05-09-1994 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

would lx Zoning File #1923 May 5. 1994 Page 3 As per all conditional use permits approv’cd in a residential zone, signage limiied to 12 square feet. Such signage would be allowed to be double-sided. Per the floor plans submined. Exhibit E, it appears the applicant pn>poses no major alterations of the classroom areas. The Building Official has been asked to inspect the facility and to provide further direction concerning any building or fire code concerns. History of Use of the Facility and Land Use Implicitions In 1989, the Art Center determined the need to sell off the Hill School for private sale in order to meet ceruin financial needs. The Hill School housed the An Center siiKe 1957 and in the early 1970 ’s expanded to tla former elementary schixM to the immediate west. The current owner, Marty Schneider, purchased the property as shown on survey. Exhibit S, in 1989 after the City approved the metes and btHinds division. Prior to the filing of the metes and bounds division, the City received a conditional use permit application from Mr. Schneider seeking duplex use of the struemre. The application was withdrawn. During that review, the City received petitions from several neighbors voicing coiKcm that the former Hill School structure would now revert to residential use rather than being part of an art complex. With the approval of the subdivision, the property was now to revert to single family residential use. Soon after the subdivision was complete, Mr. Schneider advised that the Art Center still wished to continue the use of the facility. Mr. Schneider was advised of the need to file a conditional use permit to allow the continuation of that use. Review Exhibits M. N and O. The application (#1487) was filed in January of 1990 but applicant failed to continue with the review. Review Exhibit P. In September of 1990, both the Art Center and Mr. Schneider terminated their lease agreement. Since that time the facility has housed a day care use at a level that would not require a special conditional use permit. The use is a permitted use in a residential zone. Staff was not aware of a dance school being conducted at the facility at the same time. This use should have been authorized under a conditional use permit. OfTicial Status of the Property As Application #1487, the conditional use permit that would have allowed the continued use of the property for art and dance instruction, was never completed, the City recognized only the approved residential use or the day care that has been conducted at the facility for the last few years. If a fine arts school is to operate from this facility, a conditional use permit would be required. The informal gravel/parking areas were never removed along the east side of the facility but have continued to serve day care users. The required fencing had been inst' ‘.led along the north and west side of the property defining this facility’s parking area as sep • \u from the Minnetonka Art Center. Upon a recent inspection, staff noted the fencing on the west side has been removed. The Art Center has relocated a lighting pole within their parking area. The zoning or land use issues for the current review would be the need to approve a conditional