Laserfiche WebLink
Pl anni ng & Zo ni n g B o ar d <br />Decem ber 8, 2004 <br />Page 3 <br />APPROVED MINUTES <br />Mr. Pogalz asked if a church as appropriate in this resident ial area. Mr. Bengtson replied <br />a church was an appropriate use, but it w ould be up to the Council and this Board to <br />determine if it was appropriate in a residential area. <br /> <br />William Loss, 6956 Lake Drive, stated he w ould rather see some homes built on those <br />lots because of traffic concerns and no connect ions to water and sewer. He stated he was <br />not in favor of this development. <br /> <br />Carol Stanek, 6970 Lake Drive, stated previous ly the owner had wanted to get those lots <br />split and the City would not allow that so that was the reason this was being sold as one <br />lot. She stated it was her understanding that th e City did not want to run utilities to the <br />residential homes. She wondered why it woul d be okay to put sewer and water in for a <br />small church, where it would not be okay to do this for two residential homes. She <br />expressed concern about the safety in the pa rking lot and the lights being on all of the <br />time if there was a safety incident. Mr. Smys er replied there were many areas in the City <br />where utility extensions coul d be put in, but the assessm ent that would be put on a <br />residential area was very expensive and many residents did not want to pay for the <br />assessment and the City could not make a resident put in utilities. He stated that was the <br />reason that they did not allow a lot split. He noted the Church would be charged an <br />assessment for utilities and they were a larger user so they were more able to afford the <br />assessment cost. He stated a church was allowed in this area with a Conditional Use <br />Permit. <br /> <br />Ms. Stanek noted if utilities were unaffordable as one lot, they would be unaffordable as <br />two lots. Mr. Smyser replied there were tw o lots out there now and one of those lots <br />were being sold to the church. He noted there was no subdivision. <br /> <br />Ms. Stanek asked why was the subdivision no t allowed. Mr. Smyser replied it was very <br />difficult to bring utilities to the residential area. <br /> <br />Mr. Pogalz asked if the plan was for the Church to put in a septic system and well. Mr. <br />Smyser replied that was correct. <br /> <br />Dave Knutson, 38 West Golden Lake Road, Ci rcle Pines, stated he represented the <br />congregation that was purchasi ng the lot. He stated they were still waiting on the <br />County’s review and approval, bu t he would be getting everything into them in the next <br />few days. He stated he had left a message for the Stanek’s, but they have not been able to <br />connect yet. He stated they wanted to be as good of a ne ighbor as they could and the <br />light issue was a concern. He stated the lights would be on a motion sensor and they <br />would not be on all night. <br /> <br />Mr. Laden stated one of the concerns was the size of the parking lot. He asked if the <br />parking lot could be reduced. Mr. Knuts on replied he understood they had one excess <br />parking space. <br /> <br />Mr. Bengtson replied in his re port he talked about how th e setbacks were not in the <br />ordinance, but the actual parking requirem ents had to be met whether it was in a