Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission Minutes 03-21-1984Pace 67 Planninq Commission Minutes March 21, 1984 3.E. Hril+,l. ., 100 4 a!hingts n Square, Minneapolis, stated that he was an attorney representing the ownership of the Sunrise Point property (Area e referenced his letter o -F March 14, 198-4 which had been placed on file, and requested that they defer, action on this matter until on olnrl lit igati:on has been resr l s d, He briefly revieweded the: history of the attempts to develop the property, and he stated that fie and his client understood the purpose- of the hearing. He stated that the developer felt progress was being rade with the litigation, and that they wished to retain their development rights under the previous Council ap rovols. Chairwoman Vasillou stated that the Commission should establish a date certain for the deferral* Mr. Brill stated that he had suggested six months in his letter, but that it ultimately would'' be up to the court. He :,stated they may, have to come back and seek an additional extension. Bob Scribner, 2015 Lancaster Lane,,, stated that he had been involved in efforts to expr-ss concerns of various citizens regardi sl this dt:.velopmen , and its impact upon the amenity of -_ MediezAe Lade; he stated that since 1977 citizens have been concerned about the environmental impact, and that there had been numerous hearings and court cases. He stated that he was not confident the matters would' he finally resolved in: sax months, and that he had been led to believe that previous approvals b the City had become null, and void duo to thelapse of time and the denial: of required permits by the Department of Natural Resources (DNR). He ; staged that the zoning and quiOng classifications` should be reconciled as recommended at this time. Brad Gunn, 515 Peavey Building, Minneapolis, stated he was an attorney representing the, City of Medicine Lake relative to this matter. He submitted a letter dated Marsh 1, 1984, and rev.1owed it with the Commission. He stated that the citi ens of Medicine L4ke believe that the Little Peninsula property should he zoned in accordance with the LA -2 Land Use Guide plan Classification. Bruce Larson., 1940 East Medicine Lake Blvd. , stated :that ' he was the president of the As ,d iaat on of Medicine Lame Area Citizens (AMA ), and the Association supports the proposed rezoning to be consistent with the Land Use Guide Flan Classification. Page G Planninq Commission Minutes March Z11 1984 Chairwoman Vasiiiuu stated that the City administration, and the City Attorney had recommendedd a deferral until a specific, date .Aould be reasonable eonsidekring the long ana complex history of the development effort-, reg rdin '.Ills property. She stated that the six months a p .a ed to be a reasonable time frame and the Commission: could consider establishing: a specl io date when the Motlofl was made later In the eueninq$ Chairwoman asiiiau then recognized, Mr. 3oan Deinilrtqer, 1140 Evergreen Lane, who stated he was concerned about the northwest corner of Evergreen Lane and Highway 55 (Area He stated the neighbors had consistently been concerned about the zoninq` of the H"nder Clinic site, and he stated that it would be 'appropriate to rezone the property to R -1A, ratter than leave it zoned R-1. He stated he Nvas concerned with possible future expansions of the clinic and recognized that the non -conforming status would I keep than from rapening. He stated that he and neighbors were not opposed to small, businesses which were, located in the right place, and: which dial not thrive at the expense of the surrounding neighborhood, James H nder, 1025 Evergreen Lane, stated he was the owner of the property, and that he _would prefer to retain the -1 on ng which' he had received o iloina.l l ' when the ellinic was built* ire skated he does. not own any of er land in the area and does not have any expansion plans beyond those which have been recently before the Commission. Dr,. Harlan einl*nger* 1100 Evergreen Cage, stated that she had expressed her concerns about the "sameness", as wol.) as the Incompatibility of the B-1 and R -`A uses to the sane neighborhood She cited- the hlstoryof the zottling of the property and the- neighborhood concerns shoe 1969. She steed she was in favor of the rezoning to R -1 A. Donna M:Ichalskiy 1020 B Evergreen Lang, spoke later in the evening on.the same item, and stated that the clinic should not be allowed to expand further, and that there Sas bad traffic circulation %:n the area now. She recited previous concerns which had bee. expressed to the Commission recently with regard to the Site pl on review. Chairwoman Vasil.iou recognized Kevin LFerris, 610 Cottonwood Lane who stated he was concerned about the proposed reconciliation in 1 a neighborhood {Area Q. He stated that he and a t;i had purchased the house ane had Invested a substan" i.= . ,ount of money into fixing it up because thty like ea and the residential neighborhood. Page planning Commission Manatee He stated the area was peaceful, and the zoning should be left a4 It is. Dr.. 3,es-e C. Yap, 610 Cottonwood Lane., referenced his `letter of }larch 14* 1984, and requested that the ening as It Is. Re stated that the area was residential in character and that he had .invested a substantial amount of money in his home. Bill Goldsmith, 725 CottnnNyca Lane, stated there were ;at least eight 'residents` in the imirediate area who felt it was a good area to live an, and that he had resided there for 15 years. He stated he did not understand the reasons to, rezone the property, and he acted that he had received- a permit to remodel his home several years ago and was not Informed that a change was imminent. He' suggested that there was ether land in the City better suited for nm cr c .al coning Oan this area. Chairwoman VaOliou requested staff to explain the purpose c the reccncill. tion. Director Tremere explained that the Land Use Guiding for the area had been CL (limited business) for many years, but the zoning had been established as w- 'A, probably in recognition of the existing ;homes. He stated that the guiding was responsive to., the ityis plans for the eventual extension of County Read. 15 throtigh this area, and he showed a transparency of that. He noted that the commercial area as gu°ldcd would be on the north side of County Road 15 as a transition from the retail shopping center on Highway ; the single family., esidev.tial land would then be on the south side of County mead Mrs. Sherllyn Goldsmith, 725 Cottonwood Larve, stated that the residents like the area, and that It was .representative of "small townk4 living,. . She noted therz. was in the area, :and it is a good neighborhood to raise children. She believes that rezoning would hurt the area and there were better ,laces *,n the City for commercial development. Chairwoman Vasillou recooqnized Mr, Gir 'McInerney, 915 37th Place North, who stated he epr:sented the Word of Life Assembly of Cod church which has an application before the Cater at this time for development of property in the area iden4ifled as Area 0 specifically, the parcel shown as 0_ ). He Inquired as to how much: of their approximate 10, acre site was guided LA- : Director Tremere I stated that it appeared that approximately one-third of the site was so guided, and if left guided LA -3 would ultimately be rezoned to -.; Page 70 P"Aninq Com i.ssi* A Minutes March 21, 1984 Directoi Tremere also explained that staff members had lulked ith fir. 131 l.nerney l and assur .d the church representatives that whether the land were zoned -1A or 3 or both) it would not affect the ability of the church to develop the site with a church which is a conditional use in all residential districts. Mr. McInerney stated he was supported of the recommended reconciliation for this area. Chaltwo an Vasiltou recognized Mr. 3ames Bosch, 1630 wrest iew Lane, a few mii:utes later,. who also had concerns about this area. He stated that he lived within 5€0 'f . of the areas contained in Area D, and that he sought additional information from that provided in the notice. Chairwoman Vasillou asked director Tremere, to review the purpose of the reconciliation in this area; it was noted that the current zoning of this area is --1, whereas, the zoning of this area which Is rest of Mr. Bosch `s property has been guided LA— for a number of years. Director Tremere noted that the north portion of the approved Fox For s% development Nvas guided LA -3 -and had been zoned R-3 Mr. Busch stated his concerns with the higher density guidin and ,tonln , and that he could see no reason shy the zoning should b- changed In the area. He supported retention of thq R - 1A Zoning. Chairwomai, Vasiliou recognized prudence; Peterson, 9600 24th r, nue North. { he explained that she had reviewed the reconciliation for this area (Area C)and strongly encouraged the Planning Commission to consider changinq the guiding frost LA- to LA -1 She explained that the ,area was virtually totally developed with single family detached hou inq); and that neighbors were concerned about the possible development of bull ple family housing in the remaining vacant areas. She asked about the procedures for finalizing the conciliation,, and Chairwoman VasI*ou eupl4lnod that the City Council would eventually have the final determination. Chairwoman si.ltou, noted that a letter dated. March 1 had been received from Eileen Morant 2265 North Kilmer Lane,, regarding concerns about this same area, The letter expressed concerns about increased density In the areas as well as ,theotenti.al for additional multiple dwellings that might he developed if the land' were rezoned to. R-2,7 consistent with, the guiding. She sought assurance that before density were inoreasedt streets ' and other municipal services related V._. street maintenance would be improved. Chairwoman Vasiliou recognized Mrs 3ames Sentman 13510 CountyRo 155, who received verification that his propertyl and his`° neighborhood were not involved .in this hearing.