Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02.08.21CITY OF ST. JOSEPH www.cityofstjoseph.com St. Joseph Planning Commission Monday, February 8th, 2021 6:00 PM **The meeting will also be offered through Zoom** 1. Call to Order 2. Pledge of Allegiance 3. Agenda Review and Adoption 4. Approve Minutes — January 11th, 2021 5. New Business a. New member introductions b. Public Hearing, Variance application wetland setback — MN Home Improvements c. Public Hearing, Variance application parking material/curbing requirements — MN Home Improvements d. Ordinance amendments — wetland setbacks and curbing requirements e. Outdoor dining/sidewalk cafe ordinance f. Comprehensive Plan Compliance — Sale of Property 84.53843.0005 6. Old Business a. Fence ordinance b. Accessory structure ordinance c. Student liaison discussion 7. Other Business 8. Adjourn ZOOM Join Zoom Meeting https://zoom.us/a/96555891828?pwd=VTN BS3YzTW9aYWVEN W95VF14RVB6QT09 Meeting ID: 965 5589 1828 Passcode: 397150 One tap mobile +13017158592„96555891828#,,,,*397150# US (Washington DC) +13126266799„96555891828#,,,,*397150# US (Chicago) Dial by your location +1 301 715 8592 US (Washington DC) +1312 626 6799 US (Chicago) +1929 205 6099 US (New York) +1253 215 8782 US (Tacoma) +1346 248 7799 US (Houston) 75 Callaway Street East I Saint Joseph, Minnesota 56374 Email: cityoffices@cityofstjoseph.com I Phone: 320.363.7201 1 Fax 320.363-0342 CITY OF ST. JOSEPH www.cityofstjoseph.com +1669 900 6833 US (San Jose) Meeting ID: 965 5589 1828 Passcode: 397150 Find your local number: https://zoom.us/u/abvmzNabzl 75 Callaway Street East I Saint Joseph, Minnesota 56374 Email: cityoffices@cityofstjoseph.com I Phone: 320.363.7201 1 Fax 320.363-0342 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the Planning Commission for the City of St. Joseph met via a Zoom Meeting on Tuesday, January 11 th, 2021 at 6:00 PM. Planning Commission Members Present: Commissioners Brian Theisen, Chad Hausmann, Anne Jarrell, Mike Ross, Community Development Director Nate Keller Members Absent Gina Dullinger, Approval of the Agenda: Nate Keller requested that an item listed as 6.d. called Student Liaison Discussion be added to the agenda. Theisen made a motion to approve the agenda. The motion was seconded by Ross and passed unanimously. Approval of the Minutes: Hausmann noted to make a change to a typo on his last name in the minutes. The last time it is referenced, it is misspelled. Theisen made a motion to approve the amended minutes of November 10th, 2020. The motion was seconded by Ross and passed unanimously. New Business a. Appoint a Chair and Co -Chair Keller shared that we are looking to establish these positions for the calendar year. Hausmann asked if there were any volunteers. Theisen is exempt from this as he is the council liaison. Hausmann volunteered to be the Chair. Theisen nominated Dullinger to be the Co -Chair. Ross made a motion to approve the appointments. The motion was seconded by Theisen and passed unanimously. b. Public Hearing, Preliminary Plat, St. Joseph City Hall Addition Keller presented the request for a Preliminary and Final Plat Approval for the St. Joseph City Hall Addition. The City is the applicant. Keller acknowledged the Planning Commission authorized the sale of a portion of this property in October. This request will help to facilitate that sale. The purpose of the plat is to separate the existing parcel into three parcels. One will house City Hall, the second will house the Little Saints Academy, and the third is where the existing ballfields are will house the future Community Center. Keller pointed out the unique drainage and utilities easements on the eastern boundary of Lot 1 and the northern boundary of Lot 2. They are larger than what is listed in the City Subdivision Ordinance. This is due to existing utilities and watermains that run through the properties. Keller recommended the approval of this request and mentioned that he would be happy to address any questions the Planning Commission had. Hausmann asked to verify that there is no change to zoning and this is only a change to the lot split. Keller did acknowledge that is indeed correct. Hausmann opened the public hearing at 6:12 p.m. for the Preliminary and Final Plat Approval. Emily Chaphalkar, who lives at 102 2nd Avenue SE, asked what the zoning for this plat was and how that would impact any of the plans that have been submitted to the State for the proposed Community Center. Keller replied that the bonding money authorized by the State is for the design and the construction plan of the Community Center. This proposal splits the parcel into three. The Community Center would be on the eastern parcel or the Lot 3 parcel. Emily Chaphalkar asked about the history of the parcel. She wanted to know if this was initially three parcels, then became one parcel and is now going back to three parcels. She'd recalled that the school district used to own the building at this location. Keller replied that his understanding of the history was that this was always one continuous parcel and had never been platted out before. This would be the first proposal to split this into three separate parcels. Emily Chaphalkar mentioned that the former Kennedy School Building is being sold to Little Saints Academy. She asked what the City is doing to ensure that there is no conflict of interest or favorable treatment as the owner of Little Saints Academy is partnered or married to the chief of the St. Joseph Police Department. Keller stated that the City issued a request for proposals for that parcel before it was sold and that only one proposal was received and it was from the organization that owns Little Saints Academy. In October, the Planning Commission authorized the sale of that parcel in conformance to the comprehensive plan as required by State Statute. Before that purchase agreement can be signed, that building needs to be on its own parcel thus the plat request. Kathy Salzer, who lives at 131 4t" Ave SE, also spoke. Her questions were how much land was being sold to Little Saints Academy and does it include the tennis courts and the playground? Her second question was if the City had any intention to add to the existing City Hall? Keller responded the tennis courts and the ballfields are entirely within Parcel 3 and the majority of the playground equipment is also within Parcel 3. He indicated these areas on the map to assist as a visual. He mentioned that there are no current plans to add onto the existing Government Center. Pat Meyer, who lives at 245 4t" Ave SE, mentioned that from her window she can see that lots of people use the area. Her opinion is that the City does not maintain the sidewalks in the winter which impacts use. She wants to know how much of the space will be Community Center and how much will be parking. She also wanted to know what the Community Center design would be and what the size and purpose would be. She mentioned that the current location is often utilized and wanted to share that she had concerns about a large portion of it being turned into a parking lot Hausmann replied that the main issue on the agenda today had to do with the segmenting of the parcel. He acknowledged that her question is a good one and is perhaps the more appropriate time to address it would be when the plans for the Community Center are more advanced. Keller shared that the design plans are not evolved to the point where we know what the exact layout would be. He reiterated that this particular meeting was being held to address the split of the parcel into three. Hausmann did follow up acknowledging that when the City applied for the bonding money and secured it, it was agreed that a Community Center was to be built there, and what it looks like is yet to be determined. Don Fischer, who lives at 235 4t" Ave SE, wanted to know what, if any plans are regarding street access to Lot 2. He mentioned that Little Saints Academy has one access at this time and that they used to have another one on Baker Street. Hausmann asked about the temporary gravel access that Little Saints used to have. Mr. Fischer said that a chain link fence has been placed along that access. He wanted to know if there would be one or two points of access. Hausmann pointed out that there are no plans to change any access points on Lot 2. Keller confirmed that. Emily Chaphalkar asked Nate Keller to verify that the zoning not changing and asked him what the current zoning was for the plats. Keller replied that Emily Chaphalkar was correct. The zoning is not changing and these plots are zoned Educational and Ecclesiastical. Hausmann then closed the public hearing at 6:27 p.m. as all speakers had completed their comments and questions. Ross, asked if Plot 2 could be decreased in size. He alluded to it being a potential parking solution to address the concerns heard this evening, if necessary. Keller responded that there is no minimum lot size within the district. That being said, the intent is to maintain the size proposed. Hausmann shared that he thought the greenspace was necessary given the type of business being operated there. If there are future concerns with Lot 3 and greenspace, those concerns could be addressed in the design phase of the Community Center. Ross agreed that is a discussion for a future date. Jarrell asked if the lot lines for Lot 2 were suggested by the City or by Little Saints Academy. Keller replied that from his understanding it was a joint discussion and the lines were determined by the setbacks and the need to conform to them. Hausmann explained that there are two separate resolutions and outlined them. Theisen made a motion to approve Resolution to Recommend Approval of the Preliminary Plat. The motion was seconded by Ross. Prior to a vote, Jarrell asked to verify the engineering condition in the resolution. Keller did confirm that all engineering issues are resolved. The motion was then passed unanimously by those present. c. Final Plat — St. Joseph City Hall Addition Hausmann made a motion to approve Resolution to Recommend Approval of the Final Plat. The motion was seconded by Theisen and Jarrell. The motion was then passed unanimously by those present. Other Business a. Fence Ordinance Discussion Keller mentioned that in a prior meeting, the Planning Commission requested that staff review the fence ordinance. He presented an early draft of the document and reviewed changes and updates. The goal was to remove unnecessary or unclear language, simplify the process and better explain fence placement and decoration. Jarrell pointed out an inconsistency regarding fence height in sections 506.04 and 506.06. Keller agreed that those would need to be updated. As there was no further discussion, Keller added that he would bring a more formalized ordinance amendment for the next meeting. b. Accessory Structure Discussion Keller stated that staff researched how other communities handle accessory structures. He asked the Commission to be mindful of size, material standards and attached additions. Language was added to the ordinance to address fire code, allowable building coverage and sheds that are 200 square feet or less. Hausmann commented that 200 square feet is a pretty substantial size and asked if the percentage of accessory structures on lots be examined. He added that it is good to allow for larger lots as it is a part of preparation for growth as the City annexes more property in the future. Hausmann suggested lowering the square footage to 120 and asked if any action needed to be taken at this time. Keller replied that currently staff is only looking for feedback and direction. Hausmann added that he felt it was important to have other Planning Commission members input. Keller mentioned that the other members should be in place for the next meeting. It was agreed that this topic and the fence discussion be discussed in February with a timeline for approval in March. c. 2021 Planning Commission Calendar Keller explained that the Commission typically authorizes the schedule for the year. Hausmann made a motion to approve the proposed Planning Commission meeting dates. The motion was seconded by Brian Theisen. The motion was then passed unanimously by those present. D. Student Liaison Discussion Keller suggested that a non-voting student liaison be added to the Commission. This member would represent the collage demographic and allow for a learning experience for that member. Hausmann agreed with this and shared that it added value, particularly since approximately a quarter of the population is college students for nine months of the year. Keller outlined the process adding that applications would be sent to the college, interviews conducted and the selection would be made from there. This would not have to be in ordinance as the liaison would be a non-voting member. Consensus was that adding the student liaison was valuable. Adjourn: Theisen moved to adjourn the meeting at 6:44 PM. The motion was seconded by Ross and the motion carried. Nathan Keller Community Development Director C Planning Commission Agenda Items: 5b, 5c, 5d CTW OF ST. JOSEPH MEETING DATE: February 8', 2021 AGENDA ITEM: 5b Variance application — wetland setback 5c Variance application —parking circulation material and curbing requirements 5d Ordinance amendments — wetland setbacks, and curbing requirements SUBMITTED BY: Nate Keller, Community Development Director STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the following: a. 2021-001 Variance denial of wetland setback b. 2021-002 (A) Variance denial of driveway material c. 2021-003 Variance denial of curbing requirements BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Staff has received two variance requests from Andy Fischer from MN Home Improvements for the property addressed as 7967 Sterling Dr, St. Joseph, MN 56374 within the St. Joseph Industrial Park East Plat 3 Subdivision. The subdivision was annexed into the City in 2019. The applicant purchased the property last October and has requested site plan approval for a new building to be constructed on the subject parcel. The variance requests are for: • Departure on the minimum wetland setbacks for a driveway Zoning regulation 502.19 Subd. 4 A). • Departure on the required material requirements for a driveway and curbing standards (Zoning regulation 502.10 Subd. 3 N and Zoning regulation 502.10 Subd. 5 D) St. Joseph Industrial Park East was created while in St. Joseph Township and is not serviced with City utilities (water, storm sewer, sanitary sewer). Staff is recommending ordinance amendments to address the wetland setback and curbing requirements. For your consideration, is a draft ordinance amendment reducing the wetland setback to 50 feet for drive and parking areas to be consistent with the building setback. This setback will provide the needed buffer for drainage and to filter stormwater before the wetland. Additionally, staff has drafted an ordinance amendment to allow exceptions to curbing requirements if certain criteria are met. One of the main reasons for curb and gutter is for stormwater collection and runoff and in this situation sheet drainage may be more appropriate. The drafted amendments if supported, will come back to Planning Commission in March for public hearing. A variance may be granted if enforcement of a zoning ordinance provision on a particular property would cause the landowner practical difficulties as defined by MN State Statute 462.357. A variance shall only be permitted if all of the following facts and conditions exists: Criteria. A variance shall only be permitted if all of the following facts and conditions exists: 1. The variance is consistent with the adopted St. Joseph Comprehensive Plan. 2. The variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of this Ordinance. 3. The applicant establishes that there are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. Practical difficulties as used in connection with therig of a variance shall mean: a. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the zoning ordinance. b. The plight of the landowner is due to the circumstances unique to the grope . not created by the landowner c. The variance, if granted will not alter the essential character of the locality. 4. Economic considerations alone shall not constitute practical difficulties under the terms of this Ordinance. 5. Practical difficulties shall include, but are not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy s std 6. Variances shall be granted for earth sheltered construction as defined in MN Statute 216C.06, Subd. 14 as may be amended, when in harmony with the zoning ordinance. 7. Additional Conditions: If granting a variance, the City Council may impose conditions to ensure compliance with this Ordinance and to protect adjacent properties. Code references: Zoning regulation 502.19 Subd. 4 A). "The following activity shall be subject to a 75 foot setback from wetlands: The construction or maintenance of paved driveways or areas designed for the parking of a vehicle or trailer. " Zoning regulation 502.19 Subd. 4 A) "The following activity shall be subject to a 50 foot setback from wetlands: The construction or maintenance of a building attached to a foundation, including but not limited to: pole buildings. For purposes of this paragraph, pump houses, moveable storage sheds, recreational docks and storm water or erosion control devices shall be not be considered buildings." Zoning regulation 502.10 Subd. 3 N) `All off-street parking and loading spaces, together with driveways, aisles, and other circulation areas, shall be a hard surface constructed of concrete, bituminous, or paver stone. " Zoning regulation 502.10 Subd. 5 D) "Necessary curbs or other protection against damages to adjoining properties, streets and sidewalks shall be provided and maintained. Concrete curbs to MnDOT Design B612 specifications shall be used for all automobile stops and for all drive and parking areas. " PREVIOUS PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: None ATTACHMENTS: 1. Application 2. Site Plan 3. Resolution 2021-001 4. Resolution 2021-002 (A) 5. Resolution 2021-002 (B) 6. Resolution 2021-003 7. Drafted Ordinance amendments REQUESTED PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Take action on the Variance resolutions and provide direction on the proposed ordinance amendments. East Industrial park Overview picture — — rrR�^rr���errrpremr�+�xr�rrrrrarr Floor Te Ceiling:- ing,-------------- Dr. - • Si'erling^or , Baldwin Supply Company 30577 Pearl Dr is Gold Country Trucking im erl[ng Dr, St MN 56374 Joll, 14 �06 cole,/6Pipqm nit Grae Selrvices , K&A A nobody r s. Y t�. 4 .O �a 29. AL . ■ ■ fiery Wholesale,^ ` - Inc. Off ! y IF oor To C it _ . . ,�: nOwƒ/e�\ e # � i4'C/� Pap8r8 CITY OF ST. JOSEPH FEE: $400 Date Received Applicant: Application for Variance MHI Properties, LLP (Andy Fischer) Date: 12-31 -20 Phone: 320-363-4435 Mailing Address: Property Owner: Email: andy@mnhomeimprovements.com PO Box 248 St Joseph, MN 56374 M H 1 Properties, LLP Phone: 320-309-8848 PROJECT INFORMATION: Fischer Email: andy@mnhomeimprovements.com Street Address of Subject Property: 7967 Sterling Dr, St Joseph Parcel Identification Number (PIN): 84.53300.0402 Legal Description of Property (attach a separate document if needed): Lot 5, Block 1, St joseph Industrial Park East Plat 3 Purpose of variance: The use of Class 2 (100% crushed) gravel surfacing in lieu of pavement. Encroachment of parking lot and driveway into -75 -ft wetland setback. VARIANCE APPROVAL The City Council may allow a departure from the terms of the zoning ordinance pertaining to setbacks, height or width of structures or the size of yard and open spaces where such departure will still be in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the ordinance. A variance may be granted if enforcement of a zoning ordinance provision as applied to a particular piece of property would cause the landowner "practical difficulties." For a variance to be granted, the applicant must satisfy a three -factor test for practical difficulties under state statute. All three factors must be satisfied to constitute practical difficulties. The factors are as follows: 1. That the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner but cannot do so under the rules of the ordinance. Explain how this applies to your request: See attached. 2. That the landowner's problem is due to circumstances unique to the property not caused by the landowner. There are uniquely exceptional circumstances or conditions applying to the land, structure or building in question that do not generally apply to other properties in the same zoning district i.e. sloping topography or other natural features. Variance Application, City of St. Joseph Page 49of 2 Explain how this applies to your request: See attached. That if the variance is granted it will not alter the essential character of the locality meaning the structure will not be out of scale, out of place, or otherwise inconsistent with the surrounding area. Explain how this applies to your request: See attached NOTE: Economic considerations alone shall not constitute practical difficulties. Rather, practical difficulties exist only when the three statutory factors are met. Additional conditions may be imposed to ensure compliance with the City Code and to protect adjacent properties. APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE APPROVAL Applications for Variance Approval shall be on this form and shall include the established fee. The application and copies of the site plan shall be submitted three (3) weeks prior to the next Planning Commission meeting. (Please see attached meeting schedule). The application shall contain twelve (12) copies (8.5"xl l" or 11"x17") of exhibits, which will include the following information: ❑ Site Plan drawn at scale showing parcel, grading, landscaping and location of utilities, as applicable. ❑ Location of all buildings and their square footage. ❑ Curb cuts, driveways, access roads, parking spaces, off-street loading areas and sidewalks. ❑ Landscaping and screening plans. ❑ Sanitary sewer and water plan with estimated use per day. ❑ Drainage and grading plan; indicate soil type. ❑ Any additional information reasonably required by the City Staff, Planning Commission or City Council. Review and Decision by the City Council. The City Council shall review the application after the Planning Commission has made its recommendation and will make a final determination to either approve or deny the application. In the granting of approval, the City Council may impose conditions regarding the location, character and other features of the proposed building, structure or use as it may deem necessary. We, the undersigned, hereby certify that we have read, examined and understand this application and that the information submitted herein and attached hereto is true, accurate, and correctly states my intentions. Signature of Applicant: Date: _/57' v % Signature of Owner: —- Date: Questions: Phone (320) 229-9424. Submit completed application to: St. Joseph Government Center 75 Callaway St E St. Joseph, MN 56374 Variance Application, City of St. Joseph Page2)of 2 VARIANCE ATTACHMENT That the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner but cannot do so under the rules of the ordinance. Surfacing: We purchased this property for our project partially based on observation of several nearby properties. The vast majority of these properties, including ALL of the closest ones, have parking lot and driveway areas surfaced with gravel surfacing. Based on nearby properties, gravel surfaced parking and driveway for a commercial project is a reasonable use of the property in this existing development, thus the cost of paved parking lot and driveway was not planned for in our project budget. it should be noted that the gravel surfacing proposed is Class 2 (100% crushed) gravel surfacing, which is different than the Class 5 gravel surfacing prevalent in the nearby properties. Class 2 gravel surfacing is regarded as a "dustless" surface, and is allowed in the industrial parks of other St. Cloud area cities. Wetland Setback Encroachment: The total lot area outside of the actual wetland and utility easements is approximately 59,200 -SF. The portion of this area within the 75-H wetland setback has an area of approximately 22,400 -SF, which is approximately 38% of the total lot area available for development (the aforementioned 59,200 -SF), leaving approximately 62% of available area. This is a substantial loss of available area for such a small commercial lot. Based on the overall lot size and observation of nearby properties, it is obvious that our property was platted WITHOUT a 75 -ft wetland setback in mind. Depriving us of this much area for development of a relatively small lot is an unreasonable burden on our use of the property. That the landowner's problem is due to circumstances unique to the property not caused by the landowner. There are uniquely exceptional circumstances or conditions applying to the land, structure or building in question that do not generally apply to other properties in the same zoning district i.e. sloping topography or other natural features. Surfacing: As indicated above, the vast majority of several nearby properties, including ALL of the closest ones, have parking lot and driveway areas surfaced with gravel surfacing. Requiring paved parking lot and driveway would be unique to the proposed project, and place a unique burden on us, relative to nearby properties. Wetland Setback Encroachment: As indicated above, it is obvious that the subject property was platted WITHOUT a 75-H wetland setback in mind. Other nearby properties have developed within 75 -ft of the existing wetlands. Requiring us to limit development of parking lot and driveway to area outside of the 75 -ft wetland setback (with the loss of approx. 38% of area available for development), places a unique burden on us, relative to nearby properties. That if the variance is granted it will not alter the essential character of the locality meaning the structure will not be out of scale, out of place, or otherwise inconsistent with the surrounding area. Surfacing: The whole point of this variance request is for us to be allowed to develop our property in a manner consistent with other nearby properties. Gravel surfacing in lieu of pavement WILL NOT alter the essential character of the locality, or appear out of place. Wetland Setback Encroachment: The whole point of this variance request is for us to be allowed to develop our property in a manner consistent with other nearby properties. Encroachment into the 75 -ft wetland setback WILL NOT alter the essential character of the locality, or appear out of place. Q uin .w�wr ozw✓xwxx:a/�oa,�l��anmun �u65� u�a,6uan�4a," its NW'HdSOf'1S 3�J7O`ONHNAS Z96Z Z �vi�v=sr uo�e saes-ese mze):ua a""�"vm ra\ imUevin z NOIS34 3ilS W eu one ONR133NION3 zlinHOS ulllOVJ MIN o W Holsln3a S1N3W3h0?JdWI 3WOH V10S3NNIW £ - U MH) L6WIC U LO -1 SNO HO LINO AHVNI"IIAHd NOLLOH SNOO HH ION -AHVN In N3tld P r.s9[oo z�„Srn Y° 03 O 'a �II� I —FIER w HM FlE 8 Q Ou, _os°�� I— �_ a IN <z -4� mw a IIw wo d z „c��w�w I�� u III" o — — IIS z III Z Li uQ a 2 I 08 0 Ss EE w 8_ v Ja 88 o Z .i�R �' �I TIMI �1. OF ¢ m s< s p U IiHllll' a O a 0 l s< \\ g ap ary Q Q� tea, jQ an R P o� so —v . o 033 /17 J \ \I \ w m\? \ \\yNsu W\ oc\ 14 Z W O\ Q r �s v W 04� I .y us uin .w�w� ozw✓xwxx:ay� a,.-w„ann,un °' .� nv�u�,�,""" �� NA'HdUof'1S 3AR70 `ONIINAS Z96Z 3a vi�v=sr ase esso-ese mze):ua ��av m. muvas er V NOIS34 3ilS W O ONRi33NION3 zlinHOS allDVJ MIN o U Hoisin3a S1N3W3AONdWI 3WOH V10S3NNIW OZOZ/OZlll-1 S NOAHO IIAIO AHVNIWN3tld NOLO SNOO HO ION -AHVN IW N3tld b.P -.d­­ -2 s9[ooWZ O0 Q o0 �LL C)0 Z w Q vii h �U pgp a F. ¢ m � g s gpp a s u€ a r isi e 8 ¢ 9 4 a t Y 1? 4 I$ a� � E � e ak �E �➢° # gg� � � ; p�p 4 � g g� €p ery a � � � a g➢ $ � :& s ° eo €p k P $ aF ° g sB o4 y "sf a s' eP p Eq g 88YIY47 8 a SF g2� g IJg " e� d&� �0 s g y aF Y aoL 8F q88 F" & t x 8zg g tp q a 8s o h 6 E Y as Y pYe 6� 6 aF Y f pee" ` $ Rg'� Fg g p € € =f go YgYY ee a Q $ gs s g g $g€ R " a, uin .w�w� ozouxwxx:a\°oayl�°an°°nom .� nn°� its NW'Hd350f'1S W� 10`ONIINAS Z96Z NOIS34 3ilS W euro/ e z O ONR133NION3 zlinHOS alloVJ MIN o W U Holsln3a S1N3W3AONdWI 3WOH V10S3NNIW MH) L6W/60'LO-135 NO HO LINO AHVNI"IIAHd N011 Hri SNOO HH ION -AHVN In N3tld 4 O O O4vIV? S Q o z a ; _ o 40=- � e z o=ag 3 ww Y 4 _ 6z oo'ac,H HD 4 �� c' 4u s°2Bib p9,2 90 yo`o _ -'L op24 7s 40 — 8a§ 3g _ co - ? z 4m - - _ °� --= a �_ . " Z Y:���"° 27 0 O 66 - � Q oa�8z •°°��. w8 a2�a= - F'a�3§2 ogpp _ ° » _ — k9t.0 V - � o \ �o� :.Ivvel`v ole a,agsio a / H. uieo.w�w3 ozw✓xwxx:ar�o a,.-�„ani„un °' .� n�ua,"�"" �� NA'HdUor '1S 3AR70 ONIINAS Z96Z 3a vi�v=s r ��e esso-ese mze):ua ��av m. muvas er � NOISM MIS W O ONRi33NION3 Z1lf1HoS unlDVJ M3N o U SHOISin3a S1N3W3AONdWI 3WOH V10S3NNIW OZOZ/OZlll- 1S NOAHO IIAIO AHVNIWN3tld NOUGH SNOO H0ION -AHVN IW N3tld P tN-dddMsa[oo $ ° € P e.•^g39 € 1 Pa 8 S ¢� hex la °' PB 2 �g �j€! € k€ a I E aP effi ppoop I lea �o Efi €€ s e 8 � r EP P 6°4 oatl$ a P a >tl € E° giF �s O a E°e z e➢ S: 08 E f E P °" �8P' p E' Ep E� i p8 d � s. P € € d fl 4� E � op�s,� a a4� d e¢ 48 e 8 � � € 8�6 p� tl:•" g a tl a g P d R�� e 8 �' i e s E f a _� s€ € � o 6Q o$ ?� ✓e = P E f� 8 E % g Po tl gHl I EE P €PP$ w „ I Pes a t 8 8P "P P• $ 3 " F e eaF�€ e, 4 .Pp e ° a _ a ° a 3 �c - � -o8P� � _ -➢S „m S 3t SEz ,R i5 gle2 s P gaf, ;g e g$ ®® Cg Pa 00 ° tl 4. e k e f x az tl b P E E E 3 v � p Y A. E Y E "o b � tl � ° ➢ $° C i P m 6p a E Em o $ 8 P PYE P P e p �e pn 8 " 8 gp • E "a E Y g s € of A € 55 49 �fi a$ g t Yg ;Po S � P& 3 $ Fg ! 4 £ $ E R • F s$ $ p' & 2 C $� : p gj 6P I ^" p. pB 8 m Pp S s ss ° o c fi s 4 a 'a r ss " gdE[4P l� 9 €i E Ip p° s8 �P� FP¢ Pytl '$S Bia 9S£� P P n gIx fa E t & g P P' EY 5 6R g v PCfi 4 a $ O& o=ff � P �p P 4® B a °k ¢¢p °• �, P �&� € � �s� �Y pPO4P P � � aE 4 PY Po E Ps 3 gP 6 F SP P 4 3 F _ 4 E 48 8g �e &a 4 P E o $ € E a § a s € a P E P a er s & B Y o E aY & 5 E o y 4 ap MI P & F s �� P k sP SPP 46 6 x B yF. 6 EPago 4£ 7 4 ap f o m& as p€a c yP E 'S Ep 9 & 9Io 3 E � P � P�4 e° ai "g B • fi� 8 s 'k8 5� F �"$ °-F IPE E n�8frn EE. P 6 €E.. -' ag �� p€ •e _g P�k�@ 4 F F 2 P g P � Ep aE°Y 68 RP & E 1m ^_2 diwe ee sE �. sg pop sE Bis':%y .eoyso °aa Asa of ae www.schultzengineeringdesign.com 4 ST. JOSEPH, MN License No.: 43129Date: XX/XX/2020 schultzeng@live.comSartell, MN 56377 7967 STERLING DRIVE Fx: (866) 633-1830Suite 230 3 Brian J. Schultz, PE Ph: (320) 339-066918 South Riverside Avenue 4 2 & SITE DESIGN 01/04/2021ADDED TRASH ENCLOSURE OF 1 NEW FACILITY SCHULTZ ENGINEERING DESCRIPTIONDATENO. Engineer under the laws of the state of Minnesota MINNESOTA HOME IMPROVEMENTS by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly licensed I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared20036 C4 REVISIONS 1"=30' SCALE: PROJECT NUMBER: PRELIMINARY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION PRELIMINARY CIVIL CHECK SET - 01/04/2021 (REV) NTSNTS 120 NTSNTS NOTE: FILTER LOGSSHALL BE INSTALLEDPER MNDOT 2573.3J INTERTWINE OUTER MESHAROUND STAKES. NOTE: FILTER LOGS SHALLCONSIST OF TYPE WOOD FIBER BIOROLL PER MNDOT 3897 60 30 1' TO 3' 6" 10'X10' CONCRETE WASHOUT AREA AND DISPOSE OF PER MPCA REQUIREMENTS WHEN WASHOUT AREA BECOMES HALF FULL. LOCATION FOR THE CONCRETE WASHOUT 2. CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE WASH LIQUID FROM3. CONTRACTOR SHALL SELECT THE MOST OPTIMAL 1. BOTTOM OF CONCRETE WASHOUT AREA SHALL BE 0 SWPPP - PLAN VIEW " X 2" X 16" WOOD 6" 12STAKES EVERY 12" O.C.TO SECURE FILTER LOG6" - 7" FILTER LOG A CHECK SLOT SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED AT THE TOPOF STEEP SLOPES (4:1 OR STEEPER) WHERE EROSION CONTROL2. LAY BLANKET END INTO TRENCH3. STAPLE BLANKET IN BOTTOM OF TRENCH EVERY 1 FT4. BACKFILL TRENCH WITH SOIL AND COMPACT5. IF SLOPE LENGTH (L) IS GREATER THAN 100 FT DIG A CHECK SLOT 1/3 FROM THE BOTTOM OF THE SLOPE AND STAPLE THE BLANKET IN AS IN THE TOP TRENCH.EROSION CONTROL BLANKETFILTER LOG DITCH CHECK BLANKET IS PLACED AS PER THE FOLLOWING:1. DIG 6" X 6" TRENCH OF THE STAKE POINTING UPSTREAM ENDS STAKED NOTES:2) ENDS OF MULTIPLE LOGS SHALL BE OVERLAPPED A MINIMUM OF 6" WITH BOTH 46 START OF GRADING OPERATIONS.2. THE ENTRANCE SHALL BE GRADED SUCH THAT POSITIVE DRAINAGE DURING CONSTRUCTION IS PROVIDED.3. THE ENTRANCE SHALL BE MAINTAINED IN SUCH A CONDITION SUCH THAT IT PREVENTS MUD TRACKING OFF SITE. ADDITIONAL ROCK OR REPLACEMENT OF THE ENTRANCE MAY BE REQUIRED PERIODICALLY IF MUD STARTS TO TRACK OFF SITE.4. THE ROCK ENTRANCE MAY BE REMOVED JUST PRIOR TO THE PLACEMENT OF AGGREGATE BASE. SHEETING LINERWASHOUT AREA 1. THE ROCK ENTRANCE SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED PRIOR TO THE10 MIL PLASTICPLACED WITHIN NTS NTS CONSTRUCT BERMAROUND ENTIREWASHOUT AREA MNDOT 3733 TYPE 4GEOTEXTILE FABRIC MINIMUM 6" BEDDING PERMNDOT SPEC. 3601.2B REQUIREMENTS OF MNDOT SPEC. 36012. SEE PLANS FOR CLASS OF RIP RAP3. D=PIPE DIAMETER IN FEET (SEE PLANS)4. OUTLETS ON STEEP SLOPES SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH RIP RAP FROM THE OUTLET TO THE TOE OF THE SLOPE. NOTES:1. RIP RAP SHALL MEET THE TIRE COMPACTION ZONE MACHINE SLICE8" - 12" DEPTH 5' MINIMUM LENGTH STEEL T-POST6' MAXIMUM SPACINGGEOTEXTILE FABRICGEOTEXTILE FABRIC3' WIDE POST NIPPLES FACES AWAY FROM USE PROPER EQUIPMENT SUCH THAT THE SOIL ISSLICED, NOT TURNED OVER.AFTER SILT FENCE INSTALLATION, COMPACT THE SOILIMMEDIATELY NEXT TO THE GEOTEXTILE BY DRIVINGOVER IT WITH A TRACTOR TIRE AT LEAST TWICE 1. 2. 6" CA-1 COARSEAGGREGATE 4 STAPLE PLASTICSHEETINGEVERY 5' (TYP) 1 1' 2' 6" BUMP FORKEEPING RUNOFFON SITE 2' (TYP) 2' (TYP) RIP RAP AT PIPE OUTLETS (50LB TENSILE) OF STEEL POST NOTE: PLACING FILTER FABRIC UNDER THE ROCK ENTRANCE MAYREDUCE THE AMOUNT OF MAINTENANCE IT WOULD REQUIRE. TEMPORARY ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCECONCRETE WASHOUTSILT FENCE (MACHINE SLICED) 3 PLASTIC ZIP TIES AT LEAST 1" APART LOCATED IN TOP 8" MATERIALS PER MNDOT 3886INSTALLATION PER MNDOT 2573.3C1 1235 26 T S 18" CULVERTINV=1064.72 T S T S 760 1 6 6 0 1 PERIMETER SILTFENCE (TYP) 5""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" 6 0 1 4 5 ' 8 9 6 1 0 1 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111 18" CULVERTINV=1063.78 0 0 . 4 5 60 1 0 53.6= 6 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111 2D 4 . = 8 36 01 R 2 2 = L 9 1 . 0 2 7 6 0 1 3 SILT FENCE AROUNDAREA (TYP) INFILTRATION BASIN T HA PL EP F S T O OS SJA . EE T NK S I R , L 1 A . P EK L C F A O O PERIMETER SILTFENCE (TYP) I L . R B ,T W .6S TU & F D 5 0 N 0SI . T 0 E'LY LINE OF LOT 6, BLOCK 1,ST. JOSEPH INDUSTRIAL PARKEAST PLAT 3 & W'LY ROW LINEOF STERLING DRIVE1 O 3L E 6N I 0 L 1 6 6 0 5 1 7 46 6 60 0 1 01 7 8 1 6 6 0 10 6 1 6 0 TEMPORARY ROCKCONSTRUCTION 1 ENTRANCE (TYP) CATEGORY 3EROSION CONTROLBLANKET (TYP) 6 2 6 6 4 0 0 6 1 1 0 99999999999999999999999999999999999999999 1 0 . 00000000000000000000000000000000000000000 """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" PERIMETER SILTFENCE (TYP) 9 0 7 . 7 3 CATEGORY 3EROSION CONTROLBLANKET (TYP) 01 ' 9 = 8 3 1L = 6 TYPE 4 GEOTEXTILE R 10 CY CLASS III RIPRAP OVERLAYINGFABRIC (TYP)8 6 2 0 1 = D SILT FENCE AROUND INFILTRATION BASINAREA (TYP) 7 6 6 0 4 6 1 4 0 BENCHMARK=1069.76 (88 DATUM)-"X" ON SOUTHEAST CORNER OFELECTRIC PEDESTAL . 8 1 6 7 0 1 1 WELL (BY OTHERS) 20FT DRAINAGE & UTILITYEASEMENT PER ST. JOSEPHINDUSTRIAL PARK EAST PLAT 3 8 0 . 3 3 3 C """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" E 1 7 6 2 0C 1 ' 00000000000000000000000000000000000000000 4 0 44444444444444444444444444444444444444444 .5 2 DRAINAGE & UTILITYEASEMENT & WETLANDS PERST. JOSEPH INDUSTRIALPARK EAST PLAT 3 .0 LOT 6 702 BLOCK 1 8 PERIMETER SILTFENCE (TYP) C 6 1.92+/- Acres 1 0 2 7 1 1 6= = 6 0= 4 1 R 6 D 0 L 1 E LOT 5 7 6 106PERIMETER SILTFENCE (TYP) 8 0 1 3 6 0 1 5 6C E 0 1 SILT FENCEAROUND SEPTICSYSTEM/DRAINFIELD (TYP) 4 6 CATEGORY 3EROSION CONTROLBLANKET (TYP) 0 110FT DRAINAGE & UTILITYEASEMENT PER ST. JOSEPHINDUSTRIAL PARK EAST PLAT 3 8 6 0 1 C E 88 6 66 6 0 00 EDGE OF WATER(AS LOCATED 9-24-20)1 11 7 6 0 1 FILTER LOG (TYP) C E PROPOSED BUILDINGFFE = 1068.75 6 6 0 1 W LINE OF LOT 5, BLOCK 1,ST. JOSEPH INDUSTRIALPARK EAST PLAT 3 NW CORNER OF LOT 5, BLOCK 1,ST. JOSEPH INDUSTRIAL PARK EAST PLAT 3 86.9 5 EC 69.4 52 6 6 0 1 PERIMETER SILTFENCE (TYP) FILTER LOG (TYP) CATEGORY 3EROSION CONTROL BLANKET (TYP)INDUSTRIAL PARK SW CORNER OF LOT 5,BLOCK 1, ST. JOSEPHEAST PLAT 3 VERIFY CONCENTRATED FLOW CATEGORY 3 EROSIONCONTROL BLANKET ALONGCONCENTRATED FLOW - FIELDPATH (TYP) SEPTIC SYSTEM/DRAIN FIELDTO REMAIN UNDISTURBED (BY OTHERS) PERIMETER SILTFENCE (TYP) PERIMETER SILTFENCE (TYP) NW'Hd35Of'1S W� 10`ONIINAS Z96Z NOIS34 3iIS W euro/ e z O ONR133NION3 zlinHos allDVJ MIN o W v Hoisin3a S1N3W3AONdWI 3WOH V10S3NNIW £ - U MH) L6W/60'1-0-135 NO HO LINO AHVNI"IIAHd NOLLOH SNOO HH ION -AHVN In FIAHd /\\ P id-dddMs9[oo p i o o � 6° - a w Z — �3p' u_ e a ww oos o ;�u 1,, = a LU g 0 3 3 Y fi=n= III �4 -"- Z N Z u &= Q $g Hu z p� U1 O U O 4= O Q Q 7 �A ?\ ER = o \\ \ \ 4¢ —�-- � ° o ¢ Q 3_. „m_ CONFIRMATION CITY OF ST JOSEPH 75 CALLAWAY ST E SAINT JOSEPH MN 56374 - Account STC -51131 Sales Rep: knaysmi AD# Net Amount Tax Amount 0004569610 $118.02 $0.00 STC -St Cloud Online STC -St. Cloud Times Order Taker: knaysmi T imesM E D r St. Cloud Times ! 5ctirrtesxom A �GANN ETT COMPANY PO Box 23430 Green Bay, WI 54305 PO# PC mtg 2/8 Total Amount Payment Method Payment Amount Amount Due $118.02 Invoice $0.00 $118.02 Order Created 01/22/2021 Product # Ins Start Date End Date 1 01/27/2021 01/27/2021 1 01/27/2021 01/27/2021 * ALL TRANSACTIONS CONSIDERED PAID IN FULL UPON CLEARANCE OF FINANCIAL INSTITUTION Text of Ad: 01/22/2021 City of St. Joseph Public Hearing Notice For Variance Request Notice is hereby given that the City of St. Joseph Plan- ning Commission will con- vene for their regularly scheduled meeting on Mon- day, February 8th, 2021 to conduct the following public hearings: • Variance application for subject property addressed as: 7967 Sterling Dr, St. Joseph, MN and identified as Parcel ID 84.53300.0402. Pro- posed variance application is for Zoning Ordinance 502.19 Subd.4. B (minimum wetland setbacks for driveways) and Zoning Ordinance 502.10. Subd.3 N. (off-street parking surfacing requirements) A copy of the proposed var- iance application will be available on the meeting agenda located on the city's website at www.cityofstioseph.com Written testimony may be mailed to: City of St. Joseph; 75 Callaway St. E; St. Joseph MN 56374 or emailed to nkeller@cityofstioseph.com Therese Haffner City Administrator 27 City of St. Joseph Notice of Public Hearing You are receiving this notice because you own property within 350' (three hundred and fifty feet) of a proposed Variance application that has been submitted to the city of Saint Joseph, MN. The variance application requires a public hearing. The public hearing will take place on Monday, February 8th, 2021 beginning at 6:00 P.M. at the City of St. Joseph Government Center as part of the regularly scheduled City of St. Joseph Planning Commission meeting. The meeting will also be offered remotely through Zoom. Hearing: Variance application regarding off-street parking requirements and minimum wetland setbacks for driveways. Property Owner: MHI Properties LLP Applicant: MHI Properties LLP Property description: Subject property is located at 7967 Sterling Drive in St. Joseph, MN. Parcel ID: 84.53300.0402. A map identifying the subject property is included with this letter as Exhibit A. Purpose: I The applicant has submitted a variance application to deviate from Zoning Ordinance 502.19 Subd.4. B (minimum wetland setbacks for driveways) and Zoning Ordinance 502.10. Subd.3 N. (off-street parking surfacing requirements) All interested persons are invited to participate and be heard or send written comments to: nkeller(cDcitvofstioseph.com Comments can also be mailed to City of Saint Joseph, 75 Callaway St E, St. Joseph, MN 56374.: To request more information on the proposed land use application or for specific information regarding how to participate remotely via Zoom please visit www.cityofst'oseph.com or contact: Na,f& Keti r Nate Keller Community Development Director (320)-557-3524 nkellera.citvofstioseph.com 28 I Hansen & Company I woodworks �_ Grande Services K&AAutvb�ody,� ss :, s ;Gold Countr,,, ing, a Si Battery Wholesale, Inc. (BWIrQutlet) .......� , . yW Floor To Ceiling lsteeh n. SpP _ 1. ry J i C - 7 + - 3051 - ' + Marion's Wholesale i Building Supplies„ iwrridgewQod'ad C & L Excavating 0 - r Jae Mini -Storage �'♦.,.f GOLD COUNTRY PROPERTY LLC JR PARTNERS OF ST CLOUD LLC KAREN A BECHTOLD REV TRUST 2840 4TH ST S 1922 PLEASANT AVE 428 POND VIEW LN E WAITE PARK MN 56387 ST CLOUD MN 56303 SAINT JOSEPH MN 56374 MG DEVELOPMENT LLC 1003 10TH AVE N SARTELL MN 56377 TAMARACK MATERIALS NORTHLAND 31068 COUNTY ROAD 133 ST JOSEPH MN 56374 MG DEVELOPMENT LLC PO BOX 639 SAINT JOSEPH MN 56374-0639 TMG INVESTMENTS LLC 721 1 ST ST #500 HUDSON WI 54016 011 MHI PROPERTIES LLP 7967 STI=RLING DR SAINT JOSEPH MN 56374 Affidavit of Mailing Public Hearing Notice Variance application — MHI Properties 7967 Sterling Dr State of Minnesota ) Council of St. Joseph ) Vicky Granite, being first duly sworn, deposes and says: I am a United States citizen, over 21 years of age, and the Accounting Technician for the city of St. Joseph, Minnesota. On January 27', 2021, acting on behalf of the said city, I deposited in the United States post office at St. Joseph, Minnesota, copies of the attached notice regarding a hearing to consider a variance application submitted by MHI properties. The notices were enclosed in envelopes, with postage thereon fully prepaid, addressed to the following persons at the addresses appearing opposite their respective names: Name See Attached Address There is delivery service by United States mail between the place of mailing and the places so addressed. Signatur Subscribed and sworn to before me this 27th of January, 2021 HANNAH EVE KURKOWSKI Notary Public -Minnesota `.; . My Commlasion FVIres Jan 31, 2M N *o6tr�yyLP u—b I i c r ST. JOSEPH PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2021-001 A RESOLUTION OF DENIAL REGARDING A VARIANCE TO THE MINIUM WETLAND SETBACKS FOR DRIVEWAYS WHEREAS, MHI Properties, LLP, owner, hereinafter referred to as "Applicant," has properly applied for a variance from the minimum wetland setback established in St. Joseph Ordinance 502.19 Subd. 4 Section B on the property generally described as 7967 Sterling Dr, St. Joseph, Minnesota and Parcel ID 84.53300.0402: ("Subject Property") and; A. That the matter was duly published and notice was provided to property owners within 350 feet of the Subject property. B. That City Ordinance 502.19 Subd. 4 Section B requires a wetland setback of 75 feet for driveways. C. That the applicant appeared before the St. Joseph Planning Commission on February 8th, 2021 D. That the applicant is requesting a variance to encroach the wetland setback for proposed driveway by approximately 40 feet (min. setback required is 75 feet) E. That the Subject Property is zoned I-1 Light Industrial F. That the Planning Commission conducted a Public Hearing on February 8th, 2021 G. That the variance is not consistent with the St. Joseph Comprehensive Plan H. That the variance is not in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the Ordinance L That the Applicant has not established practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ST. JOSEPH, MINNESOTA, HEREBY MAKES THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS TO DENY THE VARIANCE: 1. The variance is not consistent with the adopted St. Joseph Comprehensive Plan and following goals: a. Land Use Goals. Goal 3 "Promote Sustainable Development'' Strategy 3.4 which states " Protect and enhance natural resources such as rivers, lakes, wetlands, woodlands, and wildlife habitat as growth occurs in suburban and rural areas." b. Sustainability and Resiliency Goals. Goal 3 "Protect and Improve Water quality" Strategy 3.4 "Maintain and enforce the wetland buffer and setback ordinance". 2. The variance is not in harmony with the general purposes and intent of this Ordinance. 33 a. Allowing departure from the ordinance goes directly against the purpose of the ordinance which is to minimize adverse effects development may have on the environment. b. The proposed encroachment of 40 feet into the wetland setback will result in the driveway area being only 35 feet from the wetland. This encroachment is a significant departure from City code and would result in increased runoff and pollutants entering the wetland located on the subject property. 3. The applicant has not established that there are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance due to the following reasons: a. Encroaching 40' into the wetland setback is excessive and unreasonable and does not equate to practical difficulties. There are other options the applicant can pursue which avoids an excessive and unnecessary encroachment. b. The circumstances and proposed encroachment are a direct result of the landowner. Other driveway layouts can be explored to lessen the encroachment and more directly meet the intent of the ordinance. c. The subject property was annexed into the city in 2019 prior to applicant purchasing the property. The landowner purchased the land after it was annexed into the city therefore the plight has been caused by the landowner. c. The requested variance will alter the essential character as it will result in setting a precedence in the expectations of wetland setbacks for driveway/circulation areas and result in direct conflict with city code and comprehensive plan goals. 6. Economic considerations alone shall do not constitute practical difficulties. Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted by the St. Joseph Planning Commission this 8th day of February, 2021 CITY OF ST. JOSEPH By Chad Hausmann, Chairperson By Nate Keller, Community Development Director 34 ST. JOSEPH PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2021-002 (A) A RESOLUTION OF DENIAL REGARDING A VARIANCE TO THE MINIUM DRIVEWAY MATERIAL REQUIREMENTS WHEREAS, MHI Properties, LLP, owner, hereinafter referred to as "Applicant," has properly applied for a variance from the minimum driveway material requirements as indicated in St. Joseph Ordinances 502.10 Subd.3 N) and 502.10 Subd. 5 D) on the property described as 7967 Sterling Dr, St. Joseph, Minnesota and Parcel ID 84.53300.0402:("Subject Property") and; A. That the Applicant appeared before the St. Joseph Planning Commission on February 8th, 2021 B. That City Ordinance 502.10 Subd. 3 N requires driveway and circulation areas to be constructed of a hard surface such as concrete, bituminous, pavement or paver stone C. That the applicant is requesting a variance to install class two gravel surfacing in lieu of City ordinance 502.10 Subd. 3 N D. That the Subject Property is zoned I-1 Light Industrial E. That the Planning Commission conducted a Public Hearing on February 8th, 2021 F. That the variance is not consistent with the St. Joseph Comprehensive Plan G. That the variance is not in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the Ordinance. H. That the Applicant has not established practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ST. JOSEPH, MINNESOTA, HEREBY MAKES THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS TO DENY THE VARIANCE 1. The variance is not in harmony with the general purposes and intent of this Ordinance. The intent of the ordinance is to create aesthetically consistent and well-maintained areas of Commercial, Industrial, and Residential development. Deviating from the required material standards would set a precedence in this expectation and be a departure from the city standards, regulations, and overall goals as indicated in the Comprehensive Plan. 2. The applicant has not established that there are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance as installing class two gravel is not a reasonable alternative to the ordinance standards. Page 1 of 3 a. Installing class two gravel is not a reasonable solution to address the ordinance. b. The circumstance has been caused by the landowner as the proposed class two gravel is a choice being pursued by the landowner. The subject property was annexed into the city in 2019 and the applicant purchased the property after annexation therefore the landowner was aware that the city ordinances apply. c. The variance if granted will alter the essential character of the locality. Departing from surfacing material requirements will set a precedent on future expectations and improvements. Any new developments/improvements would be required to meet city standards. A variance to allow class two gravel is not consistent with historical or current enforcement of the prescribed regulations. 3. Applicant has stated paving the driveway area will be a financial hardship. Economic considerations cannot constitute practical difficulties Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted by the St. Joseph Planning Commission this 8th day of February, 2021 CITY OF ST. JOSEPH By Chad Hausmann, Chairperson By Nate Keller, Community Development Director Page 2 of 3 ST. JOSEPH PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2021-002 (B) A RESOLUTION APPROVING A VARIANCE TO THE MINIUM DRIVEWAY MATERIAL REQUIREMENTS WHEREAS, MHI Properties, LLP, owner, hereinafter referred to as "Applicant," has properly applied for a variance from the minimum driveway material requirements as indicated in St. Joseph Ordinances 502.10 Subd.3 N) on the property described as 7967 Sterling Dr, St. Joseph, Minnesota and Parcel ID 84.53300.0402: ("Subject Property") and; 1. That the Applicant appeared before the St. Joseph Planning Commission on February 8th, 2021 2. That the Subject Property is zoned I-1 Light Industrial 3. That the Planning Commission conducted a Public Hearing on February 8t'`, 2021 4. That the variance is consistent with the St. Joseph Comprehensive Plan 5. That the variance is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the Ordinance. 6. That the Applicant has established practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance as the property is proposed to be used in a reasonable manner that is consistent with adjacent property and the variance will not alter the essential character of the locality, and the circumstances are unique to the property. NOW THERFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ST. JOSEPH, MINNESOTA, THAT A VARIANCE TO THE MINIUM DRIVEWAY MATERIAL REQUIREMENT IS APPROVED WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: a. The proposed parking area shown in Exhibit A as "area B" shall be paved with asphalt, concrete, or paver stone. The proposed driveway circulation area shown in Exhibit A as "Area A" is granted a variance to be Class Two gravel however the gravel area cannot exceed more than 50% of the total parking surface area. Surface area includes: parking and loading spaces, driveway, and circulation areas. The applicant shall provide verifiable calculations of the spaces to ensure the 50% threshold is met. b. Dust control methods shall be deployed on the gravel area on a consistent scheduled basis. These methods include: watering, and other applicable means as directed by the city. c. The owner shall ensure no gravel is tracked onto the public right-of-way/street. d. The gravel circulation area and any other portion of the driveway or parking spaces shall be at least 50' from the wetland. This condition however is dependent on the city amending the required wetland setback for driveway/circulation areas to be 50'. If the amendment does not occur this variance shall be considered null and void. e. Failure to adhere to these conditions is grounds for the city to revoke the variance. f. The Applicant shall be responsible for all City costs incurred in administering and enforcing this variance g. This resolution shall be recorded at Stearns County recorder's office within one year otherwise this variance shall become null and void unless petition for an extension has been approved by the City Council. 39 Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted by the St. Joseph Planning Commission this 8th day of February, 2021 CITY OF ST. JOSEPH LM Chad Hausmann, Chairperson LM Nate Keller, Community Development Director 40 Exhibit A - ........... .: EA5EMENTA WETLANDS PER'........... 5T. JO5EPH INOUSTUAL r PARKEA5TPLAT3 y , If b, 3RNER 0 F LOT 5• BLOCK 1. 1SEPH INDUSTRIAL PARK�" GRAVE[ PLAT EDGE OF WATERfTyPr..�. g AAs LOCATED 9-24 -20) /'BLOC by J L.91 3 • ��". ..� r.. - s Area A RAV LIKE O�'tOT 5. BLOCK 1. SU RFAGlA1G"j��:! l.. - JO� H INtLAT 3 RIAL - i I Rx'�ASTPLAT3 I (iYP_1 � r TRASH �r 4 -Fr CONCRET APRON P ORA.LNAC,d UTILITY EM EdT.RER ST J05E PROPOSE© U5TRIAL PARK EAS LAT 3 .. .:.l _ ." I B WILDING• . . . 7: PARKING SF �.. T #1 EXISTING .. (-,KA.VEL PAYEMENT ITYP) CC"CREIE sURFAC,N� �/ / ST. JOSEPH OR SIDEWALK -T�P) VP) "OFFICE" USE ;�� I e � �;•� r" I } / J "WAREHOUSE' CONCRETE •��I .' q PAVEMENTI / SUILDING AREI PP] 0 � i` N 1 OFF ICE =2.3TZ f ! WAREHOUSE _ fJSx c. i WELL+• I 41 ST. JOSEPH PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2021-003 A RESOLUTION OF DENIAL REGARDING A VARIANCE TO THE MINIUM CURBING REQUIREMENTS WHEREAS, MHI Properties, LLP, owner, hereinafter referred to as "Applicant," has properly applied for a variance from the minimum curbing requirements as indicated in St. Joseph Ordinances 502.10 Subd. 5 D) on the property described as 7967 Sterling Dr, St. Joseph, Minnesota and Parcel ID 84.53300.0402: ("Subject Property") and; A. That the matter was duly published and notice was provided to property owners within 350 feet of the Subject property. B. That City Ordinance 5 02. 10 Sudb. 5 D) requires curbing for properties with driveway and parking areas C. That the Applicant appeared before the St. Joseph Planning Commission on February 8th, 2021 D. That the applicant requested a variance to the requirement to curb their parking lot and circulation area E. That the Subject Property is zoned I-1 Light Industrial F. That the Planning Commission conducted a Public Hearing on February 8th, 2021 F. That the variance is not consistent with the St. Joseph Comprehensive Plan G. That the variance is not in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the Ordinance. H. That the Applicant has not established practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ST. JOSEPH, MINNESOTA, HERBY MAKES THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS TO SUPPORT THE DENIAL: a. The variance is not in harmony with the general purposes and intent of this Ordinance. The intent of the ordinance is to foster developments that have consistent aesthetic standards and stormwater runoff control. Deviating from the required curbing standard would set a precedence in this expectation/standard and conflict with overall goals and standards indicated in the Comprehensive Plan. b. The circumstances have been created by the landowner. When the land was purchased by the landowner the property was within the city of St Joseph. The owner therefore purchased this land knowing the standards and ordinances of St. Joseph apply. M Economic considerations alone shall not constitute practical difficulties. The applicant cites that the financial cost to curb will put the project at jeopardy. Cost and economic considerations do not constitute practical difficulties. Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted by the St. Joseph Planning Commission this 8th day of February, 2021 CITY OF ST. JOSEPH By Chad Hausmann, Chairperson By Nate Keller, Community Development Director 43 new proposed language 44 Section 502.10: OFF STREET PARKING Subd. 5: Parking Lot Standards. In all districts off-street parking lots are subject to the following regulations: a) Adequate ingress and egress shall be provided. b) Such parking lots shall be constructed and maintained in a useable condition, with a hard surface consisting of concrete, bituminous, pavement or paver stone designed to drain and dispose of surface water. C) Whenever such parking lot boundary adjoins property zoned for residential use, a setback of fifteen (15) feet from said lot line shall be required, and maintained. d) Necessary curbs or other protection against damages to adjoining properties, streets and sidewalks shall be provided and maintained. Concrete curbs to MnDOT Design B612 specifications shall be used for all automobile stops and for all drive and parking areas. Following a review by city staff, curbing requirements may be waived if any of the following conditions are met: 1. The city engineer has determined sheet drainage over ground would improve storm water quality. 2. Where an adjacent future development phase excluding future parking would be built that would result in the removal of the curbing. 3. The parking lot will be porous pavement, along with the installation and maintenance of rain gardens or infiltration features. 4. The City Engineer finds the area can be reasonably serviced by an alternative storm water structures/facilities and infiltration. 5. The development application illustrates that: a. Reasonable visual separation from adjoining properties, streets, and sidewalks is provided and maintained through the employment of alternate treatments such as landscaping or striping; or, b. The site is subject to a unified design/development that contains joint parking or public parking facilities. 5. The city may place conditions on properties allowed a waiver. Conditions can include but are not limited to: landscaping, buffering, stormwater control. M e) No sign shall be so located as to restrict the sight, orderly operation and traffic movement within any parking area. Only signs necessary for the orderly operation of traffic movement or parking regulation shall be permitted in any parking area (e.g. visitor parking, deliveries, handicap parking). Such signs shall not be considered part of the permitted advertising space and shall be subject to signage regulations. f) All parking lots shall be screened and landscaped from abutting residential uses or districts by a wall, fence or densely -planted compact hedge or tree cover not less than four (4) feet. g) Except in the case of single-family, two-family, and townhouse developments, parking areas shall be designed so that circulation between parking aisles or driveways occurs within the designated parking lot and does not depend upon a public street or alley and such design does not require backing onto the public street. h) A parking space shall be at least nine feet wide by twenty feet long (9'x 20'). In areas where the parking space may accommodate for the overhang of the front or rear bumper, such as the perimeter of the parking lot, the parking space may be a minimum of nine feet by 18 feet (9'x 18'). i) Parking Lot. Parking lot dimensions are set forth in the table below. Circulation patterns shall allow adequate room for emergency vehicles. Angle and traffic flow Standard stall width Depth to wall Depth to Aisle interlock width Wall/wall module Interlock Module 90 de 2 -way 9' 17.5' 17.5' 26' 61' 61.0 60 de 2 -way 9' 18.0' 16.5' 26' 62' 59.0 75 deg 1 -way 9' 18.5' 17.5' 22' 59' 57.0 60 de 1 -way 9' 18.0' 16.5' 18' 54' 51.0 j) Drainage and Surfacing. Driveways shall not exceed a grade of six (6) percent and all parking lots except those for less than four (4) vehicles shall be graded according to a drainage plan which has been approved by the City Engineer. Catch basins, sumps and underground storm sewers may be required. k) Strom. All lots for five (5) or more vehicles shall have the organization of spaces painted on the surface according to the plan approved by the City. t 1) Circulation. Lots shall be so designed that internal circulation shall be available without utilizing the public street. m) Maintenance. It shall be the responsibility of the lessee and/or owner of the principal use, uses or building to maintain in a neat and adequate manner, the parking area, striping, landscaping and screening. n) Lighting. All lighting used to illuminate an off-street parking area shall be shaded or diffused so as to reflect the light away from the adjoining property and away from abutting traffic flow. 47 Section 502.19: LAND, WOODLAND AND WETLAND PRESERVATION Subd. 4: Regulation of Activities Adjacent to Wetlands. a) The following activity shall be subject to a 50 foot setback from wetlands: The construction or maintenance of a building attached to a foundation, including but not limited to, pole buildings, and the construction or maintenance of paved driveways or areas designed for parking of vehicles or trailers. For purposes of this paragraph, pump houses, moveable storage sheds, recreational docks and storm water or erosion control devices shall not be considered buildings. 4) 44ie fell shall be stibjeet te a:75 feet sethaek f+em we0ands- The b) The following activities shall be subject to a 100 foot setback from wetlands: The construction or maintenance of a well used for agricultural irrigation, or any well less than 50 feet in depth. 2. External storage of materials used in conjunction with industrial or commercial processing or manufacturing. 3. The storage of waste or refuse generated by industrial or commercial activities. 48 Planning Commission Agenda Items: 5e [.rr►' [)F ST. JOSEPH MEETING DATE: February 8t'`, 2021 AGENDA ITEM: 5e SUBMITTED BY: Community Development STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends making some changes to the Outdoor dining and sidewalk cafe ordinances. The intent is to streamline the process given the unknown nature of how spring/summer will play out (in regards to restrictions/limitations or future executive orders). Staff also recommends adding some material requirements that are reflective of Saint Joseph's character and expectations. PREVIOUS PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: None BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Last year flexibility was given outdoor dining areas and sidewalk cafes. Public Works was able to install temporary picnic tables and the city streamlined the review process. Staff would like to continue some of those aspects while inserting permanent changes to the ordinance. We do not know what this spring/summer will entail with the pandemic and ensuing executive orders or public health requirements. As such we want an ordinance that is flexible, and streamlined but also maintains minimum standards that are reflective of St. Joseph's character and expectations. Currently both outdoor dining and sidewalk cafes require Planning Commission/City council review. The proposed language would eliminate the need to obtain Planning Commission/City Council review/approval. BUDGET/FISCAL IMPACT: None ATTACHMENTS: 1. Drafted ordinance amendments for Outdoor dining/sidewalk cafes REQUESTED PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Provide direction and recommendation on potential language amendments. Staff's intent is to bring forth formal amendments and conduct Public Hearing at March meeting. 49 Red = proposed new language StFikethf otigh = proposed eliminated language Section 502.22: OUTDOOR DINING/SMOKING AREAS AND SIDEWALK CAFES Subd. 1: Intent: The intent of this section of the zoning ordinance is to establish general standards for outdoor dining areas and sidewalk cafes. Subd. 2: Definitions: a) "Outdoor Dining" — an area set aside which is designed to accommodate formal dining outdoors and where beverages and food is served including liquor. b) "Sidewalk Cafe" — a seating area located outside of an establishment in which there is not enough room to provide formal dining and where beverages and food is not formally served. Subd. 3: Outdoor Dining/Smoking Areas: Outdoor smoking/dining areas are permitted accessory uses in conjunction with a restaurant, coffee shop, or other eating and drinking facility provided a site plan is approved by the Community Development, Police, Fire, Public Works, and Engineering departments and the following requirements are met: a) Ne petqieo ef the outdoor smoking/dining area sha" be leea+ed of eeetif within can extend into the public right-of-way of be loeale oeloso,- dma two fee provided the following are met: i. The outdoor dining area is located within the B-1 Zoning district ii. Five (5) feet of pedestrian clearance known as the pedestrian clearance area must be provided. The clearance shall be measured from the edge of the dining area to the curb of the adjacent street. iii. A written encroachment agreement shall be agreed to and signed by the property owner and the city. iv. The outdoor dining area shall only be located adjacent to the food establishment it is connected to. v. Umbrellas/canopies shall not extend into the pedestrian clearance zone and shall not be higher then seven (7) in height. vi. All other sections of this outdoor dining ordinance shall be met. b) If the outdoor smoking/dining area is proposed to be within a City drainage and utility easement, the property owner shall enter into a written agreement authorizing the use of the City's easement. C) Patrons must gain entrance to the outdoor area from within the main facility, however at least one exit must be provided for fire safety. 51 m) The outdoor smoking/dining area must conform to all fire and building codes related to the number and types of exits that are required and maximum structural occupancy limits. n) The City Planning Commission or the City Council may will require the notification of property owners if the outdoor smoking/dining area is located closer than 350 feet from residential propertiesand may restrict the hours of operation based upon the proximity of the area to residential dwelling units, and upon considerations relating to the safety, repose, and welfare of residents, businesses, and other uses near the establishment. o) The parking regulations related to minimum required spaces as set forth in this chapter shall apply and compliance therewith shall be maintained. p) The maximum surface coverage requirements set forth in this chapter shall apply and compliance therewith shall be maintained. q) Smoking shall not be allowed in areas meeting the definition of “indoor area” as defined by the Freedom to Breathe Provision of the Minnesota Clean Indoor Air Act. “Indoor area” means all space between a floor and a ceiling that is bounded by walls, doorways, or windows (whether open or closed) covering more than 50 percent of the combined surface area of the wall space constituting the perimeter of the area. A screen is not considered a wall. r) Sidewalk café operators shall provide proof of insurance on an annual basis. Owners of sidewalk cafés shall hold the City harmless from all liability associated with the operation and maintenance of a sidewalk café. Subd. 4: Sidewalk Cafés: Sidewalk cafés are permitted accessory uses within the B-1 Central Business District in conjunction with a restaurant, coffee shop, or other eating and drinking facility provided a site plan specifying the area in which the café will be operated is approved by the Community Development, Fire, Police, Public Works, and Engineering departments and Planning Commission, a minimum of five (5) feet of sidewalk width remains for pedestrians, and the following requirements are met: a) Sidewalk cafés shall be limited to the placement of tables, benches, chairs on portions of sidewalks immediately adjacent to the business operating them. Allowable materials for tables and chairs shall be consistent with the outdoor dining ordinance. b) A sidewalk café may not occupy any portion of a public street unless it is an approved parklet c) Maintenance of all private facilities on public property shall be the owner’s responsibility. 53 d) Sidewalk café facilities including, but not limited to, tables chairs, and benches shall not be left outdoors after business hours or between the hours of 10 p.m. and 6 a.m. e) At no time shall the sidewalk café area be used for consumption of alcoholic beverages. f) Patrons shall not be served food or beverages outside, except that employees may refill beverage containers in the seating area. At no time, shall the sidewalk café area be used for consumption of alcoholic beverages. g) The business and/or property owner shall be responsible to ensure the sidewalk café area is properly maintained and litter-free. Sites of sidewalk cafés shall be maintained in an orderly, clean and sanitary manner and be free of debris at all times. Trash containers and staffing shall be available at all times to facilitate this condition. Litter shall be picked up on a daily basis. h) The City Planning Commission and/or City Council may shall require businesses operating sidewalk cafés routinely sweep and/or wash portions of sidewalks impacted by such cafés. i) The sidewalk café area shall not block access to the building entrance or required exits. j) Sidewalk café operators shall provide proof of insurance on an annual basis. Owners of sidewalk cafés shall hold the City harmless from all liability associated with the operation and maintenance of a sidewalk café. *Potential future amendment depending on how the parklet pilot goes this summer* Subd. 5: Parklets 1. Parklets are defined as - a seating area or green space created as a public amenity and located within a former roadside parking space. 2. Process for approval: a. Site plan shall be provided to the city and shall depict all elements of the proposed parklet. Site plan should be reviewed by the Community Development, Police, Fire, Engineering, and Public Works departments. Site plan shall be signed by the business located adjacent to the proposed parklet and parking spaces. b. After review of the site plan the application shall be forwarded to the Planning Commission and City Council for approval. 3. Criteria 54 a. One parklet cannot take up more then two (2) parking spaces located on a public street/right of way. b. Parklet applicant must be the adjacent business/property owner where the parklet is proposed to be placed. c. No music or outdoor entertainment shall occur within the parklet. d. The parklet shall have at least four (4) feet of buffer space on each side between adjacent parking spaces. e. The materials used in the parklet must be consistent with the allowable materials for outdoor dining/sidewalk cafes. f. The City Council/Planning Commission may impose conditions of approval in order to protect the public safety, and welfare. 55 Planning Commission Agenda Items: 5f th MEETING DATE: February 8, 2021 AGENDA ITEM: 5f- Comprehensive Plan Compliance – Sale of Property Portion of PID: 84.53843.0005 SUBMITTED BY: Community Development STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve Resolution finding the property sale in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. PREVIOUS PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: None BACKGROUND INFORMATION: MN State Statute 462.356 requires the Planning Commission to review land transactions in relationship to their conformity with the City Comprehensive Plan. The City is proposing the sale of a portion of the old Fire Hall and Village st Hall property located at 1 Ave NW as shown below: 56 Village Hall space Garage space The garage space (fire hall) is being leased by Bad Habit and the lease is set to expire in early July. The Village Hall space is not being used for anything and will require significant interior work. The current zoning of the parcels is B-1 Central Business District and the land use plan within the Comprehensive Plan guides the property as Central Business District. Provided the city authorizes the disposal the next step will be to determine the best way to plat the property and then issue an RFP for the subdivided portions. The city can reject or deny any proposal received. The platting can be done through a Common Interest Community (CIC) plat or a 505 plat. The CIC plat is common for skyscrapers and condominiums where there is separate ownership but common walls. Due to an existing sewer line running through a portion of the garage space the city will need to retain an easement over the line. Other common elements (interior walls, roofing, etc.) and the ownership/responsibility of those will be defined within the RFP and CIC/505 plat. The attached location map also depicts portions of the garage space which the city will need to retain for future chemical storage. The chemical storage area will need to be separated from the reminder of the garage through a fire wall. The proposed portions that would be sold (Village Hall and Garage spaces)_ is approximately 4,300 square feet in total. ATTACHMENTS: Location Map Resolution 2021-004 REQUESTED PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Motion to Approve Resolution 2021-004 finding disposal of property is in compliance with the City Comprehensive Plan. 57 City will need to retain space within the garage area for future chemical storage (for water treatment) which is depicted in the above picture. In addition, an easement will be needed in the garage space due to sewer line running from the water treatment area to 1st Ave NW. The fire hall is outlined in red and village hall is outlined in green. 58 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2021-004 RESOLUTION FINDING THE DISPOSAL OF REAL PROPERTY IN COMPLIANCE WITH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN A PORTION OF LOT 004, BLOCK 008 OF TOWNSITE OF ST JOSEPH WHEREAS, the City of St. Joseph, Minnesota, a Minnesota municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as the “City” owns the real property described as a portion of Lot 004, Block 008 of Townsite of St. Joseph, located in St. Joseph, Stearns County Minnesota (“property”); and WHEREAS, the City has an interest in the disposal of property to accommodate uses permitted in the B- 1 Central Business District, including commercial development as permitted in accordance with the City Comprehensive Plan and established zoning designation; and WHEREAS, the City Comprehensive Plan guides the property for Central Business District; and NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ST. JOSEPH, STEARNS COUNTY, STATE OF MINNESOTA: That disposal of the property is consistent and in compliance with the City Comprehensive Plan. th Whereupon said resolution was declared duly adopted by the St. Joseph Planning Commission this 8 day of February, 2021 CITY OF ST. JOSEPH By ______________________________ Chad Hausmann, Chair ATTEST By ______________________________ Nate Keller, Community Development Director 59 c Planning Commission Agenda Item: 6a, 6b, MEETING DATE: February 8th, 2021 AGENDA ITEM: 6a Fence ordinance discussion 6b Accessory structure discussion SUBMITTED BY: Nate Keller, Community Development Director STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Consideration and Planning Commission input on the drafted ordinance language and ideas presented. PREVIOUS PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Previously Planning Commission asked staff to research potential revisions to the fence and accessory structure ordinance. Brief discussion was had at the last meeting and the Commission recommended the drafts be brought back at this meeting so new PC appointed members can participate and offer feedback. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The drafted fence ordinance is meant to: clarify the application and inspection process Eliminate unnecessary and redundant language Clarify fence placement requirements The drafted accessory structure ordinance is meant to: Create consistency between city code language and other applicable codes (building, fire, etc.) Clarify and eliminate redundant language Provide choices and language consideration options Provide less restrictive options as it relates to maximum size requirements for detached buildings. ATTACHMENTS: Drafted fence ordinance language Drafted accessory structure ordinance language REQUESTED PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Staff requests the Planning Commission make a recommendation on the proposed language and potential revisions for the fence and accessory structure ordinance drafts. Based on the recommendation staff would like to bring back a final draft next month and conduct a public hearing. This way the revisions are made prior to the spring permitting season. 60 RED = new proposed language Strikethrough – proposed removed language Definitions to add: Decorative fence – split rail, or picket fences that are open and not opaque in nature. Decorative fences define boundaries but do not enclose. 61 ORDINANCE 506 FENCE ORDINANCE ............................................................................ 506-2 Section 506.01: APPLICATION .................................................................................... 506-2 Section 506.02: PURPOSE ............................................................................................. 506-2 Section 506.03: PERMIT ................................................................................................ 506-2 Section 506.04: FENCE HEIGHT .................................................................................. 506-3 Section 506.05: FENCE MATERIALS .......................................................................... 506-3 Section 506.06: FENCE PLACEMENT506-43 Section 506.07: LIVING FENCES ................................................................................. 506-5 Section 506.0: BORDER FENCE OR WALL ............................................................... 506-5 Section 506.08: VARIANCE .......................................................................................... 506-5 Section 506.9: PRE-EXISTING FENCES ..................................................................... 506-6 Section 506.10: MAINTENANCE OF FENCE ............................................................. 506-6 Section 506.11: EMERGENCY ACCESS TO FENCED AREAS ................................ 506-6 Section 506.12: RESTRICTIONS ON FENCES OVER PUBLIC EASEMENTS ........ 506-6 Section 506.13: PENALTIES/REMEDIES .................................................................... 506-6 62 ORDINANCE 506 FENCE ORDINANCE Section 506.01: APPLICATION. This ordinance shall apply to the construction and maintenance of all walls or fences, to include living fences as defined herein, within the City. The requirements of this Ordinance may also be subject to modification by the terms or conditions of a Conditional Use Permit or Rezoning applicable to an individual parcel of property. Section 506.02: PURPOSE . This Ordinance was enacted for the following purposes: a) To regulate fence or wall construction and location. b) To protect property from a loss of use, enjoyment or value due to the construction of aesthetically objectionable fences or walls on adjacent property. c) To assure that fences and walls are constructed adjacent to the property line or within the property of the party who will maintain the wall or fence. d) To assure consistency in the location of fences and walls constructed in residential districts. e) To require walls and fences be constructed of a low maintenance material. f) To require walls or fences to be constructed of non-toxic materials. Section 506.03: PERMIT. Prior to constructing or reconstructing a fence or wall within the City, the person or entity owning the property on which the wall or fence is to be constructed or reconstructed shall first secure a fence permit from the City Building Official. A permit fee, in an amount set by resolution of the City Council, shall be paid at the time the application for a permit is submitted. The application shall contain the following: a) Legal description of the property on which the fence or wall is to be constructed or reconstructed, b) Sketch showing the location of the fence or wall on the property, c) A description of the materials to be used in the construction of the fence or wall, d) A description or sketch of the design and dimensions of the fence or wall, e) Compliance with the provisions of Section 506.07 (Border fence or wall). 63 f) Other information as requested by the Zoning Administrator. 1.Application procedure and inspections The application and inspection process are as follows (unless waived by the city): 1.The application shall be reviewed by the City Building Inspectorfor issuance of a building permit upon a determination that the proposal complies with this Ordinance. 2.Upon approval of a permit but prior to construction or installation of fence or wallan initial inspection of the property shall be required unless waived by the City. The property owner shall expose at least two (2) property pins to verify proof of the property line location at the time of initial inspection. 3.Following approval of the initial inspection the applicant is allowed to construct the fence in accordance to the approved plans and conditions of the permit. 4.The fence or wall shall be final inspected by the City Building Inspector upon completion of construction or reconstruction, to assure compliance with this Ordinance. Section 506.04: FENCE HEIGHT. a) Fences and walls located within a residential area shall not exceed the height of seven feet; except fences located between the front of the residential structure and the adjacent roadway shall not exceed four feet. b) Fences and walls located in a commercial area shall not exceed the height of eight feet; except no fence shall be permitted in the front yard, unless the fence enhances the visual appearance of the site/landscaping and the fence does not exceed two feet in height and is of a reasonable linear length. Chain link fences, including those with slats are prohibited when visible from the public right of way. c) Fences and walls in an industrial area shall not exceed eight feet unless a higher fence or wall is approved as part of the special use permit allowing the industrial use; except fences located between the front of the industrial structure and the adjacent roadway shall not exceed four feet in height. d) If two different zones abut, the zoning requirements of the property owner constructing the fence shall control. Section 506.05: FENCE MATERIALS. 1. Fences constructed in residential zoning districts shall not be constructed with prohibited materials as listed in Section 506.05 Subd. 4. All wood fences, other than those constructed out of redwood or cedar shall be stained or painted upon completion of construction or reconstruction. Chain link fences shall be made out of a non-rust material. 64 2. Decorative, landscape, retaining and/or privacy walls may be constructed out of stone masonry or brick provided they are: not less than four inches or more than 24 inches in widths. Such walls over four (4) feet in height shall require footings that support the structure as required by the MN State Building Code. 3. Concrete decorative, landscape, retaining and/or privacy walls shall be prohibited unless they are formed from decorative and/or colored concrete, less than 24 inches in height and included as part of an overall landscape theme which has been developed. 3. The following materials are prohibited for fences:, but not limited to: a. Barbed wire and electrical fences, except in agricultural districts; b. Creosote lumber; c. Chicken wire; d. Woven or welded wire, except in the industrial district e. Snow Fences, except in the Agricultural/Rural Residential District f. Plastic webbing, except when used for police control. This shall not prohibit the use of plastic materials intended to resemble wood products; g. Makeshift, flimsy materials, or material such as paper, twine, rope, wood pallets, tin, except when used for traffic control or police security. 4. Decorative, landscape, retaining and/or privacy walls may be constructed out of stone masonry or brick provided they are: not less than four inches or more than 24 inches in widths. Such walls over four (4) feet in height shall require footings that support the structure as required by the MN State Building Code. 5. Concrete decorative, landscape, retaining and/or privacy walls shall be prohibited unless they are formed from decorative and/or colored concrete, less than 24 inches in height and included as part of an overall landscape theme which has been developed. 6. Other materials which are not specifically allowed by this Section, nor specifically prohibited may be permitted subject to City Council review and approval. Section 506.06: FENCE PLACEMENT 1.Fences can be placed directly on the shared property line provided the adjacent property owner (s) provide written consent in the form of a notarized signature at the 65 time of permit application. If adjacent property owner (s) do not provide written consent then the fence shall be placed at least two (2) feet off the shared property line. 2.No fence shall be constructed which is approximately parallel to an existing fence, and that is lessthan two feet and parallel to an existing fence so as to create an area between the fences which has limited accessibility for purposes of maintenance. 3.Fences shall only be allowed in the side and rear yards except decorative fences may be allowed in the front yard provided they are no higher than three and a half (3 ½) feet and are not designed to enclose the entire front yard. 4.Fences shall not extend into public right-of-way and be setback a minimum of ten (10) feet from the surface of any street. 5. Fences shall be setback at least two (2) feet from any trail, or sidewalk. 6. The finished side of the fence shall face adjacent property. Section 506.07: LIVING FENCES. Living fences may be constructed out of trees or shrubs. Trees and shrubs used as fencing are not restricted in height; except the height of the living fence located to the front of a residential structure shall not exceed four feet. The owner of the property adjacent to a living fence may trim or prune that part of the tree or shrub which extends across the property line over his or her property. Living fences do not require a permit. Section 506.08: BORDER FENCE OR WALL. a) A fence or wall constructed of maintenance-free materials may be constructed adjacent to the property line so long as all parts of the fence, including post anchors, are located within the property of the owner and so long as the bottom of the fence (exclusive of posts or anchors) is at least two inches above the ground. For purposes of this paragraph, the term "maintenance-free materials" shall include stone, brick, stucco, vinyl, plastic, or chain-link which is finished with a rust resistant material. b) Fences and walls shall be constructed at least two feet inside the property line or adjacent to the property line, unless the, fence or wall is constructed of maintenance-free materials in accordance with paragraph (a) of this section. c) For any fence or wall located within six feet of a property line, that side of the fence which presents the most finished appearance, shall be the side which faces the adjacent property. d) No fence shall be constructed which is approximately parallel to an existing fence, and closer than two feet so as to create an area between the fences which has limited accessibility for purposes of maintenance. Section 506.08: VARIANCE. Provisions of this ordinance may be varied by the City Council upon application, and after consideration and hearing by the Planning Commission with recommendation to the City Council. A fence variance application fee may be established by resolution of the City Council. 66 Section 506.9: PRE-EXISTING FENCES. This Ordinance shall apply only to fences and walls constructed or reconstructed after July 1, 2012. Any pre-existing fence that does not conform with the provisions thereof shall not be altered, extended or reconstructed except in conformance with this Ordinance. Section 506.10: MAINTENANCE OF FENCE. a)All fence and walls located within the City shall be maintained in a safe condition. The owner of the property on which a fence or wall is located shall be responsible for the maintenance and repair of the fence. b) No fence or wall may be maintained in a location which obstructs the ability of a driver of a motor vehicle to see other drivers or pedestrians on any street or alley. Section 506.11: EMERGENCY ACCESS TO FENCED AREAS. An access opening for emergency entrance shall be incorporated into any fenced areas within which a building is totally or partially located. For residential use property, the access opening shall be at least four (4) feet in width. For commercial or industrial use property, the access opening shall be at least fourteen (14) feet in width. A gate or unfenced area shall qualify as an access opening if of sufficient width. Section 506.12: RESTRICTIONS ON FENCESOVER PUBLIC EASEMENTS. Fences may only be erected over an easement if the landowner meets the requirements of St. Joseph Ordinance Section 302.03(b). If the request for the fence is approved, the City retains the right to require the landowner to remove or abate the fence where the fence interferes in any manner with the City’s easement use. If there is an emergency necessitating immediate access to the easement, the City reserves the right to remove the fence to obtain access to the easement. The landowner shall bear all costs for removal and restoration of the fence in the event the landowner is required to remove the fence for access to the easement or in the event the City removes the fence in the case of an emergency. The City specifically reserves all rights of an easement holder afforded under the common law of the State of Minnesota. Section 506.13: PENALTIES/REMEDIES . Violation of this ordinance shall constitute a misdemeanor as defined in this Code of Ordinance. When conditions are made a part of the terms under which this permit is granted, violation of the conditions is a violation of this ordinance. The City of St. Joseph may also seek civil remedies, including but not limited to a Court order directing maintenance or removal of the fence or injunctive relief prohibiting construction or maintenance of a fence in violation of this ordinance. Sec. 506.7(a) & (c) updated 2/24/98 Sec. 506.7(c), 506.12 & 506.13 amended 1/07 Ordinance Amended 07/05/12 Ordinance Amended 04/03/13 67 Red – new proposed language Strikethrough – proposed to be removed Items to think about: Accessory dwelling units. Size restrictions Size of lot Standards on materials/aesthetics. Standards related to attached additions and requiring them to Communities studied: Ramsey o http://www.cityoframsey.com/565/Accessory-Buildings Otsego o http://otsegotownship.org/Portals/1046/Zoning%20ordinance/04GENERALPRO VISIONS.pdf Big Lake o https://www.biglakemn.org/DocumentCenter/View/239/Section-1020- PDF?bidId= Sauk Rapids Sartell o https://y8uv11hr9mk3dk6fy9ukjd82-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp- content/uploads/2020/05/Title-10-Zoning-Regulations.pdf Lakeville o https://www.lakevillemn.gov/DocumentCenter/View/197/Accessory-structures- PDF Brainerd o http://www.ci.brainerd.mn.us/DocumentCenter/View/794/Zoning-Requirements- for-Accessory-Structures-PDF Lake Elmo o https://www.stfrancismn.org/sites/default/files/fileattachments/city_clerk/page/39 11/18_sec-18-acc-bldg-august-2016.pdf Big Lake o https://www.biglakemn.org/DocumentCenter/View/239/Section-1020- PDF?bidId= Community Size of lotLimits Gant <1 acre 1,000 1.01-2.99 1,500 3-4.99 2,000 5-9.59 2,500 68 9.6-14.99 3,500 15-19.99 4,000 20 No limit Brooklyn Park Any lotCannot exceed the foundation footprint of the house or 1,000 square feet – whichever is greater Lake Elmo <1 acre 600 1-2.5 1,200 2.5-5 1,500 5-104,000 10+ 5,000 Stillwater Township <5 acres1,600 5-82,400 8-112,600 Ramsey0-.51,500 or 10% of lot whichever is smaller .5-1 1,800 1-1.49 2,200 1.5-1.99 2,400 2-2.49 2,400 2.5-3.49 2,700 3.5-4.49 3,000 Forrest Lake <.344 1,120 .344 or larger2,000 Big Lake Cannot exceed coverage of home or 1,200 square feet 69 North Branch 70 Section 502.12: GENERAL PERFORMANCE STANDARDS The intent of this section of the zoning ordinance is to establish general development performance standards. The regulations provided herein shall apply equally to all districts except where special provisions provide otherwise. Subd. 1: Accessory Buildings in Residential Districts. a) Detached accessory buildings shall be located in the rear yard. b) Detached accessory buildings which are greater than fifty (50) square feet, but less than two-hundred (200) square feet shall require a zoning permit. The Zoning Permit Fee shall be established and amended from time to time by resolution of the City Council. c) Detached accessorybuildings two-hundred (200) square feet or greater shall require a building permit. d) Attached accessory buildings and structures shall comply with the setback regulations in the respective zoning district. Detached accessory buildings shall be setback a minimum of ten feet (10’) from the rear and side yard lot lines, except that on corner lots shall have a side yard setback of twenty feet (20’) feet from the property line on the intersecting street. Accessory buildings shall not be located over any easement.Any accessory building proposed to be within five feet, overhang to overhang of the principal building shall either be made structurally a part of the principle building or the wall and soffit area of the accessory building that is within five feet of the principle building shall be constructed to a one-hour fire rating. e) Accessory buildings shall not to exceed over one (l) story of or sixteen (16) feet in height whichever is less. f) All garages shall, if the vehicle entrance backs upon a public alley, be setback at least ten (10) feet from the public alley right-of-way. g) In no case shall the door of any structure, building, fence or improvement be erected or constructed so as to extend beyond any lot line. h) In business and manufacturing districts, accessory buildings and uses may occupy any of the ground area which the principal building is permitted to occupy. Accessory buildings such as buildings for parking attendants, guard shelters, gate houses and transformer buildings, may be located in the front or side yard in the Industrial District. 71 i) Within the R-1, R-2 and R-4 districts no detached accessory structures, shall exceed the maximum lot coverage requirements outlined within the respective districts or the maximum allowable accessory structure square footage (floor area) as shown in table 1: Size of lotMaximum allowable square footage (floor area) 0-.5 acres1,4001,200 .51 aces – 1 acre 2,0001,800 1.1-2 acres2,5002,200 2.1 acres and moreNo limits as long as lot coverage requirements are not exceeded Table 1 excluding decks, porches and patios but including attached garages, or any combination of accessory structures shall exceed 1,350 square feet or ten percent (10%), whichever is the lesser, of the total lot area. In addition, lot coverage requirements outlined within the respective districts shall be adhered to. j) Within the R-1, R-2, and R-4 districts no lot may have more than two (2) accessory buildings, excluding decks, porches and patios. k) Accessory building of less than fifty (50) square feet shall not be considered when computing the limitations of paragraph i. and j. above; but the combined area of accessory building of less than 50 square feet shall not exceed a total of 100 square feet. l) The same or similar exterior building material (such as siding, shingles, etc.) shall be used on the accessory building and the principal building. m) Pole barns and/or post frame construction and hoop tubular frame buildings are prohibited. 72 Section 502.12: GENERAL PERFORMANCE STANDARDS The intent of this section of the zoning ordinance is to establish general development performance standards. The regulations provided herein shall apply equally to all districts except where special provisions provide otherwise. Subd. 1: Accessory Buildings in Residential Districts. a) Detached accessory buildings shall be located in the rear yard. b) Detached accessory buildings which are greater than fifty (50) square feet, but less than two-hundred (200) square feet shall require a zoning permit. The Zoning Permit Fee shall be established and amended from time to time by resolution of the City Council. c) Detached accessorybuildings two-hundred (200) square feet or greater shall require a building permit. d) Attached accessory buildings and structures shall comply with the setback regulations in the respective zoning district. Detached accessory buildings shall be setback a minimum of ten feet (10’) from the rear and side yard lot lines, except that on corner lots shall have a side yard setback of twenty feet (20’) feet from the property line on the intersecting street. Accessory buildings shall not be located over any easement. e) Accessory buildings shall not to exceed over one (l) story of or sixteen (16) feet in height whichever is less. f) All garages shall, if the vehicle entrance backs upon a public alley, be setback at least ten (10) feet from the public alley right-of-way. g) In no case shall the door of any structure, building, fence or improvement be erected or constructed so as to extend beyond any lot line. h) In business and manufacturing districts, accessory buildings and uses may occupy any of the ground area which the principal building is permitted to occupy. Accessory buildings such as buildings for parking attendants, guard shelters, gate houses and transformer buildings, may be located in the front or side yard in the Industrial District. ii) Within the R-1, R-2 and R-4 districts no detached accessory structures, excluding decks, porches and patios but including attached garages, or any 73 combination of accessory structures shall exceed the allowable building lot coverage in the zoning district which it is located 1,350 square feet or ten percent (10%), whichever is the lesser, of the total lot area. In addition, lot coverage requirements outlined within the respective districts shall be adhered to. j) Within the R-1, R-2, and R-4 districts no lot may have more than two (2) accessory buildings, excluding decks, porches and patios. k) Accessory building of less than fifty (50) square feet shall not be considered when computing the limitations of paragraph i. and j. above; but the combined area of accessory building of less than 50 square feet shall not exceed a total of 100 square feet. l) The same or similar exterior building material (such as siding, shingles, etc.) shall be used on the accessory building and the principal building except for sheds that are 100 square feet or less can be constructed of prefabricated plastic. Metal roofs are allowed provided they are constructed with standing seams and concealed or exposed fasteners. Sheds 200 square feet or less shall be anchored through a manufacture’s approved anchoring kit. m) Pole barns and/or post frame construction and hoop tubular frame buildings are prohibited. 74