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.