Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998 09-28 CCP Regular Session Public Copy CITY COUNCIL MEETING • City of Brooklyn Center September 28, 1998 AGENDA 1. Informal Open Forum With City Council - 6:45 p.m. - provides an opportunity for the public to address the Council on items which are not on the agenda. Open Forum will be limited to 15 minutes, it is not televised, and it may not be used to make personal attacks, to air personality grievances, to make political endorsements, or for political campaign purposes. Council Members will not enter into a dialogue with citizens. Questions from the Council will be for clarification only. Open Forum will not be used as a time for problem solving or reacting to the comments made but, rather, for hearing the citizen for informational purposes only. 2. Invocation - 7 p.m. 3. Call to Order Regular Business Meeting 4. Roll Call 5. Council Report • 6. Presentations -Sean Rahn Regarding Discover the Center 7. Approval of Agenda and Consent Agenda -The following items are considered to be routine by the City Council and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Councilmember so requests, in which event the item will be removed from the consent agenda and considered at the end of Council Consideration Items. a. Approval of Minutes - Councilmembers not present at meetings will be recorded as abstaining from the vote on the minutes. 1. September 14, 1998 - Regular Session b. Licenses C. Appoint Additional Election Judges to Serve in the General Election d. Resolution Declaring a Public Nuisance and Ordering the Removal of Diseased Trees e. Resolution Accepting Work Performed and Authorizing Final Payment, 'Improvement Project No. 1998 -14, Contract 1998 -I, Kylawn Park Trail Linkage CITY COUNCIL AGENDA -2- September 28, 1998 S. Planning Commission Items a. Planning Commission Application No. 98017 Submitted by Dave Phillips, Phillips Architects. Request for Rezoning and Site and Building Plan approval through the Planned Unit Development (PUD) process for an expansion of the Brookdale Chrysler Plymouth Dealership at 6121 Brooklyn Boulevard and the interim use of 6107 Brooklyn Boulevard for the storage and display of new and used car inventory. The Planning Commission recommended approval of this application at its September 10, 1998, meeting. 1. Resolution Regarding Disposition of Planning Commission Application No. 98017 Submitted by Dave Phillips on Behalf of Brookdale Chrysler Plymouth. 2. An Ordinance Amending Chapter 35 of the City Ordinances Regarding the Zoning Classification of Certain Land ( Brookdale Chrysler Plymouth). - Requested Council Action: - Motion to adopt resolution. • - Motion to introduce first reading of Ordinance Amending Chapter 35 of the City Ordinances Regarding the Zoning Classification of Certain Land ( Brookdale Chrysler Plymouth), and set public hearing for October 13, 1998. b. Planning Commission Application No. 98018 Submitted by Joseph Lampe and Ernee McArthur. Request for a Variance from the Subdivision Ordinance to allow the division of a 16 %2 x 675' strip of land by a metes and bounds description rather than by a formal plat. The Planning Commission recommended approval of this application at its September 10, 1998, meeting. 1. An Ordinance Vacating Utility Easements in Certain Lots in Block 1, John Ryden Second Addition - Requested Council Action: - Motion to approve Planning Commission Application No 98018 subject to the conditions recommended by the Planning Commission - Motion to introduce first reading Ordinance Vacating a Utility Easement in Certain Lots in Block 1, JOHN RYDEN SECOND ADDITION, and set public hearing for October 13, 1998 • CITY COUNCIL AGENDA -3- September 28, 1998 • C. Planning Commission Application No. 98019 Submitted by Centres Group Brooklyn Center, LTD. Request for an amendment to the Planned Unit Development (PUD) approved for the Regal Theater development under Planning Commission Application No. 98015 to provide an alternative storm water detention plan. The Planning Commission recommended approval of this application at its September 10 1998, meeting. 1. Resolution Approving Final Plat - REGAL ROAD DEVELOPMENT ADDITION. - Requested Council Action: - Motion to approve Planning Commission Application No 98019 subject to the conditions recommended by the Planning Commission. - Motion to adotp resolution approving final plat - REGAL ROAD DEVELOPMENT DIVISION 9. Council Consideration Items . a. Resolution Establishing Improvement Project No. 1998 -31, Investigation of Brick Distress, Community Center, and Accepting Proposal for Professional Services - Requested Council Action: - Motion to adopt resolution. b. Set Date and Time of Joint Meeting with Planning Commission - Requested Council Action: - Motion to set December 17, 1998, 7:30 p.m. for joint meeting with planning commission. C. Resolution Expressing Recognition of and Appreciation for the Dedicated Public Service of Judith Bergland on Earle Brown Days - Requested Council Action: - Motion to adopt resolution. d. Proclamation Declaring October 5 through 11, 1998, to be Cities Week - Requested Council Action: - Motion to adopt proclamation. e. Neighborhood Concern Re: No Parking on 69th Avenue - Requested Council Action: -Ms. Chambers will give verbal update. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA 4- September 28, 1998, f. Resolution Approving Settlement and Authorizing Payment Thereof -Requested Council Action: - Motion to adopt resolution. g. Resolution Accepting Bid and Awarding Contract for Heritage Center Remodeling -Requested Council Action: - Motion to adopt resolution. h. Update on Code Enforcement -Requested Council Action: -Ms. Chambers will give verbal update. 10. Adjournment Discover the Center Discover the Center Board Report to the Brooklyn Center City Council September 28, 1998 Board Members: Karen Youngberg, Cathy Ballot, Pat Milton, Linda Hanka, Sean Rahn Meeting Time/ Location: 8:30a.m., 2nd Wed. of the Month, Family Resource Center, Humboldt Square Mission Statement: Discover th .- Center is a community wide effort to serve as a facilitator, bridging organizations and encouraging collaboratives while informing and educating both residents and non - residents about the quality of life in Brooklyn Center. Introduction of Board Members and Opening Statement —Sean Rahn Ongoing Projects: I OK Run —Karen Youngberg Realtor Day —Karen Youngberg Participant recruitment —Karen Youngberg New Projects: Healthy Youth Initiatives —Pat Milton President's Club —Sean Rahn Conclusion: Vision for the Future 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 (612) 569 -3440 F L September 28, 1998 TO: Brooklyn Center City Council Members, Diane Spector, Director of Public Works, Michael J. McCauley, City Manager, Joel Downer, Chief of Police FROM: Walt & Sandra Wenholz, Homeowners at 501 69 Avenue North SUBJECT: Removal of No Parking Signs on 69 Avenue North (No. & So. Sides) In answer to the three letters we have received this past Saturday, September 26 in regard to the on- street parking on 69 Avenue North, we would appreciate very much if you also would read our concerns related to this matter. Background: We've lived at the above address since July of 1961. It was approximately between 1972 and 1974 that these apartments were built. Before the property was rezoned, the city and builders PROMISED that this site would contain only adult luxury townhomes. We still did not want multiple housing across from us, but most of the few homeowners in the area agreed to the townhomes. After the rezoning went through, the plans were changed to regular apartments. We went to the City Council and asked how we could protect our rights - and they didn't have an answer to that. At that time plans were brought out and were shown to homeowners, showing all the parking within the complex and with the PROMISE from the city and builder there would be No- Parking signs on 69 This PROMISE was kept for over 20 years and we appreciated at least that we had one small say in this. About six years ago, a survey was taken and shown that homeowners wanted the No Parking signs to stay. In that letter it was stated that we would be notified if the subject came up again. Last year in the space of one to two weeks time, these signs were taken down, without contacting any of the homeowners on 69 Why, after 20 years, was there such an urgent need to remove the signs - there were no problems before then as far as parking was concerned. We can somewhat understand your statements about right to park, but feel that would pertain more to a homeowner's right to park if needed. Yes it is a city street, but Ms. Spector is placing the burden on the homeowners of the neighborhood and the owner of the apartment complex to enforce the overnight parking ban and parking on the wrong side of street, by bothering the police department with "nuisance calls." We don't want or like to be put in the position of reporting these violations (and of course would have to make sure we checked between 2 - 6:00 a.m.) - which will make us seem like the problem, not the tenants who park overnight or on wrong side of the street. The situation has eased since enforcement has been on the rise, but I'm certain that this level of enforcement cannot continue. Police have more important things to do than worry about parking. The other problem with this is that tenants come and go, and each time new people move in, a new round of monitoring the problems will occur, which will again fall on us. And,as I'm sure you would have to agree, renters do not care about property, etc. as do homeowners. Ms. Spector has stated that she has driven by several times and we appreciate her taking the time. However, she has not seen what can happen over a whole year's time. She mentions a junker car. That car was rammed by an irate former girlfriend in the middle of the night. This party must have been going 40 miles an hour when she hit his car intentionally. It sounded like an explosion. The car stayed in the grass for about two weeks before anyone moved it. We have seen people changing their oil, fixing brakes, having their tools laid out on the pavement - recently a tire laid in the grass for about two weeks. Other trash from their cars is seen on the street. Our fear is that our street will begin to look like apartment garages and the contents. The cars will wear out the grass and will end up making for a very aesthetically unpleasing street. Nothing has been addressed about the increased traffic flow since the signs are gone. Our driveway is directly across from the only 69 entrance to the apartments. That was another thing the city said back in the 1970's... "there will be two entrances to 70 Ave. (which has an entrance to Hwy.252)- you will not have many egress from the 69 exit." Since the signs have been taken down, tenants coming from the west on 69 Avenue, generally make a wide sweep into the end of our driveway continuing to the apartment entrance and a U -turn made to park in front of the apartments. And, of course they come from 70 to drive through the apartments (passing the off - street parking within the apartment complex), to park on 69 Avenue. We do have some safety concerns even though the letter states there are none. When cars ark n th o the south side of 69 it makes it exceedingly difficult for p g y cu t o us to see as we back out of our driveway, We have an incline at the end of our driveway. Also at times, our grandchildren come to visit and drive bikes in the area. With cars parking the wrong way, why isn't this a safety factor for all the children in the area (including the children living in the apartments)? Another factor given for keeping No Parking signs up in the Willow Lane area, was that street crews have a difficult time clearing he snow. Why Y wouldn't that be the same for our street? We do feel the apartment owners, Gary & Rita (566 -3200) have improved the general overall care ofthe apartments. They have owned it for about eight years and they want the No Parking signs put back up. However, there is no guarantee they will stay the owners. We are retired and do not want or care to keep after these parking problems. We plan and want to stay in our home for the remainder of our years (cur four children were born and grew up there)... and that is why we are trying so hard to keep some control of this situation. Thank you. r RESOLUTION EXPRESSING CONCERN FOR THE PASSAGE OF THE 1999 FEDERAL GOVERNMENT APPROPRIATIONS BILL. WHEREAS, Each year our Congress and the President of the United States have the duty of passing a budget appropriations bill by October I WHEREAS, The passage of this bill is required for the continued normal operation of our Federal Government. WHEREAS, Uninterrupted continuation of programs such as Medicare and Social Security are vital to our Senior citizens in Brooklyn Center. WHEREAS, Any veto of this bill could cause a negative impact on our senior citizens who are living on fixed incomes, and are dependent upon these subsidies to survive. y NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center that in order to assure no interruptions of our senior citizens benefits we would like to express our sincere concern and desire to see the 1999 appropriation bill passed by Congress and signed by the President of the United States. a . t t City Council Agenda Item No. 7a 1 • 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 SEPTEMBER 14, 1998 CITY HALL 1. INFORMAL OPEN FORUM WITH CITY COUNCIL CALL TO ORDER INFORMAL OPEN FORUM The Brooklyn Center City Council met in an informal open forum and was called to order by Mayor Myrna Kragness at 6:45 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor Myrna Kragness, Councilmembers Kathleen Carmody, Debra Hilstrom, Kay Lasman, and Robert Peppe. Also present: City Manager Michael J. McCauley, Assistant City Manager/HR Director Jane Chambers, Director of Public Works Diane Spector, City Attorney Charlie LeFevere, and Recording Secretary Maria Carlson. INFORMAL OPEN FORUM Darnell Ostrom, 11070 -207th Avenue Northwest, Elk River, addressed the Council on behalf of her parents regarding the development of the 69th and Brooklyn Boulevard project. Ms. Ostrom was concerned about the time this project would be settled. She informed the Council that her parents received an offer from Mr. Nelson and that she had addressed Mr. Nelson but has had no response. Donna Zieska, 5455 Brooklyn Boulevard, addressed the Council regarding the strip malls being proposed and believes these malls would not be an enhancement to the City. She would like the Council to look into this project further. Ms. Zieska also discussed the she would like to see an incentive program developed rather than the time of sale ordinance which she opposes. Walt Wenholz, 501 69th Avenue North, addressed the Council with his concern about no enforcement of overnight parking along 69th Avenue and his previous request to prohibit parking in front of apartment building on 69th Avenue. This subject will be put on the September 28, 1998, agenda. 9/14/98 -1- DRAFT • Charles Vickers, 6921 Indiana Avenue North, addressed the Council regarding his concern about residents not being informed of what is going on with the 69th and Brooklyn Boulevard project. Mayor Kragness encouraged all in attendance to attend the Council meeting and that the developer, Mr. Nelson, would be present for them to address their concerns on 69th Avenue. ADJOURN INFORMAL OPEN FORUM A motion by Councilmember Carmody, seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom to adjourn the informal open forum at 6:59 p.m. Motion passed unanimously. 2. INVOCATION The invocation was offered by Chaplain Dorothy Hughes. 3. CALL TO ORDER REGULAR BUSINESS MEETING The Brooklyn Center City Council met in regular session and was called to order by Mayor Myrna Kragness at 7:04 p.m. 4. ROLL CALL Mayor Myrna Kragness, Councilmembers Kathleen Carmody, Debra Hilstrom, Kay Lasman, and Robert Peppe. Also present: City Manager Michael J. McCauley, Assistant City Manager/HR Director Jane Chambers, Director of Public Works Diane Spector, City Attorney Charlie LeFevere, and Recording Secretary Maria Carlson. 5. COUNCIL REPORT Councilmember Carmody reported that she attended a League of Minnesota Cities meeting and was introduced to a new game about teaching City Government. She also reported that the Park and Recreation Commission will have an Evergreen Park improvement meeting on Wednesday, September 16, 1998, at 7:00 p.m. 6. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND CONSENT AGENDA City Manager Michael McCauley requested the Council add Resolution Expressing Recognition of the Achievement of the Park Center Twins. A motion by Councilmember Lasman, seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom to approve the agenda and consent agenda as amended. Motion passed unanimously. 9/14/98 -2- DRAFT 6a. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A motion by Councilmember Lasman, seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom to approve minutes from the Special Session on August 24, 1998, and the Regular Session on August 24, 1998. Motion passed unanimously. 6b. LICENSES A motion by Councilmember Lasman, seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom to approve the following list of licenses. Motion passed unanimously. GARBAGE COLLECTION VEHICLE Ace Solid Waste, Inc. 3118 162nd Lane NW, Anoka MECHANICAL SYSTEMS Air Conditioning Associates, Inc. 689 Pierce Butler Route, St. Paul R and S Heating and Air Conditioning 12651 Zenith Avenue #107, Burnsville Zahl Equipment Company 3101 Spring Street NE, Minneapolis RENTAL DWELLINGS Renewal: Gary Bistodeau 5337 70th Circle ® James Ferrara 6031 Brooklyn Boulevard SIGN HANGER Signcrafters 7775 Main Street NE, Fridley 6e. RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE HEALTHY BEGINNINGS GRANT APPLICATION OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMUNITY HEALTH DEPARTMENT RESOLUTION NO. 98 -145 Councilmember Lasman introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE HEALTHY BEGINNINGS GRANT APPLICATION OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMUNITY HEALTH DEPARTMENT The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom. Motion passed unanimously. 9/14/98 -3- DRAFT 6d. RESOLUTION DECLARING A PUBLIC NUISANCE AND ORDERING THE REMOVAL OF DISEASED TREES RESOLUTION NO. 98 -146 Councilmember Lasman introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION DECLARING A PUBLIC NUISANCE AND ORDERING THE REMOVAL OF DISEASED TREES The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom. Motion passed unanimously. 6e. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A CONTRACT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR A BROOKDALE AREA TRAFFIC STUDY RESOLUTION NO. 98 -147 Councilmember Lasman introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A CONTRACT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR A BROOKDALE AREA TRAFFIC STUDY The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom. Motion passed unanimously. 6f. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A CONTRACT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR A LAND SURVEY OF CENTRAL PARK RESOLUTION NO. 98 -148 Councilmember Lasman introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A CONTRACT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR A LAND SURVEY OF CENTRAL PARK The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom. Motion passed unanimously. 9/14/98 -4- DRAFT 6g. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND AWARDING A CONTRACT, • IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1998 -30, CONTRACT 1998 -P, MISCELLANEOUS SIDEWALK AND RETAINING WALL REPLACEMENTS RESOLUTION NO. 98-149 Councilmember Lasman introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND AWARDING A CONTRACT, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1998 -30, CONTRACT 1998 -P, MISCELLANEOUS SIDEWALK AND RETAINING WALL REPLACEMENTS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom. Motion passed unanimously. 6h. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED AND AUTHORIZING FINAL PAYMENT, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1998 -27, CONTRACT 1998 -H, 1998 SEALCOATING RESOLUTION NO. 98 -150 a Councilmember Lasman introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED AND AUTHORIZING FINAL PAYMENT, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1998 -27, CONTRACT 1998 -H, 1998 SEALCOATING The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom. Motion passed unanimously. 7. PUBLIC HEARINGS 7a. PUBLIC HEARINGS REGARDING 1998 PROPOSED SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS PROCEDURES AND GENERAL INFORMATION Mr. McCauley suggested opening the Public Hearing for items la and lb, adopt both resolutions, open Public Hearing for item 2 and adopt resolution, and open Public Hearing for items 3a, 3b, 3c, and 3d and adopt all resolutions. 9/14/98 -5- DRAFT Ia. RESOLUTION CERTIFYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR • IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NOS. 1998 -01 AND 02, CONTRACT 1998 - D, BELLVUE NEIGHBORHOOD STREET AND STORM DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS, TO THE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAX ROLLS lb. RESOLUTION AMENDING SPECIAL ASSESSMENT LEVY ROLL NOS. 14359 AND 14360 TO PROVIDE FOR THE DEFERMENT OF SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS A motion by Councilmember Hilstrom, seconded by Councilmember Carmody to open the Public Hearing regarding resolution certifying special assessments for Improvement Project Nos. 1998 -01 and 02, Contract 1998 -D, Bellvue Neighborhood Street and Storm Drainage Improvements, to the Hennepin County Tax Rolls, and the resolution amending special assessment levy rolls 14359 and 14360 to provide for the deferment of special assessments. Motion passed unanimously. Public Works Director Diane Spector discussed the special assessments and the options residents will have to pay off their assessments if approved. The assessment for streets in the Bellvue neighborhood is $2,060, and storm drainage is $670 for a total of $2,730. Residents will have the option to pay the entire amount without interest if paid within 30 days of the date of adoption by the Council (any time between September 15, 1998, and October 14, 1998). If residents choose to pay the total assessment between October 15, 1998, and November 30, 1998, it will be calculated with interest from October 1, 1998, to the date of payment. Installment payments may be made with property taxes and the first payment will be due with taxes in 1999. The total principal will be payable in annual installments for the period stated on the levy roll, and interest is paid on the unpaid balance. Councilmember Hilstrom asked if residents could make partial payments. Ms. Spector responded that partial payments were not allowed under the current assessment policy. She advised that a homeowner could pay all of one assessment and make payments on the other. For example, the homeowner could pay the entire storm water assessment, leaving only the street assessment to be certified to Hennepin County. Ms. Spector informed the Council that one resident applied for deferment and is eligible for deferral. Mayor Kragness raised the question if there were any others that applied for deferment and if residents were aware of this option. Ms. Spector responded that residents were notified several times and that they only had the one apply at this time. A motion by Councilmember Carmody, seconded by Councilmember Lasman to close the Public Hearing. Motion passed unanimously. 9/14/98 -6- DRAFT RESOLUTION NO. 98 -151 Councilmember Carmody introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION CERTIFYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NOS. 1998 -01 AND 02, CONTRACT 1998 -D, BELLVUE NEIGHBORHOOD STREET AND STORM DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS, TO THE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAX ROLLS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember Lasman. Motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 98 -152 Councilmember Carmody introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AMENDING SPECIAL ASSESSMENT LEVY ROLL NOS. 14359 AND 14360 TO PROVIDE FOR THE DEFERMENT OF SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember Lasman. Motion passed unanimously. 2. RESOLUTION CERTIFYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NOS. 1998 -04 AND 05, CONTRACT 1998 - E, ST AL'S NEIGHBORHOOD STREET AND STORM DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS, TO THE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAX ROLLS A motion by Councilmember Hilstrom, seconded by Councilmember Carmody to open the Public Hearing. Motion passed unanimously. Julie Berg, 6944 June Avenue North, addressed the Council regarding her assessment. She wanted to verify that she will have written confirmation from the City regarding her deferred payment. Ms. Berg was given a written confirmation at that time. A motion by Councilmember Lasman, seconded by Councilmember Carmody to close the Public Hearing. Motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 98 -153 Councilmember Carmody introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: 9/14/98 -7- DRAFT i RESOLUTION CERTIFYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NOS. 1998 -04 AND 05, CONTRACT 1998 -E, ST. AL'S NEIGHBORHOOD STREET AND • STORM DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS, TO THE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAX ROLLS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember Lasman. Motion passed unanimously. 3a. RESOLUTION CERTIFYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR DISEASED TREE REMOVAL COSTS TO THE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAX ROLLS 3b. RESOLUTION CERTIFYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR DELINQUENT WEED REMOVAL COSTS TO THE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAX ROLLS 3c. RESOLUTION CERTIFYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENT FOR PUBLIC UTILITY HOOKUP CHARGES TO THE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAX ROLLS 3d. RESOLUTION CERTIFYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR DELINQUENT PUBLIC UTILITY SERVICE ACCOUNTS TO THE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAX ROLLS A motion by Councilmember Carmody, seconded by Councilmember Lasman to open the Public Hearings regarding resolution certifying special assessments for diseased tree removal costs to the hennepin county tax rolls, resolution certifying special assessments for delinquent weed removal costs to the hennepin county tax rolls, resolution certifying special assessment for P ublic utility hookup charges to the hennepin county tax rolls, and resolution certifying special assessments for delinquent public utility service accounts to the hennepin county tax rolls. Motion passed unanimously. Mary Johnson, 4306 65th Avenue North, addressed the Council regarding a $90 water bill that she continues to receive from the City that needs to be addressed to previous owners. She believes she should not have to pay this $90 bill and the $30 late fee she is now receiving. Mr. McCauley suggested the Council approve these assessments excluding Ms. Johnson's assessment. A motion by Councilmember Carmody, seconded by Councilmember Lasman to close the Public Hearing. Motion passed unanimously. I 9/14/98 -8- DRAFT I • • RESOLUTION NO. 98 -154 Councilmember Carmody introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION CERTIFYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR DISEASED TREE REMOVAL COSTS TO THE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAX ROLLS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember Lasman. Motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 98 -155 Councilmember Carmody introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION CERTIFYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR WEED REMOVAL COSTS TO THE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAX ROLLS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember Lasman. Motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 98-156 Councilmember Carmody introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION CERTIFYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR PUBLIC UTILITY HOOKUP CHARGES TO THE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAX ROLLS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember Lasman. Motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 98 -157 Councilmember Carmody introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION CERTIFYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR DELINQUENT PUBLIC UTILITY SERVICE ACCOUNTS TO THE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAX ROLLS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember Lasman excluding an assessment for Mary Johnson, 4306 65th Avenue North. Motion passed unanimously. 9/14/98 -9- DRAFT 7b. AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE SALE OF Mn/DOT TURNBACK • PROPERTY ADJACENT TO 65TH AVENUE NORTH Mr. McCauley explained that since the time the agenda was prepared, a signed agreement had been received, and he recommended opening the Public Hearings, taking public input, closing the Public Hearings, and approving the ordinances with motions to include that the ordinances shall not be effective until the plat for the subdivision is executed by the City and recorded with Hennepin County. A motion by Councilmember Hilstrom, seconded by Councilmember Carmody to open the Public Hearing. Motion passed unanimously. Mr. Moses, developer of this project, was present and asked the Council to consider approving the ordinances this evening in order to make progress. Mr. McCauley asked Mr. Moses to update the Council on this project. Mr. Moses discussed all issues will be taken care of at once. The driveway issue at SuperAmerica is taking longer than anticipated. Permits have been issued and they are making progress. He is hoping to have everything together within the next 30 days. There being no other public comments, a motion was made by Councilmember Hilstrom and seconded by Councilmember Peppe to close the Public Hearing. Motion passed unanimously. ORDINANCE NO. 98 -06 Councilmember Hilstrom introduced the following ordinance and moved its adoption: AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE SALE OF Mn/DOT TURNBACK PROPERTY ADJACENT TO 65TH AVENUE NORTH The motion for the adoption of the foregoing ordinance was duly seconded by Councilmember Peppe and shall not be effective until the plat for the subdivision is executed by the City and recorded with Hennepin County. Motion passed unanimously. 7e. AN ORDINANCE VACATING PORTIONS OF NORTH LILAC DRIVE, CAMDEN AVENUE NORTH, AND 65TH AVENUE NORTH 7d. AN ORDINANCE VACATING PORTIONS OF THREE UTILITY EASEMENTS 9/14/98 -10- DRAFT • 7e. AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE SALE OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY OF THE CITY 7f. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 35 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES REGARDING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF CERTAIN LAND (REGAL THEATER) Councilmember Hilstrom asked if items 7d, 7e, and 7f, could be included as one discussion since they all relate to the same project. Mr. McCauley responded affirmatively. i A motion by Councilmember Carmody, seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom to open the Public Hearing on items 7c, 7d, 7e, and 7f. Motion passed unanimously. Wayne Paulson, 5330 Colfax Avenue, addressed the Council in regards to the theater proposed. He believes the City does not need another theater and would like to see this land used for the youth. Mr. Paulson asked if Lynbrook Bowl and the property by Lynbrook Bowl would be sold. Mayor Kragness responded that both properties have been sold and that they were privately purchased. A motion by Councilmember Lasman, seconded by Councilmember Carmody to close the Public Hearing. Motion passed unanimously. i ORDINANCE NO. 98 -07 Councilmember Hilstrom introduced the following ordinance and moved its adoption: AN ORDINANCE VACATING PORTIONS OF NORTH LILAC DRIVE, CAMDEN AVENUE NORTH, AND 65TH AVENUE NORTH The motion for the adoption of the foregoing ordinance was duly seconded by Councilmember Carmody d y shall not be effective until the plat for the subdivision is executed by the City and recorded with Hennepin County. Motion passed unanimously. ORDINANCE NO. 98 -08 Councilmember Hilstrom introduced the following ordinance and moved its adoption: AN ORDINANCE VACATING PORTIONS OF THREE UTILITY EASEMENTS 9/14/98 -11- DRAFT The motion for the adoption of the foregoing ordinance was duly seconded by Councilmember Carmody and shall not be effective until the plat for the subdivision is executed by the City and recorded with Hennepin County. Motion passed unanimously. ORDINANCE NO. 98 -09 Councilmember Hilstrom introduced the following ordinance and moved its adoption: AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE SALE OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY OF THE CITY The motion for the adoption of the foregoing ordinance was duly seconded by Councilmember Carmody and shall not be effective until the plat for the subdivision is executed by the City and recorded with Hennepin County. Motion passed unanimously. ORDINANCE NO. 98 -10 Councilmember Hilstrom introduced the, following ordinance and moved its adoption: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 35 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES REGARDING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF CERTAIN LAND (REGAL THEATER) The motion for the adoption of the foregoing ordinance was duly seconded by Councilmember Carmody and shall not be effective until the plat for the subdivision is executed by the City and recorded with Hennepin County. Motion passed unanimously. S. APPEARANCES 8a. WAYNE PAULSON REGARDING REGULATION OF BARKING DOGS Wayne Paulson, 5330 Colfax Avenue, addressed the Council with his concerns about the regulation of barking dogs. He would like to see a proposal that would allow dogs out of homes during the hours of 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., and have a curfew during the remaining hours prohibiting dogs being outside. He suggested the City get a dog catcher so that police officers did not have to deal with every issue that arises and increasing the fines. Mr. LeFevere discussed this is a difficult issue to enforce and that the terms of punishment is a misdemeanor and the Courts define the amount of fines. The City Council does not have the authority to change the amount for fines that are issued. The City Council needs to make a decision how they want to settle code enforcement and how much City resources should be spent with this issue. 9/14/98 -12- DRAFT • 8b. DAVID NELSON REGARDING UPDATE TO CITY COUNCIL OF 69TH • AND BROOKLYN BOULEVARD PROJECT Mr. Nelson was present to update the Council on the 69th and Brooklyn Boulevard project and discussed that he is making progress. He had met with some property owners and had made some offers. He hopes to close by the end of the year with all properties and explained this project is difficult to complete without knowing the acquisition costs for all the properties. Councilmember Hilstrom asked Mr. Nelson if he had any specific dates so that people with children or the elderly could make future plans. Mr. Nelson responded that things are under control and hopefully by the end of the year residents will have all the details. He will do everything to accommodate and make this a friendly relocation for everyone. Julie Berg, 6944 June Avenue North, addressed the Council to clarify a closing date of December 2, 1998, on her property. She also wanted to know when the City Council would make their decision on this project. She needs to know when she should start looking for a new home. Mr. McCauley responded if Mr. Nelson meets all the criteria this project will go forward. Mr. Nelson hopes to have an agreement with most property owners soon. Councilmember Hilstrom ® asked when the Council would see this back on the agenda if eminent domain is requested. Mr. McCauley responded that if this project requires eminent domain, this item should be on the agenda in late October or early November. Darnell Ostrom, 11070 -207th Avenue Northwest, Elk River, wanted to know if the property were acquired through eminent domain would her parents still have to move in December. She is looking for a safeguard for her parents. Mr. McCauley responded that the City would be sensitive to her parents' situation and that the City would work with Ms. Ostrom to resolve her concerns if the City were to proceed with eminent domain. Mr. Nelson gave a closing comment that he will work with property owners to make all necessary arrangements. 9. COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEMS 9a. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 23 OF THE BROOKLYN CENTER CODE OF ORDINANCES, RELATING TO THE REGULATION OF PAWNBROKERS AND SECONDHAND GOODS DEALERS 9/14/98 -13- DRAFT • Mr. McCauley discussed the following changes made to this ordinance and they are as follows: • Section 23 -606. Site Plan Subdivision 1, letter (d) - added reference to day care center and defined the distance as 300 feet from the license premises rather than the nearest location. Section 23 -608 and 23 -659. Public Hearing These sections were removed. Reference to a public hearing was also removed from Sections 23- 609 and 23 -660. Section 23 -657. Site Plan Subdivision 1, letter (d) - revised language to clarify that secondhand goods dealers receiving firearms must include in their site plan the location of schools and day care centers within 300 feet of license premises. Section 23 -661. Places Ineligible for Licenses Letter (b) - added language regarding secondhand goods dealers receiving firearms. Section 23 -673. Hours of Operation This section was removed. Councilmember Carmody asked if this ordinance is adopted, when will it be in effect and how will dealers be notified. Mr. McCauley responded mid - November and that copies of the ordinance would be mailed out. Mr. McCauley suggested that dealers have until January 1, 1999, to comply and if not in compliance by that date, they would be cited and fined. A motion by Councilmember Carmody, seconded by Councilmember Lasman to approve first reading of an ordinance amending Chapter 23 of the Brooklyn Center Code of Ordinances, relating to the regulation of Pawnbrokers and Secondhand Goods Dealers and set date for second reading and Public Hearing for October 13, 1998. Motion passed unanimously. 9b. MAYORAL APPOINTMENT TO NORTHWEST HENNEPIN HUMAN SERVICES COUNCIL ADVISORY COMMISSION 9/14/98 -14- DRAFT • A motion by Councilmember Lasman, seconded by Councilmember Carmody to ratify the Mayor's nomination of John Soloman, 6819 Emerson Avenue North, to the Northwest Hennepin Human Services Council Advisory Commission. Motion passed unanimously. 9c. PROCLAMATION DECLARING OCTOBER 12 THROUGH 16, 1998, AS MINNESOTA MANUFACTURERS WEEK A motion by Councilmember Carmody, seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom to approve the proclamation declaring October 12 through 16, 1998, as Minnesota Manufacturers Week. Motion passed unanimously. 9d. PROCLAMATION DECLARING OCTOBER 24, 1998, AS MAKE A DIFFERENCE DAY A motion by Councilmember Lasman, seconded by Councilmember Carmody to approve the proclamation declaring October 24, 1998, as Make a Difference Day. Motion passed unanimously. 9e. AGREEMENT FOR SCHOOL LIAISON OFFICER Councilmember Carmody raised the question if the school liaison officer would be a new officer. Mr. McCauley responded that the school liaison officer would be an existing officer. A motion by Councilmember Lasman, seconded by Councilmember Carmody to approve the agreement for school liaison officer. Motion passed unanimously. 9f. RESOLUTION SUPPORTING RESIDENT INITIATIVE TO REDUCE NOISE ON I- 94/694 RESOLUTION NO. 98 -158 Councilmember Hilstrom introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION SUPPORTING RESIDENT INITIATIVE TO REDUCE NOISE ON I- 94/694 The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember Carmody. Motion passed unanimously. 9g. 1999 PRELIMINARY BUDGET AND PROPERTY TAX LEVY REPORT Mr. McCauley discussed this is the proposed preliminary budget and tax levy report which needs to be adopted by the City Council. 9/14/98 -15- DRAFT • This preliminary levy may be reduced after adopted it is adopted, however it would not be able to be increased. Mr. McCauley gave a brief overview of the proposed preliminary budget which was included in the agenda materials and discussed there is an overall increase of 2.44 percent in revenues and expenditures. Real Estates taxes in the general fund would increase by 2.56 percent. Intergovernmental revenues which make up 30 percent of the general fund revenue stream are only increasing by 1.06 percent. Lodging taxes have been strong and are included in the 1999 budget at the level being experienced in 1998 for lodging tax receipts. After a large increase in 1998 for the debt service on the police and fire bonds, there is only a modest increase in debt service included in the budget. The budget proposal currently provides for operations and services as currently provided. There are no major changes in the proposed 1999 budget. He also discussed, in addition to the general fund levy, that the preliminary levy would increase real estate taxes levied by the City, the EDA and HRA by a total of 2.73 percent. Councilmember Hilstrom inquired whether there would be an evaluation of continuing with LOGIS as had been discussed. Mr. McCauley responded that it was still the intention that the City would review individual applications to determine cost effectiveness. He used as example the decision to purchase the recreation software license directly from the vendor rather than through LOGIS. He further explained that participation in LOGIS is on a menu basis. That is, the City chooses individual applications and is billed based on the applications chosen. The decision is not one of participating in LOGIS or not participating in LOGIS, but an evaluation on a program by program basis as to which programs should be received through LOGIS and which should be purchased independently. It was suggested to adopt the following four resolutions under one motion: 1. RESOLUTION TO ADOPT THE 1999 PRELIMINARY BUDGET RESOLUTION NO. 98 -159 Councilmember Carmody introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION TO ADOPT THE 1999 PRELIMINARY BUDGET The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember Lasman. Motion passed unanimously. 9/14/98 -16- DRAFT 2. RESOLUTION TO AUTHORIZE A PRELIMINARY TAX LEVY FOR 1999 APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE GENERAL FUND, THE STREET IMPROVEMENT DEBT SERVICE FUNDS, THE POLICE AND FIRE BUILDING DEBT SERVICE FUNDS, THE EDA FUND, AND THE HRA FUND BUDGETS RESOLUTION NO. 98 -160 Councilmember Carmody introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION TO AUTHORIZE A PRELIMINARY TAX LEVY FOR 1999 APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE GENERAL FUND, THE STREET IMPROVEMENT DEBT SERVICE FUNDS, THE POLICE AND FIRE BUILDING DEBT SERVICE FUNDS, THE EDA FUND, AND THE HRA FUND BUDGETS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember Lasman. Motion passed unanimously. 3. RESOLUTION APPROVING A PRELIMINARY TAX CAPACITY LEVY FOR THE PURPOSE OF DEFRAYING THE COST OF OPERATION, PROVIDING INFORMATIONAL SERVICE, AND • RELOCATING ASSISTANCE PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF MSA 469.001 THROUGH 469.047 OF THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER FOR THE YEAR OF 1999 RESOLUTION NO. 98 -161 Councilmember Carmody introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION APPROVING A PRELIMINARY TAX CAPACITY LEVY FOR THE PURPOSE OF DEFRAYING THE COST OF OPERATION, PROVIDING INFORMATIONAL SERVICE, AND RELOCATING ASSISTANCE PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF MSA 469.001 THROUGH 469.047 OF THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER FOR THE YEAR OF 1999 The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember Lasman. Motion passed unanimously. 9/14/98 -17- DRAFT 4. RESOLUTION SETTING DATES FOR TRUTH IN TAXATION PUBLIC HEARINGS RESOLUTION NO. 98 -162 Councilmember Carmody introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION SETTING DATES FOR O TRUTH IN TAXATION PUBLIC HEARINGS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember Lasman. Motion passed unanimously. 9h. 1. AWARD BIDS ON THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE EARLE BROWN HERITAGE CENTER PARKING LOT 2. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR PARKING ELECTRICAL FOR EARLE BROWN HERITAGE CENTER PARKING LOT EXPANSION Mr. McCauley requested the Council to authorize the following two resolutions: RESOLUTION NO. 98 -163 Councilmember Carmody introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: AWARD BIDS ON THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE EARLE BROWN HERITAGE CENTER PARKING LOT The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember Lasman. Motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 98 -164 Councilmember Carmody introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR PARKING ELECTRICAL FOR EARLE BROWN HERITAGE CENTER PARKING LOT EXPANSION The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember Lasman. Motion passed unanimously. 4/98 9/1 - - 18 DRAFT 9i. RESOLUTION AWARDING BID FOR THE EAST AND WEST FIRE ® STATIONS RESOLUTION 9 - S LUTION NO. 8 165 Councilmember Lasman introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AWARDING BID FOR THE EAST AND WEST FIRE STATIONS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom. Motion passed unanimously. 9j. RESOLUTION EXPRESSING RECOGNITION OF THE ACHIEVEMENT OF THE PARK CENTER TWINS RESOLUTION NO. 98 -166 Councilmember Hilstrom introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION EXPRESSING RECOGNITION OF THE ACHIEVEMENT OF THE PARK CENTER TWINS • The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember Carmody. Motion passed unanimously. 10. ADJOURNMENT A motion by Councilmember Lasman, seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom to adjourn the meeting at 8:49 p.m. Motion passed unanimously. City Clerk Mayor i 9/14/98 -19- DRAFT i • City Council Agenda Item No. 7b • • City of � o Brook Center A great place to start. A great place to stay. • MEMORANDUM TO: Michael J. McCauley, City Manager FROM: Maria Carlson, Administrative Technician DATE: September 23 1998 SUBJECT: Licenses for Council Approval The following companies /persons have applied for City licenses as noted. Each company /person has fulfilled the requirements of the City Ordinance governing respective licenses, submitted appropriate applications, and paid proper fees. Licenses to be approved by the City Council on September 28, 1998: GARBAGE COLLECTION VEHICLE A W Disposal P.O. Box 115, Norwood Environmental Refuse 4123 Russell Avenue North, Minneapolis GASOLINE SERVICE STATION Holiday Stationstore #292 420 66th Avenue North MECHANICAL SYSTEMS Air one 6317 Welcome Avenue, Brooklyn Park Care Air Conditioning and Heating 1211 Old Highway 8, New Brighton Market Mechanical 8701 Wyoming Avenue North, Brooklyn Park RENTAL DWELLINGS Renewal: Don Loobeek Twin Lakes Manor TOBACCO RELATED PRODUCT Holiday Stationstore 4292 420 66th Avenue North 6301 Shingle Creek Pkwy, Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 -2199 • City Hall & TDD Number (612) 569 -3300 Recreation and Community Center Phone & TDD Number (612) 569 -3400 • FAX (612) 569 -3494 An Affirmative Action /Equal Opportunities Employer • City Council Agenda Item No. 7c • • City of Brooklyn Center A great place to start. A great place to stay. MEMORANDUM TO: Michael J. McCauley, City Manager FROM: Sharon Knutson, City Clerk SNlltil DATE: September 23, 1998 SUBJECT: Appoint Additional Election Judges to Serve in the General Election Minnesota State Statutes, Section 204B.21, Subd. 2, requires election judges be appointed by the governing body at least 25 days before the election at which the election judges will serve. The following list of individuals have qualified to be election judges, and it is requested the City Council appoint them to serve as election judges for the general election, November 3, 1998. Shirley Hoff Peggy Mau Doris Patterson • I 6301 Shingle Creek Pkwy, Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 -2199 • City Hall & TDD Number (612) 569 -3300 Recreation and Community Center Phone & TDD Number (612) 569 -3400 • FAX (612) 569 -3494 An Affirmative Action l Equal Opportunities Employer City Council Agenda Item No. 7d • • INI E 1\IORANDUM DATE: September 2 p 3, 1998 TO: Michael U J. McCauley, City Mana FROM: Joyce Gulseth, Public Works Administrative Aide ' J SUBJECT: Resolution Declaring a Public Nuisance and Ordering the Removal of Diseased Trees The attached resolution represents the official Council action required to expedite removal of the trees most recently marked by the City tree inspector, in accordance with approved procedures. Member introduced the following resolution and moved its • adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION DECLARING A PUBLIC NUISANCE AND ORDERING THE REMOVAL OF DISEASED TREES WHEREAS, a Notice to Abate Nuisance and Diseased Tree Removal Agreement has been issued to the owners of certain properties in the City of Brooklyn Center giving the owners twenty (20) days to remove diseased trees on the owners' property; and WHEREAS, the City can expedite the removal of these diseased trees by declaring them a public nuisance. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota that: 1. The diseased trees at the following addresses are hereby declared to be a public � Y p nuisance: • TREE PROPERTY OWNER PROPERTY ADDRESS NUMBER --------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------- RAYMOND & ANNE FRITZKE 5452 FREMONT AVE N 232,233 MICHAEL & DEBRA CHENEY 2204 BROOKVIEW DR 234 BROOKDALE 10 3404 53RD AVE N 235 MN/DOT HWY I00/BROOKLYN BLVD 236 BETTY FOSTER 3006 51ST AVE N 237 DENNIS & KATHRYN NELSON 312 70TH AVE N 238 2. After twenty (20) days from the date of the notice, the property owner(s) will receive a second written notice providing five (5) business days in which to contest the determination of the City Council by requesting, in writing, a hearing. Said request shall be filed with the City Clerk. 3. After five (5) days, if the property owner fails to request a hearing, the tree(s) shall be removed by the City. All removal costs, including legal, financing, and administrative charges, shall be specially assessed against the property. • RESOLUTION NO. 0 Date Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. i s City Council Agenda Item No. 7e a • MEMORANDUM DATE: September 21, 1998 TO: Michael J. McCauley, City Manager FROM: Scott A. Brink, City Engineer � SUBJECT: Resolution Accepting Work Performed and Authorizing Final Payment, Improvement Project No. 1998 -14, Contract 19984, Kylawn Park Trail Linkage On July 13, 1998, the City Council awarded a contract to Thomas & Sons Construction, Inc. in the amount of $23,865.00 for Contract 1998 -1. Thomas & Sons Construction, Inc. has completed the work as specified. The final certified amount of the contract is $1,652.75 (7 %) over the approved contract. A contingency of 10% was included in the original estimate to cover overages. Essentially, the contract provided for the construction of a new trail connecting the intersection of June and 59%th Avenues with Kylawn Park. However, the work did involve some additional work in • Kylawn Park itself to match the trail with existing facilities that was underestimated in the original quantity estimates. The quantities included additional Class 5 aggregate and bituminous surfacing. It is recommended to accept the work performed in the amount of $25,517.25 • • Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED AND AUTHORIZING FINAL PAYMENT, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1998 -14, CONTRACT 1998 -I, KYLAWN PARK TRAIL LINKAGE WHEREAS, pursuant to a written contract signed with the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, Thomas & Sons Construction, Inc. has satisfactorily completed the following improvement in accordance with said contract: Improvement Project 1998 -14, Contract 1998 -I, Kylawn Park Trail Linkage Project NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota that: 1. It is hereby directed that final payment be made on said contract, taking the Contractor's receipt in full. The total amount to be paid for said improvement under said contract shall be $ 25,517.25. 2. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to return forthwith to all bidders the deposits made with their bids, except that the deposit of the successful bidder and the next lowest bidder shall be retained until a contract is signed. 3. The estimated project costs and revenues are as follows: COST As Bid As Final Contract $23,865.00 $25,517.25 Contingency(10 %) $ 2,386.50 Admin. /Engineering /Legal $ 3.500.00 $ 3.133.09 Total Estimated Project Cost $29,751.50 $28,650.34 REVENUES DNR Grant $14,875.75 $14,325.17 Municipal State Aid(Local) $14.875.75 $14.325.17 Total Estimated Revenue $29,751.50 $28,650.34 • • RESOLUTION NO. Date Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. i 1 • City Council Agenda Item No. 8a MEMO To: Michael J. McCauley, City Manager } From: Ronald A. Warren, Planning and Zonin g S P St • eci 16•C�J Subject: City Council Consideration Item - Planning Commission Application No. 98017 Date: September 23, 1998 On the September 28, 1998 City Council Agenda is Planning Commission Application No. 98017 submitted by Dave Phillips, Phillips Architects requesting Rezoning and Site and Building Plan approval through the Planned Unit Development (PUD) process for an expansion of the Brookdale Chrysler Plymouth Dealership at 6121 Brooklyn Boulevard and the interim use of 6107 Brooklyn Boulevard for the storage and display of new and used car inventory. Attached for your review are copies of the Planning Commission Information Sheet for • Planning Commission Application No. 98017 and also an area map showing the location of the property under consideration, various site and building plans for the proposed development, the Planning Commission minutes relating to the Commission's consideration of this matter, Planning Commission Resolution No. 98-4 and other supporting documents. This matter was considered by the Planning Commission at their August 13, 1998 and September 10, 1998 meetings and was recommended for approval by the Commission through the adoption of Planning Commission Resolution No. 98-4 It is recommended that the City Council, following consideration of this matter, approve the application. A draft resolution has been prepared for City Council consideration which would approve this PUD application and an ordinance amendment, which is offered for first reading, that would describe the property rezoned under its new zoning classification. lica - 98 Application Filed on 7 -16 PP • City Council Action Should Be Taken By 9 -14 -98 (Applicant Has Waived the 60 Day Limitation) Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 98017 Applicant: Dave Phillips, Phillips Architects Location: 6121 and 6107 Brooklyn Boulevard Request: Rezoning/Site and Building Plan - PUD /C -2 The applicant is seeking rezoning and site and building plan approval through the Planned Unit Development (PUD) process for an expansion of the Brookdale Chrysler Plymouth dealership at 6121 Brooklyn Boulevard and the interim use of 6107 Brooklyn Boulevard for the storage and display of new and used car inventory. The expansion would consist of a 8,500 sq. ft. building addition for automobile service and repair and a 1,100 sq. ft. car wash, while an approximate 100 by 180 ft. parking lot would be built on the adjacent lot to the south (6107 Brooklyn Boulevard). The Brookdale Chrysler Plymouth dealership is owned by Mr. William Bartram who leases the. facility from Chrysler Realty Corporation, owner of the land and building at 6121 Brooklyn Boulevard. Mr. Bartram owns the property at 6107 Brooklyn Boulevard, which was formerly the location of a single family home that was recently demolished. The Chrysler Plymouth ® dealership is currently zoned C -2 (Commerce) and the property at 6107 Brooklyn Boulevard is currently zoned C -1 (Service /Office). Both Mr. Bartram and Chrysler Realty are in agreement on seeking the rezoning of these properties to a PUD /C -2 zoning designation. The land in question is located on the westerly side of Brooklyn Boulevard, south of 62nd Avenue North. It is surrounded on the north by 62nd Avenue; on the east by Brooklyn Boulevard; on the south by property at 6101 Brooklyn Boulevard, which is zoned C -1 (Service/Office) and contains a legal non - conforming single family home; also on the south are two single family homes facing 61 st Avenue North, which are located in an R -1 zoning district; on the southwest by Wangstad Park; and on the west by a portion of the Ewing Square Townhomes, double bungalows and single family homes. Automobile sales and service are special uses in the C -2 zoning district. These uses are not comprehended under the C -1 zoning district. Automotive repair is not allowed to abut R- 1, R -2 or R -3 zoned property at a property line or at a street line. R -1 and R -2 abutment exists along the west property line of the dealership where one and two family homes are located and also along the south property line where there are single family homes facing 61st Avenue North. It should be noted that Wangstad Park is located in an R -1 zone as well. It is possible for off -site accessory parking for Brookdale Chrysler Plymouth to be located on C- • 9 -10 -98 Page 1 I zoned property through a special use permit provided the buffer and setback provisions • required of the principal use are met on the property containing the off -site accessory parking. The applicant's proposal, which includes expansion of the service garage to the west of the existing service garage, also creates a slight encroachment into the 35 ft. buffer /setback area required where the C -2 property abuts with R -1 zoned property. The existing building already encroaches into this buffer /setback area and the applicant proposes the expansion to continue along this building line having a setback line of 25 ft. 8 in. rather than 35 ft. Because of these factors and Mr. Bartram's desire to use his property (6107 Brooklyn Boulevard) on an interim basis, the applicant is seeking the PUD/Rezoning. Such rezonings could allow the expansion of the service garage in the manner proposed, provided a finding is made based on the plans submitted that the negative aspects are offset in an appropriate manner. This application was originally considered by the Planning Commission at its meeting on August 13, 1998, at which time the applicant's request, his written proposal relating to the City's rezoning evaluation policy and review guidelines and his plans were all considered. The Commission opened the public hearing and took comments from persons in attendance at that meeting. After reviewing the matter further, the Commission took action to continue the public hearing, table further consideration of the matter and referred it to the West Central Neighborhood Advisory Group for review and comment. The West Central Neighborhood Advisory Group met to consider this matter at the Brooklyn Center City Hall on September 2, 1998. After review, discussion and input from persons in ® attendance, the advisory group unanimously recommended approval of the proposal to the Planning Commission. Attached for. the Commission's review is a copy of the West Central Neighborhood Advisory Group minutes from that meeting. Also attached for the Commission's review is a copy of the Information Sheet for Planning Commission Application No. 98017 which was presented on August 13, 1998, and the Planning Commission minutes from that meeting. The applicant has submitted a revised landscape plan and site plan showing the two sites and how they would interrelate with each other. The two properties would not be combined into a single parcel, however, they would share common access onto Brooklyn Boulevard just to the south of the auto dealership building and an appropriate cross access agreement would need to be developed. The Chrysler dealership site is 196,693 sq. ft. in area (4.5 acres) and requires 311 landscape points. The parcel at 6107 Brooklyn Boulevard is approximately 28,800 sq. ft. in area (.66 acres). This site requires 80 landscape points. The applicant proposes to meet the point system by utilizing existing landscaping on the site and some new landscaping to be located along the 62nd Avenue North greenstrip as well as landscaping for and around the new off -site parking lot both for screening and aesthetic purposes. In addition, screening and landscaping is to be provided in the area where the service garage 9 -10 -98 Page 2 expansion is to take place. The Brookdale Chrysler site has 30 existing shade trees which are to • remain. The maximum credit for these existing plantings is 156 points. They are proposing to provide 21 new coniferous trees, Black Hills Spruce and Colorado Blue Spruce and nine new ornamental trees, such as Canada Red Cherry. Forty new shrubs are proposed which brings the total point calculation for the Brookdale Chrysler site to 315.5 points. The off -site lot proposes to have 80 landscape points by providing two Summit Ashe, five Black Hills Spruce and twenty Pointella Abbottswood as well as two existing shade trees. The concentration of landscaping is in a 35 ft. greenstrip along the westerly portion of the site. The new off -site lot would be provided with a proposed 4 ft. high fence for screening purposes. It has been recommended that the screening fence be 6 ft. high and be carried around to the south property line as well. It has also been recommended that an ivy or vine be planted on the southerly wall of the new addition to soften its impact on the residential properties to the south. This along with 16 Black Hills Spruce which are proposed to be planted in the greenstrip between the Chrysler dealership and the residential property should serve as appropriate screening to offset or mitigate the effects of the encroachment into the 35 ft. greenstrip and the expansion of the service garage adjacent to R -1 zoned property. It has been recommended that the applicant provide additional shade trees in the 15 ft. greenstrip along Brooklyn Boulevard. This should be provided in a manner consistent with the recommendations of the Brooklyn Boulevard Streetscape Study of a few years ago. The applicant has agreed to provide this landscaping and it is recommended that it be provided in clumps of three or four trees rather than evenly spaced plantings. This again is consistent with the recommendations of the Brooklyn Boulevard Streetscape Study. The applicant has requested that he be allowed to work with the • staff in rovidina e p b the precise location for these plantings and this seems appropriate. Drainage on the site will be conveyed to storm sewer, which will be connected to storm sewer in Brooklyn Boulevard. The new off -site accessory, or inventory, lot will be bound by B -612 curb and gutter. It appears that the plans and the Planned Unit Development proposal are in order and, noting the West Central Neighborhood Advisory Group's recommendation, it is recommended that the Planning Commission recommend approval to the City Council. It should be noted that the applicant, at the August 13, 1998, meeting, agreed to waive the 60 day statutory requirement for responding to zoning applications. This was to allow the ability of the West Central Neighborhood Advisory Group to meet, discuss and make recommendations regarding the plans. The applicant has also followed up with a written statement waiving this matter. Otherwise, the application would have to have been acted upon by the City Council no later than September 14, 1998. PROCEDURE • 9 -10 -98 Page 3 It is recommended that the Planning Commission take any additional comments during the • continued public hearing and deliberate any concerns that the Commission has. A draft Planning Commission Resolution is attached for the Commission's consideration. • • 9 -10 -98 Page 4 Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 98017 Applicant: Dave Phillips, Phillips Architects Location: 6121 and 6107 Brooklyn Boulevard Request: Rezoning/Site and Building Plan - PUD /C -2 The applicant is seeking rezoning and site and building plan approval through the Planned Unit Development (PUD) process for an expansion of the Brookdale Chrysler Plymouth dealership at 6121 Brooklyn Boulevard and the interim use of 6107 Brooklyn Boulevard for the storage and display of new and used car inventory. The expansion would consist of a 8,500 sq. ft. building addition for automobile service and repair and.a 1,100 sq. ft. car wash, while an approximate 100 ft. by 180 ft. parking lot would be built on the adjacent lot to the south (6107 Brooklyn Boulevard). The Brookdale Chrysler Plymouth dealership is owned by Mr. William Bartram who leases the facility from Chrysler Realty Corporation, owner of the land and building at 6121 Brooklyn Boulevard. Mr. Bartram owns the property at 6107 Brooklyn Boulevard, which was formerly the location of a single family home that was recently demolished. The Chrysler Plymouth dealership is currently zoned C -2 (Commerce) and the property at 6107 Brooklyn Boulevard is currently zoned C -1 (Service /Office). Both Mr. Bartram and Chrysler Realty are in agreement on seeking the rezoning of these properties to a PUD /C -2 zoning designation. • The land in question is located on the westerly side of Brooklyn Boulevard, south of 62nd Avenue North. It is surrounded on the north by 62nd Avenue; on the east by Brooklyn Boulevard; on the south by property at 6101 Brooklyn Boulevard, which is zoned C -1 (Service /Office) and contains a legal, non - conforming single family home; also on the south are two single family homes facing 61st Avenue North, which are located in an R -1 zoning district; on the southwest by Wangstad Park; and on the west by a portion of the Ewing Square Townhomes, double bungalows and single family homes. Automobile sales and service are special uses in the C -2 zoning district. These uses are not comprehended under the C -1 zoning district. Automotive repair is not allowed to abut R -1, R -2 or R -3 zoned property at a property line or at a street line. R -1 and R -2 abutment exists along the west property line of the dealership where one and two family homes are located and also along the south property line where there are single family homes facing 61 st Avenue North. It should be noted that Wangstad Park is also located in an R -1 zone as well. It is possible for off -site accessory parking for Brookdale Chrysler Plymouth to be located on C- 1 zoned property through a special use permit provided the buffer and setback provisions required of the principal use are met on the property containing the off -site accessory parking. The proposal, which includes the expansion of the service garage to the west of the existing service garage, also creates a slight encroachment into the 35 ft. buffer /setback area required 8 -13 -98 Page 1 I � where the C -2 property abuts with R -1 zoned property. The existing building already encroaches into this buffer /setback area and the applicant proposes the expansion to continue along this building line having a setback of 25 ft. 8 in. rather than 35 ft. Because of these factors and Mr. Bartram's desire to use his property (6107 Brooklyn Boulevard) on an interim basis, the applicant is seeking the PUD rezoning. Such a rezoning could allow the expansion of the service garage in the manner proposed, provided a finding is made based on the plan submitted that the negative aspects are offset in an appropriate manner. Mr. Bartram, at some point, would like to redevelop the area around 6107 Brooklyn Boulevard for commercial use, such as office redevelopment, general commerce redevelopment or possibly even the expansion of the car dealership. It is my understanding that he has approached neighboring property owners about their interest in selling their land. The use of his property on an interim basis for parking and display of inventory would allow a reasonable interim use of the property and would not preclude future redevelopment because no new buildings would have to be removed from the property in order to redevelop it. Also, although the parking and display lot would be accessory this t' ry s une to the dealership, the expansion of the dealership would be accomplished on its own merits. The parking in the display /inventory lot is not needed to support the service garage expansion contemplated in this proposal. It should be noted that Mr. Bartram had ursued a PUD /C -2 rezoning of the same parcels of land P g P in 1993 under Planning Commission Application No. 93011 to pursue an expansion of the Brookdale Chrysler Plymouth dealership facility. The proposal at that time comprehended a i building addition that would have extended onto the 6107 Brooklyn Boulevard site and additional parking to the south of that building. Improvements to the building included a new write up area, office, restrooms, lunchroom, and display room additions. This PUD was approved by the City Council on November 8, 1993, through Resolution No. 93 -201 (copy attached), following an amendment to the City's Comprehensive Plan that allowed this area to be designated for "commercial retail" development. Prior to this Comprehensive Plan amendment the area including the Chrysler Plymouth dealership and the property to the south were' designated ated onl for Service /Office co redevelopment. � commercial redevelo m n . The amendment designating y P g g the area for commercial retail or general commerce redevelopment has been included and recommended in the City's revised Comprehensive Plan as well. Therefore, it can be said that the expansion is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Bartram and Chrysler Realty, after the 1993 approval, did not pursue the development proposal and the PUD /C -2 designation was not attached to the property. They must, therefore, seek such a designation at this time. Although the proposal today is somewhat different from that of 1993, many of the same principals exist. REZONING 8 -13 -98 Page 2 A Planned Unit Development proposal involves the rezoning of land to the PUD designation t followed by an alpha - numeric designation of the underlying zoning district. This underlying zoning district provides the regulations governing uses and structures within the Planned Unit Development. The rules and regulations governing that district (in this case C -2) would apply to the development proposal. One of the purposes of the PUD district is to give the City Council the needed flexibility in addressing redevelopment problems. Regulations governing uses and structures may be modified by conditions ultimately imposed by the City Council on the development plans. In this case, the applicant would be seeking modification to allow automobile service expansion and an encroachment into a buffer /setback area based on special modifications that would be or could be made to their plan to offset, or mitigate, the negative effects of such an expansion. The Planning Commission's attention is directed to Section 35 -355 of the City's zoning ordinance, which addressed Planned Unit Developments (attached). The PUD rocess involves a rezoning of land and therefore is subject to the rezoning P subject g procedures outlined in Section 35 -210 of the City's zoning ordinance as well as the rezoning evaluation policy and review guidelines contained in Section 35 -208. The policy and review guidelines are attached for the Commissions review as well. Mr. Dave Phillips, of Phillips Architects, on behalf of the owners has submitted a letter and written statement regarding the proposal along with comments as to how he believes the proposal addresses the rezoning evaluation policy and review guidelines. The letter (attached) indicates that Brookdale Chrysler Plymouth at 6121 Brooklyn Boulevard needs additional space to accommodate the needs of their customers. In addition, he notes the facility is in need of upgrading to meet the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). He also indicates the desire of Mr. Bartram for an interim use of the property as a parking and display area which would reserve its ability to be combined with properties to the south and west in the future for redevelopment purposes. His letter goes on to review the proposed addition to the service garage and a 1,100 sq. ft. car wash and the remodeling of the former body shop into a parts area. He notes that in all six service bays will be eliminated in the existing area leaving a net add of seven service bays to the total compliment at the site. Also, there would be remodeling within the existing structure to provide ADA toilet facilities as well as interior changes including creating new sales offices in the existing customer lounge, toilets and service office areas. The showroom would be completely renovated and the existing used car building located to the north of the existing building would be demolished. He also notes the interim use of the property at 6107 Brooklyn Boulevard for the display and storage of new and used car invento e inventory. H points out that their would be a shared driveway between the existing Chrysler Plymouth dealership and the offsite lot with the elimination of one existing driveway on the south portion of the property at 6107 Brooklyn Boulevard. The letter goes on to comment on how the applicant believes their development proposal meets the guidelines in the zoning ordinance and how they believe it offers the city benefits with this development. 8 -13 -98 Page 3 The following is a review of the guidelines contained in Section 35 -208 of the City's zoning ordinance relating to the rezoning evaluation policy and review guidelines. First the guideline is listed, then the applicant's comments are cited and a staff response is provided as follows: A. Is there a clear and public need and benefit? The applicant's comments indicate that the improvements they propose to make will eliminate a driveway along Brooklyn Boulevard, increasing the safety at the site. Also, the ADA access and other improvements to the existing facility will benefit the public and the customers of Brookdale Chrysler Plymouth. The demolition of the used car building will enhance the Brooklyn Boulevard "street scape ". The ability will still exist to combine 6107 Brooklyn Boulevard with other lots for potential redevelopment in the area and will eventually correct a zoning conflict. The public will benefit from the substantial capital investment, which will encourage other improvements along Brooklyn Boulevard and increase the tax base. He notes that this PUD does not request any public funds or subsidies and the redevelopment will add additional above average paying jobs to the city. All of the points mentioned above by the applicant can be considered public benefits. Redevelopment along Brooklyn Boulevard has been acknowledged as important in a number of studies that have been conducted by the city and in the revised Comprehensive Plan as well. The important element in any redevelopment is that it meet city needs and be consistent with redevelopment policies. The PUD process is a vehicle which can be used to give the city the needed flexibility in addressing issues such as allowing expansions and consideration of abutting residential properties. B. Is the proposed zoning consistent and compatible with surrounding land use classifications? The applicant notes that the Chrysler dealership property is currently zoned C -2. The use as a new car sales and service facility has existed there for approximately 30 years. The PUD will not change the existing uses at the 6121 Brooklyn Boulevard property. He notes that the Bartram property (6107 Brooklyn Boulevard) is zoned C -1 and the use as an accessory parking lot is consistent with that zoning. C -2 and R -1 zoned property are allowed under the City's zoning ordinance to abut each other, however, certain buffer and setback requirements are imposed on the commercially zoned property. The sale of motor vehicles is a special use in the C -2 zone and automobile repair and service is also a special use in this zone, but this aspect of the business is not allowed to abut R -1 or R -2 zoned property at a property line. The use of the lot at 6107 Brooklyn Boulevard for off site accessory parking is comprehended under the City's zoning ordinance. It should be noted that a number of 8 -13 -98 . Page 4 studies, two in fact, recommend that the zoning ordinance be amended to allow automobile service stations, gasoline stations, fast food restaurants, etc. to abut residentially zoned properties in the Brooklyn Boulevard corridor including the Brookdale Chrysler Plymouth dealership so that it could expand. This PUD proposal would allow such a redevelopment and the expansion of the service garage at the facility. Particular attention should be made as to how this expanded area, and encroachment into the buffer area is addressed through screening and landscaping to offset adverse affects. C. Can all permitted uses in the proposed zoning district be contemplated for development of the subject property? The applicant notes that no change in the underlying zoning is requested as part of the PUD. The proposed uses, either exist in the case of servicing the vehicles or are permitted in the current zone. They say that it is desired by the city staff that 6107 property be eventually combined with adjacent C -1 and R -1 properties to form a viable commercial site This PUD, they note, facilitates the future assembly of this commercial lot by combining it with the Chrysler property. It should be noted that all of the permitted uses and the proposed uses in this proposal could be comprehended for development or redevelopment in the proposed zoning district if this PUD proposal is accepted. It should be clarified that the city staff does • not necessarily desire that 6107 Brooklyn Boulevard be eventually combined with adjacent C -1 and R -1 zoned properties. It is a fact, however, that in order for a C -1 zoned property to be developed along a major thoroughfare such as Brooklyn Boulevard, that it have a minimum of 150 feet of frontage and one acre in area. The staff has commented to the developer that the combination of lots in this area would allow such a redevelopment. It is not, however, a particular desire of the city staff that all of these properties be combined, only that it may make some sense to do this in terms of efficient redevelopment of the entire area. D. Have there been substantial physical or zoning classification changes in the area since the subject property was zoned? The applicant indicates that after the Chrylser facility was cosntructed, zoning was changed to permit the sales of new vehicles, but servicing of the vehicles became a non - conforming use. Servicing of the new cars sold at any dealership is an integral and required part of the business. There has been no substantial physical or zoning classification changes made in this area since the Brookdale Chrysler Plymouth property was zoned C -2 in the early • 8 -13 -98 Page 5 1960's. It is true that the repair of automobiles is prohibited from abutting residential property and this provision became part of the City's zoning ordinance in the late 1960's as well. We do acknowledge that automobile repair is an integral part of the sales of new and used vehicles. In fact, the City's licensing regulations relating to automobile sales requires that there be a repair facility for each operation involved in the sale of new and used cars. Various studies done in the past few years relating to Brooklyn Boulevard indicate that there should be a change in city regulations relating to this abutment issue and that the commercial areas such as the Brookdale Chrysler Plymouth site be allowed to expand. This can be seen in the Comprehensive Plan amendment, which was accomplished in 1993 relating to the then proposed Brookdale Chrysler Plymouth expansion allowing it to go forward. The use of this property in the future as a commercial retail use is recommended in the revised Comprehensive Plan as well. E. In the case of city initiated zoning proposals, is there a broad public purpose evident? This is not a city initiated zoning proposal, therefore, this guideline does not apply. F. Will the subject property bear fully the ordinance development restrictions for the proposed zoning districts? The applicant indicates that the PUD does not propose uses which are new to the zoning district, but that the process is requested to allow for the upgrading or updating I q P g of the Chrysler Plymouth facility t current standards and the additional hry ym ty o s service space needed. It is the staff's position that the subject property should bear fully the ordinance development restrictions for the PUD /C -2 proposal based on findings that would need to be made by the City Council and a development agreement between the city and the developer, which would address any and all issues raised and be acknowledged in an approved site plan as part of the development agreement. Perhaps one of the most critical points that will need to be reviewed is how the proposed use can be screened from abutting residential uses to the west and south. G. Is the subject property generally unsuited for uses permitted in the present zoning district, with respect to size, configuration, topography or location? The applicant notes that the 6107 Brooklyn Boulevard property would not meet current zoning criteria as a C -1 use due to its size. He also notes that if this property were permanently attached to the larger C -2 property (6121 Brooklyn Boulevard) to the north, then the adjacent C -1 lot to the south (6101 Brooklyn Boulevard) would not • 8 -13 -98 Page 6 meet the criteria for redevelopment as a C -1 property even if it were combined with the two R -1 lots to the west. He adds that this PUD process allowing for an interim use of 6107 Brooklyn Boulevard would also allow for future redevelopment of the property to the south of the Chrysler dealership, apparently in its entirety. The City's zoning ordinance does require minimum one acre sites with 150 ft. of frontage for service /office land uses along a major thoroughfare such as Brooklyn Boulevard. It is true that the 6107 Brooklyn Boulevard site cannot, by itself, be developed under its current zoning as a service office development. It must be combined with other property for development purposes. It is also true that 6101 Brooklyn Boulevard, which is also zoned C - -1, cannot be redeveloped under its current C -1 zoning by itself without it being attached to other property to make a large enough development site. It has been speculated, as it was in 1993, that it may be desirable for the other two properties, which are zoned R -1 and are located westerly of the C -1 zoned properties to be included as commercial land for redevelopment purposes. The only way that the two properties which are zoned C -1 (6107 and 6101 Brooklyn Boulevard) can be developed under their C -1 zoning, is if they are combined. The PUD process establishes a vehicle for proper redevelopment or the potential redevelopment of all of the properties in this area. In the meantime, it seems appropriate to use the 6107 Brooklyn Boulevard property on an interim basis for an off -site lot for the parking and display of vehicles associated with the Brookdale Chrysler Plymouth dealership. H. Will the rezoning result in the expansion of a zoning district, warranted b : 1. b P g Y Comprehensive Planning; 2. Lack of developable land in the proposed zoning district; 3. The best interest of the community? The applicant notes that all uses contemplated by the PUD request currently exist. Also the PUD is warranted due to the lack of developable land in the area and the applicant believes additional capital investment in the property is in the best interest of the community. He adds that Chrysler is also committed to compliance with the Americans with Disability Act when completing renovations for their facilities. The staff notes that studies done of the Brooklyn Boulevard corridor do encourage expansion of the Brookdale Chrysler Plymouth dealership and also to provide for expansion needs of businesses in the area. The existing Comprehensive Plan was amended to acknowledge the change in the designation of this area for a commercial retail use as well as the service office use. It can be said that the expansion of the zoning district is warranted by Comprehensive Planning and that the Comprehensive Plan has been modified to allow such an expansion in this particular case. It should also be noted that there is a lack of developable land in not only the proposed zoning • 8 -13 -98 Page 7 district, but in the city as well. Very little undeveloped land exists in the city and for • redevelopment to occur, proposals such as this are the only means for redevelopment. The creation of the PUD /C -2 zoning district provides for flexibility in dealing with redevelopment issues such as that proposed by that application. The proposed redevelopment, could be considered to be in the best interest of the community if it is properly developed. I. Does the proposal demonstrate merit beyond the interests of an owner or owners of an individual parcel? The applicant notes that they believe the proposal demonstrates merit beyond the interests of the owners by providing safety improvements along Brooklyn Boulevard including eliminating one driveway and construction of a shared entrance. They also note that future development potential to the south of the Brookdale Chrysler Plymouth dealership allows for consolidating the non - conforming parcels into a viable commercial lot. The staff believes the proposal appears to have merit beyond only the interests of a particular property owner if it can be concluded that this can lead to an upgrading in the site and the upgrading of the physical character of Brooklyn Boulevard as well. SITE AND BUILDING PLAN PROPOSAL The proposal calls for an approximate 8,500 s . ft. addition to the west side of the existing q b Brookdale Chrysler Plymouth building along with a 1,100 sq. ft. car wash addition also to the west of the building. The service addition would add additional service bays to the site and reconfigure, internally, the uses within the building itself. As the applicant has indicated, various modifications to the site would be done to meet ADA requirements. The existing used car building located in the north parking lot would be demolished and would provide additional parking in this area. ACCESS/PARKING Access to the site would remain basically the same with the accesses off 62nd Avenue remaining. The existing southerly access to the dealership site along Brooklyn Boulevard would be modified to be a shared access with the off -site parking lot to the south. An existing driveway access serving 6107 Brooklyn Boulevard would be eliminated. With the net gain of seven new service bays, an additional 21 parking spaces would be required. It appears that the site can accommodate the expansion. Parking at a car dealership is a function of providing enough parking for employees, customers, and vehicles being serviced. The balance of the site can, therefore, be used for inventory. Parking on the site will accommodate the expansion. The off- 8-13-98 Page 8 site lot is really a benefit to the dealership by providing additional inventory parking and display is parking along Brooklyn Boulevard. DRAINAGE /GRADING/UTILITIES This aspect of the proposal will be reviewed by the City Engineer and further analysis will be forthcoming. It may be required that this proposal be reviewed by the Shingle Creek Watershed Commission because the combined sites are in excess of five acres. Further comment with respect to this will be provided. I L AND S C APING /SCREENING The applicant has submitted a landscape plan showing minimal landscaping to the off -site accessory lot primarily to the west of the lot. It should be noted that an additional landscaping plan indicating the point analysis for the entire Brookdale Chrysler Plymouth site should be submitted so that an evaluation can be made as to the appropriateness of the existing landscaping on the site. An analysis of the approximate .66 acre site (6107 Brooklyn Boulevard) should also be provided. This request has been made of the architect and he has as me that he will provide such an analysis. Screening of the site is important with respect to the approval of such a proposal. It is the staff's position that extensive screening should be provided to the south of the service garage addition, particularly where it encroaches into the normally required 35 ft. buffer strip. Again, a PUD application can waive such an encroachment, but such a recommendation should be done only with extensive screening that offsets the negative effects of the encroachment. Also, with respect to the west portion of the off -site lot where the applicant is proposing a 4 ft. high opaque fence, it is recommended that screening, of an opaque variety, be provided to a height of 8 ft. where the off -site lot abuts with the existing R -1 zoned property to the west. It is also recommended that a 6 ft. high opaque screening fence be constructed along the south portion of the property, at least on an interim basis, to screen 6101 Brooklyn Boulevard, which is currently used as a residential property, from the proposed parking and display facility. This is consistent with the conditions of approval which were granted for Application No. 93011 in 1993. BUILDING The building elevations indicate that the exterior of the addition will be a single score concrete block painted to match the existing building. This seems to be in line with the existing building exterior on the site. LIGHTING/TRASH 8 -13 -98 Page 9 The plan does not show proposed lighting for the off -site lot. It is assumed that the lighting on • the existing site will remain the same. Lighting on the off -site lot will be of concern primarily in the manner that it effects the residentially zoned property to the west and the existing residence to the south. Lighting along these property lines should be a cut off type so as not to cause light glare on the adjacent properties. The applicant should provide sufficient detail with his plans to meet this ordinance standard. The plans are not totally complete, but they are sufficient to begin the PUD process. Further discussion and consideration of the entire site is in order. PROCEDURE This PUD /C -2 proposal, as previously mentioned, is a rezoning with a specific plan in hand. As such, it must go through the normal rezoning process. This means that following the Planning Commission's public hearing the rezoning and the site and building plan should be referred to the appropriate Neighborhood Advisory Group for review and comment. In this case, it should be referred to the West Central Neighborhood Advisory Group. We will attempt to schedule a . meeting of that Neighborhood Advisory Group as soon as possible. Persons receiving notices of the Planning Commission's public hearing (property owners within 350 feet of the property) and anyone else who desires to be notified, would be informed of the date, time, etc. of that meeting. As the Commission is well aware, we are operating under a state mandated deadline for making decisions relating to zoning requests. The City has 60 days in which to act on such a request from the date of filing an application. This application was filed on July 16, 1998, and must be acted on by the City Council by September 14, 1998. Almost 30 of the 60 days has expired by the time this matter is brought to a public hearing by the Planning Commission. It is also believed that the Neighborhood Advisory Group process is necessary and important. The applicant may wish to consider waiving his right to have this matter decided within 60 days so that the appropriate public hearing and public input process can be accomplished. The Planning Commission should discuss the proposal, open the public hearing and then table the application and refer it to the West Central Neighborhood Advisory Group for additional review and comment. 8 -13 -98 Page 10 Z-- FrX._J I fl r R W s ._ ' � - o� ,# — ;.' �k ���WJU.IN Dft. • % / I1f1Th - - ''_1_ _ �l/IUIF � -/ � — ,/; t_! LlS3nl�_� D 'It 3AV IhVJ 3AY p1 1 N 3A Lj 1 1; 00 , 1 - u�fU1 Y� _ _ �\1 C1.1 - T . E113AV T ol 00 REV A VE rl C) AVE. N 3AILIA 3 JULO 3AY JOV IG X, It '3AY W�Wl x /X 01 cn If 3" A L-L W-T-T AVE, N. }� t�- — r U!u Zfllllll AVE. it. T roux AYE H I-- M CY P! A WASILI!U�H AVE. FT] _fl �� lh ` VINCENT AVE ' \�; � \ \� .- \ : '.fi . +� 2 - ���1� - -�� �`�Y• • �; ; i` ` \ fi-\ �\ ,;\', \ `` ``•�� �\` . `�� , ` ` � `!`, ` \ \ ^• t t o `, ``� ,` � \: -W -V JPTM it. VHQ� �C���'G7�r1�, ..ui aw.wuow. maaw ..a.r mww w « a i � .. . C.•. -._` � ;^ »•r•. .�.o vuw .« « . rw.. • n... m•n.R nna•r.r. m. w . • - � � 7 ` vo.. ,w r..a a♦ •wm+ w ( • .•'— M s ' 9 i.a' ° ' � ,R. ..•oo wr..nwa w.»wa www w . o :. .a..a.c. •..,.a...w .a.wf u• ♦ t � � — 9. �% ;. i•o.. .ay.riwx♦am .ar..ana+.•a. « . a r?NI1NV' - GNE39A 1 f►•?/ NI W i..M •IM LII,�G1i.M �a �� � � • �� •� l �.Iti 3iI9 Q3VIQWOO wu..•w f'�} c ✓1 •• t �w0 ., � r' 11. 1 11/ M 7 � � -• iC. •/MIWtlO IMM Yi.YW WO. 'W W VNI1NV"Icl - c]NBVEll 91 I N, w a r r.l � � •saw. ��.or•.w•.w a�uecc.•w.w.a..w oa m�ww ra _ s.i«w ua1 a. ow wo. r.e .R..a.rii • a.ao a. .a c..n s.." a ��u... W wo. ao w .a O 1 • — a... rrvW••••.uu.a.GaYi•� O � � MM'W �( J a•91 W[ I..1 �• tnN MN MINV /J t, • - •w /� , • YYp ♦ \\ �+ 1,/ wtl .w, •daa f.7 o.n z Y 91✓i11Mr^iY9' '°TM'°°" o.oa. _ 9cyITTIFt� '11V13a :rniNV�d '"'°' � • �— «...yew. awa D P ^ u tw mR S g - -- . �n .room Dora � --�• _ _ _._.. I .a... •` • •• OC t'n.•...uwu•.♦ � .».sa(n w �•� 59 .a. •!Drano . _ 8 no ora.ai.vw . .i.. i.... -a •- - o ,— .'•Pd91 a.ivs^o J M � aw.a�n�' � _t �— � i 71w ip • KNOW f l . { 'uw Coe . a .a • {{.wi r..wr 01 owtW.. N z9 ..wow ut .war W101 l$ • /Di . t w ut{ aw µcrow = 06 a a 999499111 • Jun afauv ia. o "ou,rnr.a anoW . ul$ r 1 3rr l =xi 82nd AVE. N. •-�) ' �::+n z 1 � /� • 1; ' •\ • •! ✓. � 1.1 t? \�� \ � w.w •, wNIMN•. w N' i ' 11 1. • N« W •w. «a ..M.««• \/r N ,. � � \1 ' ; �? ,• ! W W. • ...• 1. 4INa r•I.r m.....1{r 1. ... /IIr. •�••{w• • l •, i . \ O,/ • •N.W tl•t W.•N. +�+.N i1w�.1. .IrrN. I t 1 •• t11 t , \. �•+ \ • .Na 1, •.r•t w 1 t �l�••r1 +Y 11« Ma41.1 «I N . II + N It•1 ,IY ♦t•ar1 U I«{ MaF.••N•Sl •. 1 . i � l ,1 O n« . as .. w aw•Y tw N tralr /. M:,./ IN \ \ � \ (y .«�� tl • ♦/.1 r. Ill1.N /rt •••t •� IN « l •a r r{I• •I It \ + ! ? i.:. i1 N�:w n.i L� s' « . a ./ :...a. t «ur t/« /• ti:.0 wu wo. rn «I / w .Irt •I « w/• N U •• : /».... I/ N•,/« lt.l • +r•M I« 111. l !rl N W «ut r ' Y ' ,` • 1 \ U "•l Mlla ' M aN NN M.•aiWM♦••• • «M 'N I «I/ • «.•' i ` ✓ INIa• •»I• Il ♦»a••• N •Iw1« Ii.l « 111.11 H 1 G..._........ f! �\ r � ......... .......... ,.. INN do tt If ,. ✓=' It Vi S. .. �y + {`a �• �( _.� � / I : ••• �~" ••_ t'LW \ \ ' \I ,C, ! III ^\ . t` • (!�• ,� '� ✓' '. ,\ { \ ••._.... ..._.,..mow r. ♦ ,. NORTH ,i ( ' —_a xe..N rc.... r..,.eN. ♦/rw l•a BROOKDALE CHRYSLER PLYMOUTH BOUNDARY • •, NM. ■TrN ��_IY -• "» + I � 1 �Nwl,,,,,,« ^,w.,, 01]t BROOKLYN OLYD. r�� TOPOORAPIBCAL Q SURVEY • r G /NI1 «M waN11 •t100 «l'!M 11, .a>i E4 •, 104 13k al 0 MOO 0 /. c tt a CO 0 SITE CENOLITION PLAN Q C A 0 C CCNTR,! 1w LLJ PARKIN(n ----- ----- k % PJ- 19 1' :3 ic (L NEW PAR<lW NP11, SITE PL _ ti r. I LOT PLAN c -� I ca i � LEGCND � �1 ♦ lI� . YprY.iIrT10 WCrr+C Q ci I . uu cr.a.o w o t , 6 �r�w: ! \w..].\ \ r `� � • ....w)ro.r PHILLIPS AR'CNITECTS \ ' f ; • ) ♦ IICC r)) a rrw w W..w C INTRACiORS _ > _ ((�r/ • I r c�eawJ COW� ll _,.. " "MV rat' - laDiO ♦ �G.M -�_. rl. l+ j NOTE: COORDINATE WITI4 DRAWING Cl ' ♦ � � NEW PARKING SITE FLAN .. P O t SITE PLAN I ) \A-J 1 0 G r47 1.4 2300 17 L7 MIS clt• lrW tl AlfCa7 POttg IL Lo 1 p ------------- - ----------- - --------------- f - ---- - - - - -- ------------ - O � i • • — ----------- — ----- ------- - ----------- -- . - � slp, � S ad 3 1..1.111.11 Dd IIII� m = m � m p g tA1fFi?FAaa1A zz -z m 5 w 4II61'IE6111 �� ? ?��pi itilltttiti tt fill 9994 N RN m �n 8 A r i WE ES T i N T t r A Z r s E PL- O 1 1 1 j e .... e 1 990 1 1 1 11 1 V4 N '—, • 7 • {°'(:'off � - �.',ra♦ � �;: , ji Wtb Gocw CJ CC PEP O NORT.1 ELEVATION _ > .tn WltrwLrY.w i i lMnd B+IOw r..►tt ri.na C) cr f � 1 50UTN ELEVATION.. C4?YSUR FRE'u 4 / � COWORATIGN LT MEW MWJ KOA (� �:Whd 1 \ i 0 UE5T ELEVATION ` - '�.- EXTERJC'R ELEVATICNS. ROC T- PLAN PD PLAN Iuaa rte+ Member Dave Rosene introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 0 13 -201 RESOLUTION REGARDING DISPOSITION OF PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION NO. 93011 SUBMITTED BY BROOKDALE - CHRYSLER PLYMOUTH +` WHEREAS, Planning Commission Application No. 93011 submitted by Brookdale Chrysler Plymouth proposes rezoning from C2 (commerce) and C1 (service /office) to PUD /C2 (planned unit development/ commerce) of the properties addressed as 6121 Brooklyn Boulevard and 6107 Brooklyn Boulevard; and WHEREAS, the proposal comprehends the combining of these two said properties, the demolition of a single family home on one of the properties and expansion of the Brookdale Chrysler Plymouth dealership all as part of this application; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly called public hearing on August 26, 1993, when a staff report and public testimony regarding the rezoning and site and building plans were received; and WHEREAS, the West Central Neighborhood Advisory Group met to consider this matter on September 30, 1993, at the City Hall and unanimously recommended approval of this planned unit development proposal; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission resumed consideration of this matter on October 28, 1993, received a staff report,a draft Comprehensive Plan amendment, revised development plans, and took further testimony during a continued public hearing; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended approval of Application No. 93011 by adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 93 -2 on October 28, 1993; and WHEREAS, the City Council considered Application No. 93011 at its November 8, 1993, meeting; and WHEREAS, the'City Council has considered this rezoning and site and building plan request in light of all testimony received, the guidelines for evaluating rezonings contained in Section 35 -208 of the Zonin g Ordinance and in light of the provisions of the Planned Unit Development Ordinance contained in Section 35 -355 and in light of the comments relative to this property in the City's Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the City Council has taken action to amend the City's Comprehensive Plan to create consistency between the Plan and the proposed planned unit development concept presented by Brookdale Chrysler Plymouth. Resolution No. 99 - NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center that Application No. 93011 submitted by Brookdale Chrysler Plymouth be approved in light of the following 3 considerations: 1. The rezoning will allow for appropriate redevelopment along Brooklyn Boulevard which is consistent with the needs and redevelopment policies of the City. 2. The rezoning will allow for the development plan involving the expansion of the Brookdale Chrysler Plymouth dealership which can be considered compatible with surrounding land uses. 3. The development of the property in question will, for the most part, conform with the City Ordinance standards. Variation form the buffer and set back requirements where the use abuts with single family residential uses is acceptable given the landscaping and screening plan submitted. 4. The property at 6107 Brooklyn Boulevard cannot be developed by itself under the current C1 zoning designation given the requirements for a minimum one acre parcel for service /office development on a major thoroughfare and must be combined with other parcels for redevelopment. Furthermore, the likelihood of service /office redevelopment in this area being undertaken in the immediate future is remote given existing and future market considerations. 5. The rezoning of the land and the accompanying development plans allow for expansion of an existing, viable business along Brooklyn Boulevard consistent with recommendations contained in two recent studies for the City of Brooklyn Center. 6. Rezoning is consistent with the amended recommendations contained in the City's Comprehensive Plan. 7. The rezoning proposal demonstrates merit beyond the interest of the owner of the land in that it will provide a substantial upgrading of this site and upgrading of the physical character of Brooklyn Boulevard which is seen as a benefit to the community. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center that approval of Application No. 93011 be subject to the following conditions and considerations: 1. Building plans are subject to review and approval Resolution No. 93 -201 by the Building Official with respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance of permits. 2. Grading, drainage and utility plans are subject to review and approval by the City Engineer, prior to the issuance of- permits. 3. A site performance agreement and supporting financial guarantee (in an amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be submitted prior to the issuance of permits. 4. Any outside trash disposal facilities and rooftop mechanical equipment shall be appropriately screened from view. 5. '.he building is to be equipped with an automatic fire extinguishing system to meet NFPA standards and shall be connected to a central monitoring device in accordance with Chapter 5 of the City Ordinances. 6. An underground irrigation system shall be installed in all landscaped areas to facility site maintenance. 7. Plan approval is exclusive of all signery which is subject to Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances. 8. B612 curb and gutter shall be provided around all parking and driving areas in the new addition area. 9. The applicant shall submit an as -built survey of .the property, improvements and utility service lines prior to release of the performance guarantee. 10. The property owner shall enter into an easement and agreement for maintenance and inspection of utility and storm drainage systems prior to the issuance of permits: 11. The applicant is subject to the requirements and regulations of the Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commission with respect to this site. A storm drainage system shall be approved by the Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commission prior to the issuance of permits. 12. The applicant shall provide an updated landscaping plan within 12 months from the date of approval of this application consistent with the landscape -- recommendations which are forthcoming from the Brooklyn Boulevard Enhancements Task Force. The City Council may extend this deadline in the event Resolution No. 93 -201 the Brooklyn Boulevard Enhancement Study is not completed by that time. 13. The plan shall be modified to include the following: a. A minimum six foot high opaque screen fence along the south portion of the property where it abuts with 6101 Brooklyn Boulevard. b. A gate located in the driveway west of the proposed addition. C. Lighting along the south property line that will be a high cut off type so as not to cause light glare on the adjacent properties, particularly 6101 Brooklyn Boulevard. 14. The applicant shall enter into a development agreement with the City, to be reviewed and approved with the City Attorney and executed prior to the issuance of any permits to include provisions relating to the above stated conditions. 15. Building permits for this project shall not be issued until the plat comprehended under Planning Commission Application No. 93014 has been given final approval by the City Council and filed with Hennepin County. 3 16. Use of the property shall be governed by, and shall comply in all respects with, the requirements of the City's Zoning Ordinance with respect to the C2 zone with the following exceptions: a. A buffer of less than 35' where the property abuts with R1 zoned property is allowed but only in the areas indicated on the approved development plan subject to continuing compliance with the landscaping, buffering and screening indicated on that plan. b. The automobile service and repair operation is allowed to be expanded but only in compliance with the approved development November 8, 1993 Date Mayor ATTEST: Deputy Clerk i The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Barb Kalligher and upon vote being taken i-- thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Todd Paulson, Celia Scott, Dave Rosene, and Barb Kalligher; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. ® C. Accessory uses incidental to the foregoing principal uses when located on the same property with the use to which it is accessory but not including any business or industrial uses. Such accessory uses to include but not be restricted to the following: 1. Off- street parking. 2. Public recreational buildings and parks, playgrounds and athletic fields. 3. Signs as permitted in the Brooklyn Center Sign Ordinance. ec - Section >> 3». PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT. Subdivision 1. Purpose. The ,purpose of the Planned Unit Development (PUD) district is to promote flexibility in land development and redevelopment, preserve aesthetically significant and environmentally sensitive site features, conserve energy and ensure a high quality of design. Subdivision 2. Classification of PUD Districts; Permitted Uses; Applicable Regulations. i a. Upon rezoning for a PUD, the district shall be designated by the letters "PUD" followed by the alphanumeric designation of the underlying zoning district which may be either the prior zoning classification or a new classification. In cases of mixed use PUDs, the' City Council shall, whenever reasonably practicable, specify underlying zoning classifications for the various parts of the PUD. When it is not reasonably practicable to so specify underlying O " zoning classifications e 'c v ,the Council may rezone the district, or any part thereof, to PUD - MIXED." ;j b. Regulations governing uses and structures in PUDs shall be the same as those governing the underlying zoning district subject to the following: 1. Regulations may be modified expressly by conditions imposed by the Council at the time of rezoning to PUD. 2. Regulations are modified by implication only to the extent necessary to comply with the development plan of the PUD. 3. In the case of districts rezoned to PUD - MIXED, the Council shall specify regulations applicable to uses and structures in various parts of the district. 35 -45 • c. For purposes of determining applicable regulations for uses or structures on land adjacent to or in the vicinity of the PUD district which depend on the zoning of the PUD district. the underlying zoning classification of PUD districts shall be deemed to be the zoning classification of the district. In the case of a district zoned PUD - MIXED, the underlying zoning classification shall be deemed to be the classification which allows as a permitted use any use which is permitted in the PUD district and which results in the most restrictive regulation of adjacent or nearby properties. Subdivision 3. Development Standards. a. A PUD shall have a minimum area of one acre, excluding land included within the floodwav or flood fringe overlay districts and excluding existing rights -of -way, unless the City finds that at least one of the following conditions exists: 1. There are unusual physical features of the property or of the surrounding neighborhood such that development as a PUD will conserve a physical or terrain feature of importance to the neighborhood or community; ?. The property is directly adjacent to or across a public right -of -way from property which previously was developed as a PUD and the new PUD will be perceived as and function • as an extension of that previously approved development; or 3. The property is located in a transitional area between different land uses and the development will be used as a buffer between the uses. b. Within a PUD, overall density for residential developments shall be consistent with Section 35-400 of this ordinance. Individual buildings or lots within a PUD may exceed these standards, provided that density for the entire PUD does not exceed the permitted standards. C. Setbacks, buffers and greenstrips within a PUD shall be consistent with Section 35 -400 to 35-414 and Section 35 -700 of this ordinance unless the developer can demonstrate to the City's satisfaction that a lesser standard should be permitted with the addition of a screening treatment or other mitigative measures. d. Parking provided for uses within a PUD shall be consistent with the parking requirements contained in Section 35 -704 of this ordinance unless the developer can demonstrate to the City's satisfaction that a lesser standard should be permitted on the grounds of the complementarity of peak parking demands by the uses within the PUD. The City may require execution of a restrictive covenant limiting future use of the property to those uses which will continue this parking complementarity, or which are otherwise approved by the City. 35-46 Subdivision 4. General Standards. a. The City may allow more than one principal building to be constructed on each platted tot within a PUD. b. A PU-D which involves only one land use or a single housing type may be permitted provided that it is otherwise consistent with the purposes and objectives of this section. C. A PUD may only contain uses consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. d. All property to be included within a PUD shall be under unified ownership or control or subject to such legal restrictions or covenants as may be necessary to ensure compliance with the approved development plan and site plan. e. The uniqueness of each PUD requires that specifications and standards for streets, utilities, public facilities and the approval of land subdivision may be subject to modifications from the City Ordinances generally governing them. The City Council may, therefore, approve streets, utilities, public facilities and land subdivisions which are not in compliance with usual specifications or ordinance requirements where it is found that such are not required in the interests of the residents or of the City. Subdivision 5. Application and Review. • a. Implementation of a PUD shall be controlled by the development plan. The development plan may be approved or disapproved by the City Council after evaluation by the Planning Commission. Submission of the development plan shall be made to the Director of Planning and Inspection on such forms and accompanied by such information and documentation as the City may deem necessary or convenient, but shall include at a minimum; the following: 1. Street and utility locations and sizes; 2. A drainage plan, including location and size of pipes and water storage areas; 3. A grading plan; 4. A landscape plan; 5. Alighting plan; 6. A plan for timing and phasing of the development; . P � P g P 7. Covenants or other restrictions proposed for the regulation of the development; 35-47 8. A site plan showing the location of all structures and parking areas; • 9. Building renderings or elevation drawings of all sides of all buildings to be constructed in at least the first phase of development; and 10. Proposed underlying zoning classification or classifications. Such information may be in a preliminary form, but shall be sufficiently complete and accurate to allow an evaluation of the development by the City. b. The Planning Commission shall hold a public hearing on the development plan. Notice of such public hearing shall be published in the official newspaper and actual notice shall be mailed to the applicant and adjacent property owners as required by Section 35 -210 of this ordinance. The Planning Commission shall review the development plan and make such recommendations as it deems appropriate regarding the plan within the time limits established by Section 35 -210 of this ordinance. C. Following receipt of the recommendations of the Planning Commission, the City Council shall hold such hearing as it deems appropriate regarding the matter. The City Council shall act upon the development plan within the time limits established by Section 35 -210 of this ordinance. Approval of the development plan shall constitute rezoning of the property to • PUD and conceptual approval of the elements of the plan. In addition to the guidelines provided in Section 35 -208 of this ordinance, the City Council shall base its actions on the rezoning upon the following criteria: 1. Compatibility of the plan with the standards, purposes and intent of this section; 2. Consistency of the plan with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan; 3. The impact of the plan on the neighborhood in which it is to be located; and 4. The adequacy of internal site organization, uses, densities, circulation, parking facilities, public facilities, recreational areas, open spaces, and buffering and landscaping. The City Council may attach such conditions to its approval as it may determine to be necessary to better accomplish the purposes of the PUD district. d. Prior to construction on any site zoned PUD, the developer shall seek plan approval pursuant to Section 35 -230 of this ordinance. In addition to the information specifically required by Section 35 -230, the developer shall submit such information as may be deemed necessary or convenient by the City to review the consistency of the proposed development with the approved development plan. 35 -48 The plan submitted for approval pursuant to Section 35 -230 shall be in substantial • compliance with the approved development plan. Substantial compliance shall mean that buildings, parking areas and roads are in essentially the same location as previously approved; the number of dwelling units, if any, has not increased or decreased by more than 5 percent; the floor area of nonresidential areas has not been increased or decreased by more than 5 percent; no building has been increased in the number of floors; open space has not been decreased or altered from its original design or use, and lot coverage of any individual building has not been increased or decreased by more than 10 percent. e. Prior to construction on any site - zoned PUD, the developer shall execute a development agreement in a form satisfactory to the City. f. Applicants may combine development plan approval with the plan approval required by Section 35 -230 by submitting 'all information required for both simultaneously. Q. After approval of the development plan and the plan approval required by Section 35 -230, nothing shall be constructed on the site and no building permits shall be issued except in conformity with the approved plans. h. If within 12 months following approval by the City Council of the development plan. no building permits have been obtained or, if within 12 months after the issuance of building • permits no construction has commenced on the area approved for the PUD district, the City Council may initiate rezoning of the property. i. Any major amendment to the development plan may be approved by the City Council following the same notice and hearing procedures specified in this section. An amendment shall be considered major if it involves any change greater than that permitted by subdivision 5d of this section. Changes which are determined by the City Council to be minor may be made if approved by the Planning Commission after such notice and hearing as may be deemed appropriate by the Planning Commission. 35-49 • Following the review and recommendation by the Planning Commission. the City Council shall consider the proposed amendment and may by resolution of two-thirds of its members, amend the Comprehensive Plan. 2. Coordination with Other Agencies. In the performance of its planning activities, the Planning Commission shall consult with and coordinate the planning activities of other departments and agencies of the municipality to insure conformity with and to assist in a development of the comprehensive municipal plan. Furthermore, the Planning Commission shall take due cognizance of the planning activities of adjacent units of government and other affected public agencies. Section 35 -208. REZONING EVALUATION POLICY AND REVIEW GUIDELINES. 1. Pumose The City Council finds that effective maintenance of the comprehensive planning and land use classifications is enhanced through uniform and equitable evaluation of periodic proposed changes to this Zoning Ordinance; and for this purpose, by the adoption of Resolution No. 77 -167, the City Council has established a rezoning evaluation policy and review guidelines. ?. Policv It is the policy of the City that: a) zoning classifications must be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, and b) rezoning proposals shall not constitute "spot zoning ", defined as a zoning decision which discriminates in favor of a particular landowner, and does not relate to the Comprehensive Plan or to accepted planning principles. 3. Procedure Each rezoning proposal will be considered on its merits, measured against the above policy and against these guidelines which may be weighed collectively or individually as deemed by the City. 4. Guidelines a. Is there a clear and public need or benefit? b. Is the proposed zoning consistent with and compatible with surrounding land use classifications? 35 -3 C. Can all permitted uses in the proposed zoning district be contemplated for development of the subject property? • P J d. Have there been substantial physical or zoning classification changes in the area since the subject property was zoned? e. In the case of City- initiated rezoning proposals, is there a broad public purpose evident? f. Will the subject property bear fully the ordinance development restrictions for the proposed zoning districts? Cr. Is the subject property generally unsuited for uses permitted in the present zoning district, with respect to size, configuration, topography or location? h. Will the rezoning result in the expansion of a zoning district warranted b : 1 _ P Y ) Comprehensive Planning; 2) the lack of developable land in the proposed zoning district; or 3) the best interests of the community? I i. Does the proposal demonstrate merit beyond the interests of an owner or owners of an individual parcel? ® Section 3 5 -210. REZONING APPLICATION PROCEDURES AND RECONSIDERATION. CONSIDERATION. The following rules shall govern applications for amendments to the Zoning Ordinance hereinafter referred to as "Rezoning Applications ": 1. Procedures a. A rezoning application may be initiated b the C Council the Planning PP Y Y tY , Commission, or by the owner of the subject property. Any such application shall be referred to the Planning Commission for public hearing, study, and report and may not be acted upon by the City Council until it has received the recommendation of the Commission, or until seventy -eight (78) days have elapsed from the date of referral of the application without. a report by the Planning Commission. The date of referral is defined as the date of the public hearing. b. The applicant or his authorized agent shall fill out and submit to the Secretary of the Planning Commission a "zoning application ", copies of which are available at the municipal offices, together with a fee in an amount as set forth by City Council resolution. The application shall be filed with the Secretary of the Planning Commission at least seventeen (17) days before the date of the public hearing. 35-4 f HILLIFS Architects & Contractor, Ic Planned Unit Development Application July 15, 1998 Applicants: Chrysler Realty Corporation Attn.: R. E. Hahneman 2289 Parmalee Brighton, MI 48116 Phone (313) 229 -8639 William J. 5artram 6121 Brooklyn Boulevard Brooklyn Center, MN 55429 Phone 612 535 -5200 Subject Properties: 61215rooklyn Boulevard (Chrysler) 6107 Brooklyn 5oulevard (5artram) Architect & David A. Philli s p Owners' PHILLIPS Architects & Contractors, Inc. representative: 1250 East Moore Lake, Suite 205 Fridley, MN 55432 Phone (612) 571 -1911 Fax (612)571 -3112 Description of project: The two applicants own adjacent parcels of land on Brooklyn Boulevard. This PUD application io made jointly by both applicants. Mr. 5artram io the owner of the Brookdale Chrysler Plymouth dealership, but leases the 5rookdale Chrysler Plymouth facility located at 6121 Brooklyn Boulevard from the property owner, Chrysler Realty Corporation. Mr. 5artram owns the property at 6107 Brooklyn Boulevard, which was a former house. The structures at 6107 Brooklyn Boulevard have been removed. Brookdale Chrysler Plymouth at 6121 Brooklyn 5oulevard needs additional space to accommodate the needs of their customers. In addition the facility is in need of upgrading to meet the requirements of the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA). 1250 East Moorc take Drive, 5uitc 205, Fridlcy, MN 55432 PH (612) 571 -1911 Fax (612) 571 -3112 PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION July 13,1998 6121 & 6107 Brooklyn Boulevard PAGE 2 The property at 6107 Brooklyn Boulevard is currently vacant. The proposed PUD allows for an interim use of this property with reserving its' availability to be combined with properties to the south andlor the west for development. Proposed Chrysler Building Addition and Renovation The Chrysler building to proposed to have a 6,960 sq, ft service addition on the west side, and a 1,100!5q. ft. car wash addition. The service addition will have 13 Service bays. The existing service area in the former body Shop will be remodeled into a parts area. The existed parts area adjacent to the showroom will be relocated to this area. In all, 6 Service bays will be eliminated in the existing areas, leaving a net add of 7 service stalls when the addition is completed. This relocation of the arts area will allow the current service of and customer loun e to be p 9 located into the vacated area along with new ADA toilet facilities. Other interior changes includes creating new sales offices in the existing customer lounge, toilets, and service office areas. The showroom will be completely renovated as well. All work will incorporate a fully ADA ® compliant accessible facility at completion. A major benefit to the renovation will be the demolition of the existing used car building which i5 north of the main building at Brookciale Chrysler as the final phase of this improvement project. In summary, the service addition allows the parts department to occupy portions of the existing service area; sales and customer facilities including the additional floor space required• for ADA compliance will occupy the former parts area; the used car sales will move into the newly created sales area in the main building allowing the demolition of the accessory building; and the interior of the entire facility will be renovated. The current Chrysler property is zoned C -2. 6107 Pronertv The house at 610713rookl n Boulevard has been demolished earlier this S rin . This lot, zoned C1, y p 9 of approximately 28,800 ft. is proposed to have paving constructed to be used for the dl5play and Storage of the new and used car inventory. it is expected that this is an interim use of the property. • A significant part of this PUD application involves one new Shared driveway located off of Brooklyn Boulevard at the north portion of the 6107 property. The existing southerly driveway PLANNED UNIT OEYELOPMENT APPLICATION July 13, 1998 6121 & 6107 Brooklyn Boulevard PAGE 3 • on the Chrysler property will be closed along with the existing driveway on the South portion of the 6107 property. Eliminating 2 driveways and replacing them with one new Shared driveway for the two separately owned parcels with croeo access easements is a clear safety benefit to the community. Compliance with Guidelines A.15 there a clear and public need or benefit? The ublic benefits for the app roval of this PUD ap plication include: P PP PP 1. Safety improvements by eliminating a driveway along Brooklyn Boulevard. 2. ADA access, 5alc5 and Service improvements to the existing facility which will benefit the public and the customers of Brookdale Chrysler. Many of these customers are residents of the area. 3. The demolition of the used car building will enhance Brooklyn Boulevard "5treetscape". 4. The availability of the 6107 property to be combined with the house lots to the west and /or the commercial lot to the South to form a legal commercial lot will facilitate future development and eventually correct a zoning conflict. S. The public will benefit from the substantial capital investment which will, encourage other improvements to along Brooklyn Boulevard and increase the tax base. This PUD does not requcot any public funds or 5ub5idies. 6. Additional above average paying jobs will be created at a local employer. The annual payroll exceeds $2,000,000. 5.15 the proposed zoning con5i5tent with and compatible with the surrounding land use classification? The Chrysler property (6121) is currently zoned C -2. The use as a new car safes and Service facility has existed for approximately 30 years. This PUD will not change the existing uses at the 6121 property. The Bartram lot (6107) i5 zoned C -1, and the use as an accessory parking lot i5 con5ietent with the zoning. The 6107 property i5 bordered on the South by a C -1 zoned home bu5ine5S and to the west by (2) R -1 houses. The R -1 zoned lots to the South currently abut the C -2 zoned dealership facility. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION July 13, 1998 6121 & 6107 Brooklyn Boulevard PAGE 4 C. Can all permitted uses in the proposed zoning district be contemplated for development of the Subject property? No change in the underlying zoning is requested ae part of this PUD. The proposed uses, either exist in the case of servicing the vehicles or are permitted in the current zoning. It is desired by the city staff that the 6107 property be eventually combined with the adjacent C -1 & R -1 properties to form a viable commercial Site. This PUD facilitates the future assembly of this new commercial lot by not combining it with the Chrysler property. D. Have there been substantial physical or zoning classification changes in the area Since the subject property was zoned? After the Chrysler facility was conotructed, zoning was changed to permit the Sales of new vehicles, but servicing of the vehicles became a nonconforming use. Servicing of the new cars sold at any dealership is an iritceral and required part of the business. i E. In the case of City - initiated zoning proposals, is there a broad public purpose evident? This io not City initiated zoning. F. Will the subject property bear fully the ordinance development restrictions for the proposed zoning districts? This PUD does not propose uses which are new to the zoning district. The PUD process i5 requested to allow for updating the Chrysler facility to current Standards and the additional service space. G. Is the Subject property generally unsuited for uses permitted in the present zoning district, with respect to size, configuration, topography or location? The 6107 property would not meet current zoning criteria as a C -1 lot due to it's size. If permanently attached to the larger C -2 6121 property, the adjacent C -1 lot to the south would not meet the criteria even if combined with the (2) R -1 lots to the west. This PUD would 'allow for the future development of the property south of the Chrysler dealership. PLANNED UNIT DEYELOPMENT APPLICATION July 13, 1998 6121 & 6107 5rooklyn Boulevard PAGE 5 H. Will the rezoning result in the expansion of a zoning district, warranted by. 1. Comprehensive planning; 2. The lack of developable land in the proposed zoning district; or, 3. The best interests of the community? All u5e5 contemplated by this PUD rac ue5t currently exist. This PUD 15 warranted due to the lack of developable land in the area for the area. The applicants believe additional capital investment in the property is in the best interest of the community. Chrysler i5 also committed to compliance with the Americans With Disabilities Act when completing renovations of their facilities. I. Does the proposal demons_ trate merit beyond the interests of an owner or owners of an individual parcel? This proposal demonstrates merit beyond the interests of the owners by the public benefits Stated above. The safety improvements along Brooklyn 5oulevard include the eliminating of one driveway and construction of a shared entrance. Future development . potential to the South of 5rookdale Chrysler Plymouth allows for consolidating the nonconforming parcels into a viable commercial lot. The applicants respectfully request City approval of this Planned Unit Development. Construction will begin upon approval and issuance of a building permit. Very truly yours, PH4LIF'5 chitect5 & C ontractors, Inc. )alip5 President MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE WEST CENTRAL NEIGHBORHOOD ADVISORY GROUP OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA SEPTEMBER 02, 1998 CALL TO ORDER The West Central Neighborhood Advisory Group meeting was called to order by Mr. Warren at 7:30 p.m. INTRODUCTIONS Mr. Ronald Warren, Planning and Zoning Special and Secretary to the Planning Commission introduced the members of the Advisory Group present including Mary Jo Danielson and Patricia Weitzel. Member Donald Ewert did not attend this meeting. Planning Commissioner Rex Newman and Planning Commission Recording Secretary were also present. Representing the applicant were Dave Phillips and William Bartram. APPLICATION NO. 98017. SIJBMITTFD BY DAVE PHILLIPS. PHILLIPS ARCHITECTS Using overhead transparencies, Mr. Warren described the location, site, and building plans of the Brookdale Chrysler Plymouth auto dealership, 6121 Brooklyn Boulevard. The applicant is seeking approval through the Planned Unit Development (PUD) process to construct a 8,500 sq. ft. addition to expand its auto service and repair departments and to install a car wash, and to renovate its facilities to meet the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). In addition, the applicant requests rezoning of the dealership's property from C -2 /Commerce to PUD /C -2 to facilitate the expansion and upgrading requested. Mr. Bartram, owrter of the dealership, owns the property at 6107 Brooklyn Boulevard, and requests rezoning of that C -1- Service /Office property to PUD /C -2, to use that property for storage and display of new and used car inventory. A single family home was previously located on that property and because of its limited size can be redeveloped only in combination with another nearby lot. Mr. Bartram leases the dealership building and property from its owner, Chrysler Realty Corporation. Mr. Warren provided additional information on the expansion proposal including landscaping as detailed in the Planning Commission Information Sheet dated 08- 13 -98. He noted that on August 18 the Planning Commission considered the application, conducted a public hearing, referred the application to the Advisory Group for its review and comment, and tabled action on the application. Mr. Warren called for questions from the Advisory Group. The Group requested comments from • the Applicant. Mr. Phillips, the applicant, stated that Chrysler Corporation has invested substantial capital in the • project which also is an investment in the community. Besides the new addition, the front of the building on Brooklyn Boulevard will be completely gutted and renovated for office space, customer lounge, and bathrooms to meet the ADA requirements, and provided details regarding the building to be added to the west end of the exiting structure, the car wash, and the parking lot. Mr. Phillips described the revised landscaping plan for the area between the residential property and the new building and on Brooklyn Boulevard, and provided details about the new 75' screening walls and fencing on the site. He stated that vine or ivy plantings on the side of the building that abuts the residential area as recommended by the staff and Planning Commission is a reasonable request to soften the impact of the wall. Reconfiguration of the service /repair area was described. Mr. Phillips reported that the Used Car building will be demolished and electrical components in that building will be relocated into the main building. In response to a question from Ms. Danielson, Mr. Phillips explained that vehicles will enter the 16' high car wash structure from the south and exit to the north to the storage lot or into a service area for additional detail work. Mr. Bartram stated that car wash hours will coincide with the late night service hours (Mon. - Thurs. to 2 a.m.; Fri. -Sat. to 6 pm) which have existed for 19 years. He indicated that 3,000 of his 8000 -9,000 customers utilize and depend on the late night service hours for their car service /repairs, and that he is always sensitive to the concerns of the residential neighbors. This project does not include any additional lighting on the site or buildings. In response to a question from Mr. Bucsko, a resident adjacent to the dealership, Mr. Phillips explained the exit from the service bay will be through a 14' do6r. Windows will be located near the top of the 20' building which is the same height as the existing building. There was discussion regarding the 35' easement area between the building and the residential properties in that it is a "no- man's land" subject to some undesirable activities and dumping of bicycles, etc. There was some discussion of the options available for redevelopment of the 6107 property where the new parking lot will be located which would require combination with adjacent lots which are currently residential. Chrysler is not interested in purchasing those lots for any future use. It was noted that the City approved a similar application for the Chrysler dealership in 1993, however Chrysler did not approve funding for the project at that time. It was noted that approval of this application will not preclude further future development in the area. Mr. Bartram expressed the need to work with the adjacent residents to develop a combined property. While the owners of the adjacent residential lots, Messrs. Bucsko and Tacheny, lamented the additional construction on the dealership site, it was pointed out that upgrading and continued maintenance represent a commitment to the property and the City as opposed to deterioration or abandonment of the dealership. It was acknowledged that Brooklyn Boulevard is in reality a commercial roadway and needs to be supported for that purpose. Mr. Bartram indicated the proposal being considered for the Chrysler dealership would sustain his business far into the future and reiterated his commitment to being a good neighbor. Mr. Warren provided current information 9 -02 -98 2 with respect to the County and City plans to improve the roadway which is scheduled for the year 2000. Commissioner Newman and Mr. Warren agreed that details for the landscaping that includes clumps of trees on 61 st Avenue and Brooklyn Boulevard could be worked out at a later date. RECOMMENDATION ON APPLICATION NO. 98017 Ms. Danielson stated her support for the application noting that Mr. Bartram has worked diligently with the neighborhood and the plans do not represent substantial changes to the current site. Ms. Weitzel stated her support for the application noting it will protect the existing property as well as protect and provide for possible future acceptable development, and will not add lighting to the car dealership. Commissioner Newman reiterated that the application does not create appreciable changes in noise or light pollution, brings certainty to the car dealership as a good neighbor and is therefore a positive improvement to the City. Mr. Warren stated he would convey the Group's favorable recommendation on the application to the Planning Commission. The Commission will take action on Application No. 98017 at its September 10 meeting. Interested parties are encouraged to attend that meeting. It was noted that the City Council will make the final decision on this matter at its September 28 meeting. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 8:55 p.m. Chair Recorded and transcribed by: Arlene Bergfalk TimeSaver Off Site Site Secretarial, Inc. i 9 -02 -98 Member introduced the following resolution and moved i its adoption: PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 98 -04 RESOLUTION REGARDING RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION OF PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION NO. 98017 SUBMITTED BY DAVE PHILLIPS ON BEHALF OF BROOKDALE CHRYSLER PLYMOUTH WHEREAS, Planning Commission Application No. 98017 submitted by Dave Phillips on behalf of Brookdale Chrysler Plymouth, proposes rezoning from C -2 (Commerce) and C -1 (Service /Office) to PUD /C -2 (Planned Unit Development/Commerce) of the properties addressed as 6121 Brooklyn Boulevard and 6107 Brooklyn Boulevard; and WHEREAS, the proposal comprehends the expansion of the Brookdale Chrysler Plymouth dealership with an 8,500 sq. ft. building addition for automobile service and repair and a 1,100 sq. ft. car wash at 6121 Brooklyn Boulevard and the interim use of 6107 Brooklyn Boulevard for the storage and display of new and used car inventory; and WHEREAS, the Planning called public hearing b Commission held a duly c p g on August 13, 1998, when a staff report and public testimony regarding the rezoning and site and building plans were received; and WHEREAS, the West Central Neighborhood Advisory Group met to consider this matter on September 2, 1998, at the City Hall and unanimously recommended approval of this Planned Unit Development proposal; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission resumed consideration of this matter on September 10, 1998, received a staff report, revised development plans, and took further testimony during a continued public hearing; and WHEREAS, the Commission considered the rezoning and site and building plan request in light of all testimony received, the guidelines for evaluating rezonings contained in Section 35 -208 of the City's zoning ordinance and in light of the provisions of the Planned Unit Development ordinance contained in Section 35 -355, and in light of the comments relative to this property in the City's Comprehensive Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the Brooklyn Center Planning Advisory Commission to recommend to the City Council that Application No. 98017 be approved in light of the following considerations: 1. The rezoning will allow for appropriate redevelopment along Brooklyn Boulevard, which is consistent with the needs and redevelopment policies of the City. i 1 Planning Commission Resolution No. 98 -04 2. The rezoning will allow for the development plan involving the expansion of the Brookdale Chrysler Plymouth dealership, which can be considered compatible with surrounding land uses. 3. The development of the property in question, will for the most part, conform with city ordinance standards. Variation from the buffer and setback requirements where the use abuts single family residential uses is acceptable given the landscaping and screening plans submitted. Also the expansion of the automobile service operation is acceptable given the landscaping and screening plans submitted. 4. The property at 6107 Brooklyn Boulevard cannot be developed by itself under the current C -1 zoning designation given the requirements for a minimum one acre parcel for service /office development on a major thoroughfare and must be combined with other parcels for redevelopment. The interim use of this parcel for the parking and storage of inventory is an appropriate use and still allows for the future combination of this parcel with other property for appropriate commercial development. 5. The rezoning of the land and the accompanying development plans allow for expansion of a existing viable business along Brooklyn Boulevard consistent with the recommendations contained in recent studies for the City of Brooklyn Center. 6. The rezoning is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. The rezoning proposal demonstrates merit beyond the interests of the owner of land in that it will provide a substantial upgrading of the site and upgrading of the physical character of Brooklyn Boulevard and allow for the interim use of a parcel of land that would otherwise sit vacant and this is considered a benefit to the community. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Advisory Commission of the City of Brooklyn Center to recommend to the City Council that approval of Application No. 98017 be subject to the following conditions and considerations: 1. Building plans are subject to review and approval by the Building Official with respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance of permits. 2. Grading, drainage and utility plans are subject to review and approval by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of permits. 3. A site performance agreement and supporting financial guarantee (in an amount to be determined based on cost estimates) shall be submitted prior to the issuance of permits. 2 Planning Commission Resolution No. 98 -04 4. Any outside trash disposal facilities and rooftop mechanical equipment shall be appropriately screened from view. 5. The building is to be equipped with an automatic fire extinguishing system to meet NFPA standards and shall be connected to a central monitoring device in accordance with Chapter 5 of the city ordinances. P n' 6. An underground irrigation system shall be installed in all landscaped areas to facilitate site maintenance. 7. Plan approval is exclusive of all signery which is subject to Chapter 34 of the city ordinances. 8. B -612 curb and tter shall be provided around the parking and driving areas in the 8u P P g g off -site inventory lot. 9. The applicant shall submit an as -built survey of the property, improvements and utility service lines prior to release of the performance guarantee. 10. The property owner shall enter into an easement and agreement for maintenance and • inspection of utility and storm drainage systems prior to the issuance of permits. 11. The plans shall be modified to include the following: a. A minim six foot high opaque screen fence along the west and south portions of the property where it abuts with 6101 Brooklyn Boulevard. b. Lighting along the south property line will be a high cut -off type so as not to cause n light glare adjacent properties, particularly those zoned residential. g g J P P c. The applicant shall work with the Staff in providing shade trees in the Brooklyn Boulevard greenstrip consistent with the Streetscape Study for that street. 12. The applicant shall enter into a development agreement with the City, to be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney and executed prior to the issuance of permits to include provisions relating to the above stated conditions. • 3 Planning Commission Resolution No. 98 -04 7� I; 6 Z�� V Date Chair ATTEST: " c2 -- _0 G Secretary The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Newman and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Chair Willson, Commissioners Nelson, Newman, Rahn, and Reem. and the following voted against the same: ' None whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. • • 4 Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION REGARDING DISPOSITION OF PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION NO. 98017 SUBMITTED BY DAVE PHILLIPS ON BEHALF OF BROOKDALE CHRYSLER PLYMOUTH WHEREAS, Planning Commission Application No. 98017 submitted by Dave Phillips on behalf of Brookdale Chrysler Plymouth, proposes rezoning from C -2 (Commerce) and C -1 (Service /Office) to PUD /C -2 (Planned Unit Development /Commerce) of the properties addressed as 6121 Brooklyn Boulevard and 6107 Brooklyn Boulevard; and WHEREAS, the proposal comprehends the expansion of the Brookdale Chrysler Plymouth dealership with an 8,500 sq. ft. building addition for automobile service and repair and a 1,100 sq. ft. car wash at 6121 Brooklyn Boulevard and the interim use of 6107 Brooklyn Boulevard for the storage and display of new and used car inventory; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly called public hearing on August 13, 1998, when a staff report and public testimony regarding the rezoning and site and building plans were received; and WHEREAS the West Central Neighborhood Advisory Group met to consider this g ry P matter on September 2, 1998, at the City Hall and unanimously recommended approval of this Planned Unit Development proposal; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission resumed consideration of this matter on September 10, 1998, received a staff report, revised development plans, and took further testimony during a continued public hearing; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended approval of Application No. 98017 by adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 98 -04 on September 10, 1998; and WHEREAS, the City Council considered Application No. 98017 at its September 28, 1998 meeting; and WHEREAS, the City Council considered the rezoning and site and building plan request in light of all testimony received, the guidelines for evaluating rezonings contained in Section 35 -208 of the City's zoning ordinance and in light of the provisions of the Planned Unit Development ordinance contained in Section 35 -355, and in light of the comments relative to this property in the City's Comprehensive Plan. • 1 City Council Resolution No. NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center that Application No. 98017 be approved in light of the following considerations: 1. The rezoning will allow for appropriate redevelopment along Brooklyn Boulevard, which is consistent with the needs and redevelopment policies of the City. 2. The rezoning will allow for a development plan involving the expansion of the Brookdale Chrysler Plymouth dealership, which can be considered compatible with surrounding land uses. 3. The development of the property in question, will for the most part, conform with city ordinance standards. Variation from the buffer and setback requirements where the use abuts single family residential uses is acceptable given the landscaping and screening plans submitted. Also the expansion of the automobile service operation is acceptable given the landscaping and screening plans submitted. 4. The property at 6107 Brooklyn Boulevard cannot be developed by itself under the • current C -1 zoning designation given the requirements for a minim one acre parcel for service /office development on a major thoroughfare and must be combined with other parcels for redevelopment. The interim use of this parcel for the parking and storage of inventory is an appropriate use and still allows for the future combination of this parcel with other property for appropriate commercial development. 5. The rezoning of the land and the accompanying development plans allow for expansion of a existing viable business along Brooklyn Boulevard consistent with the recommendations contained in recent studies for the City of Brooklyn Center. 6. The rezoning is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. The rezoning proposal demonstrates merit beyond the interests of the owner of land in that it will provide a substantial upgrading of the site and upgrading of the physical character of Brooklyn Boulevard and allow for the interim use of a parcel of land that would otherwise sit vacant and this is considered a benefit to the community. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center to approve Application No. 98017 subject to the following conditions and considerations: 1. Building plans are subject to review and' approval by the Building Official with respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance of permits. 2 City Council Resolution No. 2. Grading, drainage and utility plans are subject to review and approval by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of permits. 3. A site performance agreement and supporting financial guarantee (in an amount to be determined based on cost estimates) shall be submitted prior to the issuance of permits. 4. Any outside trash disposal facilities and rooftop mechanical equipment shall be appropriately screened from view. 5. The building is to be equipped with an automatic fire extinguishing system to meet NFPA standards and shall be connected to a central monitoring device in accordance with Chapter 5 of the city ordinances. 6. An underground irrigation system shall be installed in all landscaped areas to facilitate site maintenance. 7. Plan approval is exclusive of all signery which is subject to Chapter 34 of the city ordinances. 8. B -612 curb and er shall be provided around the parking and driving areas in the gutt p o d o p g g off -site inventory lot. 9. The applicant shall submit an as -built survey of the property, improvements and utility service lines prior to release of the performance guarantee. 10. The roe owner shall enter into an easement and agreement for maintenance and P P m' g inspection of utility and storm drainage systems prior to the issuance of permits. 11. The plans shall be modified to include the following: a. A minimum six foot high opaque screen fence along the west and south portions of the property where it abuts with 6101 Brooklyn Boulevard. b. Lighting along the south property line will be a high cut -off type so as not to cause light glare on adjacent properties, particularly those zoned residential. c. The applicant shall work with the Staff in providing shade trees in the Brooklyn Boulevard greenstrip consistent with the Streetscape Study for that street. 3 City Council Resolution No. 12. The applicant shall enter into a development agreement with the City, to be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney and executed prior to the issuance of permits to include provisions relating to the above stated conditions. Date Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. 4 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held on the day of , 1998, at _ p.m. or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard at the City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, to consider an Ordinance Amending Chapter 35 of the City Ordinances g p y Regarding the Zoning Classification of Certain Land (Brookdale Chrysler Plymouth). Auxiliary aids for persons with disabilities are available upon request at least 96 hours in advance. Please contact the City Clerk at 569 -3300 to make arrangements. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 35 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES REGARDING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF CERTAIN LAND ROOKDALE CHRYSLER PLYMOUTH). THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Chapter 35 of the City Ordinances of the City of Brooklyn Center is Hereby Amended in the Following Manner: Section 35 -1170. SERVICE /OFFICE DISTRICT (Cl). The following properties are hereby established as being within the (Cl) Service /Office District zoning classification: Lot - � 2, Block 6, Wangstad's Brooklyn Terrace Addition. Section 35 -1190. COMMERCE DISTRICT (C2). The following properties are hereby established as being within the (C2) Commerce zoning classification: Lc4t 1, Dlc, 1 Ghrysler Motors t crpoYtY tion Addition. lock 2, Ewing Lune A44iticf. lying -a&t J the w atee rand wic3t l liic - xieftd of Lct 1, Mock 1, Gis 'r�r Motors rppr -a.4m A ddition. r Section 35 -1240. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT (PUD). The following properties are hereby established as being within a (PUD) Planned Unit Development District zoning classification: 4. The following properties are designated as PUD /C2 (Planned Unit Development /Commerce) : • 1 I ® Lot 1. Block 6. Wangstad's Brooklyn Terrace Addition Lot 1. Block 1. Chry is er M otors Corporation 2nd Addition; Section 2. This ordinance shall become effective after adoption and upon thirty days following its legal publication. Adopted this day of , 1998. Mayor ATTEST: Clerk Date of Publication Effective Date Strikeouts indicate matter t d e matter.) ( t o be deleted, underline indicates new mat e .) 0 City Council Agenda Item No. Sb i • MEMO To: Michael J. McCauley, City Manager From: Ronald A. Warren, Planning and Zoning Speci ist G , Subject: City Council Consideration Item - Planning Commission Application No. 98018 Date: September 23, 1998 On the September 28, 1998 City Council Agenda is Planning Commission Application No. 98018 submitted by Joseph Lampe and Ernee McArthur requesting a Variance from the Subdivision Ordinance to allow the division of a 16 '/z' x 675' strip of land by a metes and bounds description rather than by a formal plat. Attached for your review are copies of the Planning Commission Information Sheet for Planning Commission Application No. 98018 and also an area map showing the location of the property under consideration, the Planning Commission minutes relating to the Commission's • consideration of this matter and other supporting documents. This matter was considered by the Planning Commission at their September 10, 1998 meeting and was recommended for approval. It is recommended that the City consideration of this matter, approve the ty ouncil, following ons pp application subject to the conditions recommended by the Planning Commission. I • Application Filed on 8 -13 -98 City Council Action Should Be Taken By 10 -12 -98 (60 Days) Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 98018 Applicant: Joseph Lampe and Ernee McArthur Location: 16 V x 675' Strip of Land Located West of Oliver Avenue North Between 55th Avenue North and Ericon Drive Request: Variance (Subdivision By Metes and Bounds) The applicants, Joseph Lampe and Ernee McArthur who reside at 2118 55th Avenue North, are requesting a variance to allow a subdivision of land by metes and bounds description rather than by a formal plat. The property in question is a 16 %Z ft. x 675 ft. strip of land located on the back lot lines of the properties facing 55th Avenue North and Ericon Drive, westerly of Oliver Avenue North (see area map for location). The property is zoned R -1 (One Family Residence) and is surrounded by single family homes. The applicants have purchased this property which was a tax forfeit parcel and now wish to divide it into nine separate tracts of land, each 75 feet wide, that would coincide with the property lines of the nine lots abutting 55th Avenue North. The purpose of these divisions is to create parcels that can be conveyed to the adjacent homeowners. • In a letter accompanying their application (copy attached), Lampe/McArthur have indicated that five homeowners have signed purchase agreements to acquire the segments of land adjacent to their lots to be created through this metes and bounds descri ption. My understanding is that these are the homeowners at 2224, 2218, 2212, 2206 and 2200 55th Avenue North. All of these properties lay to the west of the Lampe/McArthur residence. Apparently, no agreement has been reached with the property owners to the east, but the applicants wish to divide the property nonetheless in the same fashion so such conveyances could be made in the future should agreements be reached. Attached for the Commission's review, in addition to the area map, is a copy of a portion of the 1/8 section map highlighting the parcel proposed to be divided and the Lampe/McArthur property as well as the addresses and dimensions of surrounding properties. Also, there is a reduced view of a plan sized survey showing the properties and the proposed divisions into the nine tracts adjacent to the various properties. Legal descriptions (metes and bounds) for the various tracts have been prepared and have been reviewed and approved by the Hennepin County Auditor and the County's drafting and surveying staff. If the divisions, are approved and the property conveyed as proposed, persons acquiring the adjacent parcels can request the City Assessor to "combine the parcels for tax purposes ". Once • 9 -10 -98 Page 1 this has been accomplished the properties are considered a single parcel for setback and building purposes. The combination would increase the depth of the properties from 127 ft. to 143.5 ft. One additional action which may be necessary will be for property owners to set a vacation of 10' drainage and utility easement which is along their north property line Under the City's subdivision ordinance, divisions of land are to be performed by plat or registered land survey unless the City Council shall by variance allow otherwise. Section 15 -112 of the subdivision, or platting, ordinance authorizes the Council to grant variances from their regulations when, in its opinion, undue hardship may result from strict compliance. In making its findings, the Council shall take into consideration the nature of the proposed use of land, the existing use of land in the vicinity, the number of persons to reside or work in the proposed subdivision and the probable effect of the proposed subdivision upon traffic conditions in the vicinity. To grant a variance, the Council shall find: 1. That there are special circumstances or conditions affecting said property such that the strict application of the provisions of this ordinance would deprive the applicant of the reasonable use of his/her land. 2. That the variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the petitioner. 3. That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property in the territory in which said property is situated. The applicants in their letter of application have responded to these standards by stating the following: 1. The only reasonable use of this lon g, narrow parcel is to subdivide it so that the adjacent land owners can legally utilize it. The parcel was created via a platting error more than 60 years ago; the original plat should not have been approved by the Village; and correction of the error is to everyone's benefit. 2. The variance is necessary to allow the parcels current owners to sell segments of the parcel to adjacent homeowners. The right to sell one's property is clearly a "substantial property right of the petitioner ". 3. Granting the variance not only is not "detrimental or iniurious" : but the division is desirable because the adjacent landowners want to acquire segments of the parcel in order to enhance the value and usefulness of their existing property. The applicants also go on to note the costs expended thus far in the acquisition and division project that they have undertaken. They also note additional expenses would be incurred if the replatting process required under Chapter 15 is imposed. They note that because replatting via Section 15 will be very costly and requires an excessive inefficient and unnecessary expenditure of time, funds and effort by the existing land owner, potential purchasers, lawyers, surveyors, the Planning Commission and City staff, that they hereby request that a land division by "metes and bounds" be approved as a variance. 9 -10 -98 Page 2 The staff concur with the comments submitted by the applicants in this case and do believe the • standards for variance can be met in this particular case. Also, there is much precedent for the granting of metes and bounds division variances. Such variances were quite common prior to 1978. Since that time, at least three such divisions have been approved through the variance process by the City Council. The variances granted typically cited the right of the property owner to divide his/her property and the hardship of bearing full platting costs to divide the property by plat. Also, divisions of land b metes and bounds have been allowed provided that: Y p 1. No new buildable lots were being created; 2. That the underlying land is platted ro erl ; 3. P P Y That no lot or setback variances are implied and that lot area requirements will still be met. The proposed metes and bounds description variance appears to meet both the variance standards contained in Section 15 -112 of the City Ordinances and the City's policy regarding divisions by metes and bounds descriptions. A public hearing has been scheduled and notices to surrounding property owners have been sent. RECOMMENDATION As mentioned previously, it is believed that the standards for variance and the City's policy regarding subdivisions by metes and bounds have been met. Therefore, approval is recommended noting the above findings subject to at least the following conditions: 1. The legal descriptions and survey showing the division of the 16 %2 ft. x 675 ft. parcel of land shall be filed with Hennepin County. 2. Once these legal descriptions have been established, the City Assessor is authorized to allow combinations of adjacent parcels for tax purposes. 3. The utility asement located within adjoining e vacated ty d oinin parcels shall be Gated as prescribed J gP P by City Ordinances and a replacement drainage and utility easement shall be filed in a manner approved b the City Engineer. PP Y ty a �m er. Page 3 YORK AVE. N. , — ?� ; `• a WASHBURN AVE. N. h` . `'`��x` - I VINCFNT AVE. N. i UPTON AVE. Nil � ` `� ♦ � `(1 it i • ( l a. _ • �� �` � i Q ' p � , `C ♦ � \ — 'Y'♦' /�/'� ' v RUSSELL AVE N. \ N . -- ,�. QUEEN AVE. N_ 8 �. ��-� ---- _ o - -- .LIVER AVE. _ — 00 Q ��Q -N1L l INEEWTON AVE _ N. I I I I N IAORG - - -AVE. tAORGAN �; / -- / J 1 11 I I 1 1 1 I I T - SUIilI7 OR. II LOGAN AV . N. I I .GAN AVE. N. ► ���T a i �. n r I�NO AVE. N. I I I I t 1 s �. 0M D hit] I I1J I , EARLE _ II II II,, I, > � I I I, I, �I�I u�JAIES VE. N_ ��_1_1_W_1 t• 1 L�_1 L1J �. 1 1 ` JAWS AVE.. I C� J. n 7 (50) z 7 ) % '3 Cal) (8) (82) (2 5 ( 4 (ag) 3 (101) 13 (102) 84) z 3 4 (87) (58) 21 (103) 'o 14 ----- - - (105) C 119 04) R 277 (85) v 75 120 50 . ,0. VIA (60) �� W ERICON 11 : 73 75 Mo 75 70 (701 (2s ( 5 3 4 3 5 ( 7 '69) ol 63) (64) (65) (66) (67) (68) 4 2) 2 22 - IS 2 20/7 2 201 212 21 2 1 i 7 (71) -------- (62) '9 XXAY,> 1 42 FAAT OF 5 � 75 74.8 75 5 75 is 73 75 Is 4 w, PZ 7 (68) 69 - (7 72 (7,4) (75) (76) (7 0 00 2_2 2 2, 2:2/2 2206 1 2200 .2 3L 2112 2-109 21CO T4.55 75 75 73 75 Is 75 75 75 75 71 75 55T AVE N III I Is m too 80 eo 95 9 95 97 14 8 6 7 16) 17) - (118) (119) (101) Z; ( l i4) (115) ion Its 91 Qq i 21 73 110 Is 102 EASI I ) � 19 � O 8 m ti - S 11 (110 22 23 Q; 2) Z 21.4 It l 15 iz (130) 24) N Al S x (133) q 17 13 b�. �W 4 n - .97 Q _�j 12 c - ( 100) (134) t ---------- 50) 41 40- .71 74 48 1 07. a o. a A5 � \ - 95 95 93 9.5 I is z Is 9A 14 '(311 (1 16 (94) (93) 5 St 0 ) (9 (9, 97 (95) S 1 Al r Aq 101-12 m 95 95 71 75 79.4S 54TH AVE N IM. 37 60 '. 134.87 � 134.87 131.87 LLJ 09) 4 05) 102) EXISTING I415' ALLEY (UNIMPROVED) PROPOSED TO BE VACATED — �[.,s�rwc s'vT,�r� usn.e.r ru oot.no.eae•t +s __ �••w.aw voeo rurct -•- 675.0• -• n +'w•c• •. 000 rE.Ke F r•.+rR relC ., f1w,e +Paw uww rtwtr - _IS•Q o _ v �Rl{C� 1SIl J 3 ^ -- 750 4— - �o -- ,^ TRAC--T Q —8- VT - RACT � -9- v n C-� -}-� '2—f �.s s.c d � 1 R 5 �.7TRatCi� �'_ —w `:� . ' - -- - ,75.0 L 1 �( `75.0 �r 75.0 _ 0 5S 75.0 � 7 � ' 15.0 s s l a'N,w ra •� r[RCC �•�•.� y;� (�w [p• i�•wrcw 67 75.0 rawtc � � • • + "^•" I ( I I I I 7 I � I .0 l ?,! i• r E I f r r rl Pi L P ' I I I ( I I I I u, M t 5 T AV A 0 L a w L H � x a 0 W a� c 3 c L Q To: Brooklyn Center Planning Commission ® From: Joseph Lampe and Ernee McArthur 2118 55th Ave N Brooklyn Center MN 55430 Date: August 11, 1998 Re: Request for Variance to Platting Process (Chapter 15 of City Ordinances) On April 8, 1996, we purchased from the State of Minnesota a 675 foot long by 16 %2 foot wide strip of abandoned, tax - forfeited property located behind our home and eight other homes on 55th Avenue North in Brooklyn Center. The prior owner of this parcel stopped paying property taxes on it in 1957, and the State of Minnesota assumed ownership in 1963. This narrow parcel of property appears to have been inadvertently created in the 1930's when two adjacent blocks of lots were incorrectly platted with a 16 % foot gap between them, and the plat was approved by the Village of Brooklyn Center. In recent years, this narrow parcel became a nuisance and problem for the City, County and nearby residents, via trash dumping, overgrown weeds and brush, and encroachment with fences, buildings, gardens, etc. We hereby request that the City approve dividing this tax - forfeited strip of property behind nine homes on 55th Avenue into nine segments 16 1 /2 feet wide by 75 feet long, so that they can be legally acquired and utilized by adjacent homeowners. So far, five homeowners have signed purchase agreements with Lampe/McArthur for the 75 foot property segments which lie at the rear of each of their homes. Acquiring title to the 75 foot segment increases the depth of each homeowner's property from 127 feet to 143.5 feet. A surveyor's drawing and neighborhood plat map are attached showing the location of the tax- forfeited parcel and its proposed division. Chapter 15 of the City ordinances is a 20 -page single spaced document which specifies the mechanism for subdividing land in Brooklyn Center via formal land platting or re- platting (a three -page summary is attached). It is a very complex, lengthy and costly process, which the preamble states is oriented toward the orderly and controlled development of residential and commercial areas. Chapter 15 is highly appropriate for building a subdivision of homes, but we believe that it is an unnecessarily complex, costly and burdensome process for small parcels of unbuildable land, such as the one adjacent to the nine lots on 55th Avenue. A series of meetings and conversations between Lampe/McArthur, City and County staff, and a land surveyor during 1996/1997 produced a preponderance of opinion that a much lower cost, simpler, faster, and less burdensome process than re- platting would be preferred for dividing a strip of land 16 1 /2 feet wide. The Hennepin County Auditor and the County's drafting and surveying staff have given their approval for a "metes and bounds" division of the property, rather than a formal re -plat. Section 112 of the Chapter 15 platting ordinance provides that "the council may • authorize a variance from these regulations when in its opinion, undue hardship may result from strict compliance." "To grant a variance, the council shall find: 1. That there are special circumstances or conditions affecting said property such that the strict application of the provisions of this ordinance would deprive the applicant of the reasonable use of his land. 2. That the variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the petitioner. 3. That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property in the territory in which said property is situated." Petitioner's Response: 1. The only reasonable use of this long, narrow parcel is to subdivide it so that the adjacent landowners can legally utilize it. The parcel was created via a platting error more than 60 years ago; the original plat should not have been approved by the Village; and correction of the error is to everyone's benefit. 2. The variance is necessary to allow the parcel's current owners to sell segments of the parcel to adjacent homeowners. The right to sell one's property is clearly a "substantial property right of the petitioner." 3. Granting the variance not only is not "detrimental or iniurious": but the division is desirable because the adjacent landowners want to acquire segments of the parcel in order enhance the value and usefulness of their existing property. Lampe/McArthur have so far expended $4,354 on the land division project. Utilizing the formal land re- platting process of Chapter 15 could easily require them to expend an additional $6,000 or more. Because re- platting via Section 15 will be very costly and requires an excessive, inefficient and unnecessary expenditure of time, funds and effort by the existing landowner, potential purchasers, lawyers, surveyors, the Planning Commission and City staff, we hereby request that a land division by "metes and bounds" be approved by the Planning Commission and City Council as a variance from the process described in Chapter 15. Respectfully submitted by Joseph Lampe and Ernee McArthur • subdiv4.doc EXHIBIT "B" Legal Description of Entire Parcel That part of Lot 25 Auditor's Subdivision No. 218 lying within the NW %4 of SE' /4 of Section 2 Township 118 Range 21, and lying West of the W line of Oliver Avenue North. ( Hennepin County Property ID: 02 118 2142 0114 ) i 1andMdoc EXHIBIT 1 ® Legal Description of Parcel 1 as drafted by Hennepin County Auditor's staff That part of Lot 25, Auditor's Subdivision No. 218 lying within the NW' /4 of SE 1 /4 of Section 2, Township 118, Range 21, which lies west of the northerly extension of the east line of Lot 1, Block 1, John Ryden Second Addition. i descl.doc EXHIBIT 2 ® Legal Description of Parcel 2 g P as drafted by Hennepin County Auditor's staff That part of Lot 25, Auditor's Subdivision No. 218 lying within the NW' /4 of SE 1 /4 of Section 2, Township 118, Range 21, which lies between the northerly extensions of the east and west lines of Lot 2, Block 1, John Ryden Second Addition. • descldoc EXHIBIT 3 Legal Description of Parcel 3 as drafted by Hennepin County Auditor's staff That part of Lot 25, Auditor's Subdivision No. 218 lying within the NW' /4 of SE 1 /4 of Section 2, Township 118, Range 21, which lies between the northerly extensions of the east and west lines of Lot 3, Block 1, John Ryden Second Addition. descldoc EXHIBIT 4 • Legal Description of Parcel 4 as drafted by Hennepin County Auditor's staff That part of Lot 25, Auditor's Subdivision No. 218 lying within the NW 1 /4 of SE 1 /4 of Section 2, Township 118, Range 21, which lies between the northerly extensions of the east and west lines of Lot 4, Block 1, John Ryden Second Addition. desc4.doc EXHIBIT 6 Legal Description of Parcel 6 g P as drafted by Hennepin County Auditor's staff That part of Lot 25, Auditor's Subdivision No. 218 lying within the NW i / 4 of SE 1 /4 of Section 2, Township 118, Range 21, which lies between the northerly extensions of the east and west lines of Lot 6, Block 1, John Ryden Second Addition. desc6.doc EXHIBIT 7 Legal Description of Parcel 7 as drafted by Hennepin County Auditor's staff That part of Lot 25, Auditor's Subdivision No. 218 lying within the NW %4 of SE %4 of Section 2, Township 118, Range 21, which lies between the northerly extensions of the east and west lines of Lot 7, Block 1, John Ryden Second Addition. • desC.doc EXHIBIT 8 • Legal Description of Parcel 8 as drafted b Henne Count Auditor's I y � �' s sta That part of Lot 25, Auditor's Subdivision No. 218 lying within the NW %4 of SE '/a of Section 2, Township 118, Range 21, which lies between the northerly extensions of the east and west lines of Lot 8, Block 1, John Ryden Second Addition. • desc &doc EXHIBIT 9 • Legal Description of Parcel 9 as drafted by Hennepin County Auditor's staff That part of Lot 25, Auditor's Subdivision No. 218 lying within the NW t /4 of SE 1 /4 of Section 2, Township 118, Range 21, which lies between the northerly extensions of the east and west lines of Lot 9, Block 1, John Ryden Second Addition. desc9.doc MEMORANDUM DATE: September 23, 1998 TO: Michael J. McCauley, City Manager FROM: Diane Spector, Director of Public Wor SUBJECT: An Ordinance Vacating Utility Easements in Certain Lots in Block 1, JOHN RYDEN SECOND ADDITION On October 2, 1996, the Council approved an ordinance vacating a utility easement in Lot 6, Block 1, JOHN RYDEN SECOND ADDITION, in exchange for dedication of a more appropriate easement b the roe owners Ernee MacArthur and Joe Lampe. The couple had Y property rtY p p purchased a tax forfeit parcel behind their home at 2118- 55th Avenue North. This unique parcel was a 16.5 foot deep strip of land 675 feet wide, which appears as if it was intended to be the north half of an alley. No matching strip of land was created or dedicated when the plat on the south, JOHN RYDEN SECOND ADDITION, was created. Purchasing this parcel allowed the couple to combine the parcel with their existing lot and to construct a new garage at the back edge of their new, combined parcel. Before that could occur, however, a backyard drainage and utility easement was vacated, and the couple dedicated a replacement easement along the 675 foot length of the old alley parcel. Since that time, the couple have been marketing the parcel to their neighbors. Several have expressed an interest in acquiring the land behind their properties. To combine the lots, and to make that additional 16.5 feet usable, the backyard drainage and utility easements on those parcels would need to be vacated as well. The eight affected property owners have now petitioned the City consider this vacation. The Planning Commission has approved the division of this parcel based on metes and bounds descriptions, and that division will be considered by the Council at its September 28, 1998 meeting. Staff recommends that following Council approval of the division, the ordinance considering hese vacations be resented for first reading, a public hearing scheduled for g p g� p g October 26, 1998. • September 17, 1998 Diane Spector, Director of Public Services City of Brooklyn Center 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 Dear Ms. Spector: This letter is our request that the City of Brooklyn Center vacate the ten -foot wide utility easement which is incorrectly located on the rear of our lots along 55th Avenue N. We are requesting this action to allow the unencumbered use of our property in the future. There are no utilities located within the incorrectly placed easement. In November, 1996, Joseph Lampe and Ernee McArthur granted to the City a correctly located five -foot utility easement along the north edge of the 675 foot strip of tax - forfeited land which they purchased in April, 1996, and which lies behind nine homes on 55th Avenue. In October of 1996 the City vacated (via Ordinance 96 -15) the incorrect utility easement behind the Lampe /McArthur residence at 2118 55th Ave N. We now wish to vacate the incorrect utility easement affecting the other eight homes (2100, 2106, 2112, 2200, 2206, 2212, 2218 and 2224 55th Ave N). We would appreciate your efforts in bringing this matter to the attention of the City Council at an early date. Sincerely yours, - _ 2100 55th Ave N Leona Raisch 2106 55th Ave N l�arj A. And e 2112 55th Ave N P� ori d1(;_) c roth K. �Iu , n en. 2200 55th Ave N 7 Jud Jo s 2206 55th Ave N Gpiry & J ce Dowmn 2212 55th Ave N ' D OWV� chard V 1 'us d S 0-r n M, 21 5th Ave N �� ✓ & Chester & Linda Francis 2224 55th Ave N vacatel.doc CON D AID P E N N E P I N C UNT`( MINNESOTA h 194 sca e AFIE Ev En neers Su Nnok5 Iron Monum.4 CZ �R�ao sr D To t3 . Y ' F�;'•1..,:.�'J \ ,S- ' - No��h ' � of 1.ot'hS, A u`a1 -N `U6 � ����• le -u =u' 50 _ - -- - - - -- 1 EaSeme.n� �/' 6 �•'3 • I 33 N L N a- N 15 - 15' 15 - 15. - 15 �5 1 5 i5 i5 50 13 "l5 t5 • tr. 31 27..: � 55 AV E N U E o�• ►o0 80 80 ` 95 95 95 91 50 120.15 Q.�S �o ? - so' ' T• 0 0 33 � 1 (� 1 1 4.�' R � - • ; 19.15' �� � a � � G !1� 1 1 1 p; '1=• �d• N 9S N' de m 6 50 I , � — 120 ►oo -. j - - -95 -- 95,---- - - - -95 - - - -99— -- .. 1 1 _ , '- - -15 -- -- - 110 — ' — -- - - -95— i— - -- -102— x ,... 54 • 1 w 8 180 h°� tiTv ��.i� \ �o i 1`10 ' I ' \` , � �� ° �o� � . q.�.95:�.:.,• ,15 � c� - •i � � a '� e— \., w E R 1 �: \5"��'� b0 16 l l / L � �, �✓ � 1 130 7 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held on the 26th day of October, 1998, at 7 p.m. or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard at the City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, to consider vacating certain utility easements in Block 1 of JOHN RYDEN SECOND ADDITION. Auxiliary aids for persons with disabilities are available upon request at least 96 hours in advance. Please contact the City Clerk at 569 -3300 to make arrangements. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE VACATING UTILITY EASEMENTS IN CERTAIN LOTS IN BLOCK 1, JOHN RYDEN SECOND ADDITION THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That certain utility easements in John Ryden Second Addition, according to the plat on file and of record thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota, described as follows, are hereby vacated: The north 10.00 feet of Lots 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, and 9, Block 1, John Ryden Second Addition The north 10.00 feet of the east 42.00 feet of Lot 1, Block 1, John Ryden Second Addition Section 2. This ordinance shall be effective after adoption and thirty days following its legal publication. Adopted this day of , 1998. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk Date of Publication Effective Date (Brackets indicate matter to be deleted, underline indicates new matter.) City Council Agenda Item No. 8c • w • MEMO To: Michael J. McCauley, City Manager /" J . From: Ronald A. Warren, Planning and Zoning Spec ist et Subject: City Council Consideration Item - Planning Commission Application No. 98019 Date: September 23, 1998 On the September 28, 1998 City Council Agenda is Planning Commission Application No. 98019 submitted by Centres Group Brooklyn Center, LTD. requesting an amendment to the Planned Unit Development (PUD) approved for the Regal Theater development under Planning Commission Application No. 98015 to provide an alternative storm water detention plan. Attached for your review are copies of the Planning Commission Information Sheet for Planning Commission Application No. 98019 and also an area map showing the location of the • property under consideration, the Planning Commission minutes relating to the Commission's consideration of this matter and other supporting documents. This matter was considered by the Planning Commission at their September 10, 1998 meeting and was recommended for approval. It is recommended that the City Council, following consideration of this matter, approve the application subject to the conditions recommended by the Planning Commission. • Application Filed on 8 -14 -98 City Action Should Be Taken By 10 -13 -98 (60 Days) Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 98019 Applicant: Centres Group Brooklyn Center, LTD Location: Property Located South of 66th Avenue North, East of Camden Avenue North and North and West of Interstate 694 and T. H. 252 (Except For the Super America Property) Request: Planned Unit Development Amendment The applicant is seeking an amendment to the Planned Unit Development approval for this area in order to provide an alternative storm water detention plan. The property in question is a 16.72 acre site approved for an 85,240 sq. ft., 4,592 seat, 20 screen theater with two additional sites (one 71,693 sq. ft. and the other 88,186 sq. ft.) planned for future commercial development, most likely restaurant uses. The site is bounded on the north by 66th Avenue and the Super America property; on the east by T. H. 252; on the south by Interstate 694; and on the west by Camden Avenue. The Planned Unit Development rezoning and site and building plan for this property was approved by the City Council under City Council Resolution No. 98 -133 on July 27, 1998. Attached for the Commission's review is a copy of that resolution containing the various findings, considerations and conditions for the approval of that proposal (Planning Commission Application No. 98015). Part of the approval included a grading, drainage and erosion control plan which included an underground water detention and treatment system. This facility was to be located under a large portion of the easterly parking lot for the theater. Condition No. 12 for Application No. 98015 states "Approval of this application is subject to the applicant complying with all of the requirements and regulations of the West Mississippi Watershed Management Commission with respect to this site. The storm drainage system shall be acceptable to the Watershed Management Commission and the applicant shall comply with any conditions imposed by that body prior to the issuance of building permits for this project." The underground water detention and treatment plan was presented to the West Mississippi Watershed Management Commission on August 13, 1998 and after much discussion and review was tabled. The applicant must be granted a variance by the Commission for the proposed facility. Consideration of this matter is scheduled for the Watershed Commission meeting on September 10, 1998. The applicant has prepared an alternative plan containing a traditional detention pond in case the Watershed Commission does not approve their underground system. The applicant is, therefore, proceeding with an application to amend the Planned Unit Development (PUD) to seek approval for the alternate drainage plan and ponding as well as the • 9 -10 -98 Page 1 underground facility originally proposed. They still favor the underground facility but may have • to proceed with the traditional pond. It is anticipated that by Thursday's Planning Commission meeting the applicants will have an answer from the Watershed Commission. The alternative plan calls for a traditional pond to be located at the northeasterly portion of the property, just south of the Super America property. The site will be graded and will drain to catch basins, which will convey water to the holding pond via storm sewer. The City Engineer is reviewing the amended plan and may have some additional comments. The plan identified as "Plan A" is the original underground facility, while the plan identified as "Plan B" is the traditional pond. The applicant is submitting both plans as a matter of timing. They have been advised that any major alternation to the PUD approved on July 27, 1998, would require ad amendment to that PUD. PUD amendments require the same notice and publication requirements as an original PUD application. This means filing an application four weeks prior to the Planning Commission's hearing date with notice required to appear in the Brooklyn Center Sun/Post and notices sent to surrounding property owners. The applicant wants to keep the approval process moving, thus the two plan strategy. If "Plan B" is pursued, the final approved plat approved under Planning Commission Application No. 98016 would have to be changed to reflect the new lot lines. Lot lines would be shifted to relocate parking such that pad site two, or the proposed Lot 3, Block 1, Regal Road Development i Addition, would be reduced to 42,000 sq. ft. PROCEDURE As pointed out previously, this proposal is an amendment to the Planned Unit Development proposal for this area. As such, it is required to follow the procedures contained in Section 35- 355 regarding Planned Unit Developments. This requires a public hearing which has been scheduled. Notices have been sent and notice has been published in the Brooklyn Center Sun Post. Normally, plans are referred to Neighborhood Advisory Groups. It is not recommended that this matter be referred to the Northeast Neighborhood Advisory Group mainly because the plans are of a very technical nature. As mentioned, the West Mississippi Watershed Management Commission will have to approve a storm water drainage plan for the facility. Depending on which option is pursued, the site plan will either remain the same or have to be modified as indicated. It is not considered necessary that Neighborhood Advisory Group input on this particular aspect of the plan is necessary. RECOMMENDATION We believe the plans are in order, particularly with respect to any recommendations by the Watershed Management Commission. We would, therefore, recommend approval of the 9 -10 -98 Page 2 amendment acknowledging both alternative "Plan A" and "Plan B ". Approval of this application should acknowledge the findings, considerations and conditions contained in City. Council Resolution No. 98 -133 and be subject to the following additional condition: 16. The final plat comprehended under Planning Commission Application No. 98016 shall be modified prior to approval by the City Council if the grading, drainage and erosion control plan identified as "Plan B" is pursued. • 9 -10 -98 Page 3 'Yl 11011! _ "• �� � !" � Of ITMUJA N - 111A \� ev sYlm • � ���. to • w s I r I QY 113A11 A tti NI on K Hit Dot s IT 000 N MY to l9 r I � � — 4� • 1t If Y � \ • r ml I,M E o N )Ar Uay1111 '•- 040! ' fAX AYE. N• 00\ D t N 0 r )AT M103 wit N fur 1N4x►4 ( N I PLO 0411 11t MY V"j I n 3CN AYE. N. -> / N MV NOTVAP 1 — QE1lSON QI t� `U ox i 'tD(� N 3tiY DOM N 3AY Uan3M3 1 I ��� ❑ iAY GW111 p ,� mot N M Y QYY1119 I N 311Y w CM19 H I _ - tg�l --- _ r �, 1 N MY 10 Karl I � � N MY O++t Y _� t t — j — _ _� tavltt4 Av[ L N A -- - < 111.11 ' i V(( M 3Ar S -we r , 1rM11 AYE: N. M M x0►d ptp AYE N• 11IJ S N 31Y NY001 1 14GM1 040E ' z „r„ aY.rt » ...........,....- w• r«»r. w ..r arr.i .. -..., T p wt M1. 'ar-- , u rw w r.tl tr.Y,y i .•dYerll[�IO.Ut� -- war- l y - WwAp - ••y ln� r lwyt � IIrtlt ltoao- .irit.l wr.t .rw r ti q rp r , rr �aY+-. ra _ 4+iM �iwr w � ar /� w r t• w.+I,w. «y r.w• p ��0 a -rY7 n� -.- r M W W 4 ✓.� N�I^.w• M� r r M a w —� N ao a... � ."�•�.r' r.Y a.•ww w rr r«.r .rt .a.. M.M. W W it'{a1 . Ay i0r9 • 1 V I N'In . w ... .. _ _ :S310N r - (ir•• levt•.Yl toatn) J'�..Y..t•1/ /�4.M1 it WN / l - wrYe uw i italr I �YIK r 1 I � �it�wa a�a• / 1 _ls1.7x+sr- .- -'__'_ .+ -,-1 t ! 1 1 �, � \ - �1/{'� / - 'y^1�"':'�_�.�1• - - .�. � ^ - -`� � .Y � \ 1 �--" i, .�` = l_ 1 _{� -- , r' uocs • r v n'nL� _ ..- - .- �o'n� ire- ' " "'7'I a • �! J ai J+ itu L .o T = I \ wa al• •\ t • .� I - -.. lm- wK � . � - I - .. - c� - 7'1 I,.til 4 -"" — - r � ,- _ '- .� i v © a � - �'+ h lr..t s ' 1 t _ can Tl - xo•Y • tiw 1rMIlY NN � � �� _ . _ . � ., , O ii1 tw✓l0Y �w1pi aw t / - -. 7 _ -'_ i m wm -.w b h / � 7mi as w�.a) A na.� wa u�i. � • 1 b I Yom) NiNq t _.. �- -. �` Kan - 7'l ♦ .. aaY�E aiw � J u 31 llU � ! 1 � w i . 8 \ 4�1 iY �N a . + t l � n i � � ti � . aY Q \ \ a to r - V _ h wwa u+Ya ml I _ ( wc-t�i W � 1st • 1 a J ifvyJ i i -1 2 \ I•.n) cY t' I f I. � t , � NYw � „ 4 �1 r � oY F Afar a ert• - r / �,� � ' i 1CC] i1fY . C b r � _ UYn ` � r .7 ( /.• � �� Mt.O W 1iiYtOD ' Itl fll G ' y - � .> �Y Ji 11it --I . �. - t:•'i - .. _ _ _ _ _ - •• I + - � V.(Q y p I i r co ITS I i t- 7' b Or . M J • I I) i tlu w It) v 4ka aY �t sot` ro� b_u1 WN TMlr'¢ At .. � � ; � i � is JR.1 itrllw ��\\ dl 1s n.t� - � xn't • r b Z..al lr t•V� ! .) a . • ft . m ,.`ts..o I ! ' v w so.Y • c ro L uuWYw . Li � t _ 1 �� i•a x �. x !Ir v l Jl itXY . 71 totrsntot/ 7siwaw'r 'tint Yrmt .t "•" I ta! rt�rl . Ta e-uYt- t«YnY I :I 1 i . J L Yt ) me Nom. / , t bin - ( Tl O :L. A�j[ %r1Y ' t i hU-• tram i maw t Jt I• I •PAY - � L ._ .. t` Yttoal a Ja- � � / HJ. lil �� ioYIYW Yw © I ro ~ (xxu) to N l.a -Y Y.mt q U1 A/rYan v i x e . = 1 - -_� eio _ - : -�• LEGEND ! N` �NWAY ( i, � _ •�'.. .! (c6_� �- (�.'. /- � ^4 ...-_ � �r.�,:n % -`� o • :ra. y K......�r E E ,,, '^ .n, ,: '".. .__ __ � -^ _ .__ �'=I:� •'`� • -_ �Qi ! 0. 7: . rou.o wow wra.r +. I �,.. \ C `_ v .- v >�� \� �a.�� � �'' I r•'1 " "� P' � ir�a..�:P.iii.w .u.`m ��''j�'�y 1 *IF' -.- '� -�, �yr.ra p,,.evir.�� +YK • (� ��.`� f v� ✓�r.a.. li(�S- `��,.,r' -. _. . uun„a.e rnrr.o,c uc is __ _ r+ � - • ._._ - . - _� =. __�.,_ � "'i - •- -- l - UKi[�ddM UICrwC IK � 111 Y 1 ! `ii I II rJri r , 4 'AC - :S. r`� • ! �w .a[r.ee we .:. ""`^ n ';iiL + , +. t,1 I I�'lt 4ill� I Ii '.1 T ' .. : �� - . :,..: gun a/, - •w: Ms) '1'�rl ( }� B (• i �, .7 I ✓ 5�,,- "''�"..... ' ,... �:.� \. . , _. r.sa•o >a r.c F .� - •'•- - 1 - z'� t`C, \�� \ E/CTER PYLON tas.ctMr•c.au.c i ^ i i PYLON SIGN V 1 4 :fi " - _ -- T=ai — _.y.. mss=. _ = - `\ \\ \ � - b - p �, �.}_ � . «.�{ _--F.` + l� - _ _ � ,erd. '� _C� � - '. - _ ''•� \ \� ' ��•` . a •>.a . M vw 011 nn � -.1-- ' = -+.- � II c_- �� _ _ _ ..� . --1- •- \+�•, " \ \\ �\ \\. a -- r.o.wte ow«a rto. � i� � � € 7 Y `\\ Ii E XISTING 1 ; SUPER AMERICA ¢ Z y ui - �- 1-.-. -� .._.(� � �"' -� "t �s` � -- ( e� " ° .L�_ __ ;yr - - � - •�•' t , 'R:; ""° � F , R rLON SIG 1�. r� \, \ . Q 0 U EGAI CINEMAS n . I ' \ 1 ' t / / • ° -FF �I ."`; AKKING g:53T�LSS'PRO / �� v t "A�'kT S 135 S 1 / 1 r • £LEV - 83 7.5 85:24! ; ' -_ . -. . Y� i.SF Y i,-`r Sj 2 1 � 83 i _9.5 � uS� PAb ELEV 8 dY t \ \� ){ t( -, y l ( 1 y • V D`/I MI DMT�`� .r. ,�+ (I I �- - - _ �•s^ i - .r. _�...��=b v I l 7� 1 ' `- - - � ..._ .-- --���_... �- - =- _, -" - - --• -,1 I . ---- - - - --_.__ --_ - -- COMPLEX �\ 1 — _ CT34DEN' II EXISTING APARTMENT :A: - - -��� -' EXISTING APARTIAEN7 COMPLEX •r' ••'�•.�:� NOIE: , OPO(x.PN._:RPADFD CYr. .+.r ..r... wu r tir •rOUEER [HCIr1CLRa+O .+ •' �.�� M.- VaMrVp•ey].w• TVPIr•AI PARKIN(t I M CrC.i11" Ry I M YY.Y Yr..r « ✓✓.� Mr «YU•.n• 1• M ✓ rYr1 < «N.[Inw «rwY.• « ✓ewYM,w ..tl. •wY ywY.r.w. ]M rrwlw M r••1 M Fwi✓,•rL r M v««« 1✓eY+a'r.•nY frN 3. fnr w Wri ✓»'r nw«ww m. w.«ww M INre...,Y wl ✓ awti r rr.+a ✓ w, « � r �« Ir•wWw « M W Y IN✓ WrrY M «Nw M W . � 1 �� D+.«.f - hrr» M M W M r•«1 ...r Mww .M .•« w/r . � C7 ..r. I � � • ✓, . M.IR} rRb � wr..«r..�wnww.M r.w F».« .«r ✓«II w Y«rtr M. � -_ -< < (�,�`.•` ` Sw f«« - Sw h«•Y M M W Y ... r✓.w Yw. ww « r.l« � r«✓ .Y,«.r r r.✓� ..r r «...r. Mr M ✓ 4M . a II t 3 5 S I • i ' ..- C.� /' } I �rw MrRU1 �� i f« J .«w r«• w w✓vw «• �Y M �MY.I M N (Z < F ¢ 1 / J � M .:. + .a ✓ w.W Mr.a « W ,w««�«,� ... p � � z Vy 4«•1.M. � Iwo ....«w« r LL W LAI I yrdl.11« er. .11m.t W� I N N e a me rte• m mum woro al , w' ww•.r 1.«n. wslw4 .[ � .oslS R rtR. w .n • �6� 'ff. -- 16'� -- . pnM rp[I W K Nc(D d [b TOC f • t. 1' -Y raY(0 Md 1 � e+•,•• a. sr rnlcc PnrK rnm l FNTRANM • - . - ro zxc ~--{ 1 f " T �.-•` 'r .:.� ° ° rnt - Ar mR .at* � llLLrd im.cx racer ..+...«..« ... w. fy.Al w w a.r PUCE IN LOUTION BEST SI TLRAiE .. -r -+� r +^ -r r+^• CONStRUC710N ACCESS CC CCESS TO SIiE M ITio FFNf;F NH R PRITTT('Tf1N ° v. 1° inn ✓ y� • .. ° .. ra.o..o. r.w i,: w. •••- �1.01,7rrMlal.w [ ® fU.l Y•1 •'.'.•"Ilr.e FM . wl•1 ~� 1 „ LOT PLACE ON ALL ON -SITE C ATCN BASM5 e ,,, .R1M Y..!!_.y '•^« 3 0 0 • Member Debra Hilstrom introduced the following resolution and moved ® its adoption: CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 98 -133 RESOLUTION REGARDING RECOMMENDING DISPOSITION OF PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION NO. 98015 SUBMI l I trij BY CENTRES GROUP BROOKLYN CENTER, LTD. WHEREAS, Planning Commission Application No. 98015 submitted by Centres Group Brooklyn Center, LTD. proposes rezoning from C -2 (Commerce) to PUD /C -2 of 730,192 sq. ft. (16.76 acres) area of land that is bounded on the north by 66th Avenue and the Super America site; on the east by TH252; on the south by Interstate 694; and on the west by Camden Avenue; and WHEREAS, this proposal comprehends the rezoning of the above mentioned property and site and building plan approval for an 85,240 sq. ft., 4,592 seat, 20 screen theater on a proposed 13.09 acre site and the creation of two other sites, one that is 71,693 sq. ft. in area and the other 88,186 sq. ft. in area for future commercial development, most likely restaurant uses; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly called public hearing on June 25, 1998, when a staff report and public testimony regarding the rezoning and site and building plan were received and the Planning Commission continued the public hearing and referred the application to the Northeast Neighborhood Advisory Group for review and comment; and WHEREAS the Northeast Neighborhood Advisor met to consider this b ry rou P matter on July 7, 1998, at the City Hall and recommended approval of this planned unit development proposal; and WHEREAS the Planning Commission resumed consideration of this matter on July 16, 1998, received an additional staff report and took further testimony during a continued public hearing; and WHEREAS the Planning io recommended approval of Application No. Commis n r pp pp 98015 by adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 98 -3 on July 16, 1998; and WHEREAS, the City Council considered Application No. 98015 at its July 27, 1998 meeting; and WHEREAS, the City Council considered the rezoning and site and building plan request in light of all testimony received, the guidelines for evaluating rezonin,,s contained in Section 35 -208 of the City's Zoning Ordinance, the provisions of the Planned Unit Development • � 1 City Council Resolution No. 98 -133 ordinance contained in Section 35 -355 the 's Comprehensive Plan and City p the Planning Commission's recommendation contained in Planning Commission Resolution No. 98 -3. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center that Application No. 98015 submitted by Centres Group Brooklyn Center, LTD. be approved in light of the following considerations: 1. The rezoning and planned unit development proposal are compatible with the standards, purposes and intent of the Planned Unit Development section of the City's Zoning Ordinance. 2. The rezoning and lanned unit development proposal will allow for the utilization p lop p p anon of the land in question in a manner which is compatible with, complimentary to and of comparable intensity to adjacent land uses as well as those permitted on 'surrounding land. 3. The utilization of the property as proposed under the rezoning and planned unit development proposal will conform with City ordinance standards with the exception of the parking requirement for theaters which requires one parking space i for every three seats within the theater complex. Variation from the Zoning Ordinance to allow a parking formula of one parking space for every four theater seats is justified on the basis of the development plan submitted and the operational differences on parking demand that a multiplex theater of this size has which allows the ability to stagger starting times within the theater complex to lessen or spread out the demand for parking over a greater period of time. The applicants have also provided a parking analysis that indicates national norms, local norms, parking generation, and local parking studies all conclude that the standard of one parking space for every four seats is a reasonable standard to apply to this proposed theater complex. 4. The rezoning and planned unit development proposal are considered compatible with the recommendations of the City's Comprehensive Plan for this area of the City. 5. The rezoning and planned unit development appear to be a good utilization of the property under consideration and the future potential uses of two adjacent properties for commercial restaurant sites is also a good long range use of the existing land and can be considered an asset to the community. 2 City Council Resolution No. 98 -133 • 6. In light of the above considerations, it is believed that the guidelines for evaluating ` rezonings and contained in Section 35 -208 of the City's Zoning Ordinance are met L and that the proposal is, therefore, in the best interests of the community. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center to approve Application No. 98015 subject to the following conditions and considerations: 1. The building plans are subject to review and approval by the Building Official with respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance of permits. 2. Grading, drainage and utility plans are subject to review and approval by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of permits. 3. A site performance agreement and supporting financial guarantee in an amount to be determined based on cost, estimates shall be submitted prior to the issuance of ' building permits to assure completion of all approved site improvements. 4. Any outside trash disposal facilities and rooftop or on ground mechanical equipment shall be appropriately screened from view. 5. The buildings are to be equipped with an automatic fire extinguishing system to meet NFPA standards and shall be connected to a central monitoring device in accordance with Chapter 5 of the City Ordinances. 6. An underground irrigation system shall be installed in all landscaped areas to facilitate site maintenance. 7. Plan approval is exclusive of all signery which is subject to Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances. 8. B612 curb and gutter shall be provided around all parking and driving areas. 9. The applicant shall submit an as -built survey of the property, improvements and utility service lines prior to release of the performance guarantee. 10. The property owner shall enter into an easement agreement for maintenance and inspection of utility and storm drainage systems, prior to the issuance of permits. 11. All work performed and materials used for construction of utilities shall conform to the City of Brooklyn Center standard specifications and details. 3 City Council Resolution No. 98 -133 12. Approval of this application is subject to the applicant complying with all of the requirements and regulations of the West Mississippi Watershed Management Commission with respect to this site. The storm drainage system shall be acceptable to the Watershed Management Commission and the applicant shall comply with any conditions imposed by that body prior to the issuance of building permits for this project. 13. Ponding areas required as art of the storm drainage lan shall be protected b q P P P Y approved easement. The easement document shall be executed and filed with Hennepin County prior to the issuance of building permits. 14. The applicant shall enter into a development agreement with the City of Brooklyn Center to be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney prior to the issuance of building ermits g . Said agreement shall acknowledge a parking ratio of one parking �P CO F g P space for every four seats in the multiplex theater and shall acknowledge all conditions of approval and assure compliance with development plans submitted by the applicant. 15. The area identified on the site plan as "pad site 2" and "pad site 3" shall be seeded in a manner to allow appropriate maintenance of this property pending future development. Future development of this area is subject to amendment to this planned unit development." 16. The applicant has agreed and the City acknowledges that it will not allow the development of "pad site 2" and "pad site 3" as a fast food/convenience food restaurant, a gasoline service station/convenience store, car wash, awn shop or P P check cashing operation and the development agreement will acknowledge this restriction or limitation on the future use of the property. 17. The construction and cost of all traffic control improvements related to 66th and Camden Avenues due to the project shall be the responsibility of the applicant including, but not limited to, traffic signal, median extension, traffic control structures, and any necessary right -of -way. This shall be acknowledged in the development agreement. 18. Vehicle access between the theater parcel and the proposed Lot 3, Block 1, Regal Road Development Addition and between the theater parcel and the Super America property is prohibited. The applicant shall provide a physical barrier, acceptable to the City, to prevent such cross access. 4 I City Council Resolution No. 98 -133 • i July 27. 1998 Date M or ATTEST: Jaw City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kathleen Carmod�?nd upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor .thereof: Myrna Kragness, Kathleen Carmody, Debra Hilstrom, Kay Lasman, and Robert Peppe; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. s 5 I MEMORANDUM DATE: September 23, 1998 TO: Michael McCauley, City Manager FROM: Scott Brink, City Engineer SUBJECT: Preliminary and Final Plat Approval - REGAL ROAD DEVELOPMENT ADDITION On Jul 27 1998 the C approved Planning Commission Application No. 98015 , 0 City Council a ro d Pl pp Y tY Pp g providing for Rezoning and Site approval through the Planned Unit Development (PUD) process to accommodate development in the area bounded by 66th Avenue North, TH 252, I -694, and Camden Avenue, including the construction of a 20 screen theater. Resolutions were also approved on September 13 providing for the vacation of specific right of ways and conveyance of City property. A preliminary plat was also approved as part of this process. Attached are copies of correspondence and specific conditions as part of the PUD approval process by both the Planning Commission and City Council. Of note, the PUD was approved subject to several conditions, some that remain to be met. These included, the construction of infrastructure improvements (paid by the developer) to accommodate increased traffic generated by the proposed development, right of way conveyances, other access issues, and approval by the West Mississippi Watershed Management Commission. It was established and understood that further approvals, including the final plat would be based upon the requirement that these conditions are met, including the execution of a subdivision agreement between the property owner and the City. The subdivision agreement includes provisions for the construction and funding of infrastructure improvements to allow for site construction, as well as utility hook -up fees. Traffic and Access Concerns As expressed at previous City Council and Planning Commission meetings improvements to the surrounding roadways to accommodate increased traffic will be required. More specifically, this will include a traffic signal at the intersection of 66th and Camden, and some widening and adjustments to those two streets as well. A driveway access to 66th Avenue adjacent to the SuperAmerica property has been developed to align with the driveway at the Holiday Station across the street to the north, now under construction. It is our understanding that Crown Brawley LLC and SuperAmerica intend to execute the documents necessary for the joint driveway on or before September 28, and that construction of the joint driveway is expected to commence the week of the 28th. A permit from Mn/DOT has been obtained for this construction. Staff and the consulting traffic engineer conducted several meetings over the past year with Regal Theater representatives, and previously with Holiday and SuperAmerica to determine the improvements necessary to accommodate traffic in the safest and most efficient manner. A preliminary/conceptual layout of the Camden/66th intersection has been developed at this time. The developer will be responsible for the cost of said roadway improvements, included in the Subdivision Agreement, which is a condition of the Final Plat approval. West Mississippi Watershed Management Commission The developer has proposed two separate site drainage plans for the property: one with an underground storm water detention facility(A), and the other with a conventional above ground storage pond(B). The West Mississippi Watershed Management Commission has already granted approval for the site plan B, and will be considering approval for site alternative A. The final plat presented to the City Council for consideration on September 28 has been developed to accommodate alternative B. In the event approval' for alternative A is attained from the Watershed, and the developer desires to proceed with that plan, then the developer will be required to again apply and submit a new plat for consideration through the platting process. Summary and Recommendation The applicant has submitted the appropriate application, but must still submit the application fee of $125.00. Although a copy of the final plat has been submitted, reproducible mylars must also still be provided for signatures by the City. I recommend approval of the final plat, subject to all conditions previously established as part of the preliminary plat approval, including the following: • Review and Approval by the City Engineer • Execution of a subdivision agreement, which includes the Developer's responsibility for the cost of constructing the necessary roadway improvements to accommodate the site development and traffic impacts to the adjacent roadways. • Provisions of Chapter 15 of the City Ordinances • Execution of a Utility and Maintenance Agreement • Approval of the Final Plat by the Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/Dot) Upon submittal of a final plat application, the City Code allows the City to act upon the application within 60 days, provided all conditions have been met. However, at the time of this writing, several of the conditions have not been met, including the execution of the Subdivision ® and Maintenance and Utility Agreements. An update as to the status of the above conditions will be available at the Council meeting on the 28th. REGAL ROAD DEVELOPMENT ADDITION R.T. DOC. NO. -F I fle- r i I) A I A 1C -1 A C.R. DOC. NO. 4 2=2 c HiI; L- SO1*Or2" 354-96 317.45 Sr R.56 158 35 'w 72 VACATED PER IIOC NO rri ' P, VI _� f II I - �?�h';... =�= I I ,t I I (; P \S � \ ) S J� T � tz Ic N 8,0 ik j Ci �7 2 7! N so N � , k�O , P S 6 " "8On3�46 E .3.5 - _ - -te r - ' ----- 80 2 / 6.56 so , GO .5 .50 2'.2' ra 4 SO4'5 - rll'E - S 3 7 1 6 0 3 ------- - 2 3 , 17 , w 1 7 'S 404 so' SO"688 13S�g pti �j 82 0 c R-60 00 VACAT 82305 R;�� Cq_ .57 '02'49*W _90*00 j JS85 5913.58 94.25 1, 30.00 N 04-57'11*W T r i 297.37 N 04-57*11'W 30 06. 11 - VENIUS NOR1 1, N89 A 236 3 N0 57'11 "W CAYOEN _A 30 -E NBSroi DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS ARE SHOWN THUS: BEARINGS ARE ASSUMED GRAPHIC SCALE • DENOTES FOUND IRON MONUMENT. - T"L - - - 9 L 0 DENOTES 1/2 INCH By 14 INCH IRON MONUMENT, b-q 5 ..1 -4 .00iling lot SE T AND MARKED WTH LICENSE NUMBER 1 10 1891 lines Z mIes90th* i,e indicated, and width and ldpllilg nght Of -Y lil,s unless a lhereiae indiopted the plot SHEET 2 OF 2 SHEETS 3- Z -z7 �7 iv I Go R N0. I auR _ P lie• `` ,— —3oR I 4oR f. fo i / 1 I i ao. / Z � tit i / / U i / ® adoption: Member introduced the following resolution and moved its RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT - REGAL ROAD DEVELOPMENT ADDITION WHEREAS, the Brooklyn Center City Council on July 27, 1998, approved Planning Commission Application No. 98015, providing for Planned Unit Development (PUD), Preliminary Plat, and site plan approval submitted by Centres Group, Ltd., Inc.; and WHEREAS, the property owner(applicant) has applied for Final Plat Approval as required by the City Code. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota that the plat of REGAL ROAD DEVELOPMENT ADDITION is hereby approved subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall enter into a standard maintenance and utility agreement with the City. 2. Review and Approval of the City Engineer. 3. Property title opinions or legal documentation as required by the City Attorney. 4. Approval of the Final Plat by the Minnesota Department of Transportation. 5. The applicant shall enter into a Subdivision Agreement with the City. 6. Provisions of Chapter 15 of the City Ordinances. Date Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 10, 1998 CALL TO ORDER The Planning Commission's regular meeting was called to order by Chair Willson at 7:30 p.m. ROLL CALL Chair Tim Willson, Commissioners Ed Nelson, Rex Newman, Sean Rahn, and Dianne Reem were present. Also present were Secretary to the Planning Commission/Planning and Zoning Specialist Ronald Warren and Planning Commission Recording Secretary Arlene Bergfalk. Commissioners Graydon Boeck and Stephen Erdmann were excused. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - AUGUST 13. 1998 There was a motion by Commissioner Nelson, seconded by Commissioner Newman, to approve the minutes of the August 13, 1998 meeting, amended on page 1, paragraph 5, first sentence to read: "Commissioner Boeck explained the Planning Commission's role as an advisory body." The motion passed unanimously. (New language underscored.) Commissioner Nelson requested use of "Ed Nelson" rather than "Edward Nelson." CHAIR'S EXPLANATION Chair Willson 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. DAVE PHILLIPS. PHILLIP ARCHITECTS -APPLICA NO. 98017 Chair Willson introduced Application No. 98017, a request for rezoning and site and building plan approval through the Planned Unit Development (PUD) process to expand the Brookdale Chrysler Plymouth dealership at 6121 Brooklyn Boulevard and interim use of 6107 Brooklyn Boulevard for storage and display of new and used car inventory. The Commission tabled this application on August 13 and referred it to the West Central Neighborhood Advisory Group which met on September 2 to review the matter. On August 13, the applicant waived the 60 day statutory requirement for Council action on zoning applications to allow time for proper review of the application. Mr. Warren presented the staff report which describes the location, and site and building plans for is the addition for automobile service and repair and a car wash, and use of the 6107 Brooklyn 9 -10 -98 1 ® Boulevard property as a parking facility for vehicle inventory. (See Planning Commission Information Sheets dated 08 -13 -98 and 09 -10 -98 attached, and Planning Commission meeting minutes dated August 13, 1998.) Mr. Warren explained the issues related to rezoning of the properties. The staff concludes that the request meets City zoning guidelines and finds that negative aspects are appropriately offset by the features included in the applicant's plans and allow Mr. Bartram, the owner of the 6107 property, to make use of that parcel, and to expand the automobile dealership as described in the application. Rezoning of the area to PUD /C -2 for commercial retail or general commerce redevelopment is prescribed in the City's Comprehensive Plan, and a similar rezoning request submitted in 1993 (though not pursued by the applicant at that time) received Council approval. Mr. Warren reviewed the applicant's revised site plan showing how the two sites, while not being combined, interrelate with each other through the use of a common access from Brooklyn Boulevard, and closing of the existing access to the 6107 property. It was pointed out that in addition to the expansion of the dealership by construction of the service garage and car wash, internal remodeling of the existing building will take place. This renovation includes revamping of the showroom, offices, bathroom facilities, and customer lounge and will meet requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act. The existing used car building on the site will be demolished. The revised landscape plan submitted by the applicant was described. Existing landscaping, new additional landscaping and screening will be provided along 62nd Avenue North, on the off -site parking lot, and in the area of the service garage expansion. In addition to shrubs, trees and . extended and new 6 ft. fencing placed strategically on the sites, ivy /vine plantings will be use to soften the impact of the southerly wall of the new addition. The revised landscape plan is designed to mitigate the effects of encroachment into the 35 ft. greenstrip and expansion of the service garage adjacent to residential property. The applicant will also plant trees along Brooklyn Boulevard and will work with staff to determine the precise planting locations to ensure consistency with the Boulevard streetscape plans. Mr. Warren stated the application, including the revised landscape and site plan, appears in order and suggested the Commission recommend approval to the City Council. He noted the West Central Advisory Group supports approval of the application. Mr. Warren reviewed proposed Planning Commission Resolution No. 98 -04, which describes Application No. 98017, provides background and findings, and prescribes considerations and conditions of approval. Notice of the continued public hearing on this appeared in the Sun/Post and adjacent property owners were notified. Chair Willson called for questions from the Commissioners. Commissioner Newman inquired whether berming could be used in conjunction with a 4 ft. fence to accomplish the desired 6 ft. screening. Mr. Warren indicated that could be considered acceptable. 9 -10 -98 2 • In response to Chair Willson's inquiries, Mr. Warren described the differences between the current application and the application considered in 1993 and the rationale for consideration of this application through the PUD process. Mr. Warren pointed out that because the 6107 parcel does not meet requirements for future C -1 development by itself, this is a step toward future development of that parcel through combination of an adjacent lot, zoned C -1 which contains a legal non - conforming home, and two R -1 lots facing 61 st Avenue North. The PUD process gives the City development flexibility and control. Commissioner Reem asked whether a specific length of time is associated with "interim" use of the 6107 parcel by the dealership for off -site parking. Mr. Warren clarified there is no time frame specified so that maintenance and allowed use of that parcel continues until conditions arise for combining the parcel for future development. Mr. Warren provided additional information on trash facilities and lighting on the site. PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED - A PPL CA TT,()N NO. 98017 There was a motion by Commissioner Nelson, seconded by Commissioner Reem, to re -open the public hearing at 8:22 p.m. and return Application No. 98017 to the table. The motion passed unanimously. Commissioner Newman, liaison to the West Central Advisory Group, reported on the Group's September 2 meeting. Two of the three members were in attendance along with other interested P � g neighborhood residents. Noting that expansion of the dealership is good for the City and for the business, does not make any appreciable changes to the existing facility, the members recommended approval of the application. Chair Willson called for comments from the public. Mr. Jerry Tachney of 3606 -61st Avenue North requested additional information regarding the 6 ft. screen fence. The fence will be opaque and likely constructed of solid wooden boards. He expressed concern regarding the slight encroachment into the buffer zone, stating that the neighborhood argued against that in connection with the 1993 application. He expressed thanks to Mr. Bartram (owner of the Chrysler dealership) for his cooperation with the neighbors. Mr. Dave Phillips, the applicant representing Mr. Bartram, stated acceptance of the conditions and considerations attached to the application and requested the Commission's approval of the project. Commissioner Nelson questioned the need for the extra 10' encroachment into the setback area on the west side of the existing service garage. Mr. Phillips explained that completion of the necessary capital improvements, involve the constraint of utilizing the existing building, meeting ADA requirements, accommodating staff relocations, expansion of the service area with acceptable exit ocations q g � P doors to accommodate customers, and demolition of the used car building. The existing building already encroaches into. the setback area and the new building will continue along that line. Additional landscaping will be provided and the masonry wall, which will have no doors, will be softened with ivy /vine growth. 9 -10 -98 Commissioner Rahn inquired about proposed lighting for the 6107 parcel. Mr. Phillips indicated that as prescribed by the conditions and in consultation with the staff, it is likely photometric fixtures will be installed to avoid light spillage to residential properties. Commissioner Reem asked about the maintenance of the area adjacent to Wangstad Park. Mr. Phillips stated there are many trees in that area, the grass is mowed and the fence is maintained. Mr. Phillips stated he would work with the staff to develop an acceptable fenceiberm combination to provide 6 foot screening on the west side of the 6107 property, if that was preferred. Mr. Bill Bartram, owner of the Chrysler franchise and the 6107 Brooklyn Boulevard parcel, stated he was available to answer Commissioners' questions. Commissioner Newman inquired about the outdoor paging system used. Mr. Bartram explained the system is currently not used during the evening hours and other adjustments can be made as needed. He further expressed his continued willingness to work with the adjacent neighborhood to remedy concerns or nuisances that may arise from his property and business. No other individuals from the public appeared before the Commission during the public hearing on Application No. 98017. • CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING There was a motion by Commissioner Newman, seconded by Commissioner Nelson, to close the public hearing on Application No. 98017 at 8:40 p.m. The motion passed unanimously. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLTJTTON NO. 98 -04 ACTION TO RECOMM A PPROV AL OF APPLI CATION NO. 98017 - DAVE PHILLIPS Commissioner Nelson introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: "Planning Commission Resolution No. 98 -04, Resolution regarding recommended disposition of Planning Commission Application No. 98017 submitted by Dave Phillips on behalf of Brookdale Chrysler Plymouth." The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Commissioner Newman and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Chair Willson, Commissioners Nelson, Newman, Rahn, and Reem, and the following voted against the same: None; whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. Resolution 98- 04 is made a part of these minutes by attachment. The Council will consider the recommendation at its September 28, 1998 meeting. The applicant must be present. Major changes to the application as reviewed by the Commissioners will require that the application be returned to the Commission for reconsideration. JOSEPH LAMPE AND ERNEE MCARTMT JR . APPLICATION NO. 98018 Chair Willson introduced Application No. 98018, a variance request, submitted by the residents of • 2118 -55th Avenue North, to allow subdivision of land by metes and bounds description rather than 9 -10 -98 4 by a formal plat. The application was filed on 08 -13 -98 and City Council action should be taken by 10 -12 -98 (60 days). Mr. Warren presented the staff report (Planning Commission Information Sheet, Application No. 98018, dated 09- 10 -98, attached). The applicants propose to divide into 9 separate tracts the 16 -1/2 ft. x 675 ft. strip of land located on the back lot lines of properties facing 55th Avenue North and Ericon Drive. Each parcel would be 75 ft. wide and coincide with the property lines of the 9 lots abutting 55th Avenue North. The purpose of the division is to create the parcels for conveyance to the adjacent homeowners. According to the applicants, 5 homeowners have signed purchase agreements to acquire the lots adjacent to their respective property. Upon request to the city assessor these parcels can be combined for tax purposes and would be considered a single parcel for setback and building purposes. Mr. Warren explained how the applicants' request for subdivision, by variance from the City's ordinance which requires platting or registered land survey, meets the standards of undue hardship, under which the variance may be granted. The applicants point out that a metes and bounds subdivision allows adjacent landowners to legally utilize the parcel, gives the owner the right to sell segments of the parcel, and gives those homeowners the opportunity to enhance the value and usefulness of their existing property. In addition, the cost of the replatting process and time expended appears unnecessary to accomplish this land division. Mr. Warren recommended approval of the application, (subject to certain conditions outlined in the . staff report) because it meets the variance standards and meets and bounds division policy, there is precedence for such action, no new buildable lots will be created, the land is platted property, and lot area requirements are met. The public hearing on this application has been properly noticed. Chair Willson called for questions from the Commissioners. Mr. Warren answered questions regarding the utility easements on the parcels which already exist, reiterated the city's policy on variances by metes and bounds and the "combination for tax purposes" action. PUBLIC HEARING - APPLICATION NO. 98018 There was a motion by Commissioner Rahn, seconded by Commissioner Newman, to open the public hearing at 9:10 p.m. The motion passed unanimously. Chair Willson called for comments from the public. The applicants were available to answer any questions. They stated appropriate drainage and utility easements for all the parcels have already been filed and approved by the City Engineer. Earl Shenk, 2123 Ericon Drive, expressed concern regarding accessibility to the parcels by utility companies such as NSP to make prompt repairs ,and/or service the lines and transformers, particularly if homeowners construct fences on the parcels. Mr. Warren stated that a protected 10' utility easement exists. Further, he observed that use of the homeowners property in combination • 9 -10 -98 5 • with the added parcel must meet ordinance setback requirements, therefore, adequate space for utility servicing is assured. Marjorie Anderson, 2112 -55th Avenue North, inquired whether the combined property requires two separate titles for purposes such as insurance. Mr. Warren stated yes. The resident inquired about access to the small parcel other than for utility service. Mr. Warren explained that an owner can deny access to his property, and may use it for whatever legal purpose they desire. Diane Shenk, 2123 Ericon Drive, commented on current and future maintenance of the parcels. Homeowners acquiring the parcel adjacent to their property would maintain it as part of their current property and the applicants /owners would continue to maintain those parcels not acquired. Henry Swanson, 2300 -55th Avenue North, indicated he was glad to have somebody (the applicants) take action on the narrow parcel and get it cleaned up. No other individuals from the public appeared before the Commission during the public hearing on Application No. 98018. CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING There was a motion by Commissioner Reem, seconded by Commissioner Nelson, to close the public hearing on Application No. 98018 at 9:30 p.m. The motion passed unanimously. • Chair Willson called for further questions from the Commissioners. Commissioner Nelson inquired whether there were any encumbrances on the property. Mr. Warren stated the City bears no risks under this Application. ACTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL. nF APPL,TCATION NO. 98018 - JOSEPH LAMPE AND ERNEE MCARTHUR There was a motion by Commissioner Newman, seconded by Commissioner Reem, to recommend to the Council that it approve Application No. 98018, submitted by Joseph Lampe and Ernee McArthur, for a variance to subdivide by metes and bounds a 16 -1/2 ft. x 675 ft. strip of land located west of Oliver Avenue North between 55th Avenue North and Ericon Drive on the grounds that the Standards for Variances and the policy for subdivisions by metes and bounds descriptions are met, subject to the following conditions: 1. The legal descriptions and survey showing the division of the 16 -1/2 ft. x 675 ft. parcel of land shall be filed with Hennepin County. 2. Once these legal descriptions have been established, the City Assessor is authorized to allow combinations of adjacent parcels for tax purposes. 3. The utility easement located within adjoining parcels shall be vacated as prescribed by City Ordinances. • 9 -10 -98 6 Voting in favor: Chair Willson, Commissioners Nelson, Newman, Rahn, and Reem. The motion passed unanimously. The Council will consider the recommendation at its September 28, 1998 meeting. The applicants must be present. Major changes to the application as viewed by the Commissioners will require that the application be returned to the Commission for re- consideration. Chair Willson recessed the meeting at 9:35 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 9:45 p.m. CENTRES GROUP BROO CENTER. LTD. - A PPLICATION NO. 98019 Chair Willson introduced Application No. 98019, submitted by Centres Group Brooklyn Center, LTD. This application is an amendment to a Planned Unit Development previously approved to provide for an alternative storm water detention plan on property located south of 66th Avenue North, east of Camden Avenue North, and north and west of Interstate 694 and T.H. 252. The application was filed on 08 -14 -98 and Council action should be taken by 10 -13 -98 (60 days). The approved plan for the 16.72 acre site provides for construction of a 20 screen theater and for two additional sites for future commercial development. Mr. Warren presented the staff report. (See Planning Commission Information Sheet, Application No. 98019, attached.) The PUD rezoning and site and building plan for the property was approved by the Council under its Resolution No. 98 -133 on July 27, 1998 (Planning Commission Application No. 98015). As part of this approval an underground water detention and treatment system (Plan • A) was approved as part of the grading, drainage and erosion control plan, subject to acceptance by the West Mississippi Watershed Management Commission. Because the Watershed Commission has not previously considered a plan of this type, it tabled action on the matter at its August 13 meeting. Therefore, the applicant is proceeding with this application to seek approval for an alternate drainage plan (Plan B) as well as the underground plan in order that the project can continue forward on a timely basis. The applicant also submitted this alternative plan to the Watershed Commission. Mr. Warren described Plan B which calls for a traditional pond located at the northeasterly portion of the property, just south of the Super America property. The site will be graded and will drain to catch basins which will convey water to the holding pond through the storm sewer. The City Engineer has accepted Plan B as submitted. Mr. Warren stated the plans are in order and recommended approval of the amendment acknowledging both Plan A and Plan B, as well as acknowledging the findings, considerations and conditions contained in Council Resolution No. 98 -133, and subject to an additional condition #16, outlined in the staff report. A public hearing on this matter has been scheduled and appropriate notice has been given. Chair Willson called for questions from the Commissioners. Commissioner Reem inquired whether the size of the site that is reduced because of moving parking to that area displaced by the traditional 9 -10 -98 7 • pond system will be adequate for development. Mr. Warren indicated that while it will be smaller, it can still be utilized as a potential restaurant site. Mr. Warren added that the applicants continue negotiations with the MN Department of Transportation for acquisition of additional property owned by the State, which if successful will result in more space on the entire site. Commissioner Rahn asked whether Super America has commented on Plan B. Mr. Warren stated there has been no comment from them, however, he noted that Plan B would provide a physical barrier between the two developments. He also noted that negotiations on a mutual driveway access continues. PUBLIC HEARING - APPLICATION No. 98019 - C'FNTRES GROUP BROOKLYN CENTER. LTD There was a motion by Commissioner Newman, seconded by Commissioner Reem, to open the public hearing on Application No. 98019 at 10:08 p.m. The motion passed unanimously. Chair Willson called for comments from the public. Mr. Terry ses representing the applicant, stated that at its meeting today 09 -10 -98 �'Y � P g PP g Y � ), the Watershed Commission approved Plan B. With respect to Plan A, the Commission requested a 30- day extension period to allow formulation of rules, etc. for an underground detention facility. Construction on the theater will begin this fall and the remainder will begin in the spring, therefore, • a final decision on the drainage plan can be deferred until early 1999. Chair Willson inquired why the applicant would not move the parking displaced by the pond to the larger site on the westerly part of the property. Mr. Moses explained that it provides for better traffic flow and parking management. In response to Commissioner Reem's inquiry regarding potential restaurants for the property, Mr. Moses indicated that Broadway Pizza and others have expressed interest for establishing sit -down restaurants. No other individuals from the public appeared before the Commission during the public hearing on Application Nos. 98019. CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING - APPLICATION NO.98019 There was a motion by Commissioner Newman, seconded by Commissioner Nelson, to close the public hearing at 10:15 p.m. The motion passed unanimously. Chair Willson called for additional comments from the Commissioners. Commissioner Nelson questioned why this application is not being brought before the Neighborhood Advisory Group. Mr. Warren replied that this amendment is a technical change relating to grading and drainage, and for this reason, it is not recommended that the Neighborhood Advisory Group be called upon to comment on this aspect of the plan. ACTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL- nF APPTICATION NO. 98019 - CENTRES GROUP BROOKLYN CENTER. LTD. 9 -10 -98 8 • There was a motion by Commissioner Newman, seconded by Commissioner Nelson, to recommend to the Council that it approve Application No. 98019, an amendment to Application 98015, to authorize a Plan A and a Plan B drainage option subject to the same findings, considerations and conditions contained in Council Resolution No. 98 -133, and further subject to the following condition: 16. The final plat comprehended under Planning Commission Application No. 98016 shall be modified prior to approval by the City Council if the grading, drainage, and erosion control plan identified as Plan B is pursued. Voting in favor: Chair Willson, Commissioners Nelson, Newman, Rahn, and Reem. The motion passed unanimously. The Council will consider the recommendation at its Monday, September 28, 1998 meeting. The applicant must be present. Major changes to the applications as reviewed by the Commissioners will require that the applications be returned to the Commission for reconsideration. OTHER BUSINESS FUTURE MEETING DATE Mr. Warren mentioned agenda items for the Commission's meeting/study session on Thursday, September 24, 1998. ADJOURNMENT There was a motion by Commissioner Newman, seconded by Commissioner Rahn, to adjourn the Planning Commission meeting. The motion passed unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 10:20 p.m. Chair Recorded and transcribed by: Arlene Bergfalk TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. 9 -10 -98 9 • City Council Agenda Item No. 9a • • MEMORAINDUM DATE: September 24, 1998 TO: Michael McCauley, City Manager FROM: Jim Glasoe it c D e for of Community Activities, Recreation and Services V SUBJECT: Resolution Establishing Improvement Project No. 1998 -31, Investigation of Brick Distress, Community Center, and Accepting Proposal for Professional Services Per your request, I have reviewed the history, project files and additional information related to the deteriorating condition of the south wall of the Community Center. This review was conducted with the intent of answering the question "Is the condition and stability of the wall adequate to withstand an additional 18 to 24 months, until a comprehensive Civic Center rehabilitation plan can be developed and implemented ?" Shortly after the Community Center was constructed in the early 1970's, it was noted that the brick fascia on the south side of the Community Center was spalling and deteriorating. The cause of this deterioration was identified as moist air from the swimming pool, passing through the concrete block and brick, freezing on the exterior of the building and fracturing the fascia of the brick. Throughout the history of the building, ongoing maintenance has been done to maintain the integrity of the brick. On at least one occasion in the early 1980's, some of the brick was replaced and a number of the mortar joints tuckpointed. On February 23, 1987, the City Council authorized an agreement with the architectural firm of Carlson Mjorud Architecture (CMA) to prepare plans and specifications for proposed improvements to the Community Center. These improvements included replacement and insulation of the roof, tuckpointing mortar joints on the southern exposure of the building and minor remodeling of Constitution Hall. In preparation for these improvements, CMA's structural engineer reviewed the capacity and condition of the existing structure to carry the additional loads that would be created by the roof replacement. As part of this review, four "inspection ports" were cut into the concrete walls at the point where the roof trusses connected to the steel columns. The review indicated that these connections were structurally sound. After these tests were completed, CMA recommended that similar tests be conducted every five years too more closely monitor the condition of the building. In reviewing the appropriate project files and as confirmed by our Maintenance Supervisor Mike Schlosser, no follow up e tests have been conducted. In discussions with Al Mjorud of CMA regarding the initial question of the stability of the wall, it was his recommendation that the city retain the services of a reputable contracting firm to come in and replicate this "destructive testing" process. In that way, the structure of the building could be checked as well as the condition and stability of the brick fascia. Attached is a proposal from Braun Intertec to investigate the brick distress and perform the above mentioned testing. The total cost to perform these services and prepare a detailed written report is $8,475. It is recommended that the City Council approve the attached resolution establishing Improvement Project No. 1998 -31, Investigation of Brick Distress, Community Center, and accept the proposal of Braun Intertec for a Condition Survey. With authorization, Braun would commence testing within one week. They have estimated that field testing would last two to three days. A preliminary report would be available approximately one week after the field testing has been completed. A final report would be issued once all of the laboratory analysis had been completed. I e Member introduced the following resolution and moved its • adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1998 -31, INVESTIGATION OF BRICK DISTRESS, COMMUNITY CENTER, AND ACCEPTING PROPOSAL FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES WHEREAS, throughout the history of the Community Center building, ongoing maintenance has been undertaken to maintain the integrity of the exterior brick; and WHEREAS, an investigation was undertaken in 1987 to survey the condition of the Community Center's exterior and its underlying structure; and WHEREAS, the mechanical engineer that conducted the above testing recommended that similar testing be undertaken every five years; and WHEREAS, no additional testing has been conducted. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota that: 1. Improvement Project 1998 -31, Investigation of Brick Distress, Community Center, is hereby established. 2. All expenditures for this improvement project will be accounted for in the Capital Improvements Fund. 3. The quote for professional services by Braun Intertec in the amount of $8,475.00 is hereby approved. Date Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. SLID 17 'se 03 =12FM BRAUN IN=TcC P.2 /4 B P RA U , K,, greun Intertec Corporation 6801 Washingion Armen vc South I N T E RT E C P.O. Box 39108 Minneopars, Minnsuab 55d394 106 612- 9dIS600 Fox: 9x1.4151 Eng nears and Scientists Sarving inr 301 and Nc+uml Enmironments' September 17, 1998 Proposal BADX -98 -8388 Phone (612) 544 -3871 Fax (612) 545 -4354 Mr. Al Mjorud Mjorud Architecture 12400 Twelvth Avenue North Minneapolis, MN 5544I -4612 Dear Mr. Mjorud: Re: Proposal for Condition Survey and Investigation of Brick Distress, Brooklyn Park Community Center Swimming Pool Further to our meeting at the above -noted site on September 15, 1998, Braun Intertec is pleased to present this fee proposal for a condition survey and remaining Iife assessment of the above -noted structure. Background It is understood that the community center swimm ing pool was constructed in 1971 as part of the Brooklyn Center City Hall Complex at Shingle Creek Parkway and Interstate Highway 94. The structure 'IS a two -story steel frame wid1 a brick veneer cladding, three mechanical penthouse turrets made of brick construction and a conventional built -up roof. The facility is used as a community center, and contains a large swimming pool complex. Throughout the structure's history, ongoing repairs have been required to address deterioration of the brick and masonry, as well as to evaluate the potential for corrosion of the concrete steel frame members. Repairs to the building facad have been extensive including the removal of several bricks. Recently, there have been water penetrations evident in the gypsum wallboard ceilings at the above -noted facility. Additionally, approximately ten years ago, openings were made in the wall to visually inspect the condition of the structural steel frame members. At that time, no corrosion of the structural frame was noted. It is understood that this work was carved out by a structural engineer, and that the report is available as part of our review. Braun Intertec was contacted by the City of Brooklyn Center to determine the remaining life of the major building components, as well as to provide recommendations to eliminate the underlying problems causing the spalling of the brick veneer. It was noted that the brick veneer damage is most pronounced on the western and southern exposure of the building, although there is damage on the north side of the mechanical turrets, as well as in other l locations throughout the perimeter of the building. • SEP 17 '98 03 :13PM BRAUN INTERTEC P,3i4 .Mjorud Architecture Proposal BADX -98- 8388 September 17, 1993 • Page 2 Methodology In order to assess the condition of the building components and to investigate the underlying causes of the observed brick spalling, a complete visual survey would be made of the exterior and applicable interior portions of the building, concentrating on' the structural elements but also addressing the cladding, windows roof and other building envelope elements. In addition, a number of test cuts within the masonry brick veneer walls would be made to examine the condition of the substrate materials and to obtain samples of brick and mortar for additional analysis. In addition, a review would be made of applicable portions of the original construction documents to obtain detailed information on the condition and construction of the walls. A thermal analysis of the wall construction would be performed to determine the location of the dewpoint within the wall construction, as well as to investigate the use of various insulating schemes in protecting the wall from further damage. The relative vapor permeability of the brick and mortar would be determined by a laboratory analysis. The absorption characteristics of the brick would be investigated as well. A review of the HVAC system may also be required. We would suggest that this review would form a second phase of this investigation, and the present would simply assume certain humidity temperature limits which could be maintained within the pool enclosure area. • Basis of Proposal Based on the above scope of work, our lump sum fee to perform investigation.and prepare a detailed written report, complete with photographs and video where applicable, would be $8,475. This fee would not include retaining the services of a mechanical engineer for HVAC analysis, if required. Out written report would contain a visual and semi - destructive evaluation of the major components of the structural and building envelope system, comment on their existing condition, their Iikely remaining life and their likely replacement costs. At least one opening location would be chosen to be coincident with the location of the structural steel framing around the pool area to examine its condition with respect to corrosion. Schedule We would be prepared to proceed one week after notification of authorization is received from ; the City of Brooklyn Center. Our work would entail approximately two days in the field, and laboratory analyses would take approximately two to four weeks. A preliminary report will be issued one week after completion of the field work, and a final report will be issued once all of the laboratory analyses has been completed. i ^ SEP 17 '98 03 :13PM BRAUN INTERTEC - P.4i4 Nijorud Architecture Proposal BADX -98 -8388 September 17, 1998 • Page 3 Closure We trust this meets with your present requirements. If you have any questions or concerns, or if you wish to further rcfine the scope of work, please call Kevin MacDonald at (612) 942 -4825. Thank you for this opportunity to submit a proposal. Sincerely, / /� r Kevin A. MacDonald, M.A. Sc., P.E. Principal Engineer • k=:drt \ptai3383 I City Council Agenda Item No. 9b i City of Brooklyn Center • A great place to start. A great place to stay. MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Kragness, Councilmembers Carmody, Hilstrom asman, and Peppe FROM: Michael J. McCauley, City Manager DATE: September 23, 1998 SUBJECT: Joint Meeting with Planning Commission I would request setting December 17, 1998, for a joint meeting between the City Council and Planning Commission. This is a regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting which is set to begin at 7:30 p.m. This would be an opportunity for the Council to discuss several items with the Planning Commission, including the Council's concerns regarding the process used to review and approve various land use matters. 6301 Shingle Creek Pkwy, Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 -2199 • City Hall & TDD Number (612) 569 -3300 Recreation and Community Center Phone & TDD Number (612) 569 -3400 • FAX (612) 569 -3494 An Affirmative Action /Equal Opportunities Employer City Council Agenda Item No. 9c • • City of Brooklyn Center A great place to start. A great place to stay. M-- EMO To: Michael McCauley, City Manager From: Sue LaCrosse, City Liaison Subject: Request For Council Consideration Date: September 23, 1998 This is a request for the City Council to pass a resolution expressing recognition of and appreciation for the dedicated public service of Judith Bergeland in regards to her volunteer pP P service on the Earle Brown Days Board of Directors. i 6301 Shingle Creek Pkwy, Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 -2199 • City Hall & TDD Number (612) 569 -3300 Recreation and Community Center Phone & TDD Number (612) 569 -3400 • FAX (612) 569 -3494 An Affirmative Action /Equal Opportunities Employer Member introduced the following resolution and moved • its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION EXPRESSING RECOGNITION AND APPRECIATION OF JUDITH BERGELAND FOR HER DEDICATED PUBLIC SERVICE ON THE EARLE BROWN DAYS BOARD OF DIRECTORS WHEREAS, Judith Bergeland has been a member of the Earle Brown Days Board of Directors from 1988 to 1998; and WHEREAS, Judith Bergeland has been the chairperson of the Earle Brown Days festival committee during the 1990 and 1991 festival years; and WHEREAS, Judith Bergeland has been the chairperson of the Earle Brown Days arts & crafts fair committee from 1992 to 1994; and WHEREAS, Judith Bergeland has worked on the Earle Brown Days auction, barn dance, arts & crafts fair and A Day At The Farm committees; and WHEREAS, her public service and civic effort for the betterment of the community merit the gratitude of the citizens of Brooklyn Center; and WHEREAS, it is highly appropriate that her service to the community should be recognized and expressed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center that Judith Bergeland is hereby recognized and appreciated for her dedicated public service on the Earle Brown Days Board of Directors. Date Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. City Council Agenda Item No. 9d S S PROCLAMATION DECLARING OCTOBER 5 THROUGH 11, 1998, TO BE CITIES WEEK WHEREAS, Cities are the gathering places for neighbors, families, and friends and provide the cornerstone for creating and supporting the well -being of our communities; and WHEREAS, After natural disasters hit many of Minnesota's cities in recent months, citizens, alongside their city officials, banded together to fight the rising rivers and clean up their communities; and WHEREAS, All communities, whether simply growing and changing or dealing with disaster, provide a forum for citizens to reach out to each other, learn from each other, and share ideas and resources; and WHEREAS, Citizens' involvement in their government is essential, from volunteering to serving in public office to simply understanding and caring about the government that is closest to the people; and WHEREAS, Cities Week 1998 — Celebrating Caring Communities — promotes the value of cities and the role they play in developing communities and our home towns. • NOW, THEREFORE, I, AS MAYOR OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, State of Minnesota, do hereby proclaim the week of October 5 through 11, 1998, to be Cities Week. Date Mayor Attest: City Clerk • City Council Agenda Item No. 9e • • MEMORANDUM DATE: September 22, 1998 TO: Michael J. McCauley, City Manager FROM: Diane Spector, Director of Public Work SUBJECT: Neighborhood Concern Re: No Parking on 69th Avenue Mr. Walt Wenholz, 501 - 69th Avenue, has on several occasions expressed concern about the removal of No Parking signs from the easterly end of 69th Avenue. His concern was that apartment residents park on the street overnight, and are often parked facing the wrong way. Mr. Wenholz points to No Parking designations in two other locations where single family properties abut multi - family housing: Camden Avenue on the east side of Evergreen Park, and Willow Lane south of 65th Avenue. Background State law prescribes certain situations under which parking is prohibited, such as in proximity to fire hydrants, or within a certain number of feet from an intersection. The Municipal State Aid road system • also has regulations regarding parking, requiring parking restrictions at narrower street widths. Other parking prohibitions are locally established. Section 27 -120 of the City Ordinances provides the general parking restrictions in the City. This ordinance prohibits on- street parking from 2 am to 6 am, and also for periods longer than 6 hours any time. For more specific cases, the Council and staff have relied on a "public safety and welfare" policy to determine where more specific parking prohibitions should be established. In general, on- street parking has been prohibited, by petition of property owners, where there has been a significant public or traffic safety concern. For example, adjacent to some churches, on- street parking is prohibited during church services because cars parked on both sides of the street make it difficult for property owners to see oncoming traffic when backing out of their driveways. On- street parking is prohibited in the vicinity of many schools to provide safe bus and parent drop -off zones. In the southwest area of the city, in the vicinity of Middle Twin Lake, on- street parking is prohibited during the summer months because of continuing problems with parties at Twin Lake Park, and with boat trailer parking near the public lake accesses. In the two cases cited by Mr. Wenholz above, public and traffic safety were the driving forces behind those prohibitions. Near Evergreen Park, which has heavily -used softball diamonds and a football field, players and spectators were parking on both sides of Camden instead of in park parking lots. Residents in the neighborhood were concerned that the parked cars would block the view of children going to and from the park, or that children would run out from between parked cars. On Willow Lane and 65th, apartment residents and Brookdale Motel patrons were parking on both sides of the street. Residents on Willow Lane could not see oncoming traffic when they tried to back out of their driveways. Also, in the winter time, • street maintenance crews had a very difficult time plowing those streets because of all the on- street parking. • Policy Issue As I noted in my September 4 memo, this parking concern has been reviewed for public and traffic safety implications. We have found that the parked vehicles do not pose any public or traffic safety hazards, except for the case of those vehicles which are parked pointed the wrong way. These vehicles obviously crossed over the center line and traveled the wrong way to park. Because of the low volume of traffic on 69th at this point, this is probably not a very significant hazard. The issue of enforcement is related but separate from this discussion. There has been increased enforcement of the existing general restriction on overnight parking (see attached memo from Chief Downer), and the apartment manager has passed along this information to the residents. There has been a reduction in the number of vehicles parked on the street and overnight, however, it has not eliminated the parking. If there is no public or traffic safety reason for establishing No Parking restrictions on 69th in this location, the Council must establish a valid reason for removing the public's right to park on the street. The City's zoning and subdivision codes, which have been rigorously enforced, assure that in most situations there is sufficient off - street parking. There is sufficient off - street parking at this apartment complex for residents and visitors. However, that does not mean that residents must park in the parking lot at all times. There are times when it is more convenient to temporarily park on the street. The dedication of 69th Avenue as a public street invests the general public with a right to use that street, including the right to park on the street unless it is specifically prohibited. The City has established a practice of only restricting that right when there is a safety hazard. • Chronic and persistent violation of the parking ordinance despite repeated enforcement efforts might offer some opportunity to address this particular issue. This would follow from the argument that the public safety and welfare are being compromised because the police must utilize their fixed resources to continually provide enforcement here rather than higher - priority efforts elsewhere. However, the Council should establish very specific definitions to be used as a guide, such as length of time to be studied, the nature of the enforcement efforts (every night, random, 3 times a week, etc.), and what is "chronic and persistent violation." X ty r KLYN TER Public Works Department Eli MEMORANDUM ik, Engineering TO: Michael J. McCauley Streets FROM: Diane Spector Parks SUBJ: Parking on 700 Block of 69th Walt Wenholz Complaint Public Utilities DATE: September 4, 1998 Central Garage Police Chief Joel Downer, Housing Inspector Janine Atchison, and I reviewed the 6 U, concerns expressed by Mr. Walt Wenholz at the August 24, 1998 Open Forum about Watershed apartment residents parking on 69th Avenue. Management I have periodically driven by this location. The number of cars parked on 69th varies. On a recent visit, I observed 11 vehicles parked on the street at 2 pm, and 8 vehicles parked on the street the next morning just before 8 am. Some of the cars were P gJ parked P facing the wrong way. There was one vehicle which appeared to be a junk car, which I reported to Captain McComb. When evaluating the need for No Parking designation, there are several factors which are reviewed. These parked vehicles did not pose a traffic safety hazard, for example, narrowing the street so that vehicles could not pass by safely. They did not appear to be restricting access to 69th Avenue by other neighborhood residents, nor did they pose a threat to bicyclists or pedestrians. Based on this review, while the parked vehicles on 69th may be aesthetically unwelcome, there is no traffic safety or public health reason to restrict the public's right to park on this street. It does appear that some vehicles are parked on the street overnight, in violation of City ordinances. The Police Department's Apartment Liaison, and Janine Atchison will discuss this issue with the manager of the apartment complex. The manager will be informed that neighborhood residents are concerned about the number of vehicles parking on the street, and the vehicles parked overnight. After an agreed -to grace period, the police will begin enforcement of the overnight parking restrictions. • BROOKLYN CENTER ���OKLYN C�pr POLICE DEPARTMENT POLICE MEMORANDUM TO: Michael McCauley, City Manager FROM: Joel Downer, Chief of Polic DATE: September 23, 1998 SUBJECT: 69th Avenue Parking The police department has responded to concerns regarding parking in the 400 and 500 blocks of 69th Avenue. Officer Peggy Broberg, who is the apartment liaison for the River Glen apartments, notified on -site management that the police department would be strictly enforcing the overnight parking ordinance which prohibits parking on city streets from 2 am to 6 am. Apartment management was advised to inform the residents of the complex in an attempt to gain voluntary compliance with the overnight parking ordinance. Officers began issuing citations for violations of the overnight parking ordinance on September 21, 1998. Five citations have been issued during the first three nights of enforcement. It was common to see 12 -15 vehicles parked on 69th Avenue in front of the River Glen apartment complex prior to requesting voluntary compliance from apartment management and residents. The police department will continue to strictly enforce the overnight parking ordinance in this area and other areas of the city. JD /jm • parkinglmem City Council Agenda Item No. 9f Member introduced the following resolution and moved • its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING SETTLEMENT AND AUTHORIZING PAYMENT THEREOF BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota (City), as follows: Section 1. Background. 1.1. The City of Brooklyn Center (hereinafter referred to as the "City ") is a defendant in the cases of Starks v. Minneapolis Police Recruitment System, et al; Hennepin County District Court File No. EM93 -219, and Fields v. Minnesota Police Recruitment System, et al.; District Court File No. EM93 -218. 1.2. The Court has concluded in said actions that the defendants violated Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 363, the Minnesota Human Rights Act, in the administration of the Minnesota Police Recruitment System (MPRS) testing process for entry level police officers employment screening and that defendants are obligated to pay certain damages and penalties. 1.3. The City has previously approved a formula for the allocation of costs and damages among the defendants. 1.4. The order of the Court also requires ongoing reporting to the Court of information about all written tests used by the City for police officer selection until January 1, 2004. 1.5. The Council has been presented with a proposal for settlement of these cases under which the defendant cities would collectively pay the sum of Fifteen Thousand Dollars ($15,000) in addition to damages, costs, and fees previously awarded by the Court if counsel for plaintiffs and defendant are successful in securing a complete dismissal of the cases. 1.6. The Council has determined that it is in the public interest to settle the cases to avoid the administrative burden, commitment of staff resources, attorneys' fees, and costs associated with ongoing reporting to the Court. 1.7. The MPRS has proposed that payment of the settlement be allocated among the defendant cities in accordance with Attachment One to this Resolution, which allocation is the same as that used for costs and damages previously awarded by the Court, and which allocation the Council finds to be fair and reasonable. • I RESOLUTION NO. • Section 2. Approvals and Authorizations. 2.1 Settlement of the cases for the total payment of Fifteen Thousand Dollars ($15,000) plus damages, costs, and fees previously awarded by the Court is approved, contingent upon first securing from the Court a total dismissal of the case with prejudice. 2.2 The City consents and agrees to payment of its share of such settlement in accordance with the allocation set forth in Attachment One. 2.3 The City Manager and Mayor are authorized and directed to make payment for the City's share of such settlement upon notification from legal counsel that final settlement has been reached and dismissal has been secured. 2.4 This resolution does not amend any previous agreement among the defendant cities for allocation of damages, costs, disbursements, plaintiffs' attorneys fees, defense costs, and defendants' attorneys fees. Date Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. ® APPORTIONMENT OF PROPOSED SETTLEMENT Community x $15,000 Anoka 2.20% S 330.00 Apple Valley 4,15 622,50 Blaine 4.33 657.00 Bloomington 8.71 1,306.50 Brooklyn Center 3.23 484.50 Brooklyn Park 6,01 901.50 Chaska 1,78 267.00 Columbia Heights (inc. Hilltop) 2.41 361.50 Coon Rapids 6.07 910.50 Cottage Grove 2.97 445,50 Crystal 2.79 418.50 Faribault 2,29 343,50 Fridley 3.21 481.50 Golden Valley 2.53 379.50 Hastings 2.07 310,50 Inver Grove Heights 2.84 426,00 Mendota Heights (inc. Lilydale and Mendota 1.61 241.50 New Brighton 2.66 399.00 Ne w Hope 2.60 390,00 New Ulm 1.82 273.00 North St. Paul 1.75 262.50 Oakdale 2.64 396.00 Orono (inc. Long Lake, Mtka. Beach and Spring Park) 1.65 247.50 Plymouth S, 73 . 859.50 Prior Lake 1.69 253.50 Ramsey . 1.88 282.00 Redwood Falls 1.02 153.00 Robbinsdale 1.91 286.50 Rosemount 1.54 231.00 Roseville (inc. Falcon - Heights and Lauderdale) 411 646,50 St. Anthony 1.31 196.50 St, James 0.97 145.50 Savage 1,77 265.50 Shakopee 1.75 262.50 Wayzata 0.92 139.00 Woodbury 2.9.8 447.00 ATTACHMENT ONE City Council Agenda Item No. 9g RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR HERITAGE CENTER REMODELING These materials will be sent to you on Friday. There is a question regarding a defect in the low bid that is being researched by the City Attorney. We should have an answer and recommendation for Council consideration by Friday. City Council Agenda Item No. 9h • 1 OQ ,pOKLYN CEpt BROOKLYN CENTER - POLICE DEPARTMENT POLICE MEMORANDUM TO: City Manager Michael McCauley FROM: Chief Joel Downe _ DATE: Septem 4, 1998 SUBJECT: Code Enforcement Status Report The neighborhood liaison has completed the code sweep of all neighborhoods north of I -694. All properties in the area have been inspected, however several that are not in compliance require inspection at a later date. • The code sweep now moves south to the area bounded by 58th Avenue on the south, Brooklyn Boulevard on the east, I -694 on the north, and the city limits on the west. 175 properties that were inspected between August 18, 1998, and September 23, 1998, were found to be in violation of City ordinances. The most common violations continue to be improper storage or removal of garbage, rubbish, and debris. 121 re- inspections of property were conducted between August 18, 1998, and September 23, 1998. 23 properties that had been inspected and re- inspected were found to be in compliance with City code with no further action required. The remaining properties were cited for the violations, or have made arrangements to correct the violations in a reasonable time. The neighborhood liaison continues to respond to calls from the public as well as assisting other City de partment's in the issuance of citations and locat p ro p erty owners and mort tY P gP P rt3' companies of abandoned property. JD:kh codestalmem • � — ` 4 1 = nt / ,�.wtttol E._tiY ,� n }rt .'. � , t � .\ ,�` 0 - za x !� 3Jv. c�ut�tAY N � . . II ERA;CRU �"�AY.� �o n r, i:t J • M AV 11 �� " • o I ^�• °, N`ciCl% IHIT" .r '�:i,• w :v !% O� ,E lO AV 1' / :I$lu iz a� < ► I;b atSCb clot a ^t ! t + - �Y, J CFHT t (�' Ztiz� s z s 101Ej00 , lN ► � I. ISCOIT < r.w.= \ p .,• I� x l .: ul l.1 t� i'�t ... IEMIT <AY^ =. : .ry ..,.� i i . ..:. ;.h �y < < ►yuAl z�u tl .ArIN• Ir ' �.Z°A Au I : N 0 p'" O1)AI� AV ,a - rte.. -.. h X z ,< 1 _� 0 ,l I < . {1 TINY !.1 �~ q 3 ;Y(NnT �ouAN Ir.u. IAAI " I I e� Iq ?E 1 I =_ RRY.. hV 3_N T 1 c .�p e' + Yn�., ►l AM AV n UL VO """`Ti ; l I pv " C• nee o l Av n r�r. . n • O OR(IIAR r% [1 {AV x N Y _. ' , +n K_ Q •. ` �,? ! ( {J %!T i < .:I AV N 01 1CHARU . T N IiLE AV f — A q y V l Y Al IASE AV L }� C.� 7� Z . - lEf j �� I Aki Vrt W AV . 6 p r V N . ( N U NNN U!2 At ELIA I '"AV I 1 F Af V v I f t P12M1: . ,•-0 (v �... - c ui E N I< i :KCAT NI[ v t A y om I ► c ° } AV 3 . N 1.� ter �nAnc , �AV� N .. . k h..ls'n / .Y Y M48. -l l. ^L/ 1_.. ` + _ t i$ •EWING A Y. .. z pI " (•AO_ • Y C U M• i x w i �._. • o o s i 1 !• 4 EtN Y �� : on(w( ,AY,< z , /eAILI '", -z = ,y0 . ,• � Y 11. � .�;_f : S loop '' - L Ps t• r } c tt. � Ia011r1•O AV N _. �� „ i..• z i� Y.►� tf�. z ttl3550. �r r c OUV31�_. - AV OtlV.O v c , o o AV I <•-- r } a8011 Oti .itl. � �„_o O ']fl. __ N r r .r. ` .�1 F o, A V A N z T-y �u O s�iirr m m _ f •^ r' ZE ( x 2x r•o •. . r , k `'(IBBOT AV _ 1 v O ti r. (•' O AY — • •N - p 9 D ,� {j+ �! p y 7 ; + 1 +•t rON N 1• y � h l�Nltl/ o - p V •[ 3 /,t R Ii�• , ICNI'!H AY_ l AY tf ro ^y� ' , z xfRkF S.v` �� i r A Y l a �� xE. < a: 11lY9. Y PK :w�su( AV N04- N S xRx s Z ? .__`� -Ytt j__ `'a �I \� �•--- O�yS •, tk (VINCENT „AV ..N p.�i - VASISURN AV it p n ) z z .:l'.::'•:,' AL UPIOtI - AV H N r n j NCCNI AV tj -' C1�� o I 1 :� Ili I 1 T11OMA5 : AV Io N �a �IPTON_ AV N (; `' /P n _.. I f- z- 'O �.�0 I f• }:�' \ / r SHERIOAN AV I N - \ ��� �'��� ``'"tY/ / �;�r� � ro`' nus [ ?I ° -- --- m �i'Q n o '.. r;.,��b e_aooKi + HIISSEi L AV It r J SIIIN \ i !0 IpUEEtt AY < N < / x i _ 0 �\ C!F l C ,: "^ Q m ! l I PNN AV N I •' n p �h ' -i •; x' - 9 ( , -+ \ N n ! t 1 I LIVER ' AV 1 )41Y�I..._- ifOti^ o\ ?� (`,pF I y 7 S� � (n� y ••� j NI A _ ! 1 � tt1W AV N_ �E• tE? 0'7 ' 1 a� V f I 16', PK � n ! /(,, IU ' _ ` ••'L b b WY pCIR� <:• A f( % A o t t h10NGAN (•Y .. --- _.N . 1 a`... - b t; 0 + O r HONG L< jV AV . _ JAMES - AV 1 AY Ni A b ;`� ? iz �/< n - t.O( - AN, \ . AY_. ( /.ti.!_'1 '• ~AC i^ ; Z ' ?, a o,l Q _ r 1 1 j% i N �. g I = .cq ! °J2 _ 2 AV KNOX __ AV da \NO _ � N, 4 t s S x r JAM - u, ` �..@ROWN_Q� ! t • A NYIIIG n s v S E A lq %:.J( C -_ AV x- �1< 11UMOOLOT .. _ .,. IRVIttG �AV :nom < I "N �a1YN � _ yc 1 t I ... _.... _. _ _ I I l i +. /1 ` °' Al N '<_ C-- x N— a N , q _ = GIRARR 1Y • V ' REMOt j +Y Y 1= < z u• �i. < MONT� - > ►' + t v, 1• _ a+ j r• rr S ) n £MAY x AV N S NN r It'•, �' t> �} i ' o L E>"EI SON.. <_ _ �N_�_ ° ^ R° f ( J 0 I< _ C LEAX E\ COLEAX z AV iz N I o o ? > _.. N .._.._. _ _COL A X— ._ Ay_. S N t < r - » 3 b \^• Im L'RYAttT IAV�S a N. < <... a - ,DRY Ni_ _ _ AV _ _ N— `> A - • o '�1D1 CN t � AI IIIIICI( AV N C MUE a i I BI' tl LORiC 1 z z z X t F ! ua AN AY ' 1 ' N c • z •• U �z 6111 SC i.. _.. .... � — •_.. �, • CAMU(ti_ L) N� MI ` 1�..._.� _NP�f_BbY iii n, vE a SS ISSIpp / '1111 R ROAL $ - ,:.., _ R�V R( AL_Eii' i 1 • 1 • + •�,,, a . a ,`' -__ �+r sis t�Ir� ...0 p —' _�" _.r-- •�_"�. "_"'• -- 1 . ... C t• tz• ` ,ice 180 ' �`..` "`.• -�._.. 'N S•• �/' r LtS � ._ •'� .— ....5_.�t K i MissiZa l