07/10/1996 P&Z Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

• • • Planning & Zoning Board July 10, 1996 Mr. Wyland responded that as long as the footprint of the building does not change substantially, she would not see a need for them to reapply for the later two phases. Mr. Dunn asked if there has been a legal review of Mr. Carlson's situation. Ms. Wyland stated that she does not believe Mr. Carlson's landlocked parcel is a City issue. His options are to negotiate with church officials or purchase other property. Mr. Dunn asked if there are any neighborhood issues to be resolved. Mr. Tim Yantos, Chair of Shoreview Covenant Church Development Committee, stated that he is not aware of any concerns of the residents. He stated that the church would be in favor of reasonable discussions with Mr. Carlson. Past discussions have not been advantageous to the church's building plans. Mr. Dunn asked if there is an environmental impact analysis for surface water drainage. Mr. Ahrens stated that an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) is not required for this project. Encroachment on wetlands and storm water ponding have been reviewed by the Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD). Ms. Wyland noted that the church had a wetland delineation prepared and is in the process of getting all necessary approvals from the RCWD. One concern is the name of Shoreview as part of the name of the church. Church representatives are considering a name change, but the City would not require it. Mr. Rick Carlson stated that when he built Woodridge Estates, he excluded the now landlocked parcel because he thought the area would be developed as residential. He has no objections to the church development but feels slighted if he is left out of options. He met with church officials in 1993, who indicated that the church is not interested in any type of land exchange. The property owner to the south has indicated that he is not interested in selling any property. He requested the Planning Board to grant him more time to resolve this issue. A meeting was scheduled for the previous week but did not take place. If the project is passed with a recommendation to negotiate, he does not believe the church will want to negotiate. He also approached the previous owner of the church property about purchasing it. That property owner was difficult to work with, and negotiations were unsuccessful. If his property remains landlocked, it will be worthless. Chair Schaps noted that there would be something to be gained for the church to work something out with Mr. Carlson. He noted that the church made no counter proposal to Mr. Carlson. He asked the time frame for building the church.