2017.04.25 CC Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

April 25, 2017 Page 4 of 10 outdoor play area would be constructed outside the northeast corner of the McMillan Center, inside the existing pathway. It is anticipated the use would generate no more than 30 trips at morning drop-off and 30 more trips at afternoon pick-up (50% busses, 50% vehicles). Bus traffic would enter the site from 5th Street NW and leave from Stinson Boulevard. Based on schools of this size, limited (or no) after-school activities or weekend activities would be conducted on the site. Assistant Director of Community Assets and Development/Planning Director Gundlach stated staff provided a full written analysis of the special use permit criteria in the written Planning Report. Staff notes the biggest concerns surround overall size of school, traffic, noise, the playground location, hours of operation, and public safety calls for service. Staff reported the Planning Commission held a lengthy discussion regarding this request and recommends approval of the Special Use Permit, subject to 12 conditions. Councilmember Strub stated he attended the seminary's open house and the Planning Commission meeting. He suggested the applicant be brought forward at this time to explain why they were making this request of the City. Dr. Lou Zeidner, United Theological Seminary, reported the seminary has been in New Brighton for the past 55 years. He reported the seminary trains ministers and chaplains in mainline protestant denominations. He explained 10 years ago he had 200 students on campus on a daily basis. Over the past 10 years, church attendance is down and the call to ministry has changed. In addition, many students are electing to study online. As a result, the seminary has more space than it needs. This has led the seminary to request a Special Use Permit to allow a K-8 school to share the campus. He explained the seminary needed to have an SUP in place prior to pursuing a tenant. He stated the seminary supported all of the conditions as drafted but requested the hours of outdoor play not be restricted. Councilmember Bauman understood the seminary property was valued at $13.3 million. She believed it may be a better option for the seminary to sell off some of their property than to share the campus with an elementary school. She stated the seminary currently had 80 students attending with 20 living on campus. She questioned how many staff and faculty members the seminary had. Dr. Zeidner explained he had 45 staffand faculty members. Councilmember Bauman questioned ifthe seminary would undergo changed to the property prior to finding a tenant. Dr. Zeidner reported no changes would be made to the property until after a tenant was secured. Councilmember Bauman inquired the length of contract the seminary would be pursuing with the K-8 school. She requested that less than 150 students be using the playground during recess hours. Dr. Zeidner stated he would work to have less than 150 students on the playground during lunch hours. He explained the seminary had considered selling off additional land but was working to find a proper balance. Councilmember Bauman indicated she did not support the requested SUP as she did not believe this was the proper use for the seminary property. Councilmember Burg requested further information on the SUP. Assistant Director of Community Assets and Development/Planning Director Gundlach reported the SUP would only be remain valid if acted upon. Councilmember Burg understood the Planning Commission held a long discussion regarding this request. She questioned how staff came up with the 150 number. Assistant Director of Community Assets and Development/Planning Director Gundlach commented this number was determined by staff after concerns were raised by the neighborhood. Councilmember Burg did not believe it was fair to limit the seminary's future tenant the use of the outdoor playground. She believed that the other elementary schools in the City were allowed to use their playgrounds for school functions in the evening hours and requested further comment from on this matter. Councilmember Strub commented on the discussions held regarding this matter from both the Open House and by the Planning Commission. He explained the neighbors had concerns and he believed the conditions set forth by staffoffered a healthy compromise. '— Mayor Johnson questioned ifthe proposed conditions were too limiting. Councilmember Strub believed Condition 6 and Condition 9 were overly restrictive and put an unnecessary burden on the applicant. He understood the City Council wanted to be pro-business and for this reason, he