation request. 1. A petition for annexation has been received and either 100% of the property owners have petitioned to do so, or the subject property has completed the hearing process with approval from both the City and Township; and 2. The property requesting annexation is contiguous to the City Limits; and 3. The City can extend water and sewer services to the subject property. In the event that the City and Township mutually agree to consider an annexation request that does not meet the criteria established above, at least 60% of the affected property owners must submit a petition for annexation. In that event, a joint hearing of both the Town Board and the City Council shall be called to consider the petition. The petition shall not be approved unless both the Town Board and City Council, voting as separate bodies, approve the petition seeking annexation. Weyrens and Reischl will forward this information to the Township Attorney for review and a final draft of the new language will be prepared. After both the City and Township have approved the draft, the joint hearing will be scheduled. Southwest Beltwav: City Engineer Joe Bettendorf presented those present with information regarding the proposed transportation route entitled the Southwest Beltway. The Southwest Beltway affects property in the City of Waite Park, St. Joseph and St. Joseph Township. The Southwest Beltway will connect from County Road 138 to County Road 75. The area where the road is proposed, is being sought by developers for development and the St. Cloud Area Planning Organization (APO) is requesting that a corridor study be completed. It is estimated that the corridor study will cost approximately $ 850,000. During discussions with the APO, the cost sharing is proposed with Stearns County contributing 50% of the total cost and the City and Township equally dividing the remaining 50%. Representatives from St. Joseph questioned if the Township would be willing to contribute towards the cost of the Study as the property is currently located in St. Joseph Township. Bechtold stated that it is his opinion that the road corridor needs to be preserved and the study should be completed before development artificially determines where the road will be placed. Township representatives requested additional information on the total cost and will consider the request at a future meeting. Adiourn: Carlbom made a motion to adjourn at 9:30 PM; seconded by Rieke and passed unanimously. Judy Weyrens Administrator .. ,. -#,":,1' 11 Seventh Avenue North P.O. Box 1433 St. Cloud. MN 56302-1433 320-251-1055 Toll Free 800-445-9617 Fax 320-251-5896 rajhan@rajhan.com www.rajhan.com Frank J. Rajkowski'" Gordon H. Hansmeier Frederick L Grunke Thomas G. Jovanovich- John H. Scherer" Paul A. Rajkowskl" Kevin F. Gray William J. Cashman Richard W. Sobalvarro Patrick J. larkin Susan M. Dege leAnne D. Barti.honkl Kevin J. Rodlund Sarah L Smith ~VRajkOWSki Hansmeier lid. . ATTORNEYS AT LAW March 20, 2002 Ms. JudyWeyrens Clerk Administrator of the City ofSt.'Joseph 25 College Avenue North P.O. Box 668 St. Joseph, MN 56374 Re: Land Use Regulation in Orderly Annexation Area Our File No. 21793 Dear Judy: Under Minn. Stat. ~ 414.0325, planning in ateas designated for orderly annexation may . be handled in several ways. The joint resolution designating the area for orderly annexation may provide for the establishment of a sepatate board to exercise planning and land use controls within that area. If the joint resolution does not provide for a joint planning and land use board, then the statute provides for one of two other alternatives: ": J.. \.IftheCo4ntyand To~ship agree to: exclude the area from their zoning and ,',: c'; . :~\lbdivi~ionregulationsi the :City may extendJts,zoning/and. Subd~vi'sion' r~gulations1 . to the eritife orderly annexation area, or... ",,>,,, '", ; :::. . 2. If the County and Township do riot agree to such extra territorial zoning and subdivision regulation, the orderly annexation area shall be' controlled by a three- member committee representing the City, Town and County. This three member committee shall serve as the "governing body" for purposes ofland use decisions. : , . i It is my understahding that at the present time, land use deCiSion. s ate governed by a i . three- rnember board comprised ofa representative of the City, Township and County. l 'believe that this board was created by agreement as opposed to being ~reatedby default.j I believe that the Cjtyand Town could extend City regulation into these areas one of two ways. First, the joint resolution could be amended to provide for extension of City regulation into the orderly annexation area. The County would need to sign on as well. . Not only would. the City apply .its. ordinances to the orderly annexation areas, but the City Planning, PQrom!ssion :and. City Coum;,il would. se~e: asthe~ advisory;~4,gQvemitigjbQar,ds wit~.re~ar:d'tP4ecisions.ri1ad.e:inthose areas. ',::'; .H' ~':~'; :,.,';,}:d!.! :';I.;).~!:t :!;:'t I ! ..;." I. ~ ';;. :~:-}~; .',~: .i,//,;'; ~}~;J:'..!.. ;';,;'.'Ct' :;-.. . ,I' ':r~'~ .l .i";CL,"J '....i;. (:,!.,',:;',' . '; :f~; ',_': . ","-'. '.' .,. i Frank J. Rajkowskl and Richard IN. Soba/varro are admitted to practice in North Dakota. Gordon H. Hansmeler In North Dakota and W1scon.lln. Paul A. Rajkowski In WIscOnsin and William J. Cashmah in South Dakota. . "Member of American Board of Trial Advocates. "Quallfled ADR Neutral. ! I Ms, JudyWe)'I'ens. Match 2() .2002. . " ,. . .: :Page 2 . 'Wf'.. .... ..... .,'t' .. . . . ," ; . . ' - . ,"", . '. . Aiternati"ely; I b'elieve:thatwe could aUowthe three-memberCityrfownship/CountY board to continue asa g()v~ming body, but simply have that body adopt City zoning and subdivision regulatioriSto govenithe area designated for orderly annexation and proceed with zolling those areas in accordance with our zoning calcifications. .1 aSsume that for the most part, except for esiablished.residentiaI properties, the zoning would be agricultural.. As the property is. design. ated Ior 'development;.it would then be re-zonedby thejoint board (or City upon anneXation)'tC, the appropriatedevelbpedlanduse. . . , '... '.. ' Airastartirigpoirit the Town may find it more palatable to aI10w thejoint board to contim~eto exercise. decision making-authority~but to do so within the .zotllngand . subdivision . guidelines establishedhy our ordinances. In th~smanner, they would still maintaincontroloverre-zoning thtoughtbeirPlliiUringComtnission and representation on the joint boatd, but they would be doing so within the regulations established by our ordinances. . . .. . .' . .. . . - -.' ' . I hopethfslmormatiohishelpfulto you in beginning tomovethisissue~orWard..Let melmow if youhave.ariy questions or need other information relative to this matter, .. JHSlkjp . January 25, 2005 Page 1 of 2 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the City Council for the City of St. Joseph met in joint session with the City of St. Joseph Planning Commission, St. Joseph Township Board and St. Joseph Township Planning Commission on Tuesday, 25, 2005 at 8:00 PM in the St. Joseph Township Hall. St. Joseph City Council Present: Mayor Richard Carlbom. Councilors AI Rassier, Dale Wick, Ross Rieke, Renee Symanietz. City Administrator Judy Weyrens. City of St. Joseph Plannina Commission Present: Chair Gary Utsch. Commissioners S. Kathleen Kalinowski, Marge Lesnick, Bob Loso, Jim Graeve, Michael Deutz. St. Joseph Township Board Present: Board Chair Joe Bechtold. Supervisor Jerrome Salzer, Township Clerk Ann Reischl. St. Joseph Township Plannino Commission: Matt Symalla, Ralph Eiynck, Jeff Jansen. Bechtold opened the meeting and stated the purpose of the meeting was to review the possible extension of the Orderly Annexation Agreement. City Planning Commission Chair Gary Utsch stated that the City Council and Planning Commission reviewed the service areas identified in the current Orderly Annexation Agreement and prepared a revised service area map for discussion purposes. The map was updated to reflect current City boundaries and to move to the current year any property where development is actively being discussed. In addition, the service area has been expanded to include all property abutting Interstate 94 north of County Road 2 and south of County Road 75. During discussion of the proposed amendment of the Orderly Annexation Agreement the following items were discussed: ~ Property included in the Orderly Annexation areas must be completely within the boundary as one parcel cannot be covered by two separate agreements. Before completion of the amendment, boundary lines will be verified. ~ Before the Orderly Annexation Agreement can be amended, a public hearing will be required. As in the past, St. Joseph Township will mail hearing notices. The hearing will be joint, with the City present. Each jurisdiction will take action at their next regularly scheduled meeting. ~ For simplicity purposes, all property contained in the Orderly Annexation Area will receive notice of the public hearing. City and Township Administration will find a suitable location for the hearing and establish a meeting date. ~ Concern was expressed regarding property west of Interstate 94 and if the City will be annexing that area in the near future. City Representatives responded that they have no immediate plans to develop property west of 1-94. In fact, the City Water Filtration Plant will be constructed in St. Joseph Township, as the City did not want to extend services under the Interstate. It was the consensus of those present to accept the proposed changes to the service area as presented. Those present also discussed the need to update the verbiage in the agreement regarding under what circumstances property could be annexed. The Township expressed frustration with a neighboring jurisdiction that is in the process of annexing property that is not contiguous to their boundary. Bechtold stated the purpose of the Orderly Annexation Agreement was to provide for continuous development upon the request of the property owners who desire municipal services. The Agreement should not allow for island annexation because a specific developer is willing to pay the cost to extend services beyond an area that does not need or desire services. January 25, 2005 Page 2 of 2 Those present agreed to amend section 7 the Orderly Annexation Agreement adding the following provisions as sub-section (C): Qualification for Annexation: The City and Township mutually agree that property will not be annexed unless all three of the criteria stated below are satisfied, unless both the Township and City mutually agree to consider a specific annexation request. 1. A petition for annexation has been received and either 100% of the property owners have petitioned to do so, or the subject property has completed the hearing process with approval from both the City and Township; and 2. The property requesting annexation is contiguous to the City Limits; and 3. The City can extend water and sewer services to the subject property. In the event that the City and Township mutually agree to consider an annexation request that does not meet the criteria established above, at least 60% of the affected property owners must submit a petition for annexation. In that event, a joint hearing of both the Town Board and the City Council shall be called to consider the petition. The petition shall not be approved unless both the Town Board and City Council, voting as separate bodies, approve the petition seeking annexation. Weyrens and Reischl will forward this information to the Township Attorney for review and a final draft of the new language will be prepared. After both the City and Township have approved the draft, the joint hearing will be scheduled. Southwest Beltwav: City Engineer Joe Bettendorf presented those present with information regarding the proposed transportation route entitled the Southwest Beltway. The Southwest Beltway affects property in the City of Waite Park, St. Joseph and St. Joseph Township. The Southwest Beltway will connect from County Road 138 to County Road 75. The area where the road is proposed, is being sought by developers for development and the St. Cloud Area Planning Organization (APO) is requesting that a corridor study be completed. It is estimated that the corridor study will cost approximately $ 850,000. During discussions with the APO, the cost sharing is proposed with Stearns County contributing 50% of the total cost and the City and Township equally dividing the remaining 50%. Representatives from St. Joseph questioned if the Township would be willing to contribute towards the cost of the Study as the property is currently located in St. Joseph Township. Bechtold stated that it is his opinion that the road corridor needs to be preserved and the study should be completed before development artificially determines where the road will be placed. Township representatives requested additional information on the total cost and will consider the request at a future meeting. Adiourn: Carlbom made a motion to adjourn at 9:30 PM; seconded by Rieke and passed unanimously. Judy Weyrens Administrator