Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1965-030 CCR Member Howard Heck introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 65 -30 RESOLUTION DENYING APPLICATION #65001 FOR REZONING OF PART OF LOT 18 AUDITOR'S SUBDIVISION #25 FROM R -1 TO B -2 WHEREAS, W. O. Patterson has made application #65001 dated January 13, 1965 for the rezoning of a certain portion of Lot 18 Auditor's Subdivision #25 from R -1 zoning to B -2; and WHEREAS, the said application was placed upon the Planning Commission agenda for hearing on February 4, 1965; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission on February 4, 1965 heard the applicant and considered the application and recommended that it be denied; and WHEREAS, the said recommendation was considered by the Village Council on February 8, 1965 and was, by motion of Councilman Phil Cohen, referred back to the Planning Commission: "for the purpose of reviewing the similarity of this request with the application for the Bridgeman establishment and to obtain legal counsel on the question and WHEREAS, pursuant to the direction of the Council and on February 18, 1965 the Planning Commission conducted a hearing at which the applicant through his agent Richard Curry, the prospective lessee, Alfred Peterson and interested neighbors were heard; and WHEREAS, on February 25, 1965 the Planning Commission on motion of Robert Grosshans adopted a resolution recommending denial of application #65001 and explaining its reasons for the said recommendation; and WHEREAS, the Village Council considered the application on March 8, 1965, following several postponements requested by the applicants attorney, and at that time conducted a hearing at which the applicant appeared through its attorney, James H. Johnston and agent Richard Curry, and the proposed lessee Alfred Peterson appeared personally and Allen Erickson, manager of the P. B.C. Clinic appeared personally, and Mr. Sneva, a registered engineer appeared in behalf of the applicant and interested neighbors also appeared; and RESOLUTION NO. 65 -30 WHEREAS, the Village Council has considered the statements of the above mentioned persons, the recommendations of the Planning Commission, the recommendations of the Village Planning Consultant; and WHEREAS, the Village Council of the Village of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota believes that the question to be decided upon this application for rezoning from R -1 to B -2 is whether B -2 zoning is consistent with the character of the area wherein the subject property is located and whether B -2 zoning for the subject property is in the public interest. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Village Council of the Village of Brooklyn Center that the following are its findings, conclusions and action with respect to application #65001 for rezoning of a part of Lot 18 Auditor's Subdivision #25 from R -1 to B -2. Finding s: 1 Exhibit A is a map setting out the zoning presently in force on the subject and surrounding property and showing the property uses. 2. The area on Exhibit A outlined in red contains five uses: (2) are permitted in an R -B zone, (2) are special uses in a B -2 or B -3 zone and one is a single family dwelling. The remainder of the property is vacant although application has been made and approval given for apartment buildings behind the two gasoline service stations. 3. Surrounding the red outlined area on all sides is property zoned R -1 and used or planned primarily for residential dwellings. 4. The subject property is bounded on the West by State Highway #152 or Osseo Road which has recently been improved by the Minnesota Highway Department. This highway has been designed as a major arterial roadway to serve the people of Brooklyn Center, Brooklyn Park and other North Suburban communities. The highway design is intended to provide reasonably fast and safe trips for the essentially residential community it serves. Access from the highway to the subject property is not limited nor is there a center divider at the subject property. Traffic control devices are located 1200' north of the subject property at 63rd Ave. and 2200' south at County Road #10. 5. The two gasoline filling stations located near the subject property were approved in 1958. This approval occurred before the Village commenced the 701 planning and zoning study. 6. The Village is nearing completion of a federally assisted planning and zoning study of the entire Village. The objects and goals of this study should be applied to this application to the degree it may reasonably be done. RESOLUTION NO. 65 -30 Conclusion: 1 The red outlined area on Exhibit A should be considered a unified area for zoning purposes. The clinic on the North and mortuary on the South more or less define the limits of the area which is bounded on East and West by roadways. The area thus described is otherwise surrounded by residential uses. 2. The essential character of the above described area is somewhat unsettled. Of the five present uses, one is a R -1 use, two are R -B uses and two are special uses in a B -2 or B -3 zone. The remaining property is undeveloped. 3. The future development of the subject property should be consistent with the public interest and, so far as reasonably possible, consistent with the comprehensive planning study. 4. B -2 zoning would not be in the public interest for the following reasons: (a) The area surrounding the subject property is primarily residential in character. The uses permitted in a B -2 zone are those which involve a high degree of activity, noise, debris, auto and parking light glare and mal odor which conflict with the surrounding residential use. (b) The granting of B -2 zoning for the subject property will adversely affect the community interest in safe and speedy travel along Osseo Road since B -2 zoning could transform the red outlined area (and perhaps the land across Osseo Road) into a B -2 zone. (c) The auto turning movements which would be made into the B -2 uses would create congestion and danger for the pedestrians and drivers living in the surrounding residential area. The problem is further aggravated by the lack of traffic control devices and median strip. (d) The 701 planning consultant has recommended "service" uses for the subject property as opposed to the higher activity uses of B -2 zone. Action: For the reasons stated, and based upon a review of all of the written and oral proceedings related to this application the Village Council of the Village of Brooklyn Center denies application #65001 for rezoning a part of Lot 18, Auditor's Subdivision #25 from R -1 to B -2. RESOLUTION NO. 65 -30 March 8, 1965 Date j .1 Mayor ATTEST: /1� Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Phil Cohen and upon vote being taken thereon the following voted in favor thereof: Gordon Erickson, Howard Heck, Phil Cohen and Earl Simons and the following voted against the same: john Leary; whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.