Loading...
1983 07 13 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES REGULAR MEETING ~ JULY 13, 1983 Chairman Conrad called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m. Commissioners Present Chairman Conrad Jim Thompson Susan Albee Bill Ryan Howard Noziska Commissioners Absent Tom Merz and Mike Thompson. Conditional Use Permit Request for the Adaptive Reuse of Minnetonka West Junior High School, Public Hearing Public Present Jim Jones Rich Nocoli Mr. & Mrs. Ray Brenden Curtis Ostrum Kathy Ostrum Representing the School District 2280 Melody Hill 6730 Galpin Blvd. 6480 Murray Hill Road 6480 Murray Hill Road e waibel explained that all of the uses proposed by the school district were all non-retail type uses and are consistent with the uses allowed in Section 7.04, subsection ll(a} of the zoning Ordinance 47. He stated that any other potential uses for the building are to be reviewed by the Community Development Director for verification of consisting with the same requirements. He stated that the parking spaces presently available appear to be adequate for the uses proposed and that the signage is accep- table. Chairman Conrad explained that the City Council on Monday evening did approve a zoning ordinance amendment which setforth guideli- nes for the adaptive reuse of public or private school buildings for private business purposes. Kathy Ostrum: She explained that their property adjoins the schoolon the east. Recently they had gotten approval for a development of their property to put in six single family homes. She stated that she had a question as to what is going to be put into that school and staff had requested from them a 10 foot walking path to the school for the students in the development plan. She stated that if the building was no longer going to be a school, she had a hard time seeing why they had to deed over that 10 foot easement. She stated that she had no problem with the building being used in these other ways because it is vacant now. e e Plannning Commission Minutes July 13, 1983 Page 2 Jim Jones: He stated that they did not know the future and the Board elected to rent the building instead of selling it. They wanted to keep the option open in case they need to reopen the school in the future. Kurtis Ostrum: He stated that when they bought the property Joyce Jackson said they allowed a pedestrian gate in that fence because people were using that part. But he said that there was nothing written and it could be vacated at anytime, that is when they bought the property. Otherwise the condition of the develop- ment, they (staff) did require that we put the pedestrian path in there. Kathy Ostrum: She wondered why this could not work in reverse, if staff asked us to put it in with the option that it be sold it could be vacated, should it become a school we would deed over the 10 foot walkway. Scott Martin: He suggested to keep the publics' options open and if the building was ever disposed of for non-school purposes that would be a good reason to vacate that pedestrian walkway. - Bill Ryan: He asked Mr. Ostrum what the status of that development plan agreement was. Kurtis Ostrum: He stated that they were working with Bill Monk the City Engineer and he thought it would be submitted to the City Council at their next meeting. Chairman Conrad: He asked staff if it could be worded into the development agreement. Scott Martin: He stated that the City could not put into the contract that they wanted to maintain an easement until such time that building is sold. He explained that a vacation under State Law has to go through a public hearing process. Rich Nocoli: He wanted to know what 'conditional' meant in conditional use permit and if the permit had a certain time limit. Bob Waibel: He stated that it was a permit granted by the City setting forth guidelines and conditions under which the operation is to be conducted. He also added that if any use is found in violation of that permit or those conditions, then the City has the right to take action to remedy the problem and also there is no time limit for the permit. e Rich Nocoli: He wondered if the outside of building would have storage or any alterations. Bob Waibel: He stated that there is to be no open storage. Planning Commission Minutes July 13, 1983 Page 3 - Rich Nocoli: He felt that this would be great to reopen the school for the kids to use the swimming pool and let people in the community use it. Harvey Parker: He wanted to know if the businesses would have insurance, that the building be left in the same condition as when they moved in, so that it is not costing the public any more taxes than if it was left empty. Jim Jones: He stated that they had an attorney design a lease to protect them against that kind of problem and the whole rationale of the idea of renting is to reduce the cost. Jim Thompson moved, seconded by Albee to close the public hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried. J. Thompson moved, seconded by Noziska, that the Planning Commission recommend the City Council approve the conditional use permit for the adaptive reuse of Minnetonka West Jr. High School as proposed in Planning Case 83-3 Conditional Use Permit subject to the requirements of Section 7.04, subsection 11 of Zoning Ordinance 47. Proposed Ordinance Amending the City's Zoning Ordinance and Repealing Ordinances 45 and 64. ~ Public Present Mr. & Mrs. Merrill R. Steller Mr. & Mrs. Ray Brenden Al Klingelhutz Maynard C. Happe 1931 Crestview Drive 6730 Galpin Blvd. 8601 Great Plains Blvd. 495 Lakota Lane Scott Martin explained that the proposed ordinance will have the effect of permitting the subdivision and development of land in unsewered areas for single family residences on 5 acre lots. He stated that all applicable requirements of both the zoning and Subdivision Ordinances will be applied to unsewered area develop- ments, just as such requirements are presently applied to develop- ments served by public sewer and water. Most of the public present stated that they wanted to know the reasoning of 5 acres instead of 21 acre lots. Scott Martin explained that the City Council reviewed this debate and felt that a larger sized lot would be more flexible to mini- mize the density of the septic systems. The City Council did not want high density because of the soil content, which is mostly clay and could easily cause septic failures. Also that the lots would be easier to subdivide for future development than 21 acres because you have to consider streets, slopes, soil, maybe ~ wetlands that would be in an area, it would be less complicating. Chairman Conrad stated that sometime that area will be developed and that there will be significant cost if you get into smaller lots. Planning Commission Minutes July 13, 1983 e P~e4 Maynard Happe stated that near where he lives on Lakota Lane, there are 9 houses and only 1 home is on 4 acres the rest have 2t or less and that there has been no problems with the sewer and water system. He also stated that what if someone bought a 5 acre lot and put their house right in the middle of the lot, then how are you going to subdivide it equal. Al Klingelhutz wanted to know if there was any stipulation as far as where the house should sit on the property. Martin stated that there was not, but added that someone could not just carve out a chunk in the middle of the property, because there has to be an access onto an existing roadway. S. Albee moved, seconded by J. Thompson to close the public hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Howard Noziska felt that this proposal was a resonable solution to the problem. He wanted to know if Metro Council's minimum lot size was 5. e Scott Martin stated that Metro Council requires a minimum lot size of 10 acres. Our Comprehensive plan was adopted with 5 acres. B. Ryan moved, seconded by S. Albee, that the Planning Commission recommend the City Council approve the proposed ordinance amending the City's Zoning Ordinance and repealing Ordinances 45 and 64 as proposed in Planning Case #58 Zoning Ordinance Amendment. Public Waters Classification of the Shoreland Management Ordinance Public Present Harvey Parker Susan Conrad Georgette Sosin Henry Sosin Bob Dols 7480 Chanhassen Road 6625 Horseshoe Curve 7400 Chanhassen Road 7400 Chanhassen Road 7407 Frontier Trail Waibel explained that the Environmental Protection Committee reviewed the Shoreland Management Classification of public waters within Chanhassen. In this review of the lakes within the City it was found that all of the lakes were well within the criteria for their classification with the exception of Lotus Lake. There were five points that describe the findings on Lotus Lake. e 1, The development density of Lotus Lake is extremely close to the guideline maximum of 25 established for recreational e Planning Commission Minutes July 13, 1983 Page 5 development waters. When this figure is taken into account with the configuration of the lake, being elongated and narrow and having a relatively shallow average depth, it accentuates the conditions that this particular body of water is probably more susceptible to problems associated with higer development densities and use pressures. 2. The crowding potential was well within the range established for recreational development category. 3. The records indicates that Lotus Lake has not experienced winter kill making it equally eligible for recreational development classification. 4. The lake having a depth greater than 15 feet makes it equally conforming to both the recreational and general development categories, but the fact that 63% of Lotus Lake has a depth of less than 15 feet and an average 11.5 feet, it implies a more restrictive classification as suggested in the classifi- cation criteria. e 5. Lotus Lake is characterized as having wooded upland loams and clay loams with significant areas having slopes exceeding 18%. These characteristics make it equally compatable to the criteria for both recreational and general development shore- land classification. Waibel added that this proposal would effect existing lots of record only with regard to the increase in the ordinary high watermark setback from 50 to 75 feet. A general overview of the development patterns on Lotus Lake reveal that this will not cause any great increase in the number of substandard setbacks. The change in the lot area requirements from 15,000 to 20,000 square feet for lots abutting Lotus Lake is only applicable to properties proposed to be subdivided after reclassification. The public present basically agreed that the criteria fit Lotus Lake and that they had no problems with the reclassification of it to recreational development waters. Albee moved, seconded by J. Thompson to close the public hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried. B. Ryan felt that the large property owners on Lotus Lake should be individually notified when it goes to the City Council. e Albee moved, seconded by J. Thompson that the Planning Commission recommend the City Council approve the reclassification of Lotus Lake from General Development Waters to Recreational Development Waters as proposed in Planning Case 001 Natural Resources and - Planning Commission Minutes July 13, 1983 Page 6 that staff inform the owners of large holdings on Lotus Lake of the next City Council review. Subdivision Request for the Northwest Quarter of Section 10, Charles and Irene Song, Public Hearing Public Present Charles and Irene Song Mr. & Mrs. Merrill R. Steller 6736 Washington Street, Fridley 1931 Crestview Drive Waibel explained that the applicant is requesting to subdivide a 10 acre parcel from the approximate 110 acre parent parcel on which they have a contract for deed. The applicant has indicated that it is their intention to purchase the entire 110 acre parcel on contract for deed, however, mortgage companies require that they have unencumbered fee ownership on the land upon which the house is to be built. As such, the applicant is requesting to subdivide the 10 acre building site since it is an amount of acreage for which they can afford to obtain unencumbered fee ownership. e Chairman Conrad asked Mr. & Mrs. Song if they had any problems with the conditions that are stated in staff's recommendation. Mr. & Mrs. Song said they did not. J. Thompson moved, seconded by Albee to close the public hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried. J. Thompson moved, seconded by Albee that the Planning Commission recommend the City Council approve the subdivision as requested in Planning Case 83-5 Subdivision and as depicted on the Site plan marked Official Copy dated received May 20, 1983 Chanhassen Community Development Department with the following conditions: 1. That the applicant receive an access permit from Carver County Public Works Department for access as proposed. 2. That the applicant deliver to the City, Certificates of Survey with legal descriptions for the resulting two lots prior to the filing of the conveyance. 3. That a certification from the City be filed with the con- veyance indicating that the balance of the property is not eligible for any residential, commercial, or industrial building permits until such time as the ordinances governing the unsewered areas of the City are amended changing the building permit eligibility of the property. - All voted in favor and the motion carried. Planning Commission Minutes July 13, 1983 Page 7 e Conditional Use Permit Request for an Addition to Holy Cross Lutheran Church, Outlot A, Pleasant Acres 1st Addition, Public Hearing. Public Present Reynold Roberts (Project Architect) 4941 France Ave. S. Waibel presented the staff report on this item noting that staff recommends approval as requested with the condition that concrete curb be installed around the perimeters of the proposed hard sur- face parking and manuevering areas and that the plan receive a land alteration permit from Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. B. Ryan felt that under the proposed zoning ordinance revision, the property could be zoned as an Urban Residential District and thus such facilities as day care could be incorporated into the church activities making it a greater sewage generator. As such, he felt that the church should be required to hook-up to City sewer and water service at this time unless the City Engineer can present valid reasons as to why hook-up should not be required. e S. Albee concurred with Ryan's statements for sewer and also felt we may not have another opportunity to require hook-up. H. Noziska moved, seconded by J. Thompson to close the public hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried. B. Ryan moved, seconded by S. Albee, that the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the conditional use per- mit for the addition and parking area improvements for Holy Cross Lutheran Church as proposed in Planning Case 83-4 Conditional Use Permit as depicted on the plans submitted by Roberts Architects dated received Chanhassen Community Development Department June 22, 1983 with the condition that the perimeter of all parking and manuevering areas be lined with concrete curb and that the propo- sal receives a land alteration permit from the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. Also that the City Engineer provide the City Council at their time of review of this case, a full expla- nation as to the need for the church to hook-up to City sewer and water service. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Subdivision Request for a portion of Lots 19 and 20, Murray Hill Addition, Richard C. Stout, Public Hearing. e Waibel presented the staff report and recommended approval as proposed. S. Albee moved, seconded J. Thompson to close the public hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Planning Commission Minutes July 13, 1983 ~ Page 8 J. Thompson moved, seconded by B. Ryan, that the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the proposed replat of portions of Lots 19 and 20, Murray Hill as depicted on the Preliminary Plat for Murray Hill 2nd Addition dated received June 22, 1983 Chanhassen Community Development Department. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Approval of Minutes Noziska moved, seconded by Albee to amend the June 22, 1983 minutes on page 4, paragraph 1 to read as follows: 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 the 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. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Open Discussion e The Committee discussed the remainder of the work program of the Envionmental Protection Committee and agreed that a meeting should be held with Court MacFarlane, Ladd Conrad and the Mayor as well as staff as to how the balance of the work program of the Environmental Protection Committee is to be carried out. Members also felt that this meeting could also be used to communicate their progress on the overall revisions of the subdivsion zoning ordinance. Meeting adjourned at 10:30 p.m. e