The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2022-01-13 PCPPLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER VIRTUAL MEETING JANUARY 13, 2022 This VIRTUAL meeting is being conducted by electronic means in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 13D.021. Public access to the Webex meeting is below: Online: logis.webex.com | Phone: (312) 535-8110 Meeting Number (Access Code): 2461 560 4291 Passcode: BCPC01132022 1.Call to Order: 7 p.m. 2.Roll Call of the Year 2021 Planning Commission 3.Approval of Agenda a.Motion to Approve Planning Commission Meeting Agenda for January 13, 2022 4.Approval of Minutes a.Motion to Approve Regular Meeting Minutes for November 18, 2021 b.Motion to Approve Joint Work Session Meeting Minutes for December 14, 2021 c.Motion to Approve Joint Work Session Meeting Minutes for November 30, 2021 d.Motion to Approve Joint Work Session Meeting Minutes for October 26, 2021 e.Motion to Approve Joint Work Session Meeting Minutes for September 30, 2021 f.Motion to Approve Joint Work Session Meeting Minutes for June 29, 2021 5.Official Adjournment of the 2021 Planning Commission 6.Roll Call of the 2022 Planning Commission 7.Election of Planning Commission Chairperson for Year 2022 a.Motion/Second to Nominate Commissioner(s) to serve as Chairperson; b.Motion/Second to close all nominations; c.Conduct election; and d.Motion/Second to Accept the Results and Election of Chair for Year 2022 8.Appointment of 2022 Vice-Chair by Chairperson 9.Chairperson's Explanation The Planning Commission is an advisory body. One of the Commission's functions is to hold public hearings. In the matters concerned in these hearings, the Commission makes recommendations to the City Council. The City Council makes all final decisions in these matters. 10.Planning Items a.Planning Commission Application No. 2022-001 (PUBLIC HEARING) Applicant: Derek Haluptzok (A-Abco Auto Parts Inc) Property Owner: Schmitt Real Estate LLC Project Location: 2400 Freeway Boulevard Summary: The Applicant is requesting review and consideration of a request that would allow for the retail sale of new and used PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER VIRTUAL MEETING JANUARY 13, 2022 This VIRTUAL meeting is being conducted by electronic means in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 13D.021. Public access to the Webex meeting is below: Online: logis.webex.com | Phone: (312) 535-8110 Meeting Number (Access Code): 2461 560 4291 Passcode: BCPC01132022 auto parts warehoused on-site within the existing approximately 50,614-square foot building at 2400 Freeway Boulevard in Brooklyn Center. Said property is zoned I-1 (Industrial Park) District and the requested use is considered a Special Use in the I-1 zoning district; therefore, a special use determination is required per Section 35-330 of the City Code of Ordinances. 11. Discussion Items a. 2022 Planning Commission Schedule b. Projects Update 12. Adjournment PC Minutes 11-18-21 -1- DRAFT MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA NOVEMBER 18, 2021 1. CALL TO ORDER The Planning Commission meeting was called to order by Chair Koenig at 7:12 p.m. The meeting was conducted via Webex. 2. ROLL CALL Chair Alexander Koenig and Commissioners Peter Omari, Stephanie Jones, and Kau Guannu. Commissioners Alfreda Daniels-Juasemai arrived at 7:45 p.m. Commissioner Paris Dunn was absent. City Planner and Zoning Administrator Ginny McIntosh, Community Development Director Meg Beekman, and Associate Planner Olivia Boerschinger were also present. 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA – NOVEMBER 18, 2021 There was a motion by Commissioner Omari, seconded by Chair Koenig, to approve the agenda for the November 18, 2021 meeting as presented. Voting on the motion: Chair Koenig and Commissioners Omari, Jones, and Guannu voted aye. The motion passed unanimously. 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 4a. September 9, 2021 Regular Meeting Minutes There was a motion by Commissioner Omari, seconded by Commissioner Jones, to approve the minutes of the September 9, 2021 meeting as presented. Voting on the motion: Chair Koenig and Commissioners Omari and Jones voted aye. Commissioner Guannu abstained. The motion passed unanimously. 4b. August 12, 2021 Regular Meeting Minutes There was a motion by Commissioner Omari, seconded by Commissioner Jones, to approve the minutes of the August 12, 2021 meeting as presented. Voting on the motion: Chair Koenig and Commissioners Omari and Jones voted aye. Commissioner Guannu abstained. The motion passed unanimously. PC Minutes 11-18-21 -2- DRAFT 5. CHAIR’S EXPLANATION Chair Koenig explained the Planning Commission’s role as an advisory body. One of the Commission’s functions is to hold public hearings. In the matters concerned in these hearings, the Commission makes recommendations to the City Council. The City Council makes all final decisions in these matters. 6. PLANNING APPLICATION ITEMS 6a. Planning Commission Application No. 2021-006 Applicant: McGlynn Partners LLC | ODAA Center LLC Property Address: 6440 James Circle North Summary: The Applicant is requesting review and consideration of a proposal to re-develop the former Earle Brown Bowl property, located at 6440 James Circle North, to an approximately 64,000-square foot mixed office and light industrial building with related site improvements on an approximately 4.03-acre site. The City’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan guides the Subject Property as “Business Mixed-Use”. City Planner Ginny McIntosh reviewed a request for site and building plan, rezoning, and Planned Unit Development for property at 6440 James Circle North, formerly Earle Brown Bowl. The proposal is to redevelop the site into a 64,000 square foot mixed office/light industrial building and related site improvements. The property received a Special Use Permit in 1978 for live entertainment and a bowling alley, and is currently zoned C-2 Commercial District, and the bowling alley has been vacant since the business closed in 2015. Ms. McIntosh stated the property owner, Tashitaa Tufaa, ODAA Center, purchased the property in 2017. Mr. Tufaa submitted requests for Special Use Permits in 2018 and again in 2019 for an event center with restaurant and bar. The re-issued Special Use Permit expired on January 13, 2021. The property owner has been in contact with City Staff and has since partnered with McGlynn Partners LLC and Endeavor Development to bring this proposal forward. The City Council reviewed the concept and provided feedback in May 2021. Ms. McIntosh stated the City’s Zoning Code is currently undergoing extensive updates to bring it into alignment with the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. The proposed land use designation would guide the property for a mix of business and light industrial and would support retail and service uses. No residential uses would be allowed, but there could be potential opportunities for limited live/work spaces. The property has three front yard setbacks which have been reviewed by City Staff using the existing Light Industrial zone setback requirements. Due to site constraints and multiple frontages, certain building setback flexibilities would be needed. The proposal meets the minimum 15-foot Green Strip requirement. Ms. McIntosh stated the development was reviewed using architectural design guidance derived from Shingle Creek Crossing, includes Class 1 and Class 2 building materials, consisting of PC Minutes 11-18-21 -3- DRAFT recast concrete panels and glazing/glass. City Staff has requested that plans be revised to include enhanced architectural features and address screening concerns, as well as additional glazing and design elements around the building entrance and on all four sides. Fencing along the east property line will be required. City Staff is requesting the removal of a proposed curb cut off of Freeway Boulevard. The proposal meets minimum drive aisle and parking requirements, and there is opportunity for additional parking on site if needed. Ms. McIntosh stated City Staff reviewed similar speculative developments in Maple Grove and Brooklyn Park to determine overall parking requirements. City Staff recommends that distribution facilities be prohibited as a use, with the exception of cases where it is an accessory use for a manufacturing facility or warehouse where a product is made or packaged on-site. A minimum twenty percent finish level would also be required upon full lease-up of the building. City Staff is also requesting diagrams showing turn radius for semi-trucks and garbage trucks. Ms. McIntosh stated a photometric plan was provided which meets all lighting requirements, with the exception of the southeast area of the site abutting the Quality Inn, where lighting appears to exceed maximum candles allowed for residential zoning. City Staff is recommending that lighting at that location be reduced to below three foot-candles, and lighting is recommended for the sidewalk connection at Freeway Boulevard. Ms. McIntosh stated City Staff is recommending that the applicant be required to provide additional details regarding the trash enclosure to the southeast, and all on-site equipment must be screened per Code requirements. Fencing along the rear or east property line will be required; and no outside storage or display or products will be allowed. Landscaping plans will be required to comply with the City's landscape point system policy, and installation of an irrigation system will be required. The applicant will be required to meet City Sign Code requirements, which is currently undergoing an update. Ms. McIntosh stated a memo with comments was provided by Assistant City Engineer Andrew Hogg, including the requirement of a watershed plan and MPCA permit; new stormwater pond at the southwest corner, and drafting of a utility facilities easement agreement and construction management plan and agreement. The fire inspector and building official provided a Building Review memo dated November 12, 2021, which includes compliance Sewer Access Charge requirements; Minnesota Accessibility Code; and 2020 Minnesota Fire and Building Codes. Ms. McIntosh stated public hearing notice was published in the Sun Post on November 4, 2021 and notices were sent to adjacent properties. Development signs were installed on the property. City Staff have not received any public comments. Ms. McIntosh stated City Staff recommends Planning Commission recommendation of City Council approval of site and building plan, rezoning, and Planned Unit Development for the property at 6440 James Avenue North based on submitted plans and findings of fact. Ms. McIntosh stated Commissioner Daniels-Juasemai joined the meeting 7:45 p.m. PC Minutes 11-18-21 -4- DRAFT Brian Schack stated he represents Endeavor Development, working with Patrick McGlynn, to develop a speculative industrial business park. He added Endeavor was launched in 2021 and is currently involved in five projects in what has become a very busy market. He added this development will fill gaps in the market and provide benefit to the City of Brooklyn Center, creating local jobs, and allowing local businesses to expand and stay in Brooklyn Center. Brian stated the development will be a sustainable product with many materials locally resourced and created. Energy efficient materials will be used to reduce potential heat island effect; LED lighting will be on timers and motion sensors and low flow water fixtures will be installed. Native drought tolerant plant materials will be used in landscaping, and the asphalt on site will be used as fill to reduce materials disposal. OPEN TO PUBLIC COMMENTS – APPLICATION NO. 2021-006 There was a motion by Commissioner Omari, seconded by Commissioner Jones, to open the public hearing on Application No. 2021-006. Voting on the motion: Chair Koenig and Commissioners Omari, Jones, Daniels-Juasemai, and Guannu voted aye. The motion passed unanimously. Anita, Manager at CES Imaging, stated she joined the meeting to learn more about the project. Another resident stated she joined the call to hear what is happening in the neighborhood. No other public comments were provided during the public hearing portion of the meeting. MOTION TO CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENTS (HEARING) There was a motion by Commissioner Omari, seconded by Chair Koenig, to close the public hearing on Application No. 2021-006. Voting on the motion: Chair Koenig and Commissioners Omari, Jones, Daniels-Juasemai, and Guannu voted aye. The motion passed unanimously. Commissioner Jones requested clarification regarding the previous use of the property since the mixed-use zone will be a new zoning designation. Ms. McIntosh stated the property was formerly Earle Brown Bowl and is currently zoned C-2 Commerce District. She added the current zoning would be changing anyway under the new Zoning Code, as the 2040 Comprehensive Plan designates future land use guidance of Business Mixed Use for the entirety of James Circle. Commissioner Jones asked whether the existing hotels will be allowed to continue under the new zoning. Ms. McIntosh confirmed this, adding the 2040 Comprehensive Plan identifies this area as an area of potential change and development within the next 20 years. PC Minutes 11-18-21 -5- DRAFT Commissioner Daniels-Juasemai asked whether there have been any comments or concerns from other nearby businesses about this property. Ms. McIntosh stated there have been comments over the years related to graffiti, trash, towing, and uncut grass for the Subject Property since the bowling alley closed. She added notices were sent to adjacent businesses and properties, and development signs were erected on the site, but no comments were received. Commissioner Omari stated this property has been reviewed twice already by the City, and nothing happened. He asked how this proposal is different. Ms. McIntosh stated the previous proposals from property owner Mr. Tufaa were for an event center, restaurant, and bar. She added this proposal from applicant McGlynn Partners and Endeavor is for a different type of development and they were not previously involved on the event center proposals. Mr. Schack stated it is his assumption that the timing was not appropriate for an event center due to the pandemic. He added the proposed product type is a good complement to the area. He noted he is unsure about the specifics of the other two applications. Commissioner Omari asked whether Mr. Schack represents the applicant or the developer. Ms. McIntosh stated the applicant is McGlynn Partners and the property owner is Mr. Tufaa with ODAA Center. Mr. Schack is with Endeavor Development, who is co-developing with McGlynn Partners. Chair Koenig asked whether requirements regarding turnaround of emergency vehicles have been resolved. Ms. McIntosh confirmed this. Commissioner Omari stressed the importance of ensuring that there will be emergency access and people will be safe if this development is built. Ms. McIntosh stated the proposed building would be twice the size of the existing building but laid out differently. She added City Staff is recommending the closing of the proposed new access from Freeway Boulevard and noted that the east portion of the property should have sufficient turnaround ability given that the loading docks are on that side. Commissioner Omari asked, with regard to Mr. Schack’s presentation, whether hiring local is purely speculative. Ms. McIntosh stated the City of Brooklyn Center does not have a policy in place that would require private companies to hire locally. Mr. Schack stated the proposed contractor is R.J. Ryan, a large local contractor. He added all subcontractors would be local, and the majority of workers on the site will be local people. Chair Koenig stated, under Item 2, distribution facilities are not a permitted use under this Planned Unit Development. He asked whether that can be modified. PC Minutes 11-18-21 -6- DRAFT Ms. McIntosh stated City Staff reviewed various factors including traffic, surrounding businesses, job creation and differences between various uses. She added Brooklyn Park had the same language regarding distribution facilities and speculative development. She noted the no distribution facility requirement comes from City Staff. Chair Koenig asked whether this is a lease arrangement. He asked who has an interest in ensuring that the development is successful once it is completed. He asked who owns the building. Mr. Schack stated both parties have a mutual interest in the success of the project. He added the existing property owner, ODAA, will remain as the owner of the project. He added Mr. McGlynn may be part of the ownership structure. Chair Koenig asked whether there will be speculative uses in the building, including office use. He added Ms. McIntosh had indicated a minimum 20-percent finish level. Ms. McIntosh stated City Staff have had several discussions with the City Council regarding demand for light industrial use, including a recent presentation from Julie Kimble of KimbleCo. She added the 20-percent finish level minimum would be for finished space, such as office space. Chair Koenig stated a building that can be configured to various uses is a positive step, and it would be salient to go lighter on office space compared to other uses. Chair Koenig stated there is a requirement that the applicant must provide details of any amendments prior to City Council approval. He asked whether these issues will be reviewed by the Planning Commission instead of giving an open agreement now. Ms. McIntosh stated there is a condition that any major changes or modifications to conditions of approval would require further City Council review and approval. ACTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION NO. 2021-006 SUBMITTED BY MCGLYNN PARTNERS LLC. There was a motion by Commissioner Jones, seconded by Commissioner Daniels-Juasemai, to recommend City Council approval of Planning Commission Application 2021-006 for site and building plan, rezoning and Planned Unit Development for 6440 James Circle North. Voting on the motion: Chair Koenig and Commissioners Omari, Jones, Daniels-Juasemai, and Guannu voted aye. And the following voted against the same: None The motion passed unanimously. PC Minutes 11-18-21 -7- DRAFT 7. DISCUSSION ITEMS 7a. Upcoming Joint Planning and Housing Commission Work Sessions (November 30 and December 14) Ms. McIntosh stated joint work sessions of the Planning and Housing Commissions are set for November 30 and December 14 at 6:30 p.m. She added the meetings will include a presentation from Bolton & Menk and as requested should not take longer than 1.5 hours. 7b. December 9 Planning Commission Meeting Ms. McIntosh stated the December 9, 2021 meeting will probably be cancelled, as the only pending planning case will be moved to the January 2022 meeting. 7c. 2022 Planning Commission Schedule Ms. McIntosh stated the 2022 Planning Commission meetings will be held on the second full Thursday of each month, and January 13, 2022 will be the first scheduled meeting. She agreed to email meeting invitations to all Commissioners when the schedule has been finalized by the City Clerk. She noted there have been discussions about resuming in-person meetings. Commissioner Daniels-Juasemai asked when there was discussion about resuming in-person meetings. She added the number of Covid cases in Minnesota is increasing. Ms. McIntosh stated this issue was discussed at a recent City Council meeting. She added she prefers in-person meetings, but she fully understands the need for remote meetings due to the pandemic. She agreed to keep the Commission updated on further discussions. Chair Koenig stated there were plans for the City to acquire technology and equipment to increase digital capability for remote meetings. Ms. McIntosh confirmed this, adding the equipment is being installed in Council Chambers, which is where the Planning Commission meetings are held. Chair Koenig stated he agrees that in-person engagement and meetings are more effective, but they can be inconvenient and the negative impacts of Covid must be taken into account. He added he hopes that facilities and access can be made available so Commissioners and residents can participate as much as possible. 8. ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Omari wished everyone a Happy Thanksgiving. There was a motion by Commissioner Jones, seconded by Commissioner Daniels-Juasemai, to adjourn the Planning Commission meeting. PC Minutes 11-18-21 -8- DRAFT Voting on the motion: Chair Koenig and Commissioners Omari, Jones, Daniels-Juasemai, and Guannu voted aye. The motion passed unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 8:51 p.m. _______________________________ _______________________________ Ginny McIntosh, Secretary Alexander Koenig, Chair MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND HOUSING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND STATE OF MINNESOTA JOINT WORK SESSION DECEMBER 14, 2021 CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center Planning Commission/Housing Commission Joint Work Session was called to order by Chair Koenig at 6:38 p.m. ROLL CALL Planning Commission Chair Alexander Koenig and Commissioners Stephanie Jones, Peter Omari and Kau Guannu were present. Commissioners Alfreda Daniels-Juasemai and Paris Dunn were absent. Housing Commission Commissioners Michael Donnelly, Zarita Hester, Paul Oman, and Johnson Yang were present. Chair Mark Goodell and Commissioner De’Ja’ Carter were absent. Others Present: Community Development Director Meg Beekman and City Planner Ginny McIntosh. Also present were Mike Thompson and Haila Maze, Bolton & Menk. RECAP OF ZONING CODE REVIEW Mr. Thompson stated several Zoning Code review sessions have been held over the past few months since October 26, 2021. He added tonight's review will cover signs, zoning, and subdivision procedures, and other specific procedures. WORK SESSION #3 WALK THROUGH a. Section 6 - Signs Mr. Thompson stated Section 6 of the Zoning Code focuses on signs and establishes comprehensive standards and procedures governing signs. He added signs are considered free speech as ruled by the Supreme Court in the case of Reed v. Town of Gilbert, determining that cities can regulate dimensional aspects of signs but cannot dictate sign content, as signs are an extension of free speech. He noted the draft Zoning Code affirms compliance with federal and State laws related to neutral content and freedom of expression. Mr. Thompson stated the draft code outlines criteria necessary for signs with a fairly standard approach. He added City Staff and consultants met with local business owners last year to get feedback and comments. 12/14/2021 Page 2 Mr. Thompson reviewed the City’s process for approval for signs, with preliminary application review by City Planner Ginny McIntosh, who works with applicants to bring their application into compliance in preparation for the permitting process. b. Section 7 – Zoning and Subdivision Procedures Mr. Thompson stated Section 7 of the draft code addresses zoning and subdivision procedures; establishes the review and decision-making powers of the Planning Commission; establishes application requirements; and regulates design standards and Planned Unit Developments (PUD). He added this affirms the Planning Commission’s role in decision making, granting powers and duties based on the City Charter, and ultimately affirming the City Council’s official decision-making authority. He noted applications are reviewed by the zoning administrator and forwarded to the Planning Commission for review and recommendation, and on to the City Council for determination. Mr. Thompson stated the appeals process is clarified, which is governed by State and federal regulations. He stressed the importance of aligning the draft code with State statutes as outlined in Section 7. Ms. Beekman stated, from a procedural standpoint, she would like to review how PUDs are handled as they are cumbersome and require a Code amendment and can take a long time to process. She added it is impossible to process a PUD within the required time frame. She noted changes to the PUD would require an amendment of City Council policy. Ms. McIntosh stated an issue with PUDs is the way the language is currently written with regard to changing processes, so there is confusion in that regard. She added the trigger for site and plan approval is also confusing as it addresses building improvements and expansions, but not necessarily site improvements, even when they are large scale alterations. Mr. Thompson stated the goal of Section 7 is to improve efficiency by updating code language to reduce ambiguity, ensuring that City Staff and leadership are not put in a difficult spot. He added the section focuses on subdivision design standards to align with the Comprehensive Plan and new city street design standards. c. Section 8 – Specific Procedures Mr. Thompson stated Section 8 of the draft code, “Specific Procedures”, could be called “Other Procedures”, and incorporates public notice, public hearings, Comprehensive Plan adoption, and UDO amendments, as well as public notice for DNR-mandated environmental protections. He added this section affirms these processes. He added the public notice process requires notice in the City’s official newspaper as well as a notice sent to property owners in the mail. He noted there has been conversation in the past about expanding the notice process. Chair Koenig stated it can be difficult to provide notice to a community and reach everyone, and often people feel that they have been excluded. He added it is important to give effective notice 12/14/2021 Page 3 due to potential liability issues. He noted it can be tempting for developers to cut corners to meet timelines, but he supports looking for ways to enhance and modify the notification process. Commissioner Hester stated notice is published in the Sun Post but should also be posted in other places. She added not everyone reads the Sun Post, and notice should be posted in places where people get their information, so they can feel like they are a part of what is going on. She noted the newspaper limits who is able to see the notice. Mr. Thompson stated this issue and other systemic concerns have been discussed by City Staff. He added people who have historically been excluded from the process should be aware of what is happening in the City. He noted public noticing can be a way of ensuring that the process is enhanced to increase public awareness. Chair Koenig stated there will be substantial housing developments, including affordable housing, in Brooklyn Center over the next few years. He added he agrees that people do not have access to the Sun Post of a regular basis. He stressed the importance of bridging those gaps. Mr. Thompson requested feedback about how residents currently get information about what is going on in the City. He asked whether people are effectively getting information. Chair Koenig stated City Staff have been doing flyers, community events, and using online social media to do outreach. He added word of mouth is more effective than publishing a notice in the Sun Post. Commissioner Hester stated she agrees the City website is a good place to publish notices, but some families do not have access to computers. She added it is a good idea to post notices in places that are easily accessible for people to see, and where they get their information, and to use as many different forms of communication as possible. She stressed the importance of thinking outside the box. Ms. McIntosh stated City Staff is required to follow State statute and publish notices in the City’s official newspaper. She added other methods have also been used, including putting up signage on sites for building projects and new construction to increase awareness. She noted there should be some standardization and a more detailed process. Chair Koenig stated on-site signage is always terrific, although there could be inequities related to perimeter and distance, and traffic visibility. Ms. McIntosh stated the Sun Post is the City’s official publication, and City Staff sends notices to properties that would be affected by a proposal as well as property owners. She added thresholds that would trigger a neighborhood meeting could be determined as part of a new notification policy. She noted City Staff can look at other cities to see what they are doing, to form a base line above the minimum State requirements. City staff has to be careful about going above and beyond the minimum outlined notice requirements when no other policies are in place and in situations where a similar level of notification would not be given for another project. 12/14/2021 Page 4 Mr. Thompson stated Section 7 covers the Comprehensive Plan process and UDO amendments, which are triggered by criteria including zoning applications and rezoning; proposed changes to zoning districts; Planning Commission recommendations, and City Council approval. Mr. Thompson stated recorded versions of these presentations are available on the project website, along with the entirety of the zoning code content, and the project webpage will be added to the City website. He added the zoning code document will be revised and updated over time. NEXT STEPS Mr. Thompson stated a City Council work session is tentatively scheduled for January 10, 2022, to provide summaries of the joint work sessions. He added public outreach materials will be provided including an interactive zoning map. He noted a final community meeting is planned to be scheduled in early 2022, after which the UDO and recommendation will be reviewed for adoption by the City Council. Mr. Thompson encouraged participants to visit the Becoming Brooklyn Center website and click on the Zoning tab to view videos of the review sessions. Mr. Thompson thanked all the work session participants and expressed his appreciation for their thoughts and comments. ADJOURNMENT There was a motion by Commissioner Hester, seconded by Commissioner Donnelly, to adjourn the Planning Commission/Housing Commission Joint Work Session at 6:54 p.m. Voting on the motion: Planning Commission Chair Koenig and Commissioners Guannu, Omari and Jones; and Housing Commission Commissioners Donnelly, Hester, Oman, and Yang voted aye. The motion passed unanimously. _______________________________ _______________________________ Ginny McIntosh, Secretary Alexander Koenig, Chair MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND HOUSING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND STATE OF MINNESOTA JOINT WORK SESSION NOVEMBER 30, 2021 CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center Planning Commission/Housing Commission Joint Work Session was called to order by Chair Koenig at 6:46 p.m. ROLL CALL Planning Commission Chair Alexander Koenig and Commissioners Stephanie Jones and Paris Dunn were present. Commissioners Peter Omari, Alfreda Daniels-Juasemai, and Kau Guannu were absent and excused. Housing Commission Commissioners Michael Donnelly and Zarita Hester were present. Chair Mark Goodell and Commissioners, De’ja Carter, Johnson Yang, and Paul Oman were absent and excused. Others Present: Community Development Director Meg Beekman, City Planner Ginny McIntosh, Associate Planner Olivia Boerschinger, and Deputy Community Development Director Jesse Anderson. Also present were Mike Thompson and Haila Maze, Bolton & Menk. ZONING CODE REVIEW Mr. Thompson, Bolton & Menk, thanked the attendees for joining the work session tonight. He added he wanted to acknowledge that there’s a lot going on in Brooklyn Center at the moment, and he appreciated everyone that took the time to attend. He noted this evening’s session will include a review of two sections of the Code – regulations, and development standards and incentives. Mr. Thompson reviewed Use Regulations, a section that establishes land uses allowed in each zoning district - which uses are permitted, conditional, interim, or accessory, and use-specific standards. Use-specific standards includes residential, commercial and non-residential standards. Federal regulations apply to some standards, including telecommunications and sexually- oriented uses. Mr. Thompson requested that City Staff ensure that the City Attorney reviews the proposed language to confirm that there are no conflicts with State or federal laws. Ms. Beekman stated the use table is comprehensive and contains permitted uses, conditional uses, temporary uses, and accessory uses in City Code. There are no substantive changes from the current Code except for updates to some definitions. The Zoning Code is a work in progress, and any amendments can be brought forward to change the use table. 11/30/2021 Page 2 Haila Maze, Bolton & Menk, stated amended definitions are important to review as the terms are not necessarily self-explanatory and can be explained multiple ways. She added that is further down in the review process, but definitions can matter a great deal. Chair Koenig stated he has looked through the documents and it is complex. He asked whether there are any significant changes that should be highlighted for the Commissioner’s consideration. He added, for example the change to sexually-oriented use from adult use. He noted that change could have connotations in terms of applicability. Ms. Beekman stated any new uses were not previously included in the Code, but the parcels exist today so they would be rezoned. She added, for example, a commercial use would be changed to mixed-use, which expands the allowable uses that are possible there. She noted the Zoning Code would allow single family homes in the mixed-use zone along Brooklyn Boulevard to be used for businesses purposes, acknowledging that over time, uses will be mixed. Chair Koenig stated mixed-use is being recommended in several different areas, and is an over- arching theme, which is very common in many other metro areas. Ms. Beekman stated the mixed-use business district would embrace many additional land uses, including light industrial, retail, restaurants and hotels, but would not include residential use or stand-alone distribution and warehouse centers. She added the mixed-use district is an attempt to intensify land uses within the district and have higher job density per acre, driving it toward businesses that have more finished space. Ms. Beekman stated the industrial use district is for heavier industrial, warehouse, distribution, and outdoor storage, and is confined to the southern part of the City. Mr. Thompson stated redevelopment standards for each zoning district cover building and site aesthetic components, parking requirements, and landscape expectations. The goal is to establish legal framework of development standards within each zoning district. This will provide regulations and guidance for general building standards; development incentives; operating and maintenance standards; exterior lighting; parking and driveway; and landscape, screening and fencing. Mr. Thompson stated development incentives include building height, lot coverage, and parking reduction. He added the City can explore other development incentives, and more districts could be included in incentives. He asked feedback and comments from the Commissioners related to development incentives. Chair Koenig stated he supports landscape incentives for environmental reasons and beautification. Mr. Thompson stated landscaping elements will be discussed as an additional incentive category. He added greater density in exchange for LEED certification or stormwater management can also be considered. He noted the City would be declaring its priorities, but a development can pick and choose what bonuses they are seeking. 11/30/2021 Page 3 Chair Koenig stated he supports moving forward with incentives. He added environmental sustainability is important and can be used as an incentive for a developer to provide green space or walkable space. Commissioner Hester stated she would support incentives for developers to create affordable units. Mr. Thompson stated a developer of a multi-family development would have a certain threshold of affordability that would allow them to build a higher or larger building or reduce parking spaces. Ms. Beekman stated this is an attempt to provide incentives to developers to build into their products residential or commercial affordability, or environmental sustainability. She added the duration of affordability should be considered, as an incentive program could become pointless if the cost of providing affordable units outweighs the benefits. Mr. Thompson stated an incentive program can be unattainable, because of duration and threshold limitations. He added it will be necessary to review the proposed changes with other stakeholders before anything is finalized. Ms. Maze stated this will probably end up being revisited over time, because it should be as meaningful and impactful as possible. Commissioner Jones asked in the chat function, “Would this also be where we incentivize BIPOC businesses or developers?” Mr. Thompson stated he has not seen that in a Zoning Code, and he is unsure whether that would be possible. He added there would be complexities in terms of finding eligible financing partners. Ms. Beekman stated City Staff are working on a BIPOC procurement policy, which would become part of the City’s public subsidy policy. She added the City would provide financial assistance to a project that meets minimum requirements for BIPOC and female developers, contracting and construction companies. She noted this would be a voluntary program that would fit in with public subsidies. Ms. Beekman stated, at a previous work session, there was discussion regarding historic racism built into zoning laws. She added early land use law required race-neutral language in zoning codes. She noted it is worth exploring as an incentive because that would be voluntary, but to require BIPOC developers or businesses could be problematic. Chair Koenig stated the concept of incentivization is more of an exchange; for example, a taller building in exchange for something the city is encouraging or desiring. He asked whether Commissioner Jones is asking about providing opportunities for subsidies and financing to be able to compete with larger developers. He added the City incentivizes a certain category of 11/30/2021 Page 4 developer and financing because of the nature of the city, which tends to be mid- to lower- income. He noted return for financers and developers is lower. Ms. Beekman agreed that is a barrier. She added it would be problematic to allow developers to build a taller building because they are people of color. She added she is not suggesting it is a bad idea. Chair Koenig stated he understands the benefits in offering incentives to a specific group of people, but there are different ways to approach it and offer opportunity to certain developers. Ms. Beekman stated City-owned EDA land would be a good place to start because the City has more discretion in how that land is used. She added it is worth looking at programs in St. Paul and Minneapolis, so reviewing their programs and how they are set up will be worth looking into. Mr. Thompson stated the old City Code establishes a series of parking minimums, while the new updated Code would seek to balance minimums and set maximums on commercial uses or removing minimums entirely, which many cities are doing. He added the old parking Code is difficult to navigate. He asked whether the Commissioners feel that the amount of existing parking across the City feels appropriate. Chair Koenig stated there are certain areas in the City where there is sufficient parking, but not excess parking. He added he would fall on the side of caution, even though other cities are shedding their minimum parking requirements because they are running out of space and want to continue to develop. He noted he would support reducing minimums but not doing away with them, keeping an eye toward the future when there may be a need for more parking. He noted he would hesitate to do away with parking requirements. Commissioner Hester stated she agrees with Chair Koenig’s comments. Mr. Thompson asked what areas Chair Koenig had in mind when he mentioned certain areas where parking is an issue. Chair Koenig stated he is thinking of the triplexes on Brooklyn Boulevard and the Wangsted Commons development. He added the City has received public feedback about on-street parking in this area, and nearby residents are concerned that the parking will spill over into their neighborhoods. Ms. Beekman stated rents are lower in Brooklyn Center than other communities, and developers have to convince investors to fund projects that will show a return on investment. She added developers must cut costs to induce investment, or have a bigger building, and one way to cut costs is in parking requirements. She noted this will be a theme that is seen in Brooklyn Center for the foreseeable future. Chair Koenig stated parking will be an issue in commercial, mixed-use, and residential districts. He added it should be relatively predictable to determine where parking will be an issue. He 11/30/2021 Page 5 stressed the importance of balancing the need to decrease parking but keeping future uses in mind. Ms. Beekman stated transit-oriented development or TOD districts will be denser, urban areas with on-street parking. She added lower parking ratios in that district would be acceptable, but not in multi-family developments in suburban areas. Chair Koenig stated a happy medium is where the City should be right now regarding parking and predicting a little bit into the future. He added St. Paul and Minneapolis reduced the requirement for parking because they are out of space, but Brooklyn Center does have a choice. Mr. Thompson stated another consideration is whether the equation changes when a new development project is within close proximity to transit. Mr. Thompson asked whether there is any interest from the Commissioners in allowing projects to include street parking as part of parking calculations for development. Chair Koenig stated he would not support that option because whatever parking might be available during development might not always be available as the City continues to grow. He added he is not opposed to it in terms of progress and need for parking. Mr. Thompson stated, with regard to Landscaping, the old Code sets a scoring system that is difficult for City Staff to administer. Many updated codes set spacing regulations based on square feet of " landscape planting area", or the area not devoted to building site, driveways, sidewalks, parking and loading, and other similar elements. He added updated Codes set a series of district-specific landscape expectations. Ms. McIntosh stated the current requirements are based on providing a certain amount of diversity of trees, shrubs and plantings, but does not count perennials. She added there is a lack of variety and creativity, even though developers meet the minimum requirements. Commissioner Hester asked whether there are any requirements related to health in addition to opacity of hedges. Mr. Thompson confirmed there is a requirement for 40% screening and vegetation throughout the year at a minimum of five feet in height. He added that is addressed under Screening. He noted transit-oriented developments and mixed-use districts may not have adequate space to meet landscape requirements, so a value system is being considered, similar to that which is used in the City of Hopkins. Mr. Thompson stated City Staff can re-evaluate this approach and customize it by project. He added this is a starting point. Commissioner Hester stated trees and plants are a good idea, but developments can be enhanced it in many other ways as well. She added she supports some flexibility and discussion regarding landscaping when working with developers. 11/30/2021 Page 6 Ms. Beekman stated Hopkins has had success in their downtown area because it is an area of dense development. She added they have included public art projects, enhanced streetscaping, and pedestrian improvements. Commissioner Hester stated public art and other improvements provide the development with more personality. She added community artists can be invited to get involved, bringing more of a connection between the community and the development. Mr. Thompson stated these zoning materials can be found on the website, www.becomingbrooklyncenter.com/zoning. He added all materials from the last session are publicly available including a recorded video, and comments and questions. He noted information from today’s session will be added for additional review. He thanked everyone who joined the meeting. Chair Koenig thanked Mr. Thompson for his beneficial and understandable presentation. Ms. McIntosh stated the next joint work session is scheduled for December 14, 2021. ADJOURNMENT Chair Koenig adjourned the Planning Commission/Housing Commission Joint Work Session at 8:29 p.m. _______________________________ _______________________________ Ginny McIntosh, Secretary Alexander Koenig, Chair MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND HOUSING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND STATE OF MINNESOTA JOINT WORK SESSION OCTOBER 26, 2021 CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center Planning Commission/Housing Commission Joint Work Session was called to order by Chair Goodell at 6:30 p.m. ROLL CALL Planning Commission Commissioners Kau Guannu and Stephanie Jones were present. Chair Alexander Koenig and Commissioners Alfreda Daniels-Juasemai, Paris Dunn, and Peter Omari were absent. Housing Commission Chair Mark Goodell and Commissioner Zarita Hester were present. Commissioners Kathie Amdahl, De’Ja’ Carter, Michael Donnelly, Paul Oman, and Johnson Yang were absent. Others Present: Community Development Director Meg Beekman and City Planner Ginny McIntosh. Also present was Haila Maze, Bolton & Menk. ZONING CODE REVIEW Haila Maze, Bolton & Menk, stated this evening’s work session will include a review of zoning code content and an overview of the schedule. She added these meetings are meant to be informational and conversational and questions or comments are welcome. She noted the intent is to ensure that the code aligns with the Comprehensive Plan. Ms. Maze stated the code has been amended over the years but not in a comprehensive manner and improvements are overdue. The code should be clear and easy to use for City Staff and the public, as well as up to date with all current standards. The code will continue to be modified over the years and will be codified as a Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) that incorporates the Zoning Code, Subdivision Ordinance, and Sign Code. Chair Goodell asked how updates to the code would be regulated. Ms. Maze stated it would not be a scheduled system, but topics come up during development processes when codes are under review. This will be an ongoing process that might require research and time. Ms. Beekman stated issues will be elevated throughout the process that will require further thought and discussion. She added one example of this is a potential list of development 10/26/2021 Page 2 incentives which can be added to the Zoning Code. She noted there will be many opportunities to amend the zoning code. Ms. Beekman stated cities are legally required by State law to ensure that their Zoning Code is in alignment with the Comprehensive Plan. Ms. Maze stated Sections 1 and 2 will be reviewed at tonight’s meeting. Section 1 addresses General Provisions, establishes the legal authority of the document, and how the document will be used. This section includes definition of terms. Section 2 addresses Zoning Districts, establishing parameters for zoning districts, setting the authority of the zoning map, and clarifying changes to zoning districts. Business and mixed-use districts have been greatly modified, and a variety of housing choices and densities are encouraged. Ms. Beekman stated the new business districts will affect commercial property the most, and City Staff have tried as much as possible to support businesses that are considered non- conforming. This will be a continuing process as land use and zoning districts continue to be discussed. Chair Goodell requested clarification regarding the term PUD. Ms. Maze stated existing PUDs approved by the City in the past were applied as part of the approval process. Ms. Beekman stated Planned Unit Development, or PUD, is the rezoning of a single parcel of land to allow for a specific type of development. A PUD allows for a flexible review process when a project is larger or more complex. The city can give flexibility in return for development aspects. A Commissioner stated Lakeside Park, near Upper Twin Lake, is not identified as park land on the zoning map. He added that should be designated park land. Ms. Maze thanked the Commissioner for spotting that. She added all parks were previously zoned single family residential and will now be designated as open space. A Commissioner requested clarification regarding the Allowed Use Table, which is referenced throughout the text but is not shown. Ms. Beekman stated this will be covered under Sections 4 and 5 at the next joint work session. Ms. Beekman stated the existing zoning code is posted on the City website for comparison purposes. She added the dimensional standards table could perhaps be provided when that section of the Code is reviewed. Ms. Maze noted that allowable heights in the zoning districts should be reviewed. Ms. Beekman stated there are some buildings in the mixed-use commercial district that are taller than 48 feet. She added there is a step-down requirement and additional setbacks for any district that abuts an R-1 or R-2 district. 10/26/2021 Page 3 Ms. McIntosh stated The Crest is within the mixed-use commercial district, and that is a 13-story building. Ms. Maze stated the height requirement would have to change, or the building would be legal non-conforming. Ms. Beekman stated higher heights should be allowed in that district. Chair Goodell stated Brooklyn Center is a first ring suburb that is becoming more urban. He asked whether this will be addressed in consequent Comprehensive Plans. Ms. Beekman agreed the City should be forward thinking, but it is not difficult to change the zoning code. Ms. Maze agreed the code is fairly straightforward and easy to modify, but it is a good idea to be as clear as possible in the code as a signal to developers about what the City wants and will accept in each designation. Chair Goodell asked what is the difference between mixed use N-1 and N-2. Ms. Maze stated the N-2 is larger format commercial than N-1. She added it is bigger scale but could be less dense. Chair Goodell stated there was discussion about including parks areas in the TOD (Transit- Oriented Development) district. He asked whether that would be decided during the development phase. Ms. Beekman stated the TOD district is not currently defined. She added the Opportunity Site master plan has plans for two parks and some public plazas, and they will be rezoned accordingly. Ms. Maze reviewed Section 2 discussion topics for review: district heights; required vs. incentivize; residential density; impervious coverage, other topics. Chair Goodell stated other cities are looking at requirements for hard scape and lighter color buildings to reflect heat. He asked whether that is included in the building code. Ms. Beekman stated impervious coverage just covers permeable coverage of the lot, vs impermeable. She added that is something City Staff can take a look at, as it plays into the PUD process. She noted community engagement has revealed three areas of focus: incentives for affordable housing, affordable commercial space, and environmental sustainability practices. She noted she would like to see developers address one of those three issues as a theme for incentivizing. Chair Goodell stated that concept makes a lot of sense, and he would like to see that addressed in the code. Commissioner Hester stated, with regard to what is required vs. what is incentivized, that could mean working with low-income advocacy organizations. She added people have different thoughts when they hear “affordable housing”. 10/26/2021 Page 4 Ms. Beekman agreed, adding the City should decide what is important, and what kind of development is desirable, and build incentive packages. She added that will take a little more time to grapple and come up with the correct answer for Brooklyn Center. Ms. McIntosh stated, with regard to heat reduction requirements, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) maintains a nationwide heat islands community action database, with mechanisms for communities to account for heat islands through building and zoning codes. She added Minnesota does not have this type of policy. Chair Goodell stated there is a difference between what is affordable within the region, and what is affordable for Brooklyn Center. Commissioner Hester agreed, adding sometimes affordable housing in other cities is not even affordable in Brooklyn Center. Ms. Beekman stated the City could create its own Average Mean Income (AMI). She added it will be necessary to write an incentive program in the zoning code that would provide flexibility based on local AMI’s. Chair Goodell stated the new zoning map seems to match the current zoning map. He asked whether there are any areas where differences could be incentivized, for example, in the mixed use residential commercial district. He added there are communities with zones that have a heavy concentration of mixed use, like the West End in St. Louis Park. He asked if zoning could be planned to provide incentives for what Brooklyn Center wants to have rather than what is already there. Ms. Beekman stated City Staff are looking at the long-term picture of where the community is going. She added that is a fairly significant shift in thinking about land use. She noted, by up- zoning, the City will be incentivizing redevelopment. Ms. Beekman stated cities incentivize development through public subsidy, which is not part of the zoning code but rather a policy decision of the City Council. She stressed the importance of aligning the zoning code with the City’s public subsidy policy. Ms. Maze stated Section 3, Overlay Districts, regulates additional levels of regulatory control in the City’s 3 main overlay districts: flood plain, shoreland, and Mississippi River Critical Corridor. These districts are mandated and receive oversight from the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR). City Staff are working with the DNR to create a critical overlay district for the Mississippi River rather than a shoreland district. Outreach regarding these overlay districts is targeted to property owners who abut water. Ms. Maze stated the DNR has oversight over shoreland and MRCCA overlays, which require a DNR review prior to City approval. She added the process is customized for the City but comes from the DNR’s template. Ms. Maze stated Section 9, Definitions, provides meanings for phrases and how they can be interpreted within the code. She added this section will continue to grow as terms and definitions are added. 10/26/2021 Page 5 Ms. Maze asked whether the Commission had any questions or comments regarding the new districts and definitions, and whether they support the Commissioners’ understanding of the vision and goals of Brooklyn Center. She asked how this information should be effectively conveyed to the City Council and general public. Ms. Maze stated, with regard to the engagement process over the past several months, the task force meetings and joint work sessions have been focused on topics that are more relevant to the public that can inform updates going forward. A project website has been set up and sections of the code will be released on the website along with a series of fact sheets to help people understand the issues. The formal approval process will begin early in 2022, and feedback and comments are always welcome. Meg stated Commissioner Jones asked a question the chat function: “why are the residential zones are going from 7 to 5?” Ms. Maze stated the goal is to make the code easier to implement, and some districts were consolidated. Ms. McIntosh stated most of the homes in the R-2 district are single-family homes. The district allows for one and two-family homes, but properties more often do not meet minimum frontage or square footage requirements to have a two-family property. The R-7 district is not currently used, as the properties that were R-7 were rezoned to PUD. The one R-7 property that remains is owned by the City and largely encompasses a portion of Shingle Creek. It makes sense to consolidate and clarify uses for each district. Ms. Beekman stated City Staff anticipates that there will be issues when property owners receive notification that their property is being rezoned. Property owners will be reassured that their new zoning district will be more inclusive of land use rather than restrictive. Accessory dwelling units will be a new provision in the code, and setbacks will be clarified, to make it easier for homeowners to expand in place, removing barriers that will allow them to stay in their home. Ms. Maze read a comment from Commissioner Hester in the chat function: “create more ways for people to stay.” Ms. Beekman stated that was a major theme for the task force, with discussions focused on life cycle housing and diversity of housing at all price points. ADJOURNMENT Chair Goodell adjourned the meeting at 7:48 p.m. _______________________________ _______________________________ Ginny McIntosh, Secretary Alexander Koenig, Chair MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND HOUSING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND STATE OF MINNESOTA JOINT WORK SESSION SEPTEMBER 30, 2021 Community Development Director Meg Beekman stated tonight’s work session was intended to be a review of engagement work that has been done, and a high-level overview of commercial districts including parking requirements. She added, due to the low number of attendees, it might be more productive review these issues at next scheduled work session on October 14, 2021. She requested feedback and comments on this issue. Mr. Thompson stated this work session could provide an overview of these topics but hold questions until a larger majority of the group is present. Chair Goodell and Chair Koenig agreed. Commissioner Jones stated she made a point to attend tonight’s meeting and would like to proceed. CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center Planning Commission/Housing Commission Joint Work Session was called to order by Chair Koenig at 6:45 p.m. ROLL CALL Planning Commission Chair Alexander Koenig and Commissioners Alfreda Daniels-Juasemai, Stephanie Jones, and Peter Omari were present. Commissioner Paris Dunn was absent. Housing Commission Chair Mark Goodell and Commissioner Zarita Hester were present. Commissioners Kathie Amdahl, De’Ja Carter, Michael Donnelly, Paul Oman, and Johnson Yang were absent. Others Present: Community Development Director Meg Beekman and City Planner Ginny McIntosh. Also present were Mike Thompson and Haila Maze, Bolton & Menk. ZONING CODE REVIEW Mike Thompson, Bolton & Menk welcomed meeting attendees. He stated this work session will include a high-level review of changes proposed for the new Zoning Code. He added remote community meetings were held in July with high resident turnout ranging from 30 to 40 attendees, up to 60 attendees. He noted information regarding these sessions can be found on the Becoming Brooklyn Center website. Mr. Thompson stated the Zoning Code sets the standard and legal foundation for what can be built in Brooklyn Center, where it can be built, and how it is permitted to look. Districts within 09/30/2021 Page 2 the Zoning Code will be reviewed and amended as part of this process, as there has not been a significant update since the 1960s. Mr. Thompson reviewed proposed major changes to the Code and their implications, including a focus on connecting jobs, housing, services, and transit; the creation of neighborhood centers; and an update of housing designations and environmental protections in adherence to State law. Mr. Thompson stated the City currently has many land uses, which are proposed to be consolidated and reduced to increase efficiency and flexibility. He reviewed commercial implications of the new Code, with six new districts including less dense residential neighborhoods with mixed uses, and commercial mixed use to increase building height refine commercial uses. Transit Oriented Development (TOD) districts would have the highest intensity of uses. Recommendations are included for the public realm, including gathering spaces and public sidewalks. The majority of this type of zoning would occur in the Opportunity Site area. The Business Mixed Use district is intended to have a mix of light industrial, related offices, and other general office space. Chair Goodell asked what is the difference between what is being proposed and what currently exists in commercial areas. Mr. Thompson stated the proposed changes will clarify the types of allowable uses within the districts. He added many elements of the existing Code, which has not been updated since the 1960s, are irrelevant in terms of where allowable uses should be located. Ms. Beekman stated, with regard to business mixed use, the current Zoning Code has I-1 and I-2 industrial districts. The I-1 district is lighter use and includes a number of PUDs approved over time allowing other types of uses, including hotels, restaurants, gas stations, and retail service uses. The business mixed use district was created to provide greater flexibility of land use for businesses, but residential uses are not allowed. Ms. Beekman stated the purpose of the new neighborhood mixed use district is to create more commercial nodes adjacent to neighborhoods that will provide opportunities for a variety for commercial use, focused near controlled intersections, particularly along Brooklyn Boulevard. Chair Goodell requested clarification regarding whether mixed uses could occur in the same building. Ms. Beekman confirmed this, adding that is a significant change as the Code has traditionally been very segregated. The new categories increase the possibility of mixing land uses, creating more dynamic, walkable spaces, and focusing high density residential in the transit corridor. Chair Goodell asked whether the TOD district is the only place where buildings that are taller than four stories will be allowed. He asked whether that would limit the City in the future. Ms. Beekman stated City Staff has been working to create a framework that includes building height requirements, allowing taller buildings in some areas including commercial mixed-use. 09/30/2021 Page 3 She added building height should be limited in the neighborhood mixed-use areas which are closer to single-family residential. Mr. Thompson stated the TOD and R-5 multi-family use are the only two districts that currently do not have a height maximum. Mr. Thompson stated parking standards in commercial areas in the existing Code are not in alignment with peer cities and evolving trends and should be reviewed. Mr. Thompson stated, with regard to environmental protections, regulatory language in two Ordinances provides baseline legal protection requirements for water bodies in Brooklyn Center. The July 2021 community meeting was attended by representatives of Friends of the Mississippi River and the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MnDNR) and included a review of Shoreland and MRCCA guidelines. A targeted invitation to that meeting was sent to properties in applicable districts, to ordinary high-water regulations. The DNR has expressed support of a single Ordinance for environmental protection to include MRCCA as the regulating body for the Mississippi River. Ms. Beekman stated many communities are going through regulatory updates to adopt this type of Ordinance, which has been helpful for City Staff. She added the City of Brooklyn Center does not have a shoreland Ordinance, so provisions are being included related to restrictions on private property, including setback requirements. She noted City Staff are working with Friends of the Mississippi River, a non-profit organization that was an integral part of the adoption of these provisions by the DNR and State. Ms. Beekman stated Three Rivers Park District has reviewed the Ordinance and is in the process of providing comments. She added full drafts have been made available on the City’s website for public comment. Ms. Beekman stated City Staff and consultants believe this is an urgent body of work as the current Code is in poor shape. She requested that Commissioners from both the Planning and Housing Commissions dedicate one evening a month for the next three months to review early draft language and provide feedback. She added the Planning Commission’s next meeting is scheduled for October 14, 2021, so that would be a good time to hold a joint session to review the Unified Development Code (UDC). Meetings will be kept to under 1.5 hours. November 4, 2021 would be an additional date, and a third potential date will be found in December. She requested feedback and comments on potential meeting dates from both Commissions. Chair Koenig stated November 4 and December 9 work for him. Chair Goodell stated the Charter Commission is scheduled to meet on October 14, 2021, so that is a potential conflict for him. Commissioner Hester stated she also plans to attend the Charter Commission meeting on October 14, 2021, as well as a Union meeting that same night. 09/30/2021 Page 4 Commissioner Daniels-Juasemai stated those dates work for her, but she is waiting for confirmation of other important meetings during those months. She agreed to contact Ms. McIntosh with any conflicts that arise. Ms. Beekman stated City Staff will provide additional dates over the next three months and send out a poll. Mr. Thompson stated Bolton & Menk will work with City Staff to determine the types of engagement that are expected by the Commissioners in this last leg of the process. He asked whether public engagement should happen concurrently with the meetings. Ms. Beekman stated City Staff plans to have a draft of the UDC available for review after a public comment period, to include a series of community meetings. She requested feedback and comment regarding whether City Staff should review information and content and get input before the draft is made public and community meetings are held, or if this should be done concurrently. Chair Koenig stated he supports the first route, so that those involved can become more knowledgeable as the process continues, and that would include later public input. He added whatever it would take to keep commissioners informed and intuitive is good. Chair Koenig stated, as indicated previously, the UDC would be a living document that would never really be complete. He added he disagrees with releasing a document to the public that is incomplete, with components that have been plugged in that could be amended or removed. Chair Goodell stated concurrent discussions and UDC review would move the process along further and ensure engagement from both Commissions as well as the public. He added he finds it helpful to get feedback during the discussion period about what the community has said, which can result in additional information that the Commissioners may not have considered. He noted it takes more effort to do it concurrently, but it is more useful. Ms. Beekman stated the UDC will be released in sections to make the information easier to review than releasing the entire document. She agreed it should be a living document that will be continually reviewed and changed even after the initial document is adopted. Mr. Thompson agreed. Ms. Beekman reviewed questions for the Commissioners to consider - what topics should be explored more deeply; what type of development should be incentivized, what types of flexibility should be encouraged; and what does the City want in exchange for incentives. Mr. Thompson stated a recap of tonight’s discussion and confirmation of upcoming meeting dates and times will be added to the Becoming Brooklyn Center website. ADJOURNMENT There was a motion by Commissioner Daniels-Juasemai, seconded by Commissioner Jones, to adjourn the Planning Commission/Housing Commission Joint Work Session at 7:42 p.m. 09/30/2021 Page 5 Voting on the motion: Planning Commission Chair Koenig and Commissioners Daniels- Juasemai, Jones, and Omari, and Housing Commission Chair Goodell and Commissioner Hester voted aye. The motion passed unanimously. _______________________________ _______________________________ Ginny McIntosh, Secretary Alexander Koenig, Chair MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND HOUSING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND STATE OF MINNESOTA JOINT WORK SESSION JUNE 29, 2021 CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center Planning Commission/Housing Commission Joint Work Session was called to order by Chair Koenig at 7:09 p.m. ROLL CALL Planning Commission Chair Alexander Koenig and Commissioners Stephanie Jones and Peter Omari were present. Commissioners Alfreda Daniels-Juasemai and Paris Dunn were absent. Housing Commission Chair Mark Goodell and Commissioners Kathie Amdahl, De’Ja’ Carter, Michael Donnelly, Zarita Hester, Paul Oman, and Johnson Yang were present. Others Present: Community Development Director Meg Beekman and City Planner Ginny McIntosh. Also present were Mike Thompson and Haila Maze, Bolton & Menk. ZONING CODE REVIEW Mike Thompson, Bolton & Menk, provided an update and shared the progress that has been made on the Zoning Code. He thanked all the Commissioners and attendees who have joined tonight’s meeting. He noted the Zoning Code update will include a review of zoning and equity; new land uses; a review of residential standards; an overview of commercial and business mixed use; and environmental protections, as well as next steps in the process. Mr. Thompson stated the Zoning Code is being updated to align with the City’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan; to bring the Code into compliance with State law; to make it easier to use by modernizing regulations, ensuring that it meets community needs. He reviewed activity over the past two years, including the formation of a Zoning Task Force, made up of residents, that has met over the past few years, conducting public outreach and surveys. The Task Force has identified new Zoning districts, overlay districts, procedures and processes. Community Development Director Meg Beekman stressed the importance of being intentional about examining the City’s zoning goals through an equity lens, and having a sense of understanding about the history of zoning laws, and how they have contributed to systemic racism. This includes the role of planning as a profession, which emerged as a response to urbanization, congestion and overcrowding. The original purpose of zoning related to restricting by race and class-based motives, which is referred to today as exclusionary zoning. These early foundations of planning, including the 06/29/2021 Page 2 practice of “red lining”, were set up to keep areas segregated and determine who would receive the benefit of public resources. The consequences of these practices have lasted for decades. Ms. Beekman reviewed a history of red-lining which affected the landscape and nature of neighborhoods and how they developed. Federal policies and programs paired well with segregationist land use zoning. The real estate market also ensured segregation by enacting covenants that restricted the sale of property based on race. The first racially restrictive covenant in Minneapolis dates from 1910, and this practice was not outlawed until 1953, and continued to be used until the enacted of the Fair Housing Act in 1968. Housing discrimination still exists, and renters bear the brunt of housing cost burdens. This has caused parallel problems to emerge including a lack of affordable housing, displacement, and housing instability. Ms. Beekman stated the City of Brooklyn Center experienced significant growth in the 1950s and 1960s, and the housing stock is fairly homogenous and affordable, and accessible to moderate income families. Racially restrictive covenants were not widely utilized in Brooklyn Center. Land uses are separate, making it difficult for residents to access transit and employment without a car. The City’s low-cost rental housing has attracted many low- and average-income renters. Brooklyn Center’s land use patterns and zoning do not utilize exclusionary techniques. There is a limited amount of industrial land, which is a detriment from a tax base perspective and in terms of the quality of jobs that are available. Ms. Beekman stated the City’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan, updated in 2019, creates new Mixed Use Districts, embracing transit as an asset for neighborhoods to connect people to places. The existing Zoning Code does not align with the 2040 Comprehensive Plan or State law, and it is cumbersome, requiring staff interpretation and time, putting the City at a competitive disadvantage. The proposed Zoning Code provides zoning affordability in exchange for certain goals, including multi-generational housing. Mr. Thompson stated this is an orienting lens for our process, as Ms. Beekman alluded to in recognizing inequity of zoning, and how this new Zoning Code will redirect towards elevating equity. He reviewed existing zoning districts and new proposed land uses, which have been reduced and consolidated to reflect the guidance of the Comprehensive Plan and to keep up with emerging trends and best practices. The new Zoning Code will support the City's goals of equity, sustainability, affordability and access to amenities. The majority of the City is single- family residential, and that designation will stay the same. The zoning updates are proposed for areas along Brooklyn Boulevard where mixed-use residential neighborhoods would better serve the community by integrating diversity of land uses. Mr. Thompson stated the Opportunity Site, Transit-Oriented Development (TOD), and Business- Mixed use areas north of I-94/694 are other key areas that could have greater flexibility and applicability for more types of businesses, broadening allowable uses. Mr. Thompson stated questions under consideration are whether duplexes should be allowed in the R-2 district, on smaller lots, to promote density. He added the R-2 district is primarily located on the City’s southern border. 06/29/2021 Page 3 Chair Goodell asked whether a twin home is considered a duplex. Ms. Beekman confirmed this. She added a duplex is defined as any property that contains two separate dwelling units. Ms. McIntosh stated the current R-2 District allows both one- and two-family dwelling units. She added current regulations make it difficult to have a legal duplex as lots do not meet minimum width and square footage requirements. Chair Goodell asked whether R-2 lot sizes are smaller than R-1 lot sizes. Mr. Thompson confirmed this. Ms. Beekman stated duplexes are allowed in R-2 District, but the size requirements are larger than if it was a single family. Lots in the R-2 are smaller anyway, so duplexes are essentially prohibited. She added it will be necessary to be more permissive and allow duplexes on smaller lots. Commissioner Amdahl stated a duplex would fit better on an R-1 lot, but duplexes are not allowed in the R-1 district. Ms. Beekman agreed, adding setbacks are smaller in the R-2 district, so there is not necessarily less buildable space. Commissioner Amdahl stated a duplex would work in the R-2 district, but setbacks and lot size are a concern. She asked how two-unit buildings can be developed if the requirement is 10 lots per acre vs. 5 lots per acre. Ms. Beekman stated what City Staff is experiencing is residents who want to finish off their basement into an apartment that they rent out as an illegal rental property, because it is not allowed under current Code. She added zoning could be changed to allow two dwelling units on a single property, but structure height and size would need to be consistent with other homes in the district. Chair Koenig asked whether the new Zoning Code will allow existing homes to be converted to duplexes, and whether there will be requirements for separation to make it possible for two families to live there. Ms. Beekman stated a home would have to receive structural modifications to be a duplex, and the new Zoning Code does not contemplate this possibility in existing structures. She added the question is whether the City should be more permissive of two-family structures, if size and other impacts, including parking, are controlled. Chair Koenig stated he supports being more permissive of two-family homes, primarily in the City’s south and southwest areas, and a little bit in the north. He added it is reasonable and tolerable to allow duplexes. Ms. Beekman stated, as noted by Ms. McIntosh, the size requirement for a two-family dwelling is 12,400 square feet, and a minimum lot size of 6,200 square feet per unit. She added those numbers could be reduced. 06/29/2021 Page 4 Chair Koenig asked whether new properties would be allowed to be developed, or if this only applies to removing an existing structure to build a duplex. Chair Goodell stated, in the past, the City has encouraged redevelopment along its southern border. He added this is an opportunity to develop rules and regulations about this type of development. He asked whether there are areas that are zoned R-2 where duplex development could be encouraged to increase density. Mr. Thompson stated additional areas that could be considered for R-2 zoning for redevelopment can be discussed during the public engagement process, before addressing it in the R-1 zone. Chair Goodell read a comment in the chat function: “is there an issue with allowing duplexes in the R-1 district?” Mr. Thompson confirmed this, stating the scale of the R-1 district, as well as considerations related to increased traffic, utilities, and infrastructure, would make it difficult to accommodate a duplex development. Ms. Beekman stated, regarding a comment in the chat function about enlarging designated areas for R-2, the City is fully platted and there are no opportunities for new subdivisions. She added, to achieve greater density, the City Code could be more permissive of accessory dwelling units or duplexes. Chair Goodell stated construction of duplexes could be allowed in the R-1 District while maintaining setbacks and dimension requirements. He added that is currently happening with R- 1 plats. Commissioner Hester stated it is a great idea to rezone properties, so duplexes are allowed, at least in one area. She added this would allow builders or homeowners to build a duplex if the property is going to be rebuilt. She noted this would make it possible for larger families to move into Brooklyn Center, because it is difficult to find larger apartments. Chair Koenig asked, to Commissioner Hester’s point, if there is a map that shows the locations of single-family residences that are rental properties throughout the city. He added this would be very interesting as an overlay but also in conjunction with distribution. He noted many single- family homes went into foreclosure and were bought by investment groups, which now control portions of the City. He stressed the importance of preventing the creation of rental duplexes as a side business for developers. Ms. McIntosh stated there is 2019 map showing properties with a rental license throughout the City. She agreed to upload the map to the City’s Development webpage. Ms. Beekman stated the City of Minneapolis recently made changes to their Zoning Code to allow duplexes and triplexes in any district that allows single family units. She stressed the importance of creating more affordable homeowner and rental opportunities in neighborhoods 06/29/2021 Page 5 that are cost prohibitive. She noted this particular problem does not exist in Brooklyn Center, as most of the single-family homes are accessible to moderate income families. Commissioner Hester stated allowing duplexes would keep families in Brooklyn Center. She added the City can be intentional about bringing in availability of housing for families while maintaining the integrity of neighborhoods. She noted an owner-occupied duplex would increase affordable housing in the neighborhood. Ms. Beekman agreed, adding someone could purchase a home and build a duplex. She stated the City is fully developed. She stated zoning does not dictate land value, which will change over time. Mr. Thompson stated, with regard to Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU), the new Zoning Code includes three new residential levels: R-3, R-4 and R-5, with specific height and density allowances. He added an ADU would be converting a portion of an existing single-family home. He requested feedback and comments on this issue. Ms. Beekman reviewed general four types of permissible ADUs: basement refinish; dwelling unit over a detached garage; a home extension; or a detached cottage. She added an ADU could be a rental unit, and an opportunity for additional income. Chair Koenig stated he feels strongly that the homeowner must live in the main home or the ADU, and that should not change. Ms. Beekman stated the City of Minneapolis requires owner-occupancy. Commissioner Omari stated things could change, and the homeowner might move out and rent both units. He added, during the housing crisis, investors bought many single-family homes and turned them in to rental units, so there are neighborhoods that have many rental homes. He noted he agrees that one unit on the property should be occupied by the owner. Ms. Beekman stated the City of Minneapolis adds a deed restriction that the property must remain a homesteaded property. If the property becomes non-homestead, the ADU must be removed. She added this process is not without its complications. Commissioner Hester stated there should be a provision for a homeowner who is unable to live in their homestead property due to health or other reasons, but they do not want to give up their property. Commissioner Omari stated the resident who is living in the main property must be a part of the family, and not a tenant. Commissioner Hester asked whether there could be two rentals on one property, which should not be an issue if the property is maintained and all guidelines are being followed. 06/29/2021 Page 6 Commissioner Omari stated investors come in and buy property in Brooklyn Center because it is allowed, so units become non-homestead. He added this situation changes the character of the neighborhood, which is often what attracted people to move to Brooklyn Center in the first place. He noted he would want to move somewhere else if that is the vision for the neighborhood, as it is not what the residents wanted when they moved there. Commissioner Omari stated people moved into neighborhoods because they wanted to live there and they want their neighborhood to continue the way it is for the long term. Commissioner Hester stated she agrees that long-term consideration should be given. She added people want to move to cities like Brooklyn Center where there is affordability, but there is a housing crisis. She asked whether property can be re-designated as it does not seem fair to penalize residents for something that is out of their control, like a medical condition. She noted it is inevitable that Brooklyn Center’s population will increase, and more people will be looking for housing. She asked whether there could be an exception for a family that owns property in Brooklyn Center not to be penalized when they cannot stay in the home on their own for medical reasons. Chair Koenig stated he believes it is reasonable to have City Staff take a look at the City of Minneapolis’ requirement that residents who sell their home abandon their right to have an ADU after a two to three-month period. He added he supports Commissioner Hester’s comments. Ms. Beekman stated zoning is largely a blunt tool, and the City must ensure that they zoning regulations are enforceable. She added the City has a robust rental licensing program and the ADU process will fall under that program. Ms. Beekman stated City Staff works with residents when homes are put into trust for a family member and are not flagged as a rental property. She added the distinction is when someone leaves, and the property is no longer homesteaded. She noted City Staff can review how these outliers are addressed by other cities. Commissioner Omari stated he moved to his neighborhood for a number of reasons. He added if many residents converted their detached garages into apartments, even if it done through the City’s process, that will change the character of the neighborhood. He asked what the City will look like. He noted this issue should be reviewed further to ensure a standard of living that is attractive to residents. Mr. Thompson stated upcoming sessions will include reviews of neighborhood mixed use, transit-oriented development, commercial mixed use, business mixed use, and environmental protections. Ms. Beekman stated a survey is being put together that will be pushed out as part of upcoming virtual community meetings that will focus on residential design standards for zoning. Other issues to be addressed in the City Code are fences, driveways and commercial vehicles, and will be included as part of the discussion. 06/29/2021 Page 7 Chair Koenig thanked everyone who attended the meeting and provided their comments both vocally and through chat. He encouraged everyone to continue to provide feedback and comments. Mr. Thompson stated the intent is to build a strong initial framework that can be revised and amended. He reviewed upcoming meetings in June and July as well as other work sessions and meetings to be determined. He thanked the meeting attendees for their time and attention. ADJOURNMENT There was a motion by Housing Commission Chair Goodell, seconded by Planning Commission Chair Koenig, to adjourn the Planning Commission/Housing Commission Joint Work Session at 8:58 p.m. Voting on the motion: Planning Commission Chair Koenig and Commissioners Omari and Jones; and Housing Commission Chair Goodell and Commissioners Amdahl, Carter, Donnelly, Hester, Oman, Yang voted aye. The motion passed unanimously. _______________________________ _______________________________ Ginny McIntosh, Secretary Alexander Koenig, Chair ________________ App. No. 2022-001 PC 01/13/2022 Page 1 Planning Commission Report Meeting Date: January 13, 2022 Application No. 2022-001 Applicant: Derek Haluptzok (A-Abco Auto Parts) Property Owner: Schmitt Real Estate LLC Location: 2400 Freeway Boulevard Request: Special Use Permit for Retail Sales and Indoor Warehousing of New and Used Auto Parts Map 1. Subject Property Location (2400 Freeway Boulevard). COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ZONING STANDARDS 2040 Land Use Plan: Commercial (C) Neighborhood: Shingle Creek Current Zoning: I-1 (Industrial Park) District Surrounding Zoning: North: O1 (Public Open Space) District East: I1 (Industrial Park) District South: Interstate 94/694 (Right-of-Way) West: PUD/I1 District Site Area: Approximately 4.69 Acres • Application Filed: 12/10/2021 • Review Period (60-day) Deadline: 02/08/2021 • Extension Declared: N/A • Extended Review Period Deadline: N/A ________________ App. No. 2022-001 PC 01/13/2022 Page 2 INTRODUCTION Derek Haluptzok of A-Abco Parts (“The Applicant”) is requesting review and consideration of an application that would allow for the issuance of a Special Use Permit for the retail sale of new and used auto parts warehoused on-site at 2400 Freeway Boulevard (“The Subject Property”). The Subject Property consists of an approximately 50,614 square foot building that was constructed in 1974 on approximately 4.69 acres. Refer to Exhibit A. The Subject Property originally received site and building plan approval as well as issuance of a Special Use Permit in 1974 under Planning Commission Application No. 74022 for construction of an approximately 50,000 square foot building, then known as the Kennedy & Cohen building, with its intended use as a major appliance retail sales warehouse facility. Approval of the Special Use Permit ultimately allowed for what was a commercial retail establishment in the I-1 (Industrial Park) District. The approval of the site and building plan also included approvals for a landscape plan, installation of an underground irrigation system, and an automatic fire extinguishing system. Included in the submitted plans were provisions that indicated adequate land area to support the required parking for the building at the C2 (Commerce) District retail level, which was outlined as 323 spaces. As only a portion of the building would be used for retail, with warehousing as the primary use, the application requested a parking reduction of 148 parking spaces (for 175 total on-site parking spaces), which was determined to be adequate. The site plan considered under this application was also reviewed with respect to proposed grading, draining, and various flood plain needs. A subsequent application was submitted in 1976 under Planning Commission Application No. 76055 and by Applicant J.Y.J. Corporation (Don Yablonsky), which requested issuance of a Special Use Permit for retail sales in the I-1 (Industrial Park) District in the now former Kennedy & Cohen building, and received approved by City Council on October 18, 1976. It was noted under this application that the Applicant had a short term lease in place with the Property Owner and was considering purchase of the building; however, based on the timing of Planning Commission Application approvals, it appears Applicant J.Y.J Corporation never purchased the building given Schmitt Music’s acquisition shortly thereafter. Additional approvals were granted in 1977 under Planning Commission No. 77019 for issuance of a Special Use Permit that would permit certain retailing and educational uses in the I-1 (Industrial Park) District, and submitted by current Property Owner, Schmitt Music, for the former Kennedy & Cohen building. Said application was approved by City Council on June 6, 1977 and specifically called out the necessity of addressing the deterioration of site improvements, and specifically the landscaping. It was as part of the approvals under this application that the underground irrigation system was also addressed, as well as the necessity of repairing and/or installing any malfunctioning or missing site lighting. Refer to Exhibit B. Colliers, who has the listing for the Subject Property, provided a photo collage representing current use of the Subject Property building and indicates a total of five (5) existing dock doors and two (2) drive-in doors, along with a clear height range of between 11-feet and 21-feet. Refer to Image 1 below. Current site photos are also provided in Images 2-5 below, as well as an Applicant provided example of an existing Abco retail counter (Image 6). ________________ App. No. 2022-001 PC 01/13/2022 Page 3 Image 1: Interior Images of Use and Subject Property (2400 Freeway) | Photo Source | Credit: Colliers (colliers.com) Images 2-5: Exterior Images of Subject Property (2400 Freeway) | Photo Source: Olivia Boerschinger (City of Brooklyn Center) ________________ App. No. 2022-001 PC 01/13/2022 Page 4 Image 6. Example of Existing Retail Sales Counter (A-Abco) | Photo Source: A-Abco. A public hearing notice was published in the Brooklyn Center Sun Post on December 30, 2021 (Exhibit C). Mail notices were also sent out to those taxpayers and occupants with property falling within the designated notification area. SPECIAL USE PERMIT REVIEW A-Abco Auto Parts has been in business since 1988 under the ownership of the Applicant. Abco currently has a manufacturing facility located in Fridley, and a 24,000-square foot retail sales and warehouse building located in Spring Lake Park. The Spring Lake Park location has been in operation since 2008, and has approximately 90 employees. The Applicant intends to model the requested use on the Subject Property after the Spring Lake Park location, with approximately 20 employees, including salespeople, warehouse clerks, and clerical staff. The Applicant does not require and outdoor storage, and there will be no manufacturing or processing of materials at the Subject Property. During discussions with the Applicant, City staff confirmed with the Applicant that they would not be requesting any allowances for outdoor storage now or in the future. The Applicant is requesting issuance of a Special Use Permit to allow for the retail sales and warehousing of auto parts in an existing building currently home to Schmitt Music and located at 2400 Freeway Boulevard. The Subject Property is currently for sale and Schmitt Music will be relocating its Brooklyn Center headquarters and showroom to Bloomington to allow for expansion. Per Section 35-220 (Special Use Permits) of the City’s Zoning Ordinance, “Special uses are those which may be required for the public welfare in a given district but which are, in some respects, incompatible with the permitted uses in the district. Before a building or premises is devoted to any use classified as a special use by this ordinance, a special use permit must be granted by the City Council.” The Applicant’s requested use closely relates to the special use of, “retail sales of products manufactured, processed, warehoused, or wholesaled on the use site” stated in Section 35-330 (I1 Industrial Park), Subsection 3 (Special Uses) of City Code. The proposed use will need to comply with special requirements set forth in Section 35-413 (Special Requirements in I1 and I2 Districts). ________________ App. No. 2022-001 PC 01/13/2022 Page 5 The requested use of the facility for retail sales and warehousing of auto parts aligns closely with the originally approved special use of a major appliance retail sales warehouse facility, and not too dissimilar from how the Subject Property is currently used today for Schmitt Music. Per the Standards of Special Use Permits, a Special Use Permit may be granted by the City Council after demonstration by evidence that all of the following are met: 1. The establishment, maintenance, or operation of the special use will promote and enhance the general public welfare and will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, morals, or comfort. The Applicant met with City staff prior to submitting their application for the Subject Property and has noted that it is not their intent to endanger the public health, safety, morals, or comfort of their customers, employees, the general public, or neighboring properties. Per the Applicant, “A-Abco Auto Parts will be an excellent addition to the City of Brooklyn Center as many of its current clients residing in Brooklyn Center drive to Fridley or Spring Lake Park to purchase auto parts. In addition, many wholesale clients are located in and around Brooklyn Center.” The Applicant expanded that they intend to use the building similar to how the building is already being used, with a portion for warehousing auto parts, and the remainder for use as a retail/showroom. Per discussions with the Applicant there are no plans to allow for outside storage of parts and all warehousing is to take place within the existing approximately 50,614-square foot building. 2. The special use will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity for the purposes already permitted, nor substantially diminish and impair property values within the neighborhood. The special use is not intended to be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity for the purposes already permitted, not substantially diminish and impair the property values within the neighborhood. As previously stated, the requested use of the Subject Property is similar in nature to the original approved use, and current use, of retail sales and warehousing. The Applicant has stated upgrades will be made to the building on the Subject Property as needed to maintain the overall property. There is no outdoor storage of materials or product being requested, and no changes are proposed to the existing building or property at this time. The Subject Property is bordered to the south by Interstate 94, to the east by BAPS Shri Swaminarayan Mandir (2300 Freeway Blvd), to the north by Shingle Creek, and to the west by what is currently a parking lot that accommodates overflow parking for 2300 Freeway Boulevard. Said property was originally approved as part of PUD in 1996 for use as 6,400-square foot, 250-seat restaurant; however, this parcel, located at 2500 Freeway Boulevard, has never been developed. The remainder of the established PUD contains a Country Inn and Suites (2550 Freeway Boulevard), and Jammin’ Wings restaurant (2590 Freeway Boulevard), which received City approval in 2020 to expand into an event center. ________________ App. No. 2022-001 PC 01/13/2022 Page 6 The 2040 Comprehensive Plan identifies the Subject Property as well as those properties immediately to the west with the Commercial (C) future land use designation, and BAPS, located to the east, as Public/Semi-Public and Institutional (PSP/Institutional). The properties to the north of Shingle Creek and located just off Parkway Circle all possess a future land use designation of Business-Mixed Use (B-MU). 3. The establishment of the special use will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding property for uses permitted in the district. The establishment of the special use should not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding properties for uses permitted in the district as the surrounding land, with the exception of 2500 Freeway Boulevard, is either fully developed or utilized as parks and open space. The requested use does not require changes to the existing building or property, as it aligns with the originally approved site and building plan and special use as well as its current use, which includes retail sales and warehousing. 4. Adequate measurements have been or will be taken to provide ingress, egress, and parking so designed as to minimize traffic congestion in the public streets. The Applicant met with City staff to discuss the proposal and estimates approximately two (2) truck deliveries daily, and approximately 50 to 100 customers per day. Delivery times are anticipated to occur between 10:00am and 3:00pm The Applicant anticipates less traffic than experienced presently with the property’s current use (Schmitt Music). Proposed business hours are 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and 9:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. Saturday. There are no proposed changes to the Subject Property’s existing ingress, egress, parking, or loading docks. 5. The special use shall, in all other respects, conform to the applicable regulations of the district in which it is located. The special use request to accommodate retail sales and warehousing of auto parts will conform with the applicable regulations of the district of the Subject Property. The current zoning of the Subject Property is I-1 (Industrial Park) District. Under Section 35-330, Subsection 1 (Permitted Uses), wholesale trade activities of automotive equipment are permitted. Additionally, as previously mentioned, the requested use closely relates to the existing special use of “retail sales of products manufactured, processed, warehoused, or wholesaled on the use site” stated in Section 35-330, Subsection 3 (Special Uses) within the City Code. Per the submitted application, the Applicant has no plans to alter the exterior of the building in such a way to render the building or site non-conforming, and has no plans to provide outdoor storage. The only anticipated alterations include updated signage to reflect the new business operations, which would need to comply with City Code requirements. The Applicant/Property Owner will need to address any missing or damaged site improvements as identified on the approved site plans, including but not limited to landscaping, irrigation, and site lighting. No review memorandum was prepared by the Assistant City Engineer given that there are no proposed improvements for the Subject Property. Building Official Dan Grinsteinner indicated that the ________________ App. No. 2022-001 PC 01/13/2022 Page 7 Applicant/Property Owner will need to meet with the City prior to occupancy of the building to discuss any necessary building modifications or alterations given the change of use and the classification of the building. Potential modifications and alterations might include upgrades to the fire suppressions systems or sprinkler heads, storage racking in the designated warehouse area, and the storage of any hazardous materials or liquids (e.g. batteries, motor oil, washing fluid). Should any modifications be determined, the Applicant/Property Owner shall obtain any necessary permits prior to any work. The Applicant/Property Owner shall also review the originally approved plans to ensure compliance is maintained, including, but not limited to the replacement of any missing plantings as identified on the approved 1974 landscape plan, as well as any irrigation systems, site lighting, etc. Although no requests were specifically made for signage, the Applicant shall obtain a sign permit for any new or altered wall or pylon/freestanding signage. Said signage shall comply with City Code requirements. APPROVAL CONDITIONS: Staff recommends the following conditions be attached to any positive recommendation on the approval of Application No. 2022-001 for 2400 Freeway Boulevard (Subject Property): a. Any major changes or modifications made to the Subject Property can only be made either through the City’s Building Permit process or through formal Site and Building Plan approval by the City. The Applicant shall provide plans for any remodeling and submit building permit applications for any work to be conducted to the building, or proposed new signage. a. The Applicant/Property Owner shall meet with the Building Official and Fire Inspector prior to occupancy of the building to discuss any changes to use or classification of the building, including but not limited to fire suppression systems, storage racking, hazardous materials and liquids storage, etc. b. The Applicant/Property Owner shall ensure compliance with the approved plan set, including replacement and/or repair of any missing plantings as identified under the approved Landscape Plan, site irrigation, and site lighting, etc. b. The Special Use Permit is for the retail sales and warehousing of auto parts and is subject to all applicable building codes, ordinances, and regulations. Any violation thereof may be grounds for revocation. i. No outside storage of parts or products is permitted on the Subject Property. ii. No parting out of vehicles or storage of vehicles is to occur on-site or within the building. iii. No hazardous materials are to be stored on-site, other than those typically found at retail auto parts stores. RECOMMENDATION Based on the above-noted findings, Planning Staff recommends the Planning Commission recommends City Council approval of Planning Commission Application No. 2022-001, Special Use Permit for the retail sale of new and used auto parts warehoused on-site within the existing 50,614-square foot building located at 2400 Freeway Boulevard, subject to the Applicant complying with the Approval Conditions. Should the Planning Commission accept this recommendation, the Commission may elect to adopt the ________________ App. No. 2022-001 PC 01/13/2022 Page 8 resolution to be provided at the Planning Commission meeting on January, 13, 2022, which memorializes the findings in issuing a Special Use Permit approval, subject to the Applicant complying with the outlined conditions of approval. Attachments Exhibit A – Application and Exhibits for Special Use Permit Request, prepared by Derek Haluptzok (A-ABCO Auto Parts.), and dated December 10, 2021. Exhibit B – Selected Excerpts Regarding Planning Commission Application Nos. 74022, 76055, and 77019. Exhibit C – Affidavit of Publication for Notice of Hearing (2400 Freeway Boulevard), published December 30, 2021, in the Brooklyn Center Sun Post. Upload narrative detailing the request, justification, and all pertinent information regarding the request. This request is to permit the use of an auto parts business at 2400 Freeway boulevard. New and used auto parts will be stored in a warehouse setting for both wholesale and retail sale with a city desk environment for parts to be picked up. Proposed business hours are 8:00-6:00 Monday-Friday, and 9:00- 3:00 Saturday. No outdoor storage is being requested. This will be ran the same was as our location since 2008 at 7857 Hwy 65 Spring Lake Park, MN 55432. Auto parts are brought daily from our production area in Fridley to be stored and sold from the warehouse. No parts are ever outdoors. Everything is done indoors. No manufacturing or any other processing of materials is done at this location. Only auto parts are delivered and sold. No vehicles are bought, sold or stored. No hazardous materials are stored onsite besides automotive batteries and automotive fluids like any other auto parts store would have. Anticipated traffic is fifty customers per day. Anticipated deliveries are two per day. Our use of this building in Brooklyn Center will meet these standards: The establishment, maintenance or operation of the special use will promote and enhance the general public welfare and will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, morals or comfort. The special use will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity for the purposes already permitted, nor substantially diminish and impair property values within the neighborhood. The establishment of the special use will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding property for permitted uses. Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress, egress and parking so designed as to minimize traffic congestion in the public streets. The special use shall, in all other respects, conform to the applicable regulations of the district in which it is located. Exhibit A From:Friedner, Dan To:Olivia Boerschinger Cc:Derek Haluptzok Subject:FW: SUP for 2400 Freeway Boulevard (Brooklyn Center) Date:Wednesday, December 15, 2021 5:51:53 PM Olivia, Can you confirm that you received the additional information from Derek below and that we are confirmed for the January Planning Commission meeting on Thursday, January 13th at 7pm? Also, I assume this will be a Zoom meeting? Let me know, we will just need the link and the package/report…thanks! Dan Friedner, Commercial Real Estate Advisor P: 612-599-7864 | E: Dan.Friedner@nmrk.com NEWMARK | View Our Team Listings Mari Hansen, Transaction Manager P: 612-440-0002 | Mari.Hansen@nmrk.com From: Derek Haluptzok <derekfap10@hotmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, December 14, 2021 1:03 PM To: Olivia Boerschinger <oboerschinger@ci.brooklyn-center.mn.us>; Friedner, Dan <Dan.Friedner@nmrk.com> Cc: Ginny McIntosh <gmcintosh@ci.brooklyn-center.mn.us> Subject: Re: SUP for 2400 Freeway Boulevard (Brooklyn Center) Good morning Olivia, Thank you for writing. I have attached the additional information concerning the standards being met that you requested below. Please let me know if anything else is needed. Thank you, Derek Haluptzok CEO A-Abco Auto Parts Inc. www.AbcoFridleyAutoParts.com 7300 Central Ave NE Fridley, MN 55432 office 763-231-6321 cell 763-442-0875 derekfap10@hotmail.com a. The establishment, maintenance or operation of the special use will promote and enhance the general public welfare and will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, morals or comfort. A-Abco Auto Parts will be an excellent addition to the City of Brooklyn Center as many of its current clients residing in Brooklyn Center drive to Fridley to purchase auto parts at their current location in Spring Lake Park (7857 Highway 65 Northeast). In addition, many A-Abco wholesale clients are located in and around Brooklyn Center. Since there will now be a new location in Brooklyn Center, this will save on fuel costs, transportation costs and will have a positive impact on the environment. Lastly, the use of the building will be very similar to how the building is currently being used, with a portion to be used for warehouse and a portion to be used for retail/showroom purposes. The addition of A-Abco Auto Parts will provide the residents of Brooklyn Center a more convenient option to purchase auto parts. b. The special use will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity for the purposes already permitted, nor substantially diminish and impair property values within the neighborhood. The use of the building will be very similar to its current use as a warehouse and retail showroom, which will not affect the surrounding community and businesses in any injurious way. A-Abco Auto Parts will not diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood; A- Abco Auto Parts will make upgrades and updates to the building as needed to maintain the overall property image. c. The establishment of the special use will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding property for uses permitted in the district. As discussed above, the current and future uses of the building are so similar there will be no negative impact upon the community or other businesses in the area. Updates and upgrades as needed will ultimately help to enhance the property and its surrounding area. d. Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress, egress and parking so designed as to minimize traffic congestion in the public streets. With two entrances, the property appears to have been well planned originally to accommodate traffic flow. We estimate only a few truck deliveries per day of incoming parts, and 50 to 100 customers per day. This should be less traffic than the current occupant has. e. The special use shall, in all other respects, conform to the applicable regulations of the district in which it is located. The special use will conform to the applicable regulations of the district in which it is located. The current zoning of this parcel is I-1 Industrial Park. Under Section 1. Permitted Uses, subsection b 1) Automotive Equipment is permitted as a wholesale trade activity within this zoning district. In addition, under section 3. Special Uses subsection c) retail sales of products manufactured, processed, warehoused or wholesaled on the use site is also permitted within this zoning district. A-Abco Auto Parts will follow these zoning guidelines for its business operations. From: Olivia Boerschinger <oboerschinger@ci.brooklyn-center.mn.us> Sent: Monday, December 13, 2021 4:25 PM To: 'Friedner, Dan' <Dan.Friedner@nmrk.com>; Derek Haluptzok <derekfap10@hotmail.com> Cc: Ginny McIntosh <gmcintosh@ci.brooklyn-center.mn.us> Subject: RE: SUP for 2400 Freeway Boulevard (Brooklyn Center) Dan and Derek, Thank you for getting additional application materials and payment submitted so quickly last week. It has given us a chance to complete an initial review and discuss if any items are missing. The detail added in the narrative regarding hours of operation, delivery, anticipated traffic, and employment is helpful. Additionally, Ginny and I will have to present the application for the Special Use Permit based on how it demonstrates that the following standards from our City Zoning Code are met. I believe these were sent in a previous email, but I have attached them again below: A special use permit may be granted by the City Council after demonstration by PLIANMNG COMMISSION INFORMATION SHEET d Application No. 74022 Applicant: B.C.I.P. Les Byron Assoc. Location: freeway Boulevard, Southwesterly of Shingle Creek Request; Special Use Permit and Site and Il c u---' Bu cling Plan Approval The applicant proposes the construction of a 50,000 sq. ft. major applicance retail sales-warehouse facility on a parcel north of F.A. a. 314 and Freeway Boulevard and southwesterly of Shingle Creek. it represents the first request for a special use permit to allow commercial-retail establishm&nts in the I-1 district. We have had extensive discussions with the applicant relative to site dimensions and improvements. Particular concern has been directed to the complementary character of the development with respect to adjacent land uses, namely the Shingle Creek greenstrip. We will be prepared to present a detailed analysis and recommenda- tion. A written addendum to this sheet will be available prior to the meeting. e iv Exhibit B MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN 'CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA REGULAR SESSION MAY 20, 1974 CITY HALL Call to Order The Brooklyn Center City Council met in regular session and was called to order by Mayor Philip Cohen at 7:30 p;m., Roll Call Mayor Cohen, Councilmen Eritts Jensen, Kuefler and Fignar', Also present were City Manager Donald Poss, Director of Public Works James Merila ; Director of Finance Paul Holml.und, Director of Planning and Inspection Blair Tremere, City Attorney Richard Schi.effer, Chief cf P'l.ice Thomas O'Hehir, City Clerk Allen Lindrnan, and Adminis- trative Assistants Daniel Hartman and James Lacina,, Invocatir)n Reverend Pohl of the St. Alphonsus Church offered the invocation,, Approval of Minutes Motion by Councilman Kuefler and seconded by Councilman 5 -6 -74 Jensen to approve the minutes of the May 6, 1:974 meeting as submitted;. Voting in favor were: Mayor Cohen, Councilmen Britts, Kuefler, Fignar and Jensen. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. 1974: Youth Employment The City Manager introduced the first item of business, Program a recommendation for authorization to participate in the youth employment program under. the :1973 Youth Employment Act. He commented that the State of Minnesota has a110- cated $10,206 to Brooklyn Center as the 75% share of wages to be paid to youth hired by , Brooklyn Center under the State act- He stated that Brooklyn Center participati cn in the program. in 19.73 was very successful- He commented that th=e program provides for:the employment of young adults up to 22 years of age fnr a ,maximum of 10 weeks nct tc: exceed 30 hours per week per individual , Motion by Councilman Britts and seconded by :Councilman Fignar`to authorize the Mayor' and the City Manager to execute an agreement to participate in the youth employ- ment program with the State of Minnesota, Department of Employment Services,. Voting in favor were: Mayc;r° Cohen, Councilmen Britts, Kuefler, Fignar_ and Jensen, Voting against.. none, The motion passed unanimously. Release of a Cash The City Manager next recommended release of a cash Escrow` (Hjelvik:escrow in the amount of $115 fear subdivision improvements Second Addition)on the Hjelvik Second Addition' He stated that this pro- ject had been completed some time ago, Motion by Councilman Kuefler and seconded by Ccunci.lman Jensen to authorize release of the cash escrow in the amount of $115 for Hjelvik Second Addition. Voting is favor were-, Mayor Cohen, Councilmen BriV s Kuefler Fignar and Jensen, Voting against. none- The motion passed unanimously. 1-S -20 -74 B s I a The proposed addition shall conform with all yard requirements with the exception of the front yard setback which may be Less than 35 feet but not less than that of the existing dwelling, 2.The applicant shall provide the City with an easement ac ross the easterly 7 feet north - 75 feet of his property for alleyway purposes as approved by the City Engine or, Voting in favor were° Mayor Cohen, Councilmen Br ttx Kuefler Fignar and Jensen. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. The next item of bLus news was consideration of Planndn,P1.i-,.`? ng i:,r on, Commission Application No. 7 /4022 submitted by 74022 B.G.I ®P., Inc. and Les Byron Associates. The item B,C and Les was again introduced by the Director of Planning and t5yrt-)r Inspection who stated, that the application consists of a special use permit request and proposed site and building plan approval for a 50,000 square foot major appliance retail sales warehouse facility on a. parcel north. of F'AI -94 and Freeway Boulevard and southwesterl of Shingle Creek. Mr. Tremere noted that the applicatJ.:=; represents the first request for a special use permit to allow a commercial retail establishment in an 1 -1 d strict. He stated that the ad.jace `.t laird use to the north war the Shingle Creek open spat green strip for which a master plan, had been developed by Brauer and Assoc aces He ccm- nn that the staff had worked with the appli- cant to assure the subject s was both complementary and compatible with that rye given environmental co sideration o acs well as the geed, to provide for adeg'jat flood, plain designs . Mro Tremere also ccmmented that the submitted play- indicate provis °ons for eror*gh land area to suupport; r quired parking for th( 1:;u, d,'ng at a Cm2 retail l ry 23 spaces. He stated, ow ver, that the applicYj;t o reposes to use only a p ). tlon of the building f.2'r `et;,al' ac =s17,rity and the remainder c f the building would b: wareho g Th— o t i EippIication req'!ue t -d r,r ent of appr°c-ximatt:dy 148 parking spaces c t;s:in l f" 1 z. ace would be adequate. Mr® -ilr,-mon d th= t th, land s ape plan comprehended the erred parki`r g. area TKe Dl- „-crc r of Publ..,c Works ti -.en explained the suit- i6 .,lout - r ` pr„a ,r,_, posed grading and berms ng an: "r t e dev vl >pm :r °t po r, i! ng area in the Shingle- k gnae strip, wh ch would be used to serve the a a iz,age ner ds of thhe site, as well as to provide a r o zr type area, which was proposed in the Brauer 3t-dyo Mr® Merila also cited the various flood plain ccno iderations and i aiicated that the design of the berming on the north end of 10 e site was intended to provide screening, as well as permitting the site to support flood plain needs. 10-5 ®20 ®74 The Mayor recognized Mr. Stephen Krogness representing the applicant and a lengthy discussion ensued relative to the landscaping and site improvements. Action Approving Motion by Councilman Kuefler and seconded by Councilman Planning Commissimr,Fignar to approve Planning Commission Application No. Application No, 74022 74022 submitted by B ®C.I.P., Inc. and Les Byron B.C.I.P. and Les Associates comprehending a special use permit and site Byron Associates)and building plan approval subject to the following conditions: 1 .Building plans are subject to review and approval by the building official with respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance of permits. r in, and bermin plans2.Utility, rainage grading g pyo0 are subject to review and approval by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of permits. 8. A performance agreement and a financial guarantee (in an amount to be determined by the City Manager) shball. be submitted to assure completion of ,site improvements as indicated on approved p.as1s 4. A portion of the required parking spaces shall be deferred as indicated on the approved plans until such time that the installation of the additional spaces is deemed necessary by the City Council; provided that the deferred area is seeded and maintained with viable turf and vegetative materials 5. The required underground Hawn sprinkling system shall be installed as indicated on- the approved plans in lieu of covering the entire green area north of the building and parking lot; provided that such system shall be extended to the north boundary green strip area at such time that the deferred parking lot is installed 6.The ponding area indicated on the approved plans as located in the Shingle Creek green strip is approved as part of the site drainage system, and shall be included as one of the required site improvements. 7.The site shall be subdivided through platting or registered land survey according to the provisions of Chapter 15 of the City Ordinances. 8.The permit shall be issued to the applicant as the operator of the facility and shall be non- transferable. Voting in favor were: Mayor Cohen, Councilmen Britts, Kuefler, Fignar and Jensen. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. 11-5-20-74 MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY-OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA REGULAR SESSION OCTOBER 18, 1976 CITY HALL Call to Order The Brooklyn Center City Council met in regular session -and was called to order by Mayor Philip Cohen at 7:30 p.m. Roll Call Mayor Cohen, Councilmen Britts, Kuefler, Fignar, and Jensen. Also present were City Managzr'Donald Poss, Director of Public Works James Merila, City Attorney Richard Schieffer, Director of Finance Paul Holmlund, Director of Planning and Inspection Blair Tremere, and Administrative Assistants Leon Beasley and Ronald Warren. Invocation The invocation was offered by Pastor Roy Lindquist of Brookdale Covenant Church. Approval of Minutes Motion by Councilman Kuefler and seconded by 9 -15 -76 Councilman Jensen to approve the minutes of the September 15 1976 City Council meeting as sub - mitted. Voting in favor were: Mayor Cohen, Councilmen Britts, Kuefler, Fignar, and Jensen. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. Brooklyn Center Garden The City Manager introduced the first item of business, Club Commendation that of a proposed resolution commending the Brooklyn Center Garden Club for the decorative' floral and plant displays in the Civic Center plaza area. He reported that this annual Garden Club project results in one of the finest plaza area displays in the Twin Cities area. He explained that the Garden Club is responsible for planning and installing the flower and plant arrange- ments, and noted that a number of visitors to the City Hall have commented on this year's Bicentennial flower arrangement. The Director of Public Works showed a number of slides depicting the garden area planter and the Bicentennial floral arrangement. Mayor Cohen complimented the Garden Club for their efforts over the years. Councilman Kuefler expressed his appreciation, on behalf of the Bicentennial Commission, for the fine Bicentennial plant arrangement RESOLUTION Member Bill Fignar introduced the following resolution NO. 76 -147 and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION EXPRESSING RECOGNITION OF AND APPRECIATION FOR THE DEDICATED PUBLIC SERVICE OF THE BROOKLYN CENTER GARDEN CLUB The motion for the adoption of the foregoing' resolution was duly seconded by member Maurice Britts, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Philip Cohen, Maurice Britts, Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar, and Robert Jensen; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. 1-10 -18 -76 Following he discussion her wthere as a motiongton b AAction ApprovingYAoPpg Councilman Britts and seconded by Councilman Fignar Planning Commission to approve Planning Commission Application No.Application No. 76052 76052 submitted by W. J. Dale subject to the W. J. Dale) following conditions: 1. Final plat is subject to approval by the City Engineer. 2. Final plat is subject to the requirements of Chapter 15 of the City Ordinances. Voting in favor were: Mayor Cohen, Councilmen Britts, Kuefler, Fignar, and Jensen. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. The City Manager introduced the next item of business Planning Commission on the agenda, that of Planning Commission Application No. 76055 Application No. 76055 submitted by J. Y. J.J. Y. J. Corporation) Corporation. The Director of Planning and Inspection proceeded with a review of Planning Commission Application No. 76055 and the Planning Commission action at their October 14, 1976 meeting. He stated that the applicant is seeking a special use permit to allow commercial retail activity at the former Kennedy -Cohen Building, 2400 Freeway Boulevard. He explained that commercial uses were special uses in the I -1 Industrial Park District. He commented that the applicant at this time had a short term lease with the owner, Fa B. S. Financial, Inc., and was considering purchasing the building. He further stated that since Kennedy -Cohen had vacated the premises the site improvements had deteriorated substantially and virtually all of the sodding had died. He noted that the Planning Commission had recom- mended that, not withstanding the short term occupancy proposed by the applicant, the status of site improve - ments should be reviewed with the intent of assuring upgrading during the next construction season. He explained that the applicant was in the process of occupying the premises as a permitted wholesale distribution use and that the proposed retail com- mercial activity would be an additional related activity involving general merchandise. He next reviewed slides showing the location and configuration of the property in question, pointing out various deteriorated site improvements that must be addressed to A brief discussion ensued relative to the application. Mayor Cohen recognized Mr. Don Yablonsky, repre- senting the applicant, who briefly reviewed the activity proposed for the site. He explained that the business buys large lots of goods from financially troubled businesses and periodically offers these items for retail sale. He stated that basically the business is a wholesale distribution operation but occasionally needs the capability of offering merchandise through a retail commercial activity. In response to an inquiry by the City Manager, Mr. Yablonsky stated that when the business has a large volume of merchandise, such as women's leather coats, they would advertise as to the 10 -15 -76 10- date and time of their proposed retail sale. He explained that the Kennedy -Cohen Building offers them the right amount of access to freeways and the visibility needed to make their sales successful. In response to a question by Councilman Fignar, Mr. Yablonsky stated that J. Y. J. Corporation has a three month lease with a one month option on the Kennedy -Cohen Building. Mayor Cohen next recognized Mr. Tim Hamilton, who represented F. B. S. Financial, Inc., `owners of the building. He stated that F. B. S. has no objection to making the necessary site improvements, but objected to the requirement that F. B. S. submit a performance agreement and financial guarantee to assure completion of the required improvements. Mayor Cohen responded that the City is concerned that site improvements and upgrading be accom- plished, thus the rationale for the performance guarantee The City Manager stated that past experience has shown the City that the best way to assure site improvements is to make the owner of the building responsible for thorn. He added that the ordinance requires that the owner submit the performance agreement and supporting financial guarantee. A brief discussion ensued relative to the required site improvements. Public Hearing Mayor Cohen opened the meeting to notified property owners. It was noted that no one spoke relating to the application, Action Approving Following further discussion there was a motion. by Planning Commission Councilman Jensen and seconded by Councilman Application No. 76055 Britts to approve Planning Commission Application J.Y. J. Corporation)No. 76055 submitted by J. Y. J. Corporation subject to the following: 1. The permit is issued to the applicant as operator and is not transferable. 2. A portion of the required parking spaces may be deferred as indicated on the plans approved under Application No. 74022 until such time that the installation of the additional spaces is deemed necessary by the City Council; provided the deferred area is planted and maintained with viable turf and vegetative material. 3. A portion of the required underground irrigation may also be deferred as indicated on the approved plans for the area north of the building and parking lot; provided that such system shall be extended to the north boundary greenstrip at such time that the. deferred parking is installed. 4. The site lighting shall be repaired and /or installed so that it will be functional prior to issuance of the permit. 5. All landscaping and parking lot improvements shall be rejuvenated, replaced or installed consistent with the approved site plans. 11-10 -18 -76IIIr. 6. A performance agreement and supporting financial guarantee (in an amount to be deter- mined by the City Manager) shall be submitted to assure completion of required improvements prior to issuance of the permit. Voting in favor were: Mayor Cohen, Councilmen Britts, Kuefler, Fignar, and Jensen. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. The City Manager inquired if the Council would be industrial /Commercial receptive to developing a maintenance code for Maintenance Code industrial and commercial properties. Councilman Jensen commented that the City presently has a maintenance code for residential properties and that it would seem logical to also have a maintenance code for industrial and commercial properties. Following a brief discussion it was the consensus of the Council that the City Manager prepare an industrial /commercial maintenance code for the Council's consideration. The City Manager introduced the next item of business Chippewa Park on the agenda, that of a review of the rental dwelling Rental Dwelling license for the Chippewa Park apartments. He stated-License Review that the matter had been deferred at the October 4, 1976 City Council meeting to this evening's meeting in order that the owner would be given an opportunity to address the City Council. He explained that when the apart - ments' license was reviewed for renewal a number of concerns were put forth relative to the site work on the property. He further explained that the owner of the property has been notified of these concerns and has been making an effort to improve the management of the complex, The City Manager stated that the number of police calls, an item that often indicates the operation of an apartment complex, has gone down in recent months. The Director of Planning and Inspection proceeded to review slides showing the condition of the Chippewa Park apartments site and pointed out the areas where trees were missing and the landscape had deteriorated. Mayor Cohen recognized Mr. Harold Liefschutz, owner of the Chippewa Park apartments, who stated that he is attempting to improve the quality of riving at the apart- ment complex and to improve the site totally. He explained that there were a number of problems when he took over the ownership of the apartment, many related to the quality of tenants living in the buildings. He commented that he is attempting to attract a better quality tenant by improving the physical appearance of the complex. He stated that much of his effort has been initially directed at improving the individual units and that it is his intention to address the site problems as soon as possible, and that it is a matter of economics as to how much he can accomplish at one time. He further stated that he plans to retain ownership of the complex for a long time and asked the Ccuncil to be patient with his efforts to improve the site. 10 -18 -76 12- MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA REGULAR SESSION JUNE 6, 1977 CITY HALL Call to Order The Brooklyn Center City Council met in regular session and was called to order by Mayor Philip Cohen at 7:30 p , m . Roll Call Mayor Cohen, Councilmen Britts, Kuefler, Fignar and Lhotka. Also present were City Manager Donald Poss, Director of Public Works James Merila, Director of Finance Paul Holmlund, City Assessor Peter Koole, Director of Planning and Inspection Blair Tremere, Assistant City Engineer Dennis Brown, and Administrative Assistants Brad Hoffman, Mary Harty, and Ronald Warren. Invocation The invocation was offered by Pastor Rosenau of the Lutheran Church of the Triune God. Approval of Minutes Mayor Cohen reported that a correction to page 11 of 5 -23 -77 the May 23, 1977 City Council minutes had been submitted and was at the table for the Council's consideration. Motion by Councilman Lhotka and seconded by Council- man Britts to approve the minutes - of the May 23 ,1977 City Council meeting as corrected. Voting in favor: Mayor Cohen, Councilmen Britts and Lhotka. Voting against: none. The motion passed. Councilmen Kuefler and Fignar abstained as they were not at that meeting. Mayoral Appointment Mayor Cohen announced his appointment of Dawn K. to the Park and Kiefer, 6218 Kyle Avenue North, to the Park and Recreation Commission Recreation Commission representing Park Service Area IV and requested Council confirmation. He explained that Mrs. Kiefer is a six year resident of Brooklyn Center and has been active in the Mrs. Jaycees, Citizens for Better Government, Community Emergency Assistance Program, and the Girl Scouts. He stated that she had been recommended by Park and Recreation Commission Chairman Gerald Johnson and would fill the vacancy created by the resignation of Margaret Whittaker. Councilman Kuefler stated that two applications for appointment to the Park and Recreation Commission had been reviewed and that both of the applicants were well qualified for appointment to the Commission. He stated that both Chairman Johnson and himself feel that Mrs. Kiefer will make an excellent Commission member. Motion by Councilman Fignar and seconded by Councilman Kuefler to confirm Mayor Cohen's appointment of Dawn K. Kiefer, 6218 Kyle Avenue North, to the Park and Recreation Commission representing Park Service Area IV effective immediately for a term to, expire December 31, 1979. Voting in favor were; Mayor Cohen, Councilmen Britts, Kuefler, Fignar and Lhotka. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. Mayoral Appointment Mayor Cohen next announced his appointment of Teri Bona, to the Park Service 6333 Regent Avenue North, to the Park Service Area IV Area IV Committee Committee and requested Council confirmation. He stated that Mrs. Bona is an eleven year resident of Brooklyn Center and is presently active as a Girl Scout leader 1-6 -6 -77 new lot at the south end of the property meets the ordinance requirements as to area and depth but that the width of 74.88 feet is 15.12 feet less than the ordinance minimum for corner lots and thus there is also a variance consideration included in the application. He reported that the applicant proposes to build a single family home on the newly created lot. He next reviewed a transparencyency showing the location and configuration of the property and various slides depicting the area. A brief discussion ensued relative to the application. Mayor Cohen recognized the applicant, Ronald jaroscak, who stated that he had nothing furthcrto add to the application. Mayor Cohen opened the meeting to notified property Public Hearing owners. No one spoke relating to the application. Following further discussion there was a motion by Action Approving Councilman Britts and seconded by Councilman Lhotka Planning Commission to approve Planning Commission Application No. 77018 Application No. 77018 submitted by Ronald jaroscak noting that the application Ronald Jaroscak) satisfies the requirements of Chapter 15 with respect to variances and subject to the following conditions; 1. Final plat is subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. 2. Final plat is subject to the requirements of Chapter 15 of the City Ordinances. 3. The variance comprehends the width and no other variances are granted or implied. Voting in favor Mayor -Cohen, Councilmen Britts , Fignar, Kuefler, and Lhotka. Voting against none. The motion passed unanimously. The City Manager introduced the next item of business Planning Commission on the agenda, that of Planning Commission Application Application No. 77019 No. '77019 submitted by Schmitt Music Company.Schmitt Music Company) The Director of Planning and Inspection proceeded to review Planning Commission Application No. 77019 and the Planning Commission. action at its May 26, 1977 meeting. He stated that the applicant was in the process of purchasing the former Kennedy & Cohen building at 2400 Freeway Boulevard and is seeking special use permit for retail sales and an educational use involving music equipment at that site. He further stated that the last time the Kennedy & Cohen building was subject to review by the Council was under Planning Commission Application No. 76055 in the fall of 1976. He briefly reviewed the applicant's proposed use and stated that a special use permit is necessary -in the I -I district because of the pro - posed retail sales and educational uses contemplated for this occupancy. He next reviewed a transparency showing the location and configuration of the property and various slides depicting the area in question. He pointed out the areas that are in need of landscaping rejuvenation. A brief discussion ensued relative to the application. Mayor Cohen recognized the applicant, Mr. Robert Schmitt, who stated that he has not yet purchased the property but should close the deal early in July. He added that he would be unable to bring landscaping improvements up to the City code by the time he intends to occupy the building, but that he has every intention of making the necessary improvements. He explained that B. C. I. P. and F. B. S. Financial, Inc. have agreed that much of the landscaping improvements are their responsibility and that they plan to rectify this matter. 6 -6 -77 6- In response to an inquiry by Councilman Kuefler, Mr. Schmitt stated that they plan to open the business for operation in late July or early August. Councilman Fignar stated that although some of the site improvements required are the responsibility of B.C.I.P. and F.B.S. Financial, Inc., for purposes of this application Mr. Schmitt is ultimately responsible for these improvements. Mr. Schmitt concurred. Action Approving Following further discussion there was a motion by Council- Planning Commission man Kuefler and seconded by Councilman Fignar to approve Application No. 77019 Planning Commission Application No. 77019 submitted by Schmitt Music Co.)Schmitt Music Company subject to the following conditions: 1. The permit is issued to the applicant as operator and is not transferable. 2. A portion of the required parking spaces may be deferred as indicated on the plans approved under Application No 74022, until such time the installation of additional spaces is deemed necessary by the City Council; provided that the deferred area is planted and maintained by a viable turf and vegetative material. e 3. A portion of the required underground irrigation may also be deferred as indicated on the deferred plans for the area north of the building and park- ing lot; provided that such systems shall be extended to the north boundary greenstrip at such time that the deferred parking is installed. 4. The site lighting shall be repaired and /or installed so that it will be functional prior to issuance of the permit. 5. All landscaping and parking lot improvements shall be rejuvenated, replaced, or installed consistent with the approved plans. 6. A performance agreement and supporting financial guarantee (in an amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be submitted prior to the issuance of the permit to assure completion of the required improvements. Voting in favor: Mayor Cohen, Councilmen Britts , Fignar, Kuefler, and Lhotka. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. Planning Commission The City Manager introduced the next item of business Application No 77020 on the agenda, that of Planning Commission Application Peter Racchini &No. 77020 submitted by Peter Racchini & Associates Y Associates for Winchell's for Winchell's Donuts. Donuts) The Director of Planning and Inspection proceeded with a review of Planning Commission Application No. 77020 and the Planning Commission action at its May 26, 1977 meeting, He stated that the applicant seeks approval of site and building plans for a 21 seat donut shop on the property currently addressed 6810 Brooklyn Boulevard. He explained that the site was the subject of site and buf ding plan approval and 7-6 -6 -77 Exhibit C The Planning Application submittal deadline dates, followed by the Planning Commission and applicable City Council meeting dates, are established for 2022. Planning Commission meetings are held the second Thursday of each month at 7:00 p.m. If a recommendation is made by the Planning Commission regarding the application it will typically be placed on the agenda of the next available City Council meeting, which are held the second and fourth Mondays of each month at 7:00 p.m. Planning Commission Meetings are typically held in the Council Chambers located on the 2nd floor of City Hall at 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, Brooklyn Center, Minnesota; however, due to the COVID-19 Pandemic, all meetings are currently being held virtually. You may access the online links to meetings via the City website calendar at: www.ci.brooklyn-center.mn.us Note: The below schedule is outlined for those submitting Planning Commission applications and does not reflect all City Council meetings scheduled for 2022, as the City Council typically meets twice per month. You may access the 2022 City Council Schedule here. Application Submittal Deadline (30 Days Prior to Meeting) 2022 Planning Commission Meeting Dates 2022 City Council Meeting Dates (for PC Applications) December 14 (2021) January 13 January 24 January 11 February 10 February 28 February 8 March 10 March 28 March 15 April 14 April 25 or May 9 April 12 May 12 May 23 May 10 June 9 June 27 June 14 July 14 July 25 or August 8 July 12 August 11 August 22 August 9 September 8 September 26 September 13 October 13 October 24 October 11 November 10 November 28 November 8 December 8 January 9 (2023) This schedule is subject to change and revisions may be made with prior notice as necessary. Please access the City of Brooklyn Center’s website at www.ci.brooklyn-center.mn.us to receive up-to-date meeting dates and notices of any changes made to this schedule. Failure to submit all application materials, fees, and escrows by 4:30 p.m. on the application submittal deadline may delay the review process. 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, MN 55430-2199 Phone (763) 569-3330 TTY/Voice 711 Fax (763) 569-3360 www.ci.brooklyn-center.mn.us City of Brooklyn Center 2022 Planning Commission Schedule & Submittal Deadline Item 11.a