03-06-90 CCM - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Feb 15th, 1990 To: Lake Elmo City Council My wife and I are owners of the 21.6 acres at the southeast corner of highway 36 and county highway 13. The River Valley Christian Church has applied for rezoning of this property for purposes of building a church. I attended the Lake Elmo Planning Commission meeting Feb 12th where the Committee voted to recommend denial of the rezoning application based on the attached findings. I do not have their final version of the recommendation but this one was passed out at the meeting. I would like to point out some shortcomings to the reasons given for denial. 1. "The change is not called for in the Future Land Use Map." That is obvious which is why the rezoning application is being made by the Church. 2. "PF zoning may allow more intensive land use." Usage by other than a church can be limited by approving the rezonig classification conditioned on it being used for a church. Looking at the Lake Elmo Land Use Map you can see that several conditional use permits have been approved in that area. 3.&4. These points I believe were striken at the meeting. However, with respect to the drianage issue, any problem can readily be dealt with in approving the building/landscape plan. In fact the design could actually reduce the exposure to damage which currently exists. 5. This number was missing from the list of reasons. 6. "Traffic Safety" The Minnesota Department of Transportation has indicated that the proposed use does not significantly increase the accident risk. 7."This is desireable residential land." There wasn't any evidence presented to support this conclusion. On the contrary, the property fronts a major highway for a quarter mile. It has high voltage power lines with two towers and a 450' NSP easement through the middle of it. The property has been for sale for four years with three real estate companies and there has not been one person interested in purchasing it to build a house. Even some of the Planning Commission members volunteered that they would not wont to build a home there. 8. "Residents unanimously consider the change a threat to their rural life style." There was nothing unanimous about it. There is no indication that all the residents in the area were asked to vote by those submitting their petition. There are residents with more land adjacent to this property that did not sign this petition than did sign. The rural life style of most of those who did sign have that life style protected by large (2-3 acres), wooded lots. More importantly, a church is consistent with a rural life style and is actually the hallmark of most rural communities.