Loading...
1983 06 22 e e e PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES REGULAR MEETING JUNE 22, 1983 Chairman Conrad called the meeting to order at 7:39 p.m. Commissioners Present Jim Thompson Tom Merz Susan Albee Ladd Conrad Bill Ryan Howard Noziska Commissioners Absent Mike Thompson Staff Present Scott Martin, Community Development Director, Bob Waibel, City planner and vicki Churchill, Secretary. Public Present Obed L. Melom Robert L. Wagner Barbara A. Wagner Linda L. Conner Jackie Mielke Robert Reutiman Joe Gorecki Don Dudycha Fay Dudycha J. Harold Anderson Agnes Anderson Gary Reed Jan Reed Bill Ziegler Dolores Ziegler Kimm Ziegler Sandy Lehmer Bill Swearingen Nancy Swearingen virginia Hanily Patrick Hanily Kenneth Lang Betty Lang Dick Braun James O. Irving Lynne Irving George Baer 2540 Orchard Lane, Excelsior 2511 Orchard Lane, Excelsior 2511 Orchard Lane, Excelsior 2521 Orchard Lane, Excelsior 2830 Washta Bay Road 6421 Oriole Ave., Excelsior 6451 Oriole Ave., Excelsior 6470 Oriole Ave., Excelsior 6470 Oriole Ave., Excelsior 2461 West 64th Street, Excelsior 2461 West 64th Street, Excelsior 6441 Oriole Ave., Excelsior 6441 Oriole Ave., Excelsior 6441 Oriole Ave., Excelsior 6250 Chaska Road, Excelsior 6250 Chaska Road, Excelsior 2660 Orchard Lane, Excelsior 2660 Orchard Lane, Excelsior 2631 Forest Ave., Excelsior 2631 Forest Ave., Excelsior 2670 Orchard Lane, Excelsior 2670 Orchard Lane, Excelsior 6300 Chaska Road, Excelsior e PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JUNE 2, 1983 PAGE 2 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Request To Change The Land Use Designation From Low Denisty Residential To Commercial, Robert W. Reutiman, Public Hearing continued from June 8, 1983. Chairman Conrad briefly stated that this item had been tabled from the last meeting in order to take a look at the surrounding area of the Reutiman property and get additional information from staff. He stated that there was a lot of public input and that it is included in the minutes for public record. He also added that this was just a request for an amendment of the Comprehensive Plan not a zoning change. Waibel presented the staff update on this request and stated that they took the report one step farther and reviewed the whole surrounding area as far as what the zoning and land use plans were for Excelsior and Shorewood boundaries that ajoin Chanhassen. The area that was studied extended both north and south of Highway 7 between the intersections of Minewashta Parkway and Highway 7 on the west and Galpin Blvd. and Highway 7 on the east. e The Planning Commission had asked that properties within the study area that may have characteristics suitable for land uses other that low density residential be identified. He stated that it appears that different land use designations could be con- sidered for the areas in the southeast corner of the intersection of Minnewashta Parkway and Highway 7, the southeast corner of the intersection of Highway 41 and 7, and the southwest corner of the intersection of Highway 41 and 7. Staff recommended for Subarea A (Minnewashta Parkway and Hwy. 7) That the Planning Commission not recommend that the Comprehensive Plan be amended at this time for that particular area. Such measures could be taken up to change a portion of the area to medium density residential when a site plan is reviewed. Staff recommended for Subarea B that the Planning Commission should reaffirm the Comprehensive Land Use plan designation for low density residential. Staff recommended for Subarea C that the Planning Commission recommend the City Council amend the Comprehensive plan to designate this property for commercial or medium density residen- tial use or a combination of both thereof. e Waibel also stated that staff received some late comments from the Department of Transportation District 5 office on this particular area. They stated that they would not allow any direct access for the property with the exception of the possibility for a right out access going east on Hwy. 7 and allowances for the existing accesses onto Hwy. 41. MNDOT stated it is their preference Planning Commission Minutes June 22, 1983 e Page 3 preference in that area to have no direct access at all to Hwy. 41 or 7 and that it receive access via West 64th Street or Oriole Lane. e Bill Swearingen: Geroge Baer and myself are all open to commer- cial development. He felt that because they had an increasing noise level, increasing commercial development in that area and the fact that Shorewood strip seems to be developing towards com- mercial. Our feeling is to design the whole thing commercial development and buffer it with a multiple strip (being a medium or high density residential area) placed between the now existing residences and the Reutiman property to decrease the impact of commericial in the neighborhood. I would like to read you my letter that was addressed to the Planning Commission. "We have lived on the corner for the past ten year. We've watched the steady growth of commercial business across the highway in Shorewood as well as listening to the increasing noise level generated by Hwy. 7 and 41. We recognize that the time is fast approaching when development pressures on the corner will make it necessary for us personally to move. We accept that. It is my sincere belief that both the remaining corners should be rezoned to commercial, the adjoining or contiguous land behind the corner should be rezoned to multiple to act as a buffer to lighten the noise generated by the highways and businesses. From what I have gathered this is a very satisfactory technique of protecting residential areas joining busy highways and intersections. I submitted this sketch to the Planning Commission as to how I see this should be zoned commercial/multiple. I would like to please note that the abutting Shorewood land areas that are already zoned either multiple or commercial. It appears that the entire strip of Shorewood land between 7 and 41 and Chaska Road will become commercial." Chairman Conrad: On the Shorewood side the most immediate sec- tion, east of that is what land use plan? B. Waibel: As was explained to me this area is to remain resi- dential with possible allowances for duplex units on an infilling basis. There has been a recent approval for an office building on the eastly most t acre of this area. Bill Swearingen: One of our neighbors who also owns property in Shorewood and Chanhassen, is on the Planning Commission in Shorewood. He has indicated to me personally that this even- tually would become the "strip", starting down at the tail end by Country Kitchen with an office building and will gradually move up, their plan is to make this commercial. e Chairman Conrad: Is that what is on their Comprehensive Plan? Bill Swearingen: No, but this is the way it's developed and that is the way that's going and that's the way that Shorewood is going. e e e Planning Commission Minutes June 22, 1983 Page 4 Chairman Conrad: They, like we do, have a Comprehensive Plan that just got approved in the last year, and it's a multi faceted plan. We have to make decisions based upon their plan. You're telling me that somebody on the Planning Commission said that's not the way it's going, however that is not reflected in the official and adopted plan. Bill Swearingen: I can tell you two things, what the Planning Commission member told me and actually what they have gotten as far as approval for an office building in that particular area. Commissioner Merz: Could you explain the subarea B. B. Waible: Subarea B is located southeast corner of the inter- section of 7 and 41. Commissioner Merz: That's the one that you are recommending that we maintain as low density residential. B. Waibel: Right, and Subarea A is at the intersection of Minnewashta Parkway and Hwy. 7 on the west corner of Lake Minnewashta. Robert Wagner: This residential area, I sympathize with the comments about commercialism and the fact that it's IIcreepingll into that area. Our fear is that the same thing is going to hap- pen over here, once this becomes commercial, Hwy. 7 becomes a valid target right on down the road. It may not be this year, but that's why you are hearing the comments and the petition. You talk about buffering potential for this site. B. Waibel: The area where there is considerable slope differen- tial from between the existing residences, it is a significant divide. Robert Wagner: It's a natural buffer and you are saying that you can improve on that. B. Waibel: I would say it would lend itself to appropriate site and design measures to be applied to it, such as plantings, filling along the backside of the slope to maintain a slope that will not erode and creating an elevation differential between the existing residences. Robert Wagner: I would like to summarize the feelings of the Minnewashta area, when you look at the other map here and you look at the density of what is currently residential on that piece of property. The care of this group is what's going to happen with this and how it's to erode the area, that's the basic concern. Bob, made the comment about if it went commercial how you regard the compatability with surrounding land uses. My con- cern is if you zone it commercial you lose the control. e Planning Commission Minutes June 22, 1983 Page 5 Chairman Conrad: We do have the control. We can make sure that whether it be residential, commercial or whatever, we make sure that the right design is applied to the area. William Ziegler(?): You are subject to the same pressures. There are two people to the west of him (Reutiman) that want com- mercial. You're saying that you have control and you'll just say no. Chairman Conrad: We are not to control, but the appropriate design we can review and accept or reject. By that, I believe we can control it. B. Waibel: You have to remember what was stated at the last meeting that this is a Comprehensive Plan amendment, the next step in the sequence to get development on the site is look to rezoning. That rezoned property establishes legal rights for whatever designation. It's going to have to be planned. Through that rezoning process they would have to submit detailed develop- ment plans. They haven't done that as of yet. e Robert Wagner: One more comment, as I come along Highway 7 from Hopkins and I look at the intersections and the development and relate it to noise, as I come across 494 and 7 I see residential basically on the west side of 494 and 7 and it seems to survive quite adequately very close again to a major roadway. As I come down to Williston and 7, I see again a residential intersection that seems to survive and it's an intersection with a stop light and has the same traffic pattern. I think this can be developed into a residential pattern and it would acceptable, but I think it would have to be done with the buffer zones. Nancy Swearingen: Bob, I would like to ask you. If that property there was the higher density of the land use as townhouses, cluster homes, whatever so you keep the feeling of nature there, would that be buffered enough for you? Robert Wagner: The problem with me is that I have a personal residence and this is very personal to me, it's my home and it effects the value of a major investment of mine. I can just see that it's going to continue. Nancy Swearingen: I am opposed to commercial as much as you are, but we've got to somehow deal with that intersection, it's not going to go away. e Robert Wagner: When we purchased our home we had thought that development would remain residential. I would not have bought it if I had thought that this was going to change. Again, I'm not just speaking for me, I'm speaking for these people. It's threatening more than one house. You can put medium or high density residential or commercial there and it will effect the price of the property. e Planning Commission Minutes June 22, 1983 Page 6 Chairman Conrad: Let me ask something of Bob Waibel. Going back in time, 1968, I do believe the land use plan stated commercial, right? B. Waibel: Yes, the land use plan showed this area as commercial and it had a ring around that even extending into this area for multiple residential. Unidentified: Why was this changed in the new Comprehensive plan? Scott Martin: This was a time frame when the downtown redevelop- ment project was being looked at in the immediate future. The feeling at the time was to take a restrictive approach to pro- tect the downtown redevelopment project by restricting the amount of property planned for commercial in areas lying outside of the central business district. Secondly, it was to plan for out lying areas as low density residential so that any development other than single family residential was required to go through a public hearing to be approved, so when a specific application came up it would really be in your hands to decide. Chairman Conrad: O.k. and my recollection, there were three public hearings on the land use plan? e Scott Martin: I could get that information. Robert Wagner: In 1979 there was a very heated debate in that area known as the Baltic property. The feelings that were put across that we wanted to remain residential. I do believe that had an input at that time. Barbara Wagner: Fifteen years ago when that was commercial pro- perty there wasn't the development back in Minnewashta Woods area. There were a few homes but it was largely pasture. In 1982 when it was rezoned to residential that was probably due to the fact that there has been a big build up in the area of single family homes. It is my feeling that the noise problem that you speak of is not really that much of a problem. Our property bor- ders 7 and we are very comfortable and the noise is not a factor. It is my feeling that commercial is just totally unacceptable. Nancy Swearingen: Exactly where is your property? Barbara Wagner: We are west of the intersection. Nancy Swearingen: So the impact of breaking the sound in your area is not a factor. e Barbara Wagner: If you talked to the person on the Planning Commission and he gives you an impact story that eventually e Planning Commission Minutes June 22, 1983 Page 7 this is all going to be commercial along that strip. Well, Baltic Corporation was supposed to be a temporary thing. That is suppose to go back to residential. We are at a point right now where it's going to be much more convenient if Mr. Reutiman's property is definitely commercial. It would be much more benefi- cial for the Baltic Corporation to go commercial and Mr. Brown, Ivings and Popes. They are the only ones down that strip that want commercial and it would be totally unacceptable. Nancy Swearingen: It wouldn't ruin the area. Barbara Wagner: It would ruin a residential area as far as I'm concerned. I think it would be much more congested and to say that you can re-route the traffic, you can to a certain degree, but you're always going to have problems with traffic in an area as small as that. e Sandy Lehmer: I live on Oriole Avenue and 64th. I think my biggest concern is the traffic problem, I have children and I know you have re-routed it but I don't think that's effective. I think it would people would still continue to use our streets. My property is right behind there and I think that it decreases the value of my home and I am strongly opposed to commercial in that area, basically because of that. I bought my home, I want to live there and I don't think my property should be devalued simply because the City would like commercial in here. I think it would be very inapropriate usage in an area that is already developed residential. e Gary Reed: I guess my feelings are that I'd like to keep it residential because I live there. I would like to develop the rest of property because I'm forced to because of the sewer assessments that I have on the property. I would like to see the properties abutting 41 made into a multiple dwelling and the rest in back of that just go with single family. The property south of me belongs to Ben Gowan and he and I have talked about the developing of the property adjoining the new park area in back. Maybe making an access to the park from our property. We had the drive-in for many years there on 41 and we still had access there but it was a "grandfather" conditional use, but we lost the use on that. As far as I'm concerned, I don't want to look at the backend of a shopping center. If something did go in there, I would like to see it done in manner that would be a service to the neighborhood. I don't have any objection to commercial as long as it is a service to our needs and something that we can live with. I'm sure that many of you people have probably eaten at Reed's Drive-in and I felt that was a real service to the com- munity. Unfortunately, how can you guarantee that something will be a service to the community until you put it in. It's up to the Planning Commission and City Council to take charge and control the situation. I would like to say that the residential use of property be made a low density residential with a buffer zone. e Planning Commission Minutes June 22, 1983 P ag e 8 Bill Swearingen: Multiple uses also have to have a buffer. You already have a major shopping center development across 7 in the Shorewood area. What we need is something to buffer the rest of the residential. What we need is some kind of commercial develop- ment and commercial/multiple behind that to shelter it. You can't put right up against the highway. Bob Waibel: I would like to note that I have a verbal addition to the recommendation. We do note the Baltic property, the recommendation on that property that the Comprehensive Land Use Plan not be amended but that property be subject to the terms and conditions of the non-conforming use permit under which that pro- perty is subject to. Robert Wagner: The conditions of the permit was not followed as it was written. The landscaping has not been done and that was one of the conditions. Bob Waibel: Landscaping will be done when the new tenant comes in. We do have bond money that was called for on this. Any new tenant or purchaser of that property is subject to the City Council's terms of that permit. e Albee moved, seconded by J. Thompson to close the public hearing, all voted in favor and the motion carried. Merz moved to recommend that based upon the limited data that we presently have to change the property to commercial that it be denied for lack of provisions. Motion fails for lack of a second. Albee moved to recommend the Comprehensive Land Use Plan be amended to designate this property to commercial. Motion fails for lack of a second. J. Thompson moved to recommend that the City Council deny the request to rezone this commercial because it sets precedent for strip zoning. Chairman Conrad: Can I just ask you to change the motion to deny the commercial zoning, the commercial land use application. e J. Thompson moved to recommend that the City Council deny the request to categorize this particular "T" as commercial designa- tion in our land use plan. Seconded by Ryan. Vote: J. Thompson, Merz, Conrad, Ryan and Noziska, aye. Albee, naye. Motion carries. Albee stated that up until two years ago the Comprehensive Plan e e e Planning Commission Minutes June 22, 1983 Page 9 designated the property as commercial. She felt the highest and best use of the property is commercial usage. Approval of Minutes Ryan moved, seconded by Noziska, to approve the minutes of May 25, 1983, and June 8, 1983 as written. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 10:30 p.m.