the village meeting for this proposal thursday at 7:30 on the 3rd floor of the civic center. Neighbors are concerned about the parking and congestion issues.

What kind of school? On the property there or in an existing house?

There is a church at that intersection.

A Montessori school.

where's recess, across the street at pfeutze park?

That's the property I was thinking about....

I suppose you could build a school on a quarter acre. Not too many kids could attend, but you could build it.

I wasn't at the neighborhood meeting but as I understand it is a school for 60 and they plan to renovate the existing church and add more space.

I think there are some misunderstandings about this project. I will post more later to help clarify.

quote:

Originally posted by GE Fan:
I think there are some misunderstandings about this project. I will post more later to help clarify.

I'd like to hear it.

That small church has been there "forever", tho I presume it was sold maybe 5 years ago to a different denomination. In the past 5 years they made small improvements to the property, mostly a small play area and benches on the large open lot.

They have some very limited parking along the alley to the E of the church.

Short version:

Owners of Montessori school want to buy building/land (they will own three lots, two of which are interior lots behind the church) as their lease is up.
Owners of Montessori school want to operate it as a Montessori school.
80 students per-day staggered.
Owners propose building a more accessible driveway as to prevent cars backing up on the village streets.
Owners plan to renovate the inside of the building to make it more school friendly.
Owners have not plans to build additional structures on open land at this time.

That's about it off the top of my head.

Sorry it took so long. I've been swamped.

quote:

Originally posted by GE Fan:
Owners of Montessori school want to buy building/land (they will own three lots, two of which are interior lots behind the church) as their lease is up.
...
Owners propose building a more accessible driveway as to prevent cars backing up on the village streets.

Interesting. I didn't know the church owned so much additional land behind (S and E) of it.

I don't know how to link a Google map, but you can see the location clearly there.
The church is on the SE corner of Park and Hillside, with a large lawn closest to the corner.
There is a gravel driveway to the E of the church building, between the church and a private home that faces Hillside, leading to a gravel parking lot immediately behind that private home. My understanding is that the church owns that lot, and I assume it is one of the "interior lots" referred to.

I'm curious what - if any - additional land the church owns that might be involved in this project.

On the E side of Park S of Hillside, there is a yellowish brick home immediately S of the church. Next to it is a smallish home with a mansard roof. Both of these lots appear to butt up to the parking lot.
The 3d and 4th homes on that block appear to have very long backyards.
Similarly, the second house to the E on Hillside similarly appears to have a very deep lot.

I wonder what and how much of this land is involved in the deal. Perhaps those residents just had the beneficial use of the church's undeveloped lot. I'll have to see if I have plat maps of that area at home.

Then there are the folks on that weird little street Bremer Court. Any development of interior lots would be right in a couple of their backyards.

Having said this, I have no dog in this fight, as I am not one of the few people who will be potentially affected. Just curious.

You say:

quote:

Owners have not plans to build additional structures on open land at this time.

In your experience do you believe the majority of folks purchase property to NOT develop it?

Hmm - interesting.
Just looked at the village's zoning map available here. (Unless your eyes are a heck of a lot better than mine, you need to enlarge it to at least 400%.)

Looks like the most likely candidates for the lots would be the one on the corner (the church and its front lawn), the parking lot (which is the width of the residential lot E of the church on Hillside and extends behind the first 2 homes S of the church on Park, and a narrow lot running E to W, behind the 4th home S of Park.

Could make for interesting times for the people in the 3d home S of Hillside on Park, or the folks on the S side of Bremer Ct.

quote:

Originally posted by Dinsdale:

In your experience do you believe the majority of folks purchase property to NOT develop it?

I agree with you 100%...but that development, if any, would have to further conform to the code...and given the size of that lot, I don't know what could be developed without variances.

If you look at the map, the subject property encompasses the corner lot, the interior lot that runs diagonally that currently has the parking lot and the other long interior lot that abuts the south end of the parking lot, lot and runs lengthwise.

My understanding is the folks E of the church had the opportunity to buy the parking lot dirt cheap many years ago, but did not act and the offer was subsequently taken off the table.

How do the zoning laws work with respect to a single lot that is made up of multiple parcels? Say, for example, I own 2 lots side by side that are each 40' wide. Because the entire property is wider than 75', do I need a variance? Would it be different if the properties were vacant, already contained one home straddling the lots, or contained 2 homes - one on each lot?
(Hell, given our town I anticipate the answer in any case would be "Let 'em build!")

What I'm getting at is, the 3 lots combined appear to have considerable possibility for development. The largest lot containing the church could hold a much larger structure. Could that structure "spill over" to the interior lots, even tho by themselves they are not buildable? (Not sure how they could snake any construction from the corner church-lot onto the diagonally adjacent parking lot-lot and still have the required setbacks, tho.) Also, I imagine they could could use the interior lots for parking, playgrounds, equipment sheds, etc.

Like I said, I don't really care, I'm just curious. Heck, I can imagine a school likely being a less undesireable neighbor than most churches!

50-80 less children in the District 41 census. Hmm.

I'm sure they already have some of those D41 kids plus most people only send their kids to Montessori from pre-k to 1st grade....sorry ronkas, don't think it would make an impact.

Apparently there was a meeting on the issue last night and it was contentious.

quote:

Originally posted by Clamato:
Apparently there was a meeting on the issue last night and it was contentious.

Contentious is too strong of a word. Passionate, opinionated and well attended is probably a more apt characterization.

Did I say "contentious?"

I meant passionate, opinionated and well-attended.