Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-08-81 s 1 } Lakeville, Minnesota Punning Commission Meeting 8 January 1-981 Planning Commission Chairman Harvey called the meeting to order at 7:40 p.m. in the Lakeville High School .Auditorium: Roll call of members .was taken. Present: Miller; Johnson; Antolik; Harvey; Geisness; Rice; Enright. Also present: Roger Knutson, City Attorney; Jim Johnson,. City Engineer; David Licht, City Planner; Patrick McGarvey, City Administrator; Sid Miller, City Building Official; Jim Robinette, City Public Works Director, Duane Zaun, City Councilman; Gordon Lekson, Mayor. The Chairman called for a review of the Planning Commission meeting minutes of 18 December 1980. 81 .05 Motion was made by Enright, seconded by Geisness to approve .the. Planning Commission meeting minutes of 18 December 1980. Roll call was taken on the motion. .Ayes: Johnson, Harvey, Geisness, Enright. Abstain: Mi (ler, Rice, Antolik . The Chairman opened discussion of the variance requests of Orest Spande concerning 10670 and 10672 162nd Street. Mr. Harvey called on members of the audience for comments. ..Opportunity for comments was declined by several members of the Lighthouse Ministries.. Mr. Geisness questioned the adequacy of the private sewer facilities serving the property. Mr. Licht commented and referenced the Plumbing Inspector's letter dated 15 December 1980, Mr. Antolik questioned the adequacy of parking and the arrangements for off-site parking: Mr. Knutson stated upon termination of leases the City would prohibit use. 81.06 Motion was made by Rice, seconded by Enright to recommend to the Lity Council approval of the variance request for front yard width and lot area for the parcel of land identified as 10670 162nd Street subject to the conditions of the City Planner's report dated 2 December 1980. Roll call was taken on the motion. Ayes: Geisness, Rice; Enright.. Nays: Antolik, Johnson, Harvey. Abstain: Muller Motion failed. 81.07 .Motion was made by Rice, seconded by Enright to forward the variance request for front yard width and lot. area for 10670 162nd Street to the City Council without Planning Commission recommendation. Roll call was taken on the motion. Ayes: Unanimous W y Lakeville,. Minnesota Planning Commission Meeting 8 January: 1981 81.08 Motion was made by Rice, seconded by Enright to forward the variance request for front yard width and lot area for 10672 162nd Street to the City Council without Planning Commission recommendation. Roll call was taken on the motion. Ayes: Unanimous The Chairman reopened the continued .public hearing on the conditional use permif by Light- house Ministries. Enright and Rice raised questions concerning parking facilities to which Mr. Knutson responded. Mr. Chris Schmacher, Paster of Lighthouse Ministries'plso stated that by ordinance, 65 spaces were. required and that the church had arrangements for 8l spaces through on-site parking .and off-site parking agreements. 81.09 Motion was made by Rice, seconded by Enright to close the public hearing. Roll call was taken on the motion. Ayes: Unanimous 81.10 Motion was. made by Enright, seconded by Geisness to recommend to the City Council approval of the conditional use permit request by Lighthouse Ministries subject to the conditions contained in, the City Planner's report dated 2 December 19$0. Roll call was taken on the motion. Ayes: Marvey, Geisness, Rice, Enright, Miller, .Johnson. Nays: Antolik. The applicant was. advised that the request would be considered by the City Counci! at their 19 January 1981 meeting. The Chairman reopened the continued public hearing on the request by Mid-America Festivals Corporation for the rezoning to PUD of the 156 .acre parcel located near the northwest corner of I-35 and Minnreg Road. Chairman Harvey read a ..listing of issues identified at the public hearing held on 4 December ..1980 as: sumtngrized in the City Planner's memo dated 18 December 1980. Mr. Don Hess, Site Planner for the proposed Renaissance PUD project, responded with the app)icant's answers to the. issues by reading a letter addressed`to the City Planner, dated 2 January 1981. Jim Johnson then presented a brief summary of public utility 'servicing alternatives for the site.' Chairman Harvey then asked far comments from the audience: Ms. Nancy Moe appeared' before the. Commission and stated she represented the group "Concerned Residents Against the Renaissance"which had a formal., presentation to offer: She introduced Mr, Charles Dayton, Attorney representing the group. Mr. Dayton presented a written statement, dated 8 Januat'yy~981 to be made. part of the record and summarized its contents. Mr. Dayton stated that it was`his opinion that an environmental impact statement was required for the project. I# the City found a negative declaration for such a study, the Concerned Residents Against Renaissance would petition the Environmental Quc~ljty Board-for a required E1S. If this fails, the Concerned Residents Against Renaissance (CRAR) would pursue legal action before a hearing examiner. Mr. Dayton then submitted and discussed.CRAR 2 Corrected Copy -Amendment 22 January 1981 Lakeville, Minnesota Planning Commtission Meeting $ January 1981 Exhibits f and involving a response from the Dakota County Parks Department and a comparison of 1974 use needs and projects to those presented as part of the application currently in question. Exhibit lll, involving the Citizens Advisory Committee report on Vinland National Center project, was then submitted for the record and Mr. Dayton emphasized the negative statements. relative to the traffic impact in the area surrounding Minnreg Road. Mr. Jack Anderson, Traffic Engineer, retained by the CRAR then appeared. and stated. that he did not have sufficient base data. at this time to evaluate the project. Once this was available he would make a report to the Commission. Mr. Jim Huey, a real estate salesman, resident of Valley Oaks and head of the CRAB, stated the amenities of the area would be destroyed by the Renaissance Festival . Additionally, commercial and residential development do not mix and a decrease in property values would be experienced.. He stated a westward transition from I-35 of higher commercial uses to low residential uses would be preferable for the area. Wally Hilgenberg appeared: on behal f of the CRAR and expressed concerns over traffic increases in the area . Access from .the west, inconvenience of residents, problems with emergency vehicle access were cited as concerns.. He stated that he had contacted Roger Simonson, Met Center Parking. Supervisor, .relative t•o the adequacy of the proposed Renaissance parking and that it was Mr. Simanson's opinion that the proposed project was inadequate. Ms. Alice Edhardt, a city resident along • Judicial Raad, stated she was trying to sell her .home and that the potential Renaissance use had caused lost of sales. She also indicated a fear of security and property and animal abuse problems if the Renaissance were allowed. Ms. Nancy Moe reiterated the potential of drug and alcohol abuse problems and a concern with emergency vehicle access. She also stated she felt the Scott County Sheriff's Department did not have adequate personnel to police the east side of the County during proposed Renaissance Festival times.: Ms..Penny„Ec,kert, operator of Valley Oaks Stables and a representative of CRAR illustrated a map showing ten stable operations in the area, five of which are within one and one-half mile of the proposed Renaissance site. She then entered. into the record the 1.975 Hennepin County Master Plan for a System of Parks. She stated her concerns with the. Renaissance use were: 1) the Renaissance dates were during the prime riding and show season; 2) experience had dernonstrated the closing of stable operations near. the present festival site; 3) stress would be created on the animals by the traffic and activity; 4) inconvenience would be created in the neighborhood; 5) hazards would be crea ed for riders and horses using the roads; and. b} a problem with security would result. She stated that her's was a family owned business which employed people from the community and which was compatible with parks in the area.. She feared the business will be lost if the Renaissance is allowed.: She also indicated that Mr. Corrigan had stated that if the community opposed the Renaissance, they would not pursue the site in question. Lem Lampert, registered architect and member of CRAB stated the land use would create loss of~ woods to the area; the site drainage system was overly complex; traffic planning according to- standards by Barton Asehman was inadequate; and it was questionable whether structures would comply with the Building Code. Mr. Rice stated that his concerns on drainage should be raised to the Natural Resources Committee. Mrs. Leon Hammer gave along statement indicating she was the second most affected property owner by the use and highlighted through a slide show the unique character of the area which would be affected by the festival use. Mr. Eric Bartel 3 Lakeville, Minnesota Planning Commission Meeting $ January 1981 Exhibits I and II involving a response from the Dakota County Parks Department and a .comparison of 1974 use needs: and projects to those presented as part of the app) ication currently in question. Exhibit III, involving the Citizens Advisory Committee :report on Vinland National Center project, was then submitted for the record and Mr. Dayton emphasized the negative statements relative to the traffic impact in the area surrounding Minnreg Road. Mr. Jack Anderson, Traffic Engineer, retained by the CRAB then appeared and stated that he did not have sufficient base data at this time to evaluate the project. Once this was available he would make a report to the Commission. Mr. Jim'Huey, a real estate salesman, resident of Valley Oaks and head of the CRAB, stated the amenities of the area would be destroyed by the Renaissance Festival . Additionally, commercial and residential development do not mix and a decrease in property values would be experienced. He stated a westward transition from 1-35 of higher commercial uses to low residential uses would be preferable for the area. Wally Hilgenberg appeared on behalf of the CRAB and expressed concerns over traffic increases in the area., Access from the west, inconvenience of residents, problems with emergency vehicle access were. cited as concerns. He stated that he had contacted Roger Simonson, Met Center Barking Supervisor, relative to the adequacy of the proposed Renaissance parking and that it was Mr. Simonson's opinion that the proposed project was inadequate. Ms. Alice`Edhardt, a city resident along . Judicial Road, stated she was trying to sell her home-and that the potential Renaissance use had caused lost of sales. She also indicated a fear of security and property and animal abuse problems if the Renaissance were allowed. Ms. Nancy Moe reiterated the potential of drug and alcohol abuse problems and a concern with emergency vehicle access. She also stated she felt the Scott County Sheriff's Department did not-have adequate personnel to police the east side of the County during proposed Renaissance Festival times.. Ms. Penny Eckert, operator. of Valley Oaks Stables and a representative of CRAB illustrated a map showing ten stable operations in the area, five of which are within one and one-half mile of the proposed Renaissance site. She then entered into the record the 1975 Hennepin County Master Pian fob a System of, Parks . She stated her concerns with the Renaissance use were: l) the Renaissance dates were during the prime- iding and show season; 2) experience had demonstrated the close of stable operations around the present festival site; 3) stress would be created: on the animals by the traffic and activity; 4) inconvenience would be created in the neighborhood; 5) hazards would be created for riders and horses using. the roads; and 6) a problem with'security would result. She stated that tier's was a family owned. business which employed people from the community and which was compatible with. parks in the area. She feared -the busijness will be lost if the Renaissance is allowed. She also indicated that Mr. CQrrigsan hadatated that if the community opposed the Renaissance,' they would not pursue the side in question, Lem Lampert, registered architect and member;of, CRAB stated the. 1'apd use would create loss of woods to the area; the si#e drainage system was overly complex; traffic planning according to standards by Barton Aschman was inadequate; and it was questionable whether structures would comply with the Building Code. Mr. Rice stated that his concerns on drainage should be raised to the Natural Resources Committee. Mrs. Leon Hammer gave a long statement indicating she was the second most affected property owner by the use and highlighted through a sl ide show the unique character of the area which would be affected by the festival use. Mr. Eric Bartel 3 Lakeville, Minnesota Planning Commission Meeting 8 January 1981 stated plans for utilization of the Honeywell Golf Course are demonstrated to'be economically unfeasible. Mr. Gary Duscow indicated his concern over pollution. Mr. Daniel Back of; the Corps of Engineers and area resident questioned who pays for public improvement costs associated with the development. Mr. Harvey stated that the proposal to date was that the applicant was responsible. Mary Guberud stated she boarded her two horses at Valley Oaks Stable. She moved her animals from the Malkerson Stables irr Shakopee due to inconvenience created by the Renaissance. She stated the festival would force current business operations out of Lakeville. Mr. Bill Peltzman, a Prior .Lake resident, Burnsville School District teacher and festival exhibitor stated the audience had a misconception of the type of people attracted to the Renaissance. Joseph Shezacek, Clerk of Credit River Township, read a resolution passed by the Credit River Town Board requesting a metropolitan significance review of the'. Renaissance Festival by the Metropolitan Council . $1.11 Motion was made by Rice, seconded by Antolik to extend the Commission meeting time-beyond the 10:30 p . m . dead I i ne . Roll call was taken on the motion. .Ayes: Ungr?imous Day Sharpe was called upon, but indicated his comments were already covered. Gloria Leighton stated most of her concerns were addressed, but she wished to emphasize the problem , with emergencies and the lack of hospital facilities in the area. Mr. W.G. McFadzem:, President of W.G . McFadzem Associates, a developer, stated he wished to put on recgrd his company's proposal to Honeywell for the.. purchase of the golf course for the development of a residential retirement community. C?evelopment costs of their proposal are $40,000,000 to $50,000,000, but would not be pursued if the f~enaissance were allowed. While he was not attempting to compete with the Renaissance and~`the decision on the festival was a local' issue to be resolved by the community, he wished to emphasize'tha# other development alternatives existed for the area in question. He also stated their long term proposal for the Honeywell golf facilities would be to turn the recreational portions of the site over to the City': Mr. Gene: Jacobson, President of the Lakeville Chamber of Commerce, stated Mr.; Corrigan had made a presentation of the proposed Renaissance festival operation to he general °membership and the Chamber had voted to "approve support and welcome" the fesfiivai to Lakeville. The festival was viewed by the Chamber as a positive asset to the community. Andrew l~ippert an Apple Valley High School student stated he worked at the Renaissance festival and the partieipartts., ,wQrFl~ers~artd-custdmers,were not hippies. He stated the festival also maintained the natural setting of its present site. Nls. Gail Johnson, resident of the Orchard Lakes area, stated there were policing problems currently in the area and questioned what additional protection would be provided if the Renaissance were allowed. Mr. Don Hamilton, dectective from'the Scott County Sheriff's office appeared and indicated he was the officer assigned to'coordinate security at the present festival bite in Shakopee. He stated he had three points to raise from., 4 Lakeville, Minnesota Planning Commission Meeting 8 January 198.1 his experience: 1) traffic was a problem typically when only disrupted by railroad train interruptions of flow. No problems had been encountered with emergency vehicle access; 2) of 240,000 persons attending the festival during 1980 only 12 drug related `arrests were made; and 3) no increase in crime rates had been experienced during festival operations. The people coming to the fair are middle and upper middle income, (aw abiding citizens. Ms. Judy Ehmcle questioned why the festival was moving from its present site. Mr. Corrigan stated theix lease had expired and the festival was interested in owning. their own property. Francis Malary an adjoining property owner to the proposed site, stated he was opposed to the use. Ms. Judy Tinglehoff stated she saw drug paraphernalia for sale at .the festival during 1980. Mr. Knutson stated the City had ordinances prohibiting sale. of such materials. Shara Litper, a festival exhibitor stated she was a potter and that drug paraphernalia was not commonly sold at the Renaissance. Mr. Dick Guntzel questioned what limited the Renaissance operation once approved. Mr. Licht stated this would be covered by a PUD zoning contract. Ms. Lora Malary stated her property would be affected on three. sides by the Renaissance and. was opposed to the use. Mr. Charles Dayton reappeared and stated the desire of the residents to keep the property as residential in character. Mr. Licht stated that the audience should be aware of the Interstate Corridor. District zoning which a) lowed any type of use by conditional use permit. Mr. Jim Huey, head of the CRAR reiterated his position not opposing development. • Mr. Pete Fellinden, a farmer from the area, asked when the City would stop moving outward. Don Hess reappeared and stated the audience had many misconceptions of the proposed use. He also stated that a draft EAW had been submitted to the Natural Resources Committee for evaluation. Mr. Licht advised the audience that the Natural Resources Committee would continue its review of the EAW at their meeting on 20 January 1981. Mr. Hess irxlicated a tour of the existing festival-site was being arranged for 17 January. Once more infarmation on the schedule is available, City officials will be notified accordingly. Mr. Licht stated that he wished to,clarify a point raised by Mr y Dayton. No variance is being requested by the applicant, rather a zanipg ordinance text amendment has been requested for the PUD provisions concerpi~g pub,(,ic_services. ~ 81.12 Motion was made by Enright, seconded by Geisness to close the public hearing, bvt to hold the record .open for 15 days for the acceptance of written comments and further discussion on the application to be tabled #o the 22 January meeting \ Mr. Geisness stated he was disappointed the City Council I"rai-son was not present." The Chairman pointed out that Councilman Duane Zaun was preset-and lii~d<been-rat the entire meeting. , Rall call was taken on the motion. Ayes: Unanimous 5 ~ f Lakeville, Minnesota Planning Commission Meeting January 1981 Chairman Harvey opened the public hearing on the application by the City of Lakeville to vacate a part of the road right-of-way on the former Walnut Street, now Holt Avenue. Mr. Knutson attested to the validity of the hearing. The Chairman asked for questions or comments from the audience. No response was received. 81 .13 Motion was made by Rice, seconded by Enright to close the public hearing. Roll call was taken on the motion. Ayes: Unanimous $1.14 Motion was made by Rice, seconded by Enright to recommend to the City Council the vacation of that portion of Walnut Street (now Holt Avenue) as requested by the City of Lakeville, subject t4 the recommendations of the City staff. Roll call was taken on the motion. Ayes: Unanimous 81 .15 Motion was made by Antolik, seconded by Rice to table discussion of items 8 and 9 on the agenda until the 22 January Commission meeting and to adjourn. Roll call was taken on the motion. A es: Unanimous Y ChoiPtrtan Harvey adjourned the meeting at 11`;30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ruin P. Geisness, Secretary AT7 atrick Harvey, C air an b