The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1980-1989 PC Apps Without Address ICYT R 7V' , y'/l'Y;�� Lyo..1J:d.74'e C'BNrTEM. /'f 7w, (9 f\ 2.J..6t�.�CYING '�.,.`�y'��`Aa3.t..3S3..G N ZONING AG.PL-LY.AT"J"`N Appli cation No. 81009 Please Print or -,—e C+_eariv Street Location of _?ropers; r CITY' OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MIN14ESOTA + 63031 Shingle Creek :parkway 55430 PROCEDURES AND REQUIREMENTS FOR FILING APPLICATION FOR SITE AND BUILDING PLAN APPROVAL Prior to submission of an application for plan review and approval, prospective applicants should arrange an informational meeting with the Planning Staff to discuss preliminary plans and to become familiarized with applicable ordinance and policy provisions. Three (3) copies of the following documents and information shall be submitted, at least 14 days prior to the date of the regular Commission meeting, concurrent with filing the application (required documents must be consistent with ordi- nance and policy provisions before an application may be accepted) : 1. A certified site survey drawing by a registered engineer or land surveyor showing pertinent existing condition, accurately dimensioned. 2.* An accurately scaled and dimensioned site plan indicating: - - a) parking layouts including access provisions b) designations and locations of accessory buildings c) fences, walls or other screening, including heights and type of material; d) outside lighting provisions, . type and . location; _ . . . . e) curbing. _ . 3.* A landscape plan showing areas to be sodded or seeded; location, size and species of trees and shrubbery. 4.* Building floor plans, elevations, sections and specifications, including materials proposed. 5.* Existing and proposed land elevations, drainage provisions, and utility provisions. 6. Additional drawings, plans or information deemed necessary by the Secretary., *Must be prepared by a registered architect or person registered with the State Board of Registration for Architects, Engineers and Land Surveyors, and said drawings/plans shall be so certified. NOTE: 'Upon approval of plans by the Council and prior to issuance of permits, a Performance Agreement as to approved site improvements and a supporting finan- cial guarantee, in an amount to be determined by the City, are required. Accept- able financial instruments include cash escrow; certificate of deposit; and performance bond. r Copies of the Zoning Ordinance may be obtained from the Administrative Office. `Questions should be directed to the Planning and Inspection Department. U./i Fnrm Nn 7 Q • I Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 81009 Applicant: Tom Wilhelmy (For Ernst, Lane & Ernst and Conoco) Location: Northeast corner of 69th and Brooklyn Boulevard Request: Appeal The applicant appeals the action of the Director of Planning and Inspections (the Secretary) in not accepting application for a special use permit to construct a Western Store (sale of groceries and gasoline at retail ) on the northwest corner of 69th and Brooklyn Boulevard. The land in question is zoned partly C2 and partly R1. The resulting site would abut R1 zoned property at a street line, if not a property line. The Zoning Ordinance prohibits a gas station from abutting R1, R2 or R3 zoned property at either a property line or a street line. A use variance (which is also prohibited) was therefore considered to be implied. i The Appeal is made on two counts. The applicant contends, first of all , that the Secretary of the Planning Commission does not possess the authority to refuse to accept an application for special use permit. Secondly, the appli- cant appeals the Secretary's interpretation of the Brooklyn Center Zoning Ordinance. The position of the applicant is laid out extensively in a letter from Mr. Tom Wilhelmy dated January 2, 1981 (attached) . The determination and decision of the Secretary is contained in a letter from him dated December 16, 1980 (also attached) . Authority of the Secretary Regarding the authority of the Secretary to refuse an application, the approval of which would require the City Council to violate City Ordinances and State law by granting a use variance, the following observations are offered: 1. To accept any and every application which must ultimately be denied by the City Council , absent a change in the Zoning Ordinance, would place an unreasonable burden on the Planning Commission, the City Council , the City Staff, and even upon the applicant. The Zoning Ordinance and the review policies of the Planning Commission and City Council require of appli- cants that they submit certain information concerning their as proposed use to the Secretary. Use information as well P ro Y p structural information is required. Until certain basic information is received, no application must be accepted. Certainly one item of information that must be present is the compliance of the use itself to the restrictions as to use laid out in the var�o ss zu oning districts. Absent this basic information, there is no real purpose in pro- ceeding with an application and no requirement in the Ordinance of Law to do so. Council have upheld 2. The Planning ommission and the City p 9 Y a similar decision by the Secretary under Application No. 79037. In that case, Howe Fertilizer appealed the decision of the Secretary that an application for a variance must be submitted in conjunction with an application for site plan approval in which a proposed building was to be located within the required setback area. The Secretary's action of not accepting the site plan application without the variance application was upheld by the Planning Commission and City Council . 1-15-81 -1- Application No. 81009 continued 3. In cases where the interpretation of the Zoning Ordinance is the first and foremost question to be resolved, on which the entire proposal must stand or fall , the appropriate procedure for resolving the intent of the Zoning Ordinance is through an Appeal . The proper subject of this application is the Secretary's interpretation of the Zoning Ordinance. The applicant acknowledges as much by the second part of his appeal letter, which will be discussed next. Interpretation of the Zoning Ordinance The appellant's arguments relating to interpretation of the Zoning Ordinance boil down to two main points. 1. The Western Store with gas pump islands is not properly a "service or gasoline station" as defined by Section 35-900 of the Zoning Ordinance; but is rather a permitted use, the retail sale of "automobile accessories" as provided under Section 35-322, 1(c) (2); and 2. Even if the Western Store facility is actually a gasoline service station, Section 35-414 of the Zoning Ordinance exempts the existing OK Tire gas station from the provisions of Section 35-111. (That section prohibits nonconforming uses from expanding in structure or land area, or being moved to a different location on the parcel , and from P structural alterations except those required by ordinance, law or other regulation.) The Planning Commission is referred to the appellant's letter (attached) to review these arguments in detail . Some of the appellant's reasoning will be evident from the staff response submitted below. A. Zoning -Classification of Wester.n,.Store Facility The appellant suggests that the Western Store facility cannot be construed as a gas station since the definition of a service station (gas or filling station) reads as follows: "Any building or premises used for dispensing, sale or offering for sale at retail any automotive fuels or oils, and where battery, tire, and other similar services may be rendered. When such dispensing, sale or offering for sale of any fuels or oils is incidental to the conduct of a public repair garage, the premises shall be classified as a public repair garage." (emphasis added) He argues that since "battery, tire, and other similar services are not also rendered at a Western Store, it cannot be classified as a service station. Rather, the activity should be classified as a permitted use since it consists of the retail sale of food and groceries, and of "automobile accessories" (which is permitted under Section 35-322, 1 (c) (2) . "The retail sale of tires, batteries and automobile accessories and marine craft accessories") . Staff would emphasize the inclusion of the work "may" in the service station definition which makes service and repair an option, not a necessary function of a service . station. Actions by the City Council and City staff since 1957 when the City first adopted a definition for "Service Station" (Gas or Filling Station) have always treated ' the, retail sale of gasoline as a special use, whether it was in conjunction with 1-15-81 -2- Application No. 81009 continued the service and/or repair of motor vehicles, in conjunction with the sale of food, or other items (O.K. Tire, Superamerica, 7-Eleven, Q Petroleum) , or as an activity by itself (Shoppers City Gas Station and Pyramid Gas Station) . Section 35-322 1 (c) (2) referred to by the appellant, has been considered to cover auto parts stores or the sale of auto accessories within a larger retail operation. Gasoline is a fuel which is consumed through the operation of automobiles. It is not an "automobile accessory, or product" which becomes a art of the working apparatus P P such as battery, spark plugs, air filter, a quart of oil or a gallon of anti- freeze. Moreover, the land use impacts from the sale of gasoline are signi- ficantly more. intense than the land use impacts resulting from the sale of auto- mobile accessories. Hence, the separate classification for this use. Staff would also point out that the Minnesota Supreme Court has already ruled on this question in the case of Southland Corporation v. Ci1Z of Minneapolis. In that case the Court ruled that t e self-service gasoline pumps at a 7-Eleven grocery store constituted an automobile service station, although no maintenance or other services were offered (opinion by Justice Todd) . B. Application of Section 35-414, Particularly Subsection 11 to Proposed Western Store Facility. The appellant argues that Section 35-414, 11 exempts the proposed Western Store, as a continuation of the O.K. Tire gas station, from the provisions of Section 35-111 concerning nonconforming uses. The Secretary bases his decision not to accept an application for special use permit in part on the provisions of Section 35-111 . Section 35-414, 11 reads as follows: "The lawful use of land for any automobile service station existing at the time of the adoption of this ordinance may be continued even P Y if such use does not conform to the above regulations provided that the use is made to conform to these regulations except Subsections 1 , 2, 3, and 4 above, within twelve months of the date that this ordinance is adopted. Subsection 3 of Section 35-414 shall apply to all exterior additions, alterations, accessory buildings and signs erected or constructed after the effective date of this ordinance." (The entirety of Section 35-414 is attached for the Planning Commission's reference.) The preface to Section 35-111 reads as follows: "Unless specifically provided otherwise herein, the lawful use of any land�or building existing at the time of adoption of this ordinance may be continued even if such use does not conform to the regulations of this ordinance, provided:"'(emphasis added) (The entirety of Section 35-111 is also attached for the Planning Commission's reference.) 1-15-81 -3- Application No. 81009 continued The appellant argues on pages 9-11 of his submission that tie provisions of Section 35-111 in their entirety do not apply to O.K. Tire, since gasoline service stations are governed by Section 35-414,11 . Staff do not accept this broad brush approach. We would point to the qualifying word "specifically" in the preface to 35-111 as meaning that a separate or different nonconforming status may be created for specific uses or aspects of nonconformity; but that those provisions do not override Section 35-111 generally. The provisions of 35-111 apply except those that are specifically dealt with in Section 35-414,11 . The exemptions allowed existing gasoline service stations under Section 35-414,11 are from the following requirements, only: 1 . Frontage on a major thoroughfare, lot width of 130' , and lot area of 20,000 sq. ft. 2. Premise abutment with R1 , R2, or R3 zoned property at either a property line or a street line. 3. Construction in accordance with high architectural standards and with a council-approved plan, and according to the procedure established by Section 35-230. 4. No driveway openings wider than 30 feet or within 40 feet of an intersection, flared, or closer than 50' from another driveway. Section 35-414, 11 stipulates that Subsection 3 applies to all "exterior additions, alterations, accessory buildings and signs erected or constructed after the effective date of this ordinance." It nowhere mentions the word "nonconforming" nor does it grant exemption f m the P rovisions of Section 35- 111 except in regard to points 1 , 2 and 4 above. While this eliminates the abutment noncon- formity of the existing O.K. Tire, it does not eliminate the nonconformity as to setback for the building. Nor is there any right established to: 1 . "occupy a greater area of land than that occupied by such use at the time of the adoption of this ordinance." 2. "be moved to any other part of the parcel of land upon which the same was conducted at the time of the adoption of this ordinance." (Section 35-111 , 1 and 2) The appellant's proposal would involve the expansion of the service stationsite by 14,565 sq. ft. and would move the location of the building about 50' from its existing location, onto land not presently part of the site. Section 35-414,11 only allows for construction of additions, alterations, accessory buildings and signs. It does not permit expansion of the site or relocation of the principal structure. The proposal involving as it does a new site, structure, owner, operator, and to some extent use, is quite literally a different use from O.K. Tire and is not, as appellant seeks to establish, a continuation of that use. The rights accruing to O.K. Tire under Section 35-414, therefore, cannot be transferred to the proposed Western Store. And the rights given to O.K. Tire under Section 35-414 do not enable it to be converted or expanded to the use proposed by the appellant. 1-15-81 -4- s, Application No. 81009 continued It should be noted in this report that the appellant has not in any way challenged the correctness or fairness of the requirement of the Zoning Ordinance that gas- oline, service stations not be allowed to abut R1 , R2 or R3 zoned land either at a property line or across a street. Absent such a challenge, no attempt will be made here to defend the current ordinance. It should also be noted that the Secretary's refusal to accept an application for a special use permit caused the appellant not to pursue a rezoning or a replatting application. Either of these applications would have been accepted. Though their aim would have been quite speculative, no violation of ordinance or statute would necessarily result from their approval . Summary In conclusion, the Secretary's action not to accept an application for special use permit to construct a Western Store/gas station at the northeast corner of 69th and Brooklyn Boulevard is based on the ordinance requirement contained in Sections 35-322, 3(a) and 35-414,2 prohibiting the location of a gas station abutting R1 , R2, or R3 zoned property either at a property line or at a street line; it also rests on Section 35-240:2 of the Zoning Ordinance which expressly prohibits the City Council from granting a use variance. We believe we have sufficiently shown in this report that: 1 . The Secretary is not obligated to accept the application for special use permit; 2. The proposed facility is a gasoline service station as that term is used in the. Zoning Ordinance; and 3. Section 35-414, 11 does not exempt the O.K. Tire use from all the provisions of Section 35-111 , nor does it grant that operation the right to be moved, or to expand beyond its existing premises. 1-15-81 -5- GRAY, PLANT, MOOTY, MOOTY & BENNETT HAROLD G.CANT(1887-1973) SUSAN L.LENTZ HENRY W.HAVERSTOCK0894-1977) LAW OFFICES DAVID R. KELLY FRANKLIN D. GRAY JOHN E.BROWER FRANK W.PLANT,JR. 300 ROANOKE BUILDING PAMELA N.DARLING JOHN W.MOOTY THOMAS DARRLING MELVIN R.MOOTY MINNEAPOLIS MINNESOTA 55402 SHELDON T. FLECK RUSSELL M. BENNETT THOMAS J.PATIN CLINTON A.SCHROEDER JAMES A.VOSE EDWARD J.CALLAHAN,JR. TELEPHONE (612) 339-9501 DIANE HOLLERN JAMES S.SIMONSON THOMAS R.WILHELMY RICHARD N.FLINT DAVID N.MOOTY MICHAEL P. SULLIVAN ELIZABETH M.SCHM IOT CURTIS D.FORSLUND RICHARD A.HACKETT RICHARD A.BOWMAN SUITE 912, FINANCIAL CENTER GEORGE W.SOULE BRUCE D.GRU SSING HI LDY B. LINEHAN C. U EV WILSON 34.43 NORTH CENTRAL AVENUE JANET C,ME MAN JOHN S.CROUCH PHOENIX,ARIZONA 85012 WILLIAM D=KLEIN DAVID T.BENNETT OF COUNSEL EDWIN C.CARPENTER LINDLEY S. BRANSON TELEPHONE(602)277-8961 ROBERT L. N D JOHN W.THIEL ROBERT A�ST N EEEI NOEL P.MULLER ARIZONA OFFICE DANIEL R.SHULMAN BERRIEN C.EATON MICHAEL R.CUNNINGHAM JEFFREY R.BROOKE** EUGENE P.DALY ANDREW C.SELDEN January 2 1981 OF COUNSEL , RICHARD A,MOORE,JR, STEPHEN E.LEE** JAMES R.LANDE *ADMITTED IN ARIZONA STEPHEN J.SNYDER —ADMITTED IN ARIZONA JEFFREY J,KEYES AND MINNESOTA BRUCE KRUGER WILLIAM L.KILLIO N ALL OTHERS ADMITTED JOHN P,JAM ES IN MINNESOTA ONLY ELIZABETH W.NORTON REPLY TO.............Minneapolis OFFIC E .............................................. JOHN Q.MCSHANE Board of Adjustment and Appeals City of Brooklyn Center 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 Appellants: PP - � - Ernst, Lane & Ernst, Inc. (Owner) 12710 12th Avenue North Plymouth, MN 55447 Continental Oil Company - Western Stores Division Suite 200 1433 Utica Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55416 (Developer) To the Board of Adjustment and Appeals: Appeal is hereby made from the decision and determination of Mr. Ronald A. Warren, Director of Planning and Inspection, as set forth in a letter dated December 16, 1980, a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference ("letter" ) . The premises affected are situate at the northeast quadrant of 69th and Brooklyn Boulevard in the City of Brooklyn Center. The legal description of the premises is set forth on Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. Appellants seek to make application for necessary permits to redevelop the premises as a Western Store offering groceries and gasoline for sale at retail. Enclosed herewith please find two Board of Adjustment and Appeals January 2, 1981 Page 2 reduced drawings, the first being marked Exhibit I and consisting of a survey of the premises and adjoining areas, and the second being marked Exhibit II and consisting of a proposed plan for the redevelopment of the corner. The premises are presently zoned C-2, with the exception of the southerly parcel of Lot 5, Block 2, Lane's Brooklyn Center Addition which is presently zoned R-1. (See Exhibit I . ) The application tendered by appellants included, among its requests, an application for the subdivision of said Lot 5 into a northerly and a southerly parcel and the rezoning of the southerly parcel as C-2. Although presently zoned R-1, said Lot 5 is presently paved as a parking lot providing parking in connection with the shops found on Lots 9 and 10, Block 2, Lane's Brooklyn Center Addition, immediately northwest of the premises along Brooklyn Boulevard. (See Exhibit I . ) As outlined by Mr. Warren in his letter, this appeal is being brought on two issues. The first of these issues is the authority of Mr. Warren to refuse to accept appellants' application for a special use permit and other necessary permits. The second issue involves the interpretation of the Brooklyn Center Zoning Ordinance ("Zoning Ordinance" ) as applied to the merits of appellants' application for the issuance of a special use permit. Although the resolution of these issues involve questions which are closely intertwined, these issues will be addressed in the order set out below so as to allow the underlying questions to be more clearly examined. I . AUTHORITY OF DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND INSPECTION TO REFUSE TO ACCEPT APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL USE PERMIT. Mr. Warren indicates in his letter that he would not accept appellants' application for a special use permit and other neces- sary approvals based upon his interpretation of the Zoning Ordi- nance. Appellants dispute Mr. Warren' s authority to make such a determination and base their appeal of this issue on the rules governing applications for a special use permit as set forth in the Zoning Ordinance. Special use permits are recognized and regulated by the terms and provisions of Secton 35-220 of the Zoning Ordinance. A copy of this section is attached hereto as Exhibit B for the convenience of the Board. Section 35-220 commences with a brief description of the nature of special uses, and then provides as follows: Board of Adjustment and Appeals January 2, 1981 Page 3 The following rules shall govern appli- cations for a special use permit: 1. Procedures. Section 35-220 then sets forth the procedure to be followed by an applicant for a special use permit, detailing the prescribed chronology of steps in parts (a) through (i) of subsection 1. These steps include submission of the application, study, public hearings and report to the City Council by the Planning Commission, and final determination by the City Council. The rules governing applications do not bestow upon the Director of Planning and Inspections the authority to act as initial arbiter of the merits of any proposed development, nor is the Director of Planning and Inspections recognized as an offical who is to interpret the Zoning Ordinance and reject applications not in conformance with his interpretation of the Zoning Ordinance. In short, the Zoning Ordinance does not contemplate an intermediate step between the steps prescribed by parts (b) and (c) of Subsection 1 of Section 35-220. Instead, the Zoning Ordinance provides that an application "shall be referred to the Planning Commission for public hearing, study and report. " Appellants therefore request that the Board recommend to the City Council that Mr. Warren be directed to accept appellants' application for a special use permit and other necessary permits. II . REDEVELOPMENT OF THE PREMISES AS A WESTERN STORE. Mr. Warren refused to accept appellants' application for a special use permit and other necessary permits based upon his interpretation of the Zoning Ordinance. The specific objection raised by Mr. Warren is the abutment of the premises, both at a property line and at a street line, with property zoned R-1. Appellants have offered to amend their application to request the rezoning of all of Lot 5, Block 2, Lane' s Brooklyn Center Addition, eliminating abutment at a property line. The abutment before the Board is therefore abutment of the premises with R-1 property across June Avenue only. Mr. Warren's interpretation purports to rest upon two primary rationales: 1. The issuance of a special use permit for applicants ' proposed development is contrary to the Zoning Ordinance, and the Board of Adjustment and Appeals January 2, 1981 Page 4 granting of a variance from said restrictions would constitute a "use variance" which is expressly prohibited by the Zoning Ordinance. 2 . The issuance of a special use permit for the proposed use of the premises by appellants cannot give approval to the sale of gasoline on the premises as a continua- tion of the sale of gasoline by the O.K. Tire Gasoline Service Station because the redevelop- ment by appellants contravenes the noncon- forming use provisions contained in Section 35-111 of the Zoning Ordinance. A. Appellants Proposed Use of the Premises is Compatible with the Uses Permitted By the Zoning Ordinances Within a C-2 Commerce District. Mr. Warren has determined that appellants proposed use of the premises would be contrary to the Zoning Ordinance. There are two provisions cited by Mr. Warren in support of his interpreta- tion. The first, Section 35-322:3(a) , is found within the list of permissible "Special Uses" within a "C-2 Commerce District", and provides, as follows: (a) Gasoline service stations (see Section 35-414) , motor vehicle repair and auto washes provided they do not abut an R-1, R-2 or R-3 district, including abutment at a street line; . . . . The second, which is referenced in Section 35-322:3(a) above, is found within an entire section of restrictions entitled "Special Requirements for Automobile Service Stations. " Section 35-414:2 provides as follows: No service station shall be constructed on a parcel which abuts an R-1, R-2 or R-3 district including abutment at a street line. For the purpose of this paragraph, a parcel which adjoins another parcel at one corner will be deemed to abut. Mr. Warren' s position is that the abutment of the premises at a street line with property located in an R-1 district renders the proposed use by appellants impermissible under the Zoning Ordinance since the issuance of a special use permit in this context would constitute issuance of a use variance. Appellants' appeal to the Board from Mr. Warren' s application of the Zoning Ordinance to their proposed use. Board of Adjustment and Appeals January 2, 1981 Page 5 The Zoning Ordinance reserves to the City Council the power to waive insistence on the strict enforcement of the literal provisions of the Zoning Ordinance to prevent undue hardship by virtue of circumstances unique and distinctive to an individual parcel of property under consideration. This authority is limited by the prohibition of "use variances" at Section 35-240:2 as referred to by Mr. warren, which reads as follows: However, the Board shall not recommend and the City Council shall in no case permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under this ordinance in the distrct where the affected person' s land is located. Appellants are not seeking a variance from the literal provisions of the Zoning Ordinance; instead, appellants base their application and appeal upon the literal provisions of the Zoning Ordinance and statements which are contained in the Zoning Ordinance as expressions of the intent underlying those literal provisions. Appellants' proposed use of the premises is for the retail sale of gasoline and groceries. Exhibit II is but one indication of the substantial efforts which appellants have already made and are prepared to make in connection with the recommendations of the Planning Commission in order to ensure that the design of the proposed use is compatible with the surrounding properties. Simply stated, appellants' proposed use is not a "gasoline service station", an "automobile service station" , or a "service station", as those terms are defined and used in the Zoning Ordinance. The restrictions of Sections 35-322 :3(a) and 35-414:2 accordingly are not properly applied in considering the issuance of the special use permit and the other necessary permits which have been requested. Appellants' examination of the Zoning Ordinance discloses only two sources for interpreting the terms "service station", "automobile service station", or "gasoline service station" . The first is set out in the definitional section of the Zoning Ordinance, Section 35-900, and the second emerges from the statements made about "service stations" and restrictions placed upon them in Section 35-414. In each instance a careful review of the Zoning Ordinance reveals that appellants' proposed use does not fall within the category of uses subject to those restrictions. Section 35-900 provides instructions for the interpretation and understanding of the Zoning Ordinance. The language set forth in the test [text] of this zoning ordinance shall be interpreted in accordance with the following definition. Board of Adjustment and Appeals January 2, 1981 Page 6 Service Station (Gas or Filling Station) - Any building or premises used for dispensing, sale, or offering for sale at retail any automobile fuels or oils, and where battery, tire or other similar service may be rendered. (Emphasis supple The proposed use by appellants does not include the use of the premises for the rendering of service to automobiles in any manner. Appellants propose to sell food items at retail, such as bread, milk, and other convenience grocery items, and have also secured an annual allocation of 1,435,000 gallons of gasoline for sale from the premises. The proposed development of the premises does not include any facilities necessary to the rendering of service to automobiles. The above-quoted definition, as well as the common usage of the phrase "automobile service station" , indicates that the Zoning Ordinance describes not the Western Store proposed by appellants, but a traditional "service station"--a small relatively unattractive building enclosing a small corner for the cash register and two large bays in which to provide oil changes and tune-ups, with racks of tires displayed for sale out front, and three or four sickly cars which seem to be perpetually parked on the side while awaiting some form of automotive surgery to get them back on the road. This was the vision of the Zoning Ordinance, and appellants' interpretation of that intent is borne out by the section of the Zoning Ordinance set aside to address the regulation of "automobile service stations" in response to that vision. Section 35-414 is replete with responses to this vision of the traditional "service station, " including the following compilations at subsection 6. Facilities for chassis and gear lubrication and for washing must be enclosed within the principal building. No merchandise may be displayed for sale outside the principal building except within four feet of the building or in pump islands unless enclosed by a structure compatible with the building. No trash, parts or tires may be stored outside the building unless enclosed by a durable structure compatible with the design of the principal building. Appellants' proposed use does not include these detrimental features of "automobile service stations. " Instead, appellants' use is clearly more similar to the permitted uses in a 11C-2 Commerce District" , which includes the "retail sale of food" Board of Adjustment and Appeals January 2, 1981 Page 7 (35-322 :1(a) ) and "the retail sale of tires, batteries and automo- bile accessories" (35-322 :1(c) (2 ) ) . The distinction which appel- lants seek to draw is dispositive of the issue which appellants have brought to the Board for determination. The Zoning Ordinance applies the restrictions of Section 35-414 to uses which involve the rendering of battery, tire and other services to automobiles on the property; the Zoning Ordinance allows as a permitted use the retail sale of automotive products (tires, batteries, accesso- ries) so long as the rendering of such services to automobiles is not performed on the property. The restrictions of Section 35-414 are criteria created in response to conditions associated with a specific use which the Zoning Ordinance recognizes as potentially detrimental in certain instances to the neighboring properties. Since these restrictions are designed to meet conditions which are not associated with appellants' proposed use, and since appellants ' proposed use is clearly distinguishable from the specific use addressed by the Zoning Ordinance, it is not appropriate to impose those restric- tions upon appellants' proposed use of the premises. Appellants propose to offer gasoline for sale at retail and no rendering of services to automobiles is involved whatsoever. The more offensive and detrimental aspects of traditional "service stations" which the persons drafting the Zoning Ordinance had in mind are not present, therefore the restrictions which those were placed on traditional "service stations" were not intended to apply to appellants' proposed use and should not now be imposed upon appellants. The Zoning Ordinance instead recognizes that among the permitted uses in a "C-2 Commerce District" are the retail sale of food, automobile products, and the "other uses similar in nature to the aforementioned uses, as determined by the City Council" (Section 35-414:1(j ) ) . Not only are the products proposed for sale by appellants similar in nature to the uses expressly permitted by the Zoning Ordinance, but the proposed use is similarly compatible with those uses listed as permitted on the premises. The operation of the Western Store will create effects upon the surrounding properties substantially identical to the effects associated with convenience stores offering groceries only. This compatibility is enhanced by the rezoning of the adjoining R-1 property (and its subsequent use as parking) so that the only abutment of the premises with property zoned R-1 is across June Avenue. Furthermore, appellants are willing to construct the Western Store in such a manner that the design of the pumps, the focus of the lighting, architecturally compatible screens, and other such aspects of the proposed development eliminate any significant adverse impact on the properties across June Avenue. Board of Adjustment and Appeals January 2, 1981 Page 8 Appellants have offered, and will evidence in detail in the plan to be submitted to the Planning Commission, that the proposed use of the premises is completely compatible with the uses permitted on the premises, that such use is substantially dissimilar from a traditional "service station, " and that the proposed use would make a substantial positive contribution to the public health, safety, welfare and general well-being of the area. Appellants therefore request a recommendation by this Board to the City Council that the proposed development of the premises as a Western Store be interpretted and recognized as constituting a permitted use of the premises and not constituting a "service station, " a "gasoline service station, " or an "automobile service station," as those terms are used in the Zoning Ordinance. B. The Zoning Ordinance Provides That The Provisions Of Section 35-111 Do Not Apply To The Continuation Of The Lawful Noncon- forming Use Of Property As An Automobile Service Station. The preceding analysis focuses upon the categories created by the Zoning Ordinance and the definitions and statements of intent which guide the interpretation of those provisions of the Zoning Ordinance concerning the regulation of "service stations. " Appellants ' analysis recognizes that the proposed use does not include the performance of any of the automotive services which are rendered by traditional "service stations", but instead includes only the retail sale of food and products similar to those expressly permitted by the Zoning Ordinance. Even if the Board does not find the foregoing analysis persuasive, and instead lumps the proposed use into the category of traditional "service stations, " the Zoning Ordinance provides a second independent rationale indicating that the proposed use by appellants is permitted by the literal terms of the Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Warren's letter includes a reference to a discussion concerning the continuance by appellants of the use of the premises by OK Tire Gasoline Service Station. Mr. Warren quite correctly recites several of the restrictions of Section 35-111 which would raise questions regarding appellants ' proposed use of the property if these restrictions applied to the proposed development by appellants. However, the Zoning Ordinance provides that the passages quoted by Mr. Warren are conditions to the continuation of the "lawful use of any land or building existing at the time of the adoption of this ordinance" "even if such use does not conform to Board of Adjustment and Appeals January 2, 1981 Page 9 the regulation of the this ordinance" which apply "unless specifi- cally provided otherwise herein. " Section 35-111 (emphasis supplied) . However, Section 35-414, the section imposing special requirements for "automobile service stations, " does specifically provide otherwise and therefore, by the very terms of the Zoning Ordinance, the restrictions of Section 35-111 do not apply to the continuation of a lawful nonconforming use of property as an "automobile service station. " Among the provisions of Section 35-414 is subsection 11, which provides as follows: The lawful use of land for any automobile service station existing at the time of the adoption of this ordinance may be continued even if such use does not conform to the above regulations provided that the use is made to conform to these regulations except subsections 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, within twelve months of the date that this ordinance is adopted. Subsection 3 of Section 35-414 shall apply to all exterior additions, altera- tions, accessory buildings, and signs erected or constructed after the effective day of this ordinance. A comparison of the above-quoted passage with the passages quoted by Mr. Warren in his letter clearly demonstrates that under the Zoning Ordinance the provisions of Section 35-111 do not apply to the continuation of the nonconforming use of "automobile service stations. " Mr. Warren quotes subsection 1 and 3 of Section 35-111, which provide as follows: No such nonconforming use of the land shall be enlarged or increased or occupy a greater area of land than that occupied by such use at the time of the adoption of this ordinance. A nonconforming use of a building existing at the time of the adoption of this ordinance may be extended throughout the building provided no structural alterations except those repaired by ordinance, law or other regulation are made therein. (Emphasis supplied) . There is thus a clear contradiction between the passages quoted by Mr. Warren and that portion of Section 35-414:11 which provides that: i Board of Adjustment and Appeals January 2, 1981 Page 10 "Section 3 of 35-414 shall apply to all exterior additions, alterations, accessory buildings and signs erected or constructed after the effected date of this ordinance. (Emphasis supplied) . This contradiction is clear evidence taken directly from the Zoning Ordinance itself that the continuation of the nonconform- ing use of property as an "automobile service station" presents one context which is "specifically provided otherwise" in the Zoning Ordinance, and that it was therefore not intended that the general restrictions of Section 35-111 should apply. Moreover, the portion of Section 35-414 concerning abutment with residential property is found at subsection 2 . It is subsection 2 of Section 35-414 that Mr. Warren relies upon in his refusal to accept appellants ' application. The Zoning Ordinance allows the use of land for any existing "automobile service station" to be continued despite nonconformity with the restrictions of Section 35-414 and specifically provides that subsection 3, not subsection 2, applies to additions and alterations constructed after the effective date of the Zoning Ordinance. Further evidence that Section 35-111 does not apply is found by examining the policy upon which it is based. Section 35-111 outlines in statutory form the fundamental policy laid down in this area of the law covering uses--from nonconforming duplexes to nonconforming factories--existing at the time a zoning ordinance is adopted. This policy is embodied in Sections 35-111:1 through 35-111:3 and, simply stated, is that while a zoning ordinance must permit an existing nonconforming use to continue, the zoning ordinance may prohibit the expansion or enlargement of that use so as to encourage the elimination of such use. The Zoning Ordinance specifically does allow expansions and enlargements to nonconforming "automobile service stations, " and also specifically allows "accessory buildings" to be constructed after the effective date of the Zoning Ordinance. These allowances are in complete contradiction to the fundamental policy of nonconforming use and evidence that the Zoning Ordinance does not apply that policy to "automobile service stations. " A factual issue immediately comes to mind--why were "automo- bile service stations" treated differently from other uses of property with respect to the continuation of a use existing at the time of the adoption of the ordinance when such use does not conform to the Zoning Ordinance? There are at least three answers to this question. First, "automobile service stations" are treated differently from other uses of land in all respects, not just with respect to the continuation of a nonconforming use. The Zoning Ordinance devotes an entire section to the regulation and restriction of "automobile service stations. " In light of Board of Adjustment and Appeals January 2, 1981 Page 11 these extraordinary restrictions imposed upon the location and operation of "automobile service stations, " it is not at all peculiar that the Zoning Ordinance would specify special rules to apply to the continuation of a nonconforming use of land as an "automobile service station" as well. Second, the Zoning Ordinance recognizes the special role of the automobile in the lives of the citizens of the community and the neighboring properties as well. Despite the "particular problems" and "potentially detrimental aspects" associated with the operation of automobiles and "automobile service stations, " the Zoning Ordinance accepts the fact that the citizens of Brooklyn Center require the use of automobiles in their daily lives and hence the need for "automobile service stations" is recognized as being in the public health, safety, welfare and well-being despite the negative aspects associated with such uses of property. Moreover, the Zoning Ordinance recognizes that, just as the automobile is subject to development and revision at a rapid rate, so too is the equipment and technology involved in the sale of gasoline subject to rapid modernization so as to better meet the needs of the citizens purchasing the product involved and to minimize the negative aspects associated therewith. Self-service pumps and the convenience store concept, both of which are prominent features of the Western Store proposed by appellants, are but two reflections of the evolution of the Western Store from the old, traditional "automobile service station" in order to allow consumers to purchase gasoline and groceries more economically, at the hour of the day that the need arises, and in a manner that it is also more convenient for such purchases. Appellants, therefore, request that the Board recommend to the City Council, in the alternative, that the proposed use of the premises by appellants be interpretted and recognized as a lawful continuation of the use of the premises by OK Tire Gasoline Service Station for the sale of gasoline existing at the time of the adoption of the Zoning Ordinance. APPELLANTS: ERNST, LANE AND ERNST, INC. and CONTINENTAL OIL COMPANY Western Stores Division Tb,okas R. Wilhelmy GRAY, PLANT, MOOTY, MO & BENNETT 300 Roanoke Building Minneapolis, Minnesota 5402 Telephone: (612) 339-9501 Attorneys for Appellants PLANNING COMP.1S,;ION ZONING APPLICATION Application No. 81046 Please Print or Type Clean 65oul, C goo t Street Location of Property 6100 Block of Beard Avenue North 7a o 39 _ Regal Description of Property Lots 1 , 3 and 4, Block 1 , P.B.C. 1st Addition Owner Erlmar Properties Address 15717 Woodgate Minnetonka 55343 Phone No. 933-7138 Applicant M.G. Boyd I Address Box 247 Elk River 55330 Phone No. 441-5999 Type of Request: Rezoning Subdivision Approval Variance ' Site & Bldg. Plan Approval Special Use Permit Other: Description of Request: Preliminary Plat - P.B.C. 2nd Addition. . . . ' . (replat of three existing . lo.ts into two lots) . I Fee $ 27.00 s Receipt No. 56084 ;V�(✓\ 4.20 Applicant' s TrIgnatIme Date PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION , - Dates of P.C. Consideration: ' Approved Denied this a.S— day of ' . . . . . 194�, subject to the following conditions Chairman CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, NIINNESOTA • 6301 Shingle Creak Parkway 55430 E'AAL'C'I llURES AND REQUIREMENTS FOR FILING As'PLICA`i'1:0N FOR SITE AND BUILDING P lulN APPROVAL Prior to submission of an application for plan review and approval, prospective applicants should arrange an informational meeting with the Planning Staff to discuss preliminary plans and to become familiarized with applicable ordinance and policy provisions. ' Three (3) copies of the following documents and information shall be submitted, at least 14 days prior to the date of the regular Commission meeting, concurrent �.ith filing the application (required documents must be consistent with ordi- nance and policy provisions before an application may be accepted) : i1. A certified site survey drawing by a registered engineer or lard surveyor showing pertinent existing condition, accurately dimensioned. 2.* An accurately scaled and dimensioned site plan indicating: - a) parking layouts including access provisions;- b) designations and locations of accessory buildings; c) fences, walls or other screening, including heights and type of material; .: d) outside lighting provisions, . type and location; _ _ e) curbing. 3.* A landscape plan showing areas to be sodded or seeded; location, size and species of trees and shrubbery. 4 . * Building floor plans, elevations, sections and specifications, including materials proposed. 5.* Existing and proposed land elevations, drainage provisions, and utility provisions. ! 6. Additional drawings; plans or information deemed necessary by the Secretary.- *Must be prepared by a registered architect or person registered with the State Board of Registration for Architects, Engineers and Land Surveyors, and said drawings/plans shall be so certified. ;NOTE: Upon approval of plans by the Council and prior to issuance of permits, 'a Performance Agreement as to approved site improvements and a supporting finan- cial guarantee, in an amount to be determined by the City, are required. Accept- Table financial instruments include cash escrow; certificate of deposit; and 'performance bond. Copies of the Zoning Ordinance may be obtained from the Administrative Office.. :Questions should be directed to the Planning and Inspection Department. Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 81046 Applicant: Mel Boyd/Erlmar Properties Location: 6117 Beard, 6120 Brooklyn Boulevard Request: Preliminary Plat The applicant requests preliminary plat approval to subdivide into two lots, the property presently described as lots 1 , 3, and 4, Block 1 , P.B.C. Clinic First Addition. The land is surrounded by Brooklyn Boulevard on the west, Burger King and a triplex on the south, Beard Avenue North on the east, and by single-family homes on the north. The P. B. C. Clinic presently occupies lot 1 and lot. 3 of P. B. C. First Addition. The vacant parcel to the southeast of the clinic, facing Beard Avenue North, is lot 4. The proposed plat would enlarge the R4 (lot 2 of the proposed plat) by expanding the frontage along Beard Avenue North by 40' .. The remainder of the land in the plat will be contained within lot 1 for the P. B. C. Clinic. The transfer of land from the clinic site to the multi-family residential site is based on a proof-of-parking for the clinic which shows that sufficient land is still available on the clinic site to provide all ordinance required parking for a medical use. Excess parking area exists on the clinic site because an addition proposed in 1972 was never built. In turn, ,the existing R4 parcel to the south is practically useless as a multi-family parcel since only 2.3 units can be permitted on the parcel under the current ordinance. Moreover, two-family dwellings are not permitted in the R4 zone. The additional land transferred by the proposed plat increases the land area to 16,653 sq. ft. and would allow a density of 3.75 units (rounding up to 4) which is far more realistic for development of the property under the current zoning. The proposed plat places the joint property line between lots 1 and 2 in a_location that splits the access off Beard Avenue North. A joint access agreement will be filed with the final plat. A 20' wide utility and drainage easement is proposed along this joint property line, 15' on the residential parcel and 5' on the clinic parcel . There are also existing drainage and utility easements along the front and rear of the residential parcel . The transfer of land from the clinic to the residential property requires a rezoning of the 40' strip from Cl to R4. An application for that purpose has been filed and will be heard on the July 16, 1981 Planning Commission meeting. A site plan for developing the residential property will also be submitted. The preliminary plat as submitted generally seems to be in order and approval is recommended, subject to the following conditions: 1 . The final plat is subject to approval by the City Engineer. 2. The final plat is subject to Chapter 15 of the City Ordinances. 3. A joint access agreement as approved by the City Engineer shall be filed with the plat at the County prior to the issuance of building permits. 4. Final plat approval is subject to approval of Application No. 81047 to rezone the north 40 feet of the proposed lot 2 from C1 to R4. 6-25-81 i PLANNI14G COP�IMISSI'C'N ZONING APPLICATION • _ , 1. Application No. 81047 Please Print or Type Clearly Street Location of Property 6100 Block of Beard Avenue N. Legal Description of Property Lots 1 , 3 and 4, Block I , P.B.C. 1st Addition (south 40') Owner Erlmar Properties Address 15717 Woodgate - Minnetonka 55343 Phone No. 933-7138 Applicant M. G. Boyd Address Box 247 - Elk River, MN 55330 Phone No. 14 -- S`t`l Type of Request: X Rezoning Subdivision Approval Variance Site & Bldg. Plan Approval . . . Special Use Permit Other: Description of Request: To rezone the property from C1- to R4. Fee $ 75.00 _ Receipt No. 56084 Applicant' s zgn ure ., Date . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Dates of P.C. Consideration: Approved Denied this day of ' " . . . . . . . . 19 subject to the following conditions: 4L44. . ' Chairman .. 1 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway 55430 PR.C10EDURrS AND REQUIREMENTS FOR FILING APPLICATION FOR SITE AND BUILDING PLAN APPfiOV.AL Prior to submission of an .application -for plan review and approval, prospective applicants should arrange an informational meeting with the Planning Staff to discuss preliminary plans and to become familiarized with applicable ordinance and policy provisions. Three (3) copies of the following documents and information shall be submitted, at least 14 clays prior to the date of the regular Commission meeting, concurrent filing the application (required documents must be consistent with ordi- nance and policy provisions before an application may be accepted) : 1. A certified site survey drawing by a registered engineer or land surveyor L showing pertinent existing condition, accurately dimensioned. i2.* An accurately scaled and dimensioned site plan indicating: . : a) parking layouts including access provisions; - b) designations and locations of accessory buildings; c) fences, walls or other screening, including heights and type of material; d) outside lighting provisions, type and location; . . e) curbing. L � 3.* A landscape plan showing areas to be sodded or seeded; location, size and species of trees and shrubbery. ' 4 .* Building floor plans, elevations, sections and specifications, including materials proposed. 5.* Existing and proposed land elevations, drainage provisions, and utility Provisions. Additional drawings; plans or information deemed necessary by the Secretary.. *Must be prepared by a registered architect or person registered with the State Board of Registration for-Architects, Engineers and Land Surveyors, and said drawings/plans shall be so certified. ' NOSE: Upon approval of plans by the Council and prior to issuance of permits, ' a Performance Agreement as to approved site improvements and a supporting finan- cial guarantee, in an amount to be determined by the City, are required. Accept- able financial instruments include cash escrow; certificate of deposit; and performance bond. _ I' Copies of the Zoning Ordinance may be obtained from the Administrative Office. ;Questions should be directed to the Planning and Inspection Department. Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 81047 Applicant: M.G. Boyd/Erlmar Properties Location: 6100 block Beard Avenue North Request: Rezoning The applicant requests rezoning of the land abutting Beard Avenue North and lying north of Lot 4, P.B.C. 1st Addition (now vacant) up to 40 feet. This is the south 40 feet of Lot 3, P.B.C. 1st Addition, which is presently included in the P.B.C. Clinic site at 6120 Brooklyn Boulevard. The land is currently zoned Cl and is surrounded by Burger King to the southwest, R4 zoned land to the south, Beard Avenue North to the east, and the P.B.C. Clinic parking lot to the north (also zoned Cl) . The purpose of the rezoning is to add enough .land area to the vacant R4 property to the south so that four dwelling units can be built at the ordinance-required density. The R4 zoning district permits dwellings one and one-half to two storeys in height at a density of twelve (12) units per acre. However, before calculating the maximum number of units permitted, the land within the setback area abutting public streets must first be deducted (Section 35-400, footnote (1 ) (a) ) . The existing R4 vacant lot is approximately 10,708 sq. ft. ; 8,250 sq. ft. after deducting the front setback area. At one unit per 3,600 sq. ft. , the existing lot can accommodate only 2.29 R4 type dwelling units, or 2.0 R3 type dwelling units. These options make the property almost unbuildable except for a two unit rental townhouse complex. The additional 40 feet of land adjoined to the existing lot will result in a 16,653 sq. ft. lot (12,792 sq. ft. after setback deduction) which is capable of supporting 3.55 (or 4) R4 type units or 3.08 R3 type units. The newly created property would also exceed the ordinance requirement of a minimum 100' lot width for R4 lots . Currently the lot is substandard at 70' width. There- fore, the proposed expansion of the R4 district by the enlargement of the vacant property abutting Beard Avenue North would make development of the property within ordinance standards--more feasible. The transfer of land from the P.B.C. Clinic site and the Cl zoning district to the vacant R4 site is made possible based on a proof-of-parking plan for the P.B.C. Clinic site which shows adequate land for all required parking on the remaining clinic property. The existing P.B.C. Clinic has a gross floor area of 13,105 sq. ft. which results in a parking requirement of 87 stalls (one space/150 sq. ft. of floor area for medical uses) . Currently, there are only 89 stalls on the site. However, a proof-of-parking plan submitted for a proposed addition (never built) in 1968 shows 111 potential stalls not including land area which would have been used u p Y b the addition to the clinic. The additional 22 stalls - which presently possible based on the roof of- arkin plan and the two extra p y p p p 9P exist on the clinic s more ini site than offset the loss of 15 stalls within the land e area to be transferred to the vacant R4 lot. The applicant has submitted a letter (attached) in which he addresses the Guide- lines for Evaluating Rezonings (Section 35-208:4, also attached). The applicant generally stresses the value to the community of providing additional rental housing and an increase to the tax base. He also stresses the improved opportunities for building on the enlarged lot over the present lot. 7-16-81 -1- Application No. 81047 continued Of note is the fact that the property presently described as Lot 3, P.B.C. 1st Addition was originally zoned for multi-family development and then rezoned to Cl in 1969 to accommodate a proposed expansion in the P.B.C. Clinic. The expansion, however, never took place, leaving some excess land in the Cl district which apparently will not be used. Section 35-210:2 of the Zoning Ordinance (attached) allows for a review of just such rezonings when no structural work has commenced within two years of the date of the rezoning action by the City Council . Since no addition to the clinic has been pursued, it would seem entirely appropriate to zone the land again for multi-family residential development which is now being actively pursued. Based on these considerations, approval of the rezoning request_is recommended. In addition, staff would recommend that the Neighborhood Advisory Group review process be bypassed in this case in lieu of the minor extent of the rezoning and the previously established multi-family zoning of the land. Any recommendation to rezone the property should be consistent with a finding that the Rezoning Policy and Review Guidelines have been met. A public hearing has been scheduled and notices have been sent to owners of property within 350 feet of the land in question. Mr. Boyer Palmer, owner of the Brookdale Manor Apartments at 6101 Beard Avenue North,has called to say he has no opposition to the rezoning request. 7-16-81 -2- CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER PLANNING COMMISSION ZONING APPLICATION 81022 Application No. Please Print Clearly or Type Street Location of Property Southwest corner at intersection of Shingle Creek Parkway and Xerxes Avenue Nor th Legal Description of Property see attached Owner Brooklyn Development Company Address 3250 W. 66th St. - Edina Phone No. 926-5151 Applicant same Address Phone No. Type of Request: !/ Rezoning Subdivision Approval Variance Site & Bldg. Plan Approval Special Use Permit Other: Description of Request: To rezone the property from R3 to C-1 . Fee $ Receipt No. 55476 pp iCA s Signature /n/ Date PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Dates of P.C. Consideration: Approved Denied' this day of 19 subject to the follow- T_ ing conditions: OLA� ) Chairman - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - MY rnlINCTI ArTTnN CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway 55430 PROCEDURES AND REQUIREMENTS FOR FILING APPLICATION FOR SITE AND BUILDING PLAN APPROVAL Prior to submission of an application for plan review and approval , prospective applicants should arrange an informational meeting with the Planning staff to discuss preliminary plans and to become familiarized with applicable ordinance and policy provisions. Three (3) copies of the following documents and information shall be submitted, at least 14 days prior to the date of the regular Commission meeting, concurrent with '°filing the app ci ation required documents must be consistent with ordinance and policy provisions before an application may be accepted) : 1. A certified site survey drawing by a registered engineer or land surveyor showing pertinent existing condition, accurately dimensioned. 2.* An accurately scaled and dimensioned site plan indicating: a) parking layouts including access provisions; b) designations and locations of accessory buildings; c) fences, walls or other screening, including heights and type of material ; d) outside lighting provisions, type and location; e) curbing. 3.* A landscape plan showing areas to be sodded or seeded; location, size and species of trees and shrubbery. 4.* Building floor plans, elevations, sections and specifications, including materials proposed. 5.* Existing and proposed land elevations, drainage provisions, and utility provisions. 6. Additional drawings, plans or information deemed necessary by the Secretary. *Must be prepared by a registered architect or person registered with the State Board of Registration for Architects, Engineers and Land Surveyors, and said drawings/plans shall be so certified. NOTE: Upon approval of plans by the Council and prior to issuance of permits, a Performance Agreement as to approved site improvements and a supporting financial guarantee, in ail amount to be determined by the City, are required. Acceptable financial instruments include cash escrow; certificate of deposit; and performance bond. Copies of the Zoning Ordinance may be obtained from the Administrative Office. Questions should be directed to the Department of Planning and Inspection. P/I Form No. 19 Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 81022 Applicant: Brooklyn Development Company Location: Shingle Creek Parkway and Xerxes Avenue North Request: Rezoning The applicant requests rezoning from R3 to Cl a 5.6 acre tract of land at the southwest corner of Shingle Creek Parkway and Xerxes Avenue North. The property is bounded by Shingle Creek Parkway on the northeast, by Xerxes Avenue North on the southeast, and by Freeway Boulevard extended on the southwest and west. This application was reviewed by the Planning Commission at its April 9, 1981 meeting and tabled at that time for review by the Northwest Neighborhood Advisory Group. Members of the Northwest Neighborhood Advisory Group and residents of the area in question met on April 30, 1981 to consider the proposed rezoning (see minutes of the Advisory Group attached. ) The recommendation of the Neighborhood Group was favorable to the rezoning request, though one member preferred to withhold the rezoning until a definite site plan for a one-storey office building is also submitted. The staff recommendation on the proposed rezoning is also favorable. As we pointed out in our original report on this application, the proposed rezoning meets a number of guidelines for evaluating rezonings set forth in Section 35-208 of the Zoning Ordinance. It should also be noted that the proposed Comprehensive Plan recommendations for the Northwest Neighborhood acknowledges some service/office use of the land at the easterly edge of Shingle Creek Parkway and Xerxes Avenue North. In general , the Cl area should serve as an appropriate buffer between the townhouse project to the west and the light industrial use to the east. Approval is recommended based on the fact that the proposed rezoning is consistent with the Rezoning Evaluation Policy and Review Guidelines contained in the City's Zoning Ordinance in that it is consistent with the proposed Comprehensive Plan and does not constitute "spot zoning." 5-21-81 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER PLANNING COMMISSION ZONING APPLICATION Application No. 81025 Please Print Clearly or Type Street Location of Property South of I-94 and north of 66th Avenue North Legal Description of Property see attached i Owner City of Brooklyn Center Address Phone No. Applicant City of Brooklyn Center Address Phone No. Type of Request: Rezoning X Subdivision Approval Variance Site & Bldg. Plan Approval Special Use Permit Other: Description of Request: Platting of the property to be known as Northgate 3rd Addition. r Fee $ n/c Receipt No. pp cants Signature March 26, 1981 Date PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Dates of P.C. Consideration: Approved Denied this day of 19 subject to the follow- ing conditions: �Z( a i rma n - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - COUNCIL ACTION CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway 55430 PROCEDURES AND REQUIREMENTS FOR FILING APPLICATION FOR SITE AND BUILDING PLAN APPROVAL Prior to submission of an application for plan review and approval , prospective applicants should arrange an informational meeting with the Planning staff to discuss preliminary plans and to become familiarized with applicable ordinance and policy provisions. Three (3) copies of the following documents and information shall be somitted, at least 14 Fs prior to the date of the regular Commission meeting, concurrent with Filing thee ap ci ation equired documents must be consistent with ordinance and policy provisions before an application may be accepted) : 1. A certified site survey drawing by a registered engineer or land surveyor showing pertinent existing condition, accurately dimensioned. 2.* An accurately scaled and dimensioned site plan indicating: a) parking layouts including access provisions; b) designations and locations of accessory buildings; c) fences, walls or other screening, including heights and type of material ; d) outside lighting provisions, type and location; e) curbing. 3.* A landscape plan showing areas to be sodded or seeded; location, size and species of trees and shrubbery. 4.* Building floor plans, elevations, sections and specifications, including materials proposed. 5.* Existing and proposed land elevations, drainage provisions, and utility provisions. 6. Additional drawings, plans or information deemed necessary by the Secretary. *Must be prepared by a registered architect or person registered with the State Board of Registration for Architects, Engineers and Land Surveyors, and said drawings/plans shall be so certified. NOTE: Upon approval of plans by the Council and prior to issuance of permits, a Performance Agreement as to approved site improvements and a supporting financial guarantee, in an amount to be determined by the City, are required.--Tcceptable financial instruments include cash escrow; certificate of deposit; and performance bond. Copies of the Zoning Ordinance may be obtained from the Administrative Office. Questions should be directed to the Department of Planning and Inspection. P/I Form No. 19 Tract A. That part of Lot 1, Exhibit "A" showing subdivision of land belonging y� ! to the estate of Eliza A. Henderson, in Section 34, Township 119 Korth, Range 21 West, according to the plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder in and for Hennepin County, Minnesota described s follows: Be at the southwest corner of ibe a Beginning innin t i said Lot 1• thence run east on the south line of said Lot 1 for 6 2 feet; thence run north at right angles to the south line of 114 g g said Lot 1 for 35 feet; thence run northeasterly to the point of intersection of Line 1 described below with a line run southerly at right angles to Line 2 described below from its point of termination; ' thence run northwesterly on said Line 1 to its intersection with a 3 line run parallel with and distant 85 feet northerly of the south line of said Lot 1; thence run westerly to a point distant 1146.2 feet east i i and 83 feet north of the southwest corner of said Lot 1; thence run i westerly to a point on the west line of said Lot 1, distant 115 feet j north of the southwest corner thereof; thence run south on the west • line of said Lot 1 to the point of beginning; Line 1. From a point on Line 2 described below, distant 215 feet westerly of its point of termination, run southerly at right angles to said Line 2 for 184 feet. to the point of beginning of Line 1 to be described; thence run southeasterly to the northeast corner of Lot 8, Block 2, } Northgate and there terminating; ' Line 2. Beginning at a point on the north and south quarter line of Section 33, Township 119 North, Range 21 West, distant 1395.88 feet southerly of the north quarter corner thereof; thence run easterly at an angle jof 95 degrees 02 minutes 29 seconds from said north and south quarter line (measured from north to east) for 2887.48 feet; thence deflect to 1 the left at an angle of 1 degree 23 minutes 15 seconds for 1065 feet and there terminating; F Page 1 of 2 pages Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 81025 Applicant: City of Brooklyn Center Location: East of Noble Avenue North between I-94 and 66th Avenue North Request: Preliminary Plat The City of Brooklyn Center proposes a plat of the vacant land east of Noble Avenue North and between I-94 and the lots on the north side of 66th Avenue North. The property is 115' wide at Noble Avenue North and tapers down to 83 feet wide between Lee Avenue North and Brooklyn Boulevard. The property in question is a remnant of a MN/DOT taking for noise barriers purposes. In March, 1978 the City agreed to acquire the excess property from MN/DOT after noise barriers were constructed. It was the express purpose of the City to in turn convey this property to abutting property owners. (See copies of Council Minutes from 3/27/78 and Resolution No. 78-60 attached for further background) . The property is not wide enough to develop standard single family lots which have access to a public street and residents of the area who live south of the land in question have agreed to purchase respective portions of the property sent t abutting property for the cost of the platting. (See copy of memo s o g p p y owners from the Public Works Director, attached) . The land is zoned R1 and no change in that designation has been recommended in the updated Comprehensive Plan. The plat establishes 15 outlots and two turnaround areas at the north end of Lee Avenue North and Noble Avenue North. The Zoning Ordinance defines an "Outlot" in part to be "A parcel of land included in a plat which is smaller than the minimum size permitted and which is thereby declared unbuildable until combined with additional land; . . . The outlots will be unbuildable by themselves and will be combined with the exst- ing single family lots to the south which face 66th Avenue North. Permits for accessory structures will only be permitted after proof that the property has been combined. A 20' wide drainage easement will run through the approximate middle of the string of outlots. Run-off will be conveyed through a drainage swale east and west from Lee Avenue North to two storm sewer lines, one at the east and one at the west end of the proposed subdivision, and from there into the Interstate 94 right-of-way. A public hearing has been scheduled and informational notices have been sent to affected property owners. The plat generally seems to be in order and approval , of course, is recommended, subject to the following conditions: 1 . The final plat is subject to approval by the City Engineer. 2. The final plat is subject to the provisions of Chapter 15 of the City Ordinances. 3. Plat approval authorizes the combining of outlots with other existing parcels without a plat or registered land survey. Building permits for accessory structures proposed for location on outlots will not be issued until verification of the combination has been presented to the Building Official . 4-9-81 CITY OF" BROOKLYN CENTER PLANNING COMMISSION ZONING APPLICATION Application No. 81020 Please Print Clearly or Type Street Location of Property Shingle Creek Parkway & Freeway Blvd. Legal Description of Property Outlot E, Twin Cities Interchange Park Owner Brooklyn Development Co. Address 3250 W. 66th Street - Edina s q>s— Phone No. 926-5151 Applicant Brooklyn Development Co./James Merila Address Phone No. Type of Request: Rezoning x Subdivision Approval Variance Site & Bldg. Plan Approval Special Use Permit Other: Description of Request: Platting of the property to be known as Earle Brown Estates. 22 Lots and 1 common area. Fee $ 48.00 Receipt No. 55538 pp cant s Signa u e March 26, 1981 Date PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Dates of P.C. Consideration: Approved enied this day of 0401, 19 [, subject to the follow- ing conditions: C a i an - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - CITY COIINCTI ACTTON CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway 55430 PROCEDURES AND REQUIREMENTS FOR FILING APPLICATION FOR SITE AND BUILDING PLAN APPROVAL Prior to submission of an application for plan review and approval ,prospective applicants should arrange an informational meeting with the Planning staff to discuss preliminary plans and to become familiarized with applicable ordinance and policy provisions. Three (3) copies of the following documents and information shall be submitted, at least 14 days prior to the date of the regular Commission meeting, concurrent with filing the application required documents must be consistent with ordinance and policy provisions before an application may be accepted) : 1. A certified site survey drawing by a registered engineer or land surveyor showing pertinent existing condition, accurately dimensioned. 2.* An accurately scaled and dimensioned site plan indicating: a) parking layouts including access provisions; b) designations and locations of accessory buildings; c) fences, walls or other screening, including heights and type of material ; d) outside lighting provisions, type and location; e) curbing. 3.* A landscape plan showing areas to be sodded or seeded; location, size and species of trees and shrubbery. 4.* Building floor plans, elevations, sections and specifications, including materials proposed. 5.* Existing and proposed land elevations, drainage provisions, and utility provisions. 6. Additional drawings, plans or information deemed necessary by the Secretary. *Must be prepared by a registered architect or person registered with the State Board of Registration for Architects, Engineers and Land and said drawings/plans shall be so certified. NOTE: Upon approval of plans by the Council and prior to issuance of permits, a Performance Agreement as to approved site improvements and a supporting financial guarantee, in ail amount to be determined by the City, are required. Acceptable financial instruments include cash escrow; certificate of deposit; and performance bond. Copies of the Zoning Ordinance may be obtained from the Administrative Office. Questions should be directed to the Department of Planning and Inspection. P/I Form No. 19 Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 81020 Applicant: Brooklyn Development Company Location: Shingle Creek Parkway and Xerxes Avenue North Request: Preliminary Plat The applicant requests preliminary plat approval to subdivide the property at the corner of Shingle Creek Parkway and Xerxes Avenue North which is presently described as Outlot E, Twin Cities Interchange Park Addition. The land is currently zoned R3 and is surrounded by Shingle Creek Parkway on the north, Xerxes Avenue North on the east, I-94 on the south, and "Old" Xerxes Avenue North on the west. The applicant requests rezoning to Cl of Lot 1 , Block 1 , Earle Brown Farm Estates lst Addition under Application No. 81022. Blocks 2, 3, 4 and 5 comprise Phase 1 of the proposed Earle Brown Farm Estates townhouse development. In addition, the plat designates five additional parcels as outlots A through E. The proposed plat shows a 60' right-of-way for the extension of Freeway Boulevard west and north to an intersection with Shingle Creek Parkway. It does not show, however, the dedication of additional right-of-way for Shingle Creek Parkway at the north tip of the property. (The intersection at Shingle Creek Parkway and 69th Avenue North may, in the future, be modified so that 69th Avenue, west of Shingle Creek Parkway, will lead directly into Shingle Creek Parkway rather than into 69th, east of Shingle Creek Parkway. Easements are indicated for the NSP power lines along the west edge of the property and for City storm sewer through the north end of Phase 1 . The proposed plat does not show an easement for public sidewalk which follows the south and southeast property lines of Outlot C of the preliminary plat to the extension of Freeway Boulevard. The preliminary plat should be revised to indicate this easement. It could also be revised to designate Outlot C as Outlot B and vice versa so that there is continuity in the sequence of outlots as they abut one to another. (This may be a concern of the County rather than the City) . It is not necessary that the sequence of construction follow the sequence of the outlots. In general , the plat seems to be in order and approval is recommended subject to the following conditions: 1 . The final plat is subject to approval by the City Engineer. 2. The final plat is subject to the ,prov ;s"Pons of Chapter 15 of the City Ordinances. 3. Homeowners Association documents for Phase 1 are subject to approval by the City Attorney prior to final plat approval. 4. The preliminary plat shall be revised prior to consideration by the City Council to indicate: additional right-of-way for Shingle Creek Parkway along the northwest portion of the property; a public sidewalk easement in the appropriate location; a water main easement in the appropriate location; and also the desig- nations of Outlots B and C shall be reversed. 4-23-81 Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 81020 Applicant: Brooklyn Development Company Location: Shingle Creek Parkway and Xerxes Avenue North Request: Preliminary Plat The applicant requests preliminary plat approval to subdivide 0utlot E, Twin Cities Interchange Addition into two blocks and one or more outlots of a new subdivision comprehending 100 townhouses and a commercial office use. The plat application accompanies the rezoning request of Application No. 81022 which concerns the land bounded by Shingle Creek Parkway on the north, Xerxes Avenue North on the east, I-94 on the south, and by "old" Xerxes Avenue North and the Earle Brown Patio Homes on the west. The land is presently zoned R3. However, application No. 81022 requests that a 5.6 acre portion at the corner of Xerxes Avenue North and Shingle Creek Parkway be rezoned to Cl . Staff have not yet received the preliminary plat survey or legal description at this time and can only make general observations about the application. A 60' side public street has been proposed extending westerly from Freeway Boulevard approximately 475' and then northerly approximately 500 feet to an intersection with Shingle Creek Parkway. The proposed street would serve primarily traffic drawn by development on the two blocks of the proposed subdivision and will not likely carry through traffic. A public sidewalk is proposed to run through the property from the intersection of "old" Xerxes and 67th Avenue North to the extension of Freeway Boulevard. The NSP power lines run along the west side of the property. Until further information is received and action taken on the requested rezoning, it is recommended that the application be tabled. 4-9-81 ► E CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION . 3 � k ��& Application No. 82008 Please Print Clearly or Type Street Location of Property 1300 Block on South Side of 69th Avenue North Legal Description of Property That part of Lot 2, Block 1 , Hi Crest Square Addition lying east of Registered Land Survey No. 1312. Owner Bergstrom Realty Company Address 3401 85th Avenue North Phone No. 425-5554 Applicant Kenneth L. Bergstrom, President, Bergstrom Realty Company Address 3401 85th Avenue North Phone No. 425-5554 Type of Request: X Rezoning Subdivision Approval Variance Site & Bldg. Plan Approval Special Use Permit Other: Description of Request: Rezoning from existing C-2 to R-3 for the purpose of constructing a Planned Unit Development of single family attached dwelling units. The applicant requests processing of this application and agrees to pay to the City of Brooklyn Center, within fifteen (15) days after mailing or delivery of the billing state- ment, the actual costs incurred by the City for Engineering, Planning and Legal expenses reasonably and necessarily required by the City for the processing of the application. Such costs shall be in addition to the application fee described herein. Withdrawal of the application shall not relieve the applicant of the obligation to pay costs incurred prior to withdrawal . Fee $ 175.00 A .1 scant Sign ure Receipt No. 57537 Date: PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Dates of P.G. Consideration: �--1�� 3/2;/ `z Approved Denied this !h day o IP C r L 19 t�o7 t� subject to the following conditions: C airman CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway 55430 PROCEDURES AND REQUIREMENTS FOR FILING APPLICATION FOR SITE AND BUILDING PLAN APPROVAL ?rior to submission of an application for plan review and approval, prospective applicants should arrange an informational meeting ith g the Plannin g Staff to discuss preliminary plans and to become familiarized with applicable ordinance ind policy provisions. three (3) copies of the. following documents and information shall be submitted, .it least 14 days prior to the date of the regular'CommisSion meeting, concurrent Frith filing t e application (required documents must be consistent with ordi- lance and policy provisions before an application may be accepted) : 1. A certified site survey drawing by a registered engineer or land surveyor showing pertinent existing condition, accurately dimensioned. 2.* An accurately scaled and dimensioned site plan indicating: a parking layouts including ng access provisions; b) 'designations and locations of accessory buildings; c) fences, walls or other screening, including heights and type of material; d) outside lighting provisions, . type and location; e) curbing. 3.* A landscape plan showing areas to be sodded or seeded; location, size and species of trees P and shrubbery. 4.* Building floor plans, elevations, sections and specifications, including materials proposed. 5.* Existing and proposed land elevations, drainage provisions, and utility provisions. o. Additional drawings, plans or information deemed necessary by the Secretary. *Must be prepared by a registered architect or person registered with the Stag Board of Registration for Architects, Engineers and Land Surveyors, and said drawings/plans shall be so certified: NOTE: Upon approval of plans by the Council and prior to issuance of permits, a Performance Agreement as to approved site improvements and a supporting finan- cial guarantee, in an amount to be determined by the City, are required. Accept• able financial instruments include cash escrow; certificate of deposit; and performance bond. Copies of the Zoning Ordinance may be obtained from the Administrative Office. Questions should be directed to the Planning and Inspection Department. Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 82008 Applicant: Bergstrom Realty Company Location: 1300 block, south side of 69th Avenue North Request: Rezoning This application needs little introduction. It has been reviewed by the Planning Commission at its February 11 and March 25, 1982 meetings and was reviewed by the Northeast Neighborhood Advisory Group on March 3, 1982. The recommendation of the Northeast Neighborhood Advisory Group and of the Planning Commission has been favorable, subject to submittal of an acceptable preliminary plat application. A preliminary plat for a 60 unit townhouse project has been submitted. Both the plat and the rezoning applications are recommended for approval . The Commission is referred to the attached draft resolution recommending approval of the rezoning and also to a memo from the Director of Planning and Inspections relating to amendment of the 1966 and 1980 Comprehensive Plans. A public hearing has been scheduled to receive comment from the public on the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment. i I y_ r Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 82008 Applicant: Bergstrom Realty Company Location: 1300 block of 69th Avenue North Request: Rezoning The applicant requests rezoning of a 7.5 acre tract of land lying east of the Humboldt Square Shopping Center from C2 (Commerce) to R3 (Townhouse) . The property in question is bounded by 69th Avenue (R5 across the street) and the City Well House No. 6 on the north, by single-family homes (R1 ) on the east, by the Hi Crest Apartments (R5) on the south and by the Humboldt Square Shopping Center (C2) on the west. This appli- cation was reviewed by the Planning Commission and a public hearing was held on February 11 , 1982. The Commission continued the public hearing, tabled consideration of the matter and referred it to the Northeast Neighborhood Advisory Group for review and comment. (The Commission's attention is directed to the February 11 , 1982 Plan- ning Commission minutes on pages 1 through 5 and also, the Planning Commission Inform- ation Sheet relating to that application for further information,) . The Northeast Neighborhood Advisory Group met to further review and comment on the matter at a meting which was held on March 3, 1982. A copy of the minutes of that meeting is attached for the Commission's review. The Neighborhood Advisory Group recommended to the Planning Commission that the R3 zoning be given a favorable con- sideration. This recommendation, however, is based upon the feeling that a conceptual plan proposed by the applicant is an acceptable use of the property. Their recom- mendation notes that a planned unit development should be approved as a platted de- velopment with FHA and VA approval with the intent that the residences be sold to their occupants; that a platting plan be developed before approval (approval of the rezoning) ; that the drainage for the neighborhood be provided for; and that a performance bond or a letter of credit be posted to guarantee the execution and com- pletion of the development. It seems that one of the main concerns of persons affected by this rezoning proposal is to assure that the conceptual plan be accomplished. The owner-occupied townhouse development seems acceptable while other uses allowed in an R3 zoning district may not be acceptable. The Commission's attention is directed to the Rezoning Evaluation Policy and Review Guidelines (Section 35-208, copy attached) which establishes the procedures for recommending and approving any rezoning action. It appears that a number of the guidelines can be met by this proposal , however, the rezoning would still be considered "spot zoning" if the City's Comprehensive Plan is not properly amended. Section 35-202 Subdivision 1 (a) of the Zoning Ordinance outlines the procedure for amending the Comprehensive Plan (copy attached) . Both the existing and the proposed Comprehensive Plans must be amended in order to accomplish the proposed rezoning. The existing plan recommends the designation of land at the southeast quadrant of 69th and Humboldt Avenues as the location for a centrally located neighborhood shopping center for the Northeast Neighborhood. In the proposed Comprehensive Plan, which has not yet been officially adopted by the City Council but has been approved for adoption by the Metropolitan Council , the Land Use Plan revisions map (Table 14 and Figure 1.5) designates this area as a future single-family residential area. The main reason for such a designation was the preliminary action taken by the Planning Commission and City Council in 1977 when Mr. Bergstrom then proposed to rezone the property from C2 to Rl . There is no dispute with the premise that there is no need to reserve this land as an area for a neighborhood shopping center. The Humboldt Square adequately serves this purpose and there is enough vacant commercial land elsewhere in the Northeast Neighborhood to serve future commercial development needs. 3-25-82 I Application No. 82008 continued The new Comprehensive Plan recommendation was directed primarily at eliminating the need for continuing the C2 designation of this property. Because the 1977 proposal seemed to be reasonable, the R1 designation was recommended. No major analysis, such as cost factors relating to the high water table, were taken into account at that time. If the Planning Commission is inclined to look favorably upon the rezoning request, they should direct the staff to prepare the necessary Comprehensive Plan amendments and establish a public hearing per Section 35-202, Subdivision l (a). Also if the Commission supports the Northeast Neighborhood Advisory Group recommendation to assure, as much as possible, an owner-occupied townhouse development, the applicant should be directed to prepare a preliminary plat of the property to be considered concurrently with any rezoning. As part of that preliminary plat, a drainage plan that would address the drainage problems would also have to be submitted. The rezoning of this property would not have to take effect until a final plat has been approved and filed with the County. The applicant would have to concur with this action and waive his right to appear before the City Council within 78 days of the date of referral of this application to the Planning Commission without a Planning Commission Application. Notices of this evening's meeting have been sent to abutting property owners and the public hearing has been continued from February 11 , 1982. It should be noted that a revised conceptual plan has also been submitted reducing the number of units from 64 to 60. A copy of that revised conceptual plan is attached for the Commission's review. 3-25-82 -2- . Planning Commission Information Sheet r Application No. 82008 Applicant: Bergstrom Realty Company Location: 1300 block of 69th Avenue North Request: Rezoning — The applicant requests rezoning f pp o o the 7.5 acre tract of land lying east of the q 9 Y 9 Humboldt Square Shopping Center from C2 (General Commerce) to R3 (Townhouse). The property is bounded by 69th Avenue North (R5 across the street) and the City Well House No. 6 on the north, by single-family homes (R1 ) on the east, by the Hi Crest apartments (R5) on the south, and by Humboldt Square Shopping Center (C2) on the west. The property was the subject of two previous rezoning requests in 1977 (to Rl) and 1979 (to R4) . The first request was given tentative approval by the City Council - subject to submission of an adequate screening and buffering plan to separate the residential development from the Humboldt Square Shopping Center to the west (Ordinance Section 35-412 requires a*35 foot buffer strip and 8' high opaque wall 9 when C2 uses abut Rl , R2, R3 uses at a property line) . That plan was never submitted and the rezoning request was ultimately withdrawn. In 1979, the request to rezone to R4 was withdrawn after a negative recommendation from the Planning Commission. The new Comprehensive Plan calls for the property in question to be zoned Rl for single-family residential development. One of the main reasons for this designation is to further policy #1 for the Northeast Neighborhood which states: "Make single- family detached housing the predominant character of the Northeast Neighborhood." Our best estimate of the current breakdown between attached housing and detached housing in the Northeast Neighborhood is: Detached Units 1276 (49%) Attached units* 1328 (51%) Total 2604 *includes townhouses This ratio is a slight improvement since the 1977 count of dwelling units in the Northeast Neighborhood, but still leaves the neighborhood short of being predominantly single-family detached residential in character. If owner-occupied attached units (39) are included with all detached housing (some of which are rental themselves) , the ratio is tipped slightly in favor of"single-family" housing: 1315 (50.5%) single family units vs. 1289 (49.5%) multi-family units. The balance of housing in the Northeast Neighborhood was a major issue in the Planning Commission's favorable recommendation of Application No. 77011 (to R1 ) and disfavorable recommendation of Application No. 79001 (to R4) . The reasons for denial of Application No. 79001 were contained in Planning Commission Resolution :No. 79-land are listed below: 1 . The proposed rezoning (to R4) is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan recommendation that single-family residential development be the predominant characteristic of the Northeast Neighborhood. 2. There is substantial vacant multiple residential zoned property in the Northeast Neighborhood. 3. There is no perceived public need or benefit in the proposal in light of the already large number of existing multiple residential structures in the immediate vicinity. 2-11-82 -1- +. Application No. 82008 continued 4. The proposed rezoning does not demonstrate merit beyond the interests of the owner of the property in question. It should be pointed out that since the recommendation on Application No. 79001 , the City has acquired a large tax-forfeited parcel of R4 zoned land north of 70th Avenue North, west of Highway 252. This is the only large parcel of vacant multi-family land in the neighborhood and will likely be used for expansion of Highway 252 right- of-way and other public purposes. Thus , there is no longer a substantial amount of vacant land in the Northeast Neighborhood for multi-family 'housing . It should also be noted that the most recent conceptual proposal for use of that land, prior to the City acquiring it, was for an R-3 type development. (Planning Commission Resolution Nos. 77-2, 77-3 and 79-1 are attached for the Commission's review) . A letter addressing the Zoning Ordinance Policy Statement and the Guidelines for Evaluating Rezonings has been submitted by Merila and Associates on behalf of the applicant (a copy of the letter and the guidelines is enclosed for the Commission's consideration) . The letter addresses the policy statement forbidding "spot zoning" by pointing out that the proposed rezoning would benefit the City of Brooklyn Center and the Brooklyn Center School District besides the property owner. Mr. Merila also points out that the R3 zoning is more compatible with the surrounding land uses than the R1 zoning. These two points are further expanded upon in the discussion of the guidelines. Mr. Merila also states that the owner intends to develop the property as a Planned Unit Development with owner-occupied townhouses clustered in pairs along the area adjacent to single family homes and in groups of four or six in areas adjacent to multi-family structures to the south and Humboldt Square Shopping Center to the west. Mr. Merida points out that almost 91% of all town- houses built (97% of all occupied are homestead properties) . This percentage excludes townhouses built for rent which amount to 50.5% of all townhouses built or partially built in Brooklyn Center (326 rental vs. 319 potentially owner-occupied). Mr. Merila states that there is no real demand for the land under its current C2 zoning because Humboldt Square meets the neighborhood's commercial center needs. Staff would certainly concur with this assessment and that is partly why the new Comprehensive Plan calls for a zoning change to residential . Mr. Merila also explains that development of the property for single-family homes is not econ- omically feasible because the cost of correcting a high water table problem on the property cannot be recouped from a 22 lot subdivision (the 1977 plan) , but can be from a planned unit development with more units. A conceptual plan for 64 townhouse units has been submitted. (This implies some density credit for tuck- under garages since the maximum normal density for a 7.5 acre parcel would be 60 units) Upon reviewing the material presented on behalf of the applicant, staff would agree with the contention that R3 zoning adjacent to Humboldt Square has advantages over R1 zoning. We would also acknowledge that the economic feasibility of de- veloping the property is improved with the development of more housing units. Though economic hardship is not considered a factor in variance requests, it may be a factor in rezonings if coupled with unique circumstances (the high water table) and appropriate locational criteria (i .e. more intense surrounding develop- ment) . The contention that a 64 unit townhouse development will help the Brooklyn Center School Dsitrict more than a 22 unit single-family development is very 9 Y p questionable in light of the fact that owner—occupied townhouse developments in the City have very few children. Staff also have some concern as to the ability to sell townhouses located adjacent to the Humboldt Square Shopping Center. Town- houses built west of Humboldt Avenue have been difficult to market because of surrounding intense land uses. Nor does it seem that additional townhouse density will help the sale of townhouses. Yet it does seem that single-family homes would be equally, if not more difficult, to sell in the same location. 2-11-82 -2- Application No- 82008 continued On balance, staff are neutral to the rezoning proposal . The land should be developed, and developed with an appropriate relationship to surrounding land uses. The con- ceptual plan takes these factors into account. Yet, an even greater variety in housing types, perhaps including single-family residences adjacent to the existing homes to the east, might be an equally feasible alternative. Rezoning of any of the land in question to a classification other than R1 would involve an amendment to the new Comprehensive Plan either before or after its adoption. As with all rezonings, it is recommended that the Commission, after holding a public hearing, table the proposal and refer it to the Northeast Neighborhood Advisory Group for review and comment. 2-11-82 -3- CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER 1 " %/ 7��, PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION . ' • Y Application No. 82016 Please Print Clearly or Type Street Location of Property 1300 Block on South Side of 69th Avenue North Legal Description of Property That part of Lot 2, Block 1 , Hi Crest Souare Ad ition lyin_o_____ east of Registered Land Survey No. 1312. Owner Realty Company Address 3401 85th Avenue North, Brooklyn Park, MN 55443 Phone No. 425-5554 Applicant Kenneth L. Bergstrom, President, Bergstrom Realty Company Address 3401 85th Avenue North, Brooklyn Park, MN 55443 Phone No. 425-5554 Type of Request: Rezoning X Subdivision Approval Variance Site & Bldg. Plan Approval Special Use Permit Other: Description of Request: Preliminary Plat for Subdividing the prnPrty intn 29 lntc and 6 outlots at this time, and the ultimate subdivision to a total of 61 lots. The subdivision is for the purpose of constructing a Planned Unit Development of single family attached dwelling units. The applicant requests process in of this application and agrees to pay to the City of Brooklyn Center, within fifteen 15) days after mailing or delivery of the billing state- ment the actual cost s incurred by the City for Engineering, Planning and Legal expenses reasonabl y and necessarily required by the City for the processing of the application. Such costs shall be in addition to the application fee described herein. Withdrawal of the application shall not relieve the applicant of the obligation to pay costs incurred prior to withdrawal . Fee $ 225.00 pp cants Signature Receipt No. 58126 Date: Z PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Dates of P.C. Consideration: 5 -�L Approved Denied this day of 14L% 198r'-- , subject to the following conditions: Nai T CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway 55430 PROCEDURES AND REQUIREMENTS FOR FILING APPLICATION FOR SITE AND BUILDING PLAN APPROVAL rior to submission of an application for plan review and approval, prospective pplicants should arrange an informational meeting with the Planning Staff to .iscuss preliminary plans and to become familiarized with applicable ordinance .nd policy provisions. 'hree (3) copies of the. following documents and information shall be submitted, .t least 14 days prior to the date of the regular'Commission meeting, concurrent -ith filing a application (required documents must be consistent with ordi- ,ance and policy provisions before an application may be accepted) : A certified site survey drawing by a registered engineer or land surveyor showing pertinent existing condition, accurately dimensioned. .* An accurately scaled and dimensioned site plan indicating: . . a) parking layouts including access provisions; b) designations and locations of accessory buildings; c) fences, walls or other screening, including heights and type of, material; d) outside lighting provisions,'. type and location; e) curbing. l.* A landscape plan showing areas to be sodded or seeded; location, size and species of trees and shrubbery. _.* Building floor plans, elevations, sections and specifications, including materials proposed. �.* Existing and proposed land elevations, drainage provisions, and utility provisions. �. Additional drawings, plans or information deemed necessary by the Secretary. *Must be prepared by a registered architect or person registered with the State 3oard of Registration for Architects, Engineers and Land Surveyors, and said trawings/plans shall be so certified: 1OTE: Upon approval of plans by the Council and prior to issuance of permits, 3 Performance Agreement as to approved site improvements and a supporting finan- :ial guarantee, in an amount to be determined by the City, are required. Accept- able financial instruments include cash escrow; certificate of deposit; and aerformance bond. .opies of the Zoning Ordinance may be obtained from the Administrative Office. 2uestions should be directed to the Planning and Inspection Department. Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 82016 Applicant: Ken Bergstrom Location: 1300 block on south side of 69th Avenue North Request: Preliminary Plat The applicant seeks preliminary plat approval to subdivide the land in the 1300 block on the south side of 69th Avenue North into 11 blocks and 6 outlots. The purpose of the plat is to set up individual lots for location of townhouses. The property is the subject of Application No. 82008 to rezone the property from C2 to R3. The plat creates a single large common area, to be described as Lot 1 , Block 1 , Hi Crest Square Estates. Blocks 2 through 11 contain 28 townhouse lots mostly along the east side of the development. Outlots A through F are more on the west side of the complex and will be replatted into 32 additional townhouse lots when construction is ready to begin on those units. Submitted along with the preliminary plat are grading and utility plans for the proposed development. The Planning Commission is referred to a memo from Jim Grube on these aspects. Briefly, the grading plan calls for a large pond on the west side of the development to receive the majority of the drainage from the site. There will also be pockets along the east and south sides of the site which will collect drainage to be conveyed by storm sewer ultimately in the City storm sewer in 67th Avenue North. Water and sanitary sewer will be brought in from 69th Avenue North. The applicant also proposes to loop the water system to a private water line serving the Humboldt Square Shopping Center. The proposed plat provides for 5' of additional right-of-way dedication along 69th Avenue North in line with the County's policy to bring the width of 69th Avenue North to 80' . No Homeowner's association documents have been submitted as yet. These must be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney prior to final plat approval . Altogether, the plat seems to be in order and approval is recommended, subject to at least the following conditions: 1 ) The final plat is subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. 2) The final plat is subject to the requirements of Chapter 15 of the City Ordinances. 3) Homeowner's association documents shall be subject to review and approval by the City Attorney prior to final plat approval . 4) Grading, drainage, utility and berming plans are subject to review and approval by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of permits. 4-15-82 CI I Y OF BRUUKLYN CiNTCR `;4 PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATIOiJ Application No. 82043 Please Print Clearly or Type Street Location of Property 1300 Block on south side of 69th Avenue North Legal Description of Property Outlot A. B, C, D, E and F of Hi Crest Square Estates Owner Bergstrom Realty Company Address 3401 85th Avenue North , Brooklyn Park, MN 55443 Phone No. 425-5554 Applicant Kenneth L. Bergstrom, President, Bergstrom Realty Company Address 3401 85th Avenue North, Brooklyn Park, MN 55443 Phone No. 425-5554 Type of Request: Rezoning X Subdivision Approval Variance Site & Bldg. Plan Approval Special Use Permit Other: Description of Request: Subdivision of 6 Outlots into 32 individual lots. "Hi Crest Square Estates 2nd Addition." The applicant requests processing of this application and agrees to pay to the City of Brooklyn Center, within fifteen (15) days after mailing or delivery of the billing state- ment, the actual costs incurred by the City for Engineering, Planning and Legal expenses reasonably and necessarily required by the City for the processing of the application. Such costs shall be in addition to the application fee described herein. Withdrawal of the application shall not relieve the applicant of the obligation to pay costs incurred prior to withdrawal . Fee $ 210.00 Applicant's-'Signature Receipt No. 59683 Date: G{z PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Dates of P.C. Consideration: -- Ll —g;-Z Approved V Denied this day y ° 19 ��subject to the following conditions : Od h a i ma CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway 55930 PROCEDURES AND REQUIREMENTS FOR FILING APPLICATION FOR SITE AND BUILDING PLAN APPROVAL rior to submission of an application for plan review and approval, prospective pplicants should arrange an informational meeting with the Planning Staff to iscuss preliminary plans and to become familiarized with applicable Aid policy PP le ordinance p y provisions. :free (3) copies of the. following documents and information shall be submitted, least 19 days prior to the date of the regular* Cornmission meeting, concurren ith filing the application (required documents must be consistent with ordi- ance and policy provisions before an application may be accepted) : A certified site survey drawing by a registered engineer or land surveyor showing pertinent existing condition, accurately dimensioned. . * An accurately scaled and dimensioned site plan indicating: a) parking layouts including access provisions; b) designations and locations of accessory , buildin s- g c) fences, walls or other screening, including heights and type of material d) outside lighting provisions, . type and location; e) curbing. . * A landscape plan showing areas to be sodded or seeded; location, size and species of trees and shrubbery. . * Building floor plans, elevations , sections and specifications, including materials proposed. Existing and proposed land elevations , drainage provisions, and utility provisions. Additional drawings, plans or information deemed necessary by the Secretary *Must be prepared by a registered architect or person registered with the Sta Ord of Registration for Architects, Engineers and Land Surveyors, and said lawings/plans shall be so certifieds Upon approval of plans by the Council and prior to issuance of permits, Performance Agreement as to approved site improvements and a supporting _al guarantee, in an amount to be determined by the Cit a required. Einar e financial instruments include cash escrow; certificateof deposit; andcceF c>rformance bond. c>pies of the Zoning Ordinance may be obtained from the Administrative Office. .uestibns should be directed to the Planning and Inspection Department. Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 82043 Applicant: Kenneth Bergstrom Location: 1300 block of 69th Avenue North Request: Preliminary Plat The applicant requests preliminary plat approval to subdivide into 32 townhouse lots the six remaining outlots (A, B,, C, D, E and F) in Hi Crest Square Estates. The new plat is to be called Hi Crest Square Estates 2nd Addition. The land in question lies within the R3 zoned property on the south side of the 1300 block of 69th Avenue North, directly east of Humboldt Square Shopping Center. The new plat does not change the property boundaries of the_common area for Hi Crest Square Estates (Lot 1 , Block 1). That is, the boundaries of Blocks 1 through 6 will be the same as the boundaries of the outlots of the original plat. The new plat provides for a drainage and utility easement across the corner of Lot 1 , Block 3 of the proposed 2nd Addition. This is basicly for the storm sewer line leading from the internal roadway (Fremont Place) to the holding pond on the west side of the site. The plat is fairly simple and appears to be in order. Approval is recommended, subject to the following conditions: 1 . The final plat is subject to review and approval .by the City Engineer. 2. The final plat is subject to the provisions of Chapter 15 of the City Ordinances. 3. The new plat shall be included in the same Homeowners Association as the original Hi Crest Square Estates Addition and the associ- ation documents shall be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney prior to final plat approval . 11-4-82 I, {I� , ! ! is Pl.lif6Pl lrlw; L0j jjfl ;.'.;IOfJ 11ITL 1,CA-1 JON Application No. 82045 Please Print C1 earl ar Type Street Location of Property 1300 block of 69th Avenue North Legal Description of Property Outlots A, B, C, D, E, and F (Hi Crest Square Estates 2nd Ad Lots 1 and 2, Block 4. Owner Kenneth Bergstrom g Address Bergstrom Realty Company - .3401 -85th Ave. N. Phone No. 425-5554 Applicant H. E. Homes,. Inc. Address 7240 Brooklyn Boulevard 55429 Phone No. 560-4122 Type of Request: Rezoning Subdivision Approval Variance x Site & Bldg. Plan Approval. Special Use Permit Other: Description of Request: To build townhouses. 4 The applicant requests processing of this application and agrees to pay to the City of Brooklyn Center, within fifteen (15) days after mailing or delivery of the billing state- went, the actual costs incurred by the City for Engineering, Planning and Legal expenses reasonably and necessarily required by the City for the processing of the application. Such costs shall be in addition to the application fee described herein. Withdrawal of the application shall not relieve the applicant of the obligation to pay costs incurred prior to withdrawal s ArtZy Fee $ 100.00 Applicants Signature 3 Receipt No. 59700 Date: October 1982 PLANNING COMMISSION RECO+NIMENDATION Dates of P.C. Consideration: f Approved VDenied this day of 19 9'-Z subject to the following conditions: f } i s hi rhw - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway 55430 PROCEDURES AND REQUIREMENTS FOR FILING APPLICATION FOR SITE AND BUILDING PLAN APPROVAL Prior to submission of an application for plan review and approval, prospective applicants` should arrange an informational meeting with the Planning Staff to discuss preliminary plans and to become familiarized with applicable ordinance and policy provisions. Three (3) copies of the following documents and information shall be submitted, - at least 14 days prior to the date of the regular Commission meeting, concurrent with . filing the application (required documents must be consistent with ordi- nance and policy provisions before an application may be accepted): 1. A certified site survey drawing by a registered engineer or land surveyor showing pertinent existing condition, accurately dimensioned. 2.* An accurately scaled and dimensioned site plan indicating: a) parking layouts including access provisions; b) designations and locations of accessory buildings; -- c) fences, walls or other screening, including heights and type of material; d) outside lighting provisions, . type and location; e) curbing. 3.* A landscape plan showing areas to be sodded or seeded; location, size and species of trees and sbrubbery. 4.* Building floor plans, elevations, sections and specifications; including materials proposed. S.* E x: , -. Ig 3„d p r Ji5 'G !and elavationc,., provisions, and L.t .lit;r p ovis i ohs. 6. Additional drawings, plans or information deemed necessary by the ,Secretary. *Must be prepared by a registered architect or person registered with the State �',,)a.rd of Registral.ion for Architects, Engineers and Land Surveyors, and said -1-awings/plans shall be so certified. NOTE: Upon approval of plans by the Council and prior to issuance of permits, Perforr-an:.:e Agreement as to approved s`i te -iinprovements and a supporting fi.nan- .a.a 1. guarantee, in an amount to be dvtermi.ned by the City, are required. Accept- i nts -unenus .i.nc:luee. cash escrow; cb�r i ficate of deposit; and -- formance bond. Copies of the Zoning Ordinance nay be obtained" from, the Administrative Office. Questions should be directed to the Planning and Inspection Department. P/I Form No. 19 Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 82045 Applicant: H. E. Homes Location: 1300 block of 69th Avenue North Request: Site and Building Plan The applicant requests building plan approval to construct 42 townhouse units in phase two of the Hi Crest Square Estates and two units in phase one. The land in question is zoned R3 and is bounded on the north by 69th Avenue North, on the west, by Humboldt Square Shopping Center, on the south by the Hi Crest Apartments and Emerson Chalet Apartments, and on the east by the City pump house and single-family homes. The site, landscaping, grading, and utility plans for this development were approved under Application No. 82023. The builder, H. E. Homes, is submitting building plans for Block 4, Hi Crest Square Estates which is one double-unit townhouse in phase one, and is also submitting building plans for the remainder of the townhouses in the development in phase two. The building plans are unchanged from those submitted for Phase I except that an additional design has been submitted for the L-shaped two-unit townhouses in Block 4 and Block 8 of the Hi Crest Square Estates 1st Addition. The plan for these units calls for double tuck-under garages, 4" horizontal lapboard siding and brick up to about 7' above ground level on the front wall facing the private street. Other walls will simply have the 4" lapboard siding. Decorative shutters are indicated around the second floor windows on the front elevation. The floor plans provide 960 sq. ft. of floor space on the upper level with the level split evenly between unfinished dwelling space and garage. Elevated outside wood decks are located off the dining rooms on the upper floor. Building plans for the other units are identical to those approved for the units in Phase I . Separate building plans for the four-unit clusters have not been submitted at this time, but will be the same as the six-unit plan without the two end units. Altogether, the plans appear to be in order and approval is recommended subject to at least the following conditions: 1 . The conditions pertaining to approval of Application No. 82023 (Phase I) ; see conditions attached) shall continue and shall apply to approval of Application No. 82045, with the exception of Condition No. 8 which has been fulfilled by staff. 11-4-82 • 1. Lui_lding plans are nuhject to review and approval by the Building Official with respect- to applicable codes prior to the issuance of permits. 2. Grading, drainage, utility and berming plans are subject to review and apr.)roval by the City Lngineer, prior to the issuance of permits; and specifically, should conform to the revisions and requirements set forth in the Assistant City Engineer's memo dated 6-14-82. 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 to.assure completion of approved site improve- ments for the entire development. 4. Any outside trash disposal facilities shall be appropriately screened from view. 5. Plan approval is exclusive of all signery which is subject to Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances. 6. B612 curb and gutter shall be provided around all parking and driving areas. 7. All areas regraded, but not developed according to plan shall be seeded to maintain adequate ground cover for dust control. 8. The Assistant City Engineer shall report to the City Council on how the proposed plan compares with other ponds on private developments in the City and on whether the proposed pond will fulfill its function as both a drainage control device and an aesthetic asset to the townhouse develop- ment, with an acceptable safety risk. 9. Plan approval acknowledges the proposed landscape treatment along the east side of the development as acceptable a screening in lieu of the ordinance required 4' high opaque fence. 10. The building plans shall be certified by a registered Minnesota Architect prior to the issuance of building permits if so required by the State Building Codes Division. 11. The site plans shall be amended to incorporate a system to supplement natural ground water inflow into the proposed pond thus, maintaining a constant water level elevation of 840 feet (U.S.G.S. Datum) . 12. The building plan for the six-unit buildings shall be as set forth in in the plans approved by the City Council on this date. Any departure from these plans shall be resubmitted to the City Council for approval. PLANNI[K-4 U('h,4`1IS'),ION APPLICAi IT Application No. 82027 Please Print Clearly or Ty e Street Location of Property N Legal Description of Property__ ,� '1�-y ,e,c Owner -�z y 13,ee-o ynJ L?�'rv��4:5-1e Address , 30 �,y i✓GG� G',e -� �,e,�w.gy Phone No. 4y0x//3 Applicant r Address Phone No. Type of Request: Rezoning Subdivision Approval Variance Site & Bldg. Plan Approval k Special Use Permit Other: k Description of Request: c7f- Aw f3 ' ?,g>' i ,er r3.i / / i 1/ �Pp�7v C ,17-V 41W el.,& f t The applicant requests processing of this application and agrees to pay to the City of Brooklyn Center, within fifteen (15) days after mailing or delivery of the billing state- ment, the actual costs incurred by the City for Engineering, Planning and Legal expenses reasonably and necessarily required by the City for the processing of the application. Such costs shall be in addition to the application fee described herein. Withdrawal of the application shall riot relieve the applicant vf,the obligation to pay costs incurred- prior to withdrawal . Pee $ Applicant's Signature Receipt No. Date: e, F PLANNING COMMISSION RECO*IENDATION Dates of P.C. Consideration: 3 Approved Denied this day of 19 subject to the i following conditions - t G- f Chairman - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 6 301 Shingle Crook Parkway 55430 PROCEDURES AND REQUIREMENTS FOR FILING APPLICATION ,F-OR SITE AND BUILDING FLAN APPROVAL - or to submission of an application for -plan review and approval, prospective -' licants should arrange an informational meeting with the Planning Staff to ;..scuss preliminary plans and to become familiarized with applicable ordinance policy provisions. :-xree (3) copies of the following documents and information shall be submitted, ":t least 14 days prior to the date of the regular Commission meeting, concurrent ,�Tth filing the application (required documents must be consistent with ordi- .iance and policy provisions before an application may be accepted) : 1. A certified site survey drawing by a registered engineer or land surveyor showing 'pertinent existing condition, accurately dimensioned. 2.* An accurately; scaled and dimensioned site plan indicating: a) parking layouts including access provisions; _ b) designations and locations of accessory buildings; c) fences, wall's or other screening, including heights and type of material; d) outside lighting provisions, .type and location; e) curbing. _ . A landscape plan showing- areas to be sodded or weeded; location, size and species of trees and shrubbery. 4.* Building floor plans, elevations, sections and specifications, "including materials proposed. .* ,'xi,st ng and prcposad land elevations, drainage provisions, and utility provisions. e. Additional drawings, plans or information deemed necessary by the Secretary. %Must be pre ar.ed by a registered architect or person registered with the State ,ard of Registration for Architects, Engineers and Land Surveyors,, and said :r.awings/plans small be so .certified. ,:X ". Upon approval of Volans by the <Council and prior to issuance of permits, `e :formance Z- yreement as to approved site impr_overeents and a supporting f�nan- __._ ;.Fl guarantee, in an aTti'iou It to be deterTnined i.y the City, are required. Accept- ;l Tc7 C -I St=,, ': . T3C 7 a Ci °� 2SCrC; ; certificate 7 deposit; and :?rte«+w"mance bond. ;.opie s of the "Zoe— ng' Ordinance :may ire obtained. from the �dmini s trative Office. a-�uestions shov_ld be directed to the Planning and Inspection Department. P/I Form No. 19 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION - Application No. 82004 Please Print Clearly or Type Street Location of Property West of Shingle Creek Pkwy. at 67th Legal Description of Property RLS 1537 Tracts B, C, D Owner Brooklyn Investment Company Address 6707 Shingle Creek Pkwy. . Brooklyn Center Phone No. RAn_219n Applicant Brooklyn Development Company Address 6707 Shingle Creek Pkwy. , Brooklyn Center Phone No. 560-2380 Type of Request: Rezoning Subdivision Approval Variance Site & Bldg. Plan Approval Special Use Permit Other: Rep Iat. Description of Request: The applicant requests processing of this application and agrees to pay to the City of Brooklyn Center, within fifteen (15) days after mailing or delivery of the billing state- ment, the actual costs incurred by the City for Engineering, Planning and Legal expenses reasonably and necessarily required by the City for the processing of the application. Such costs shall be in addition to the application fee described herein. Withdrawal of the application shall not relieve the applicant of the oVli ion .t pay costs incurred prior to withdrawal . 1 Fee $ 75.00 ApplicaFt s Signature Receipt No'. 57324 Date. December 16, 1981 i PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Dates of P.C. Consideration: Approved Denied this day of M44-_-� , 19� subject to the . following conditions: 00 rman CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, :MINNESOTA 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway 55430 PROCEDURES AND REQUIREMENTS FOR FILING APPLICATION FOR SITE AND BUILDING PLAN APPROVAL (Prior to submission of an application for plan review and approval, prospective 'applicants should arrange an informational meeting with the Planning Staff to discuss preliminary plans and to become familiarized with applicable ordinance and policy provisions. Three (3) copies of the. following documents and information shall be submitted, at least 14 days prior to the date of the regular'-Commission meeting, concurrent with filing the application (required documents must be consistent with ordi- nance and policy provisions before an application may be accepted) : l. A certified site survey drawing; by a registered engineer or land 'surveyor showing pertinent existing condition, accurately dimensioned. 2.* An accurately scaled and dimensioned site plan indicating: . .. a) parking layouts including access provisions,- - -- - b) designations and locations of accessory buildings; c) fences, walls or other screening, including heights and type of material; d) outside lighting provisions, . type and . location; -. - e) curbing. 3.* A landscape plan showing areas to be sodded or seeded; location, size and species of trees and shrubbery. '4.* Building floor plans, elevations, sections and specifications, including materials proposed. 5.* Existing and proposed land elevations, drainage provisions, and utility provisions. 6.- Additional drawings, plans or information deemed necessary by the Secretary. *Must be prepared by a registered architect or person registered with the State Board of Registration for Architects, Engineers and Land Surveyors, and said drawings/plans shall be so certified. NOTE: Upon approval of plans by the Council and prior to issuance of permits, a Performance Agreement as to approved site improvements and a supporting finan- cial guarantee, in an amount to be determined by the City, are requ-i red. Accept- able financial instruments include cash escrow; certificate of deposit; , dr performance bond. Copies of the .Zoning Ordinance may be obtained from the Administrative Office. Questions should be directed to the Planning and Inspection Department. Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 82004 Applicant: Brooklyn Development Company Location: 67th & Shingle Creek Parkway Request: Replat The applicant requests preliminary plat approval of a proposed R.L.S. to subdivide into four tracts (A, B, C, D) the land presently described as Tracts B, C and D, R.L.S. No. 1537. The land in question is bounded by Shingle Creek Parkway on the east, by Freeway Boulevard on the south, by the Shingle Creek right-of-way on the west, and by the MTC bus garage and Spec. Industrial Bldg. No. 9 on the north. The property is zoned I-1 and is vacant for the most part, except for Speculative Industrial Bldg. No. 11 , located on the land to be designated Tract A. Tract B is the proposed site for Spec. Bldg. No. 10. Tract C is to be used for off-site accessory parking by surrounding developments ments and Tract D is a vacant tract with no firm development presently planned. The land areas of the respective tracts are as follows: Land Area Tract A 4.23 acres Tract B 4.44 acres Tract C 1 .82 acres Tract D 24.22 acres Total 34.71 acres The proposed plat provides that there be a driveway easement along the north side of Tracts A and B so that vehicles delivering to the Spec. 9 Bldg. to the north may share common driveway space. Access to Tracts B and C, which have no frontage on public right-of-way, will be ensured by cross access easements filed with all properties contained in R. L. S. No. 1537 (which includes Spec. 9) . A storm sewer easement is proposed extending westerly from about 67th Avenue North across Tracts A and B to the northwest corner of Tract D where the easement widens from 20' to 40' until terminating at the Shingle Creek right-of-way. Approval of the proposed R. L. S. should be contingent on completion of certain work sought by the Engineering Department. This work includes the filing of an easement document, submission of an as-built utility survey and construction of a drainage Swale across Tract D. The Engineering Department also has concerns re- garding the regrading of soil on Tract D. The Planning Commission is referred to the attached memo for a discussion of these concerns. The plat, as submitted, is acceptable and approval is recommended, subject to at least the following conditions: I . The final plat is subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. 2. The final plat is subject to the requirements of Chapter 15 of the City Ordinances. 3. Tract-C shall be legally encumbered to provide parking for develop- ment on Tracts A and B. such encumbrance to be filed with the final plat at the County prior to issuance of building permits for Spec. 10. 4. The performance guarantee submitted to ensure completion of site improvements on Tract B, R. L. S. No. 1537 shall be retained until completion of all parking lot improvements on the proposed Tract C are completed in accordance with approved plans and ordinance requirements. 5. Approval of the plat constitutes a waiver of the normal ordinance re- quirements of frontage on a public street for Tract d C in liaht of the cross access agreements governing. all tracts within at a proposed R.L.S. and Tract A of R.L.S. No. 1537. 3-11-82 CITY 'OF BROOKLYN CENTFf; .. PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION Application No. 83042 Please Print Clearly or Type Street Location of Property 66th and Xerxes Legal Description of Property Outlot G, Twin Cities Interchange Park Owner Robert D. Welty Address 4818 Overlook Lake Circle, Bloomington, Minn. Phone No. 888-2089 _ Applicant Same Address Phone No. Type of Request: Rezoning X' Subdivision Approval Variance Site & Bldg. Plan Approval Special Use Permit Other: Description of Request: 'Application for Subdivision Approval (three lots) Dee Welty Addition. The applicant requests processing of this application and agrees to pay to the City of Brooklyn Center, within fifteen (15) days after mailing or delivery of the billing state- ment, the actual costs incurred by the City for Engineering, Planning and Legal expenses reasonably and necessarily required by the City for the processing of the application. Such costs shall be in addition to the application fe describe d herein. Withdrawal of the application shall not relieve the applicant of_, lig6tion to pay costs incurred prior to withdrawal . Fee $ 65.00 App is t s Signature Receipt No. 61990 Date: o� PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Dates of P.C. Consideration: Approved /`� Denied this day of 19 O'7 , subject to the PP _L5_ following conditions: V, C an - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway 55430 PROCEDURES AND REQUIREMENTS FOR FILING APPLICATION FOR SITE AND BUILDING PLAN APPROVAL Prior to submission of an application for plan 'review and approval, prospective applicants should arrange an informational meeting with the Planning Staff to discuss preliminary plans and to become familiarized with applicable ordinance and policy provisions. Three (3) copies of the following documents and information shall be submitted, at least 1s prior to the date of the' regular Commission meeting, concurrent with filing the application (required documents must be consistent with ordi- nance and policy provisions before an application may be accepted) : 1. A certified site survey drawing by a registered engineer or land surveyor showing pertinent existing condition, accurately dimensioned., 2.* An accurately scaled and dimensioned site plan indicating: a) parking layouts including access 'provisions; b) designations and locations of accessory: buildings; c) fences, walls or other screening, including heights and type of material; d) outside lighting provisions, type and location; e) curbing. 3.* A landscape plan showing areas to be sodded 'or seeded; location, size and species of trees and shrubbery. 4.* Building floor plans, elevations, sections and specifications, including materials proposed. 5.* Existing and proposed land elevations, drainage provisions, and utility provisions. f. Additional drawings, plans or information deemed necessary by the Secretary. 1 *Must be prepared by a registered architect or person registered with the State 3oard of Registration for Architects, Engineers and Land Surveyors, and said .1rawings/plans shall be so certified. NOTE: Upon approval of plans by the Council and prior to issuance of permits, a Performance Agreement as to approved site improvements and a supporting finan- cial guarantee, in an amount to be determined by 'the City, are required. Accept- able financial instruments include cash escrow; . certificate of deposit; and performance bond. , Copies of the Zoning Ordinance may be obtained from the Administrative Office. Questions should be directed to the Planning and Inspection Department. P/I Form No. 19 Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 83042 Applicant: Robert D. Welty Location: 66th and Xerxes Avenue North Request: Preliminary Plat The applicant requests preliminary plat approval to subdivide into three lots the parcel of land at the southwest quadrant of I-94 and Xerxes Avenue North. The property in question is zoned RI and is bounded on the north by I-94,on the east by Xerxes Avenue North, on the south by public right-of-way between Xerxes Avenue North and the old Xerxes Avenue North right-of-way, and on the west by "old" Xerxes and a single-family residence. The property was recently acquired at an auction of tax-forfeited property. The existing parcel is described as Outlot G, Twin Cities Interchange Park Addi- tion. An outlot is unbuildable by definition under the City's Subdivision Ordi-, nance. The proposed legal description is Lots 1 , 2, and 3, Block 1 , Dee Welty Addition. The existing parcel is 33,390 sq. ft. The new parcels have the following characteristics: Legal Description Area Frontage Width Average Depth Lot 1 12,152 s.f. 20' 98' 125' Lot 2 9,500 s.f. 61 ' 75' 114' Lot 3 11 ,738 s.f. 148' 148' 80' The proposed lots meet ordinance requirements except for lot depth on Lot 3 and frontage on Lot 1 . A separate application (No. 83043) has been filed requesting a variance from these provisions. All three lots have sufficient buildable area to locate a normal residence and two-car garage within required setbacks. The setback off Xerxes Avenue North is 25.', from I-94, 10' (because of presence of noise wall ). The setback from "old" Xerxes Avenue North from which the lots will gain access is superseded by an NSP power line easement which is 55.5' wide over Lot 1 and 35.5' wide over Lots 2 and 3. The street serving these lots is only a half-street (20' wide paved area) al- though there is 50' of right-of-way. Both 66th AVenue North and Quarles Road, which are the two nearest cross streets, also have 50' rights-of-way with full size(30' wide) streets. Water and sewer are available in "old" Xerxes Avenue North, but no service leads have been extended to the property line. City staff recommend that the existing half-street be widened to a full 30' width, allowing for 10'wide boulevards. A subdivision agreement establishing responsibility for public improvements and assessing costs will be required. Subject to approval of Application No. 83043, the plat generally appears to be in order and approval is recommended, subject to at least the following conditions: I . The final plat is subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. 2. The final plat is subject to the provisions of Chapter 15 of the City ordinances. 3. The applicant shall enter into a subdivision agreement with the City stipulating the widening of "old" Xerxes to a full street width and extension of public utilities to the respective lots. 8-11-83 CITY 'OF BROOKLYN CENTER PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION Application No. 83043 Please Print Clearly or Type Street Location of Property 66th and Xerxes Avenue Nnrth Legal Description of Property Outlot G. Twin Cities Interchange Park Owner- Robert D. Welty Address 4818 Overlook Lake Circle Bloomington 5/3 7 Phone No. 888-2089 Applicant same Address Phone No. Type of Request: Rezoning Subdivision Approval X Variance Site & Bldg. Plan Approval Special Use Permit Other: Description of Request: Variance from Section 15-106 regarding lot depth (Lot 3) I and also frontage on Lot 1 . The applicant requests processing -of this application and agrees to pay to the City of Brooklyn Center, within fifteen (15) days after mailing or delivery of the billing state- ment, the actual costs incurred by the City for Engineering, Planning and Legal expenses reasonably and necessarily required by the City for the processing of the application. Such costs shall be in addition to the application fee described herein. Withdrawal of the application shall not relieve the applicant of th obligation to pay costs incurred prior to withdrawal . Fee $50.00 plicant s Signature Receipt No. 61990 Date: i PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Dates of P.C. Consideration: Approved Denied this day of JAI 19 , subject to' the following conditions: Chariftan - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway 55430 PROCEDURES AND REQUIREMENTS FOR FILING APPLICATION FOR SITE AND BUILDING PLAN APPROVAL Prior- to submission of an application for plan review and approval, prospective applicants should arrange an informational meeting with the Planning Staff to discuss preliminary plans and to become familiarized with applicable ordinance and policy provisions. Three (3) copies of the following documents and information shall be submitted, at least 14 days prior to the 'date of the: regular Commission meeting, concurrent with filing the application (required documents must be consistent with ordi- nance and policy provisions before an application may be accepted) : 1. A certified site survey drawing by a registered engineer or land surveyor showing pertinent existing condition, accurately dimensioned. 2.* An. accurately scaled and dimensioned site plan indicating: a) parking layouts including access provisions; b) designations and locations of accessory buildings; c) fences, walls or other screening, including heights and type of material; d) outside lighting provisions, type and location; e) curbing. 3.* A landscape plan showing areas to be sodded 'or seeded; location, size and species of trees and shrubbery. 4.* Building floor plans, elevations, sections and specifications, including materials proposed. 5.* Existing and proposed land elevations, drainage provisions, and utility provisions. 6. Additional drawings, plans or information deemed necessary by the Secretary. *Must be prepared by a registered architect or person registered with the State Il Board of Registration for Architects, Engineers and Land Surveyors, and said drawings/plans shall be so certified. NOTE: Upon approval of plans by the Council and prior to issuance of permits, a Performance Agreement as to approved site improvements and a supporting finan- cial guarantee, in an amount to be determined by 'the City, are required. -Accept- able financial instruments include cash escrow; . certificate of deposit; and performance bond. Copies of the Zoning Ordinance may be obtained from the Administrative Office. Questions should be directed to the Planning and Inspection Department. P/I Form No. 19 Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 83043 Applicant: Robert D. Welty Location: 66th and Xerxes Avenue North Request: Variance The applicant reqests a variance from Section 15-106 of the Subdivision Ordinance (attached) to allow a lot with an average depth of 80' rather than the required 110' and to allow a lot with only 20' of street frontage rather than the required 60' . The lots in question are Lots l (frontage) and 3 (depth) of the proposed Dee Welty Addition ( see Application No. 83042). The land in question is zoned R1 and is bounded on the north by I-94, on the east by Xerxes Avenue North, on the south by right-of-way extending between Xerxes and the "old" Xerxes Avenue North right-of- way, and on the west by "old" Xerxes and a single-family residence. The applicant has submitted a letter (attached) in which he addresses the Standards for a Subdivision variance (also attached). He points out that the existing parcel has ample area and street frontage for the three proposed lots, but that the variances are needed to obtain an aesthetic configuration of the lot lines. He states that development of the parcel with less than three lots would "seriously deprive the petitioner of his right to fully realize the best investment standards of which he is entitled." He states that the improvement costs would be sub- stantially the same whether 1 , 2 or 3 lots are developed. Finally, he states that there would be no detrimental effect to the public welfare; rather the public would benefit from an increased tax base. He notes there would be no 9 reater cost maintaining the street if the variance is granted. The Subdivision Ordinance provides that the City Council may grant a variance when, in its opinion, an undue hardship may result from strict compliance. To grant such a variance, the Council must 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. The parcel in question, Outlot G, Twin Cities Interchange Park Addition, was created in 1967 when the alignment of the Xerxes Avenue bridge and Xerxes Avenue North right-of-way were dedicated. It is apparently a remnant parcel from the original Earle Brown Farm which could not be incoporated into the Industrial Park because of the alignment of the freeway. The power line easement running along the west side of the property was included in the original 1967 plat. It should be noted that there were a number of parcels created as outlots in the Twin Cities Interchange Park Addition plat, most of which were quite large. The fact that the parcels were designated as outlots did not necessarily mean that they were too small to be developed. 8-11-83 _1_ Application No. 83043 continued The area of the parcel is 33,390 sq.ft. more than large enough for three buildable lots. The buildable area outside the NSP easement and other setbacks is large enough to accommodate normal sized dwellings on each of the three lots. It should be noted that a variance from the zoning requirement for 30% of lot area to be in rear yard would be required on Lot 1 and possibly on Lot 3. Approval of this variance would certainly imply that the configuration of Lots 1 and 3 and the presence of the power line easement create a hardship in terms of trying to meet zoning requirements for the placement of structures. Staff believe such a hard- ship would certainly exist for Lot 1 and possibly for Lot 3. In general , we believe that the proposed lots are reasonable in that they provide adequate width and lot area and buildable area. It would appear unreasonable to deny the three lots in light of the circumstances surrounding the existing parcel . As to enjoyment of property rights, we do not believe (as the applicant apparently does) that the Subdivision Ordinance guarantees anyone the best possible return on investment. How much money someone makes or loses on real estate investments is not a concern of the Subdivision Ordinance. What is a concern is that a given area of property should be subdividable into a reasonable number of parcels without being unduly restricted by the regulations in the Subdivision Ordinance. We believe three lots is a reasonable subdivision of this parcel and may be ap- proved by variance Cwhether or not the owner makes money on the deal ). We also agree that there should be no adverse impact on surrounding property. Although some people in the neighborhood may have become accustomed to using this land in a recreational manner, the surrounding owners really have no basis to prohibit development of the property for three single-family homes. Regarding precedent, we should note that lot variances have generally been ap- proved if: 1 . The variance(s) have been minimized to the maximum extent possible. 2. There is no excess land available on adjacent lots to meet the strict letter of the ordinance. 3. The proposed lot or lots meet at least two of the requirements for lot width, depth, and area, especially lot area. In this case, Lot 3 has been made as large as possible and Lot 2 kept to the mini- mum size as a means of maximizing buildable area and lot depth on Lot 3. The frontage variance has not been minimized, however. A different configuration of property lines was originally submitted which provided 60' of frontage for both Lot 1 and Lot 2, but the side property lines would have slanted in front of prospective building sites making for a very confusing arrangement. Staff felt that a frontage variance was preferable to such an arrangement. As to excess land on neighboring lots, there is extra land on the lot to the west; but the variances in question do not pertain to a lack of area. Finally, two of the lots in question meet the width, depth, and area requirement of the Sub- division Ordinance. One lot meets width and area, but no't depth. We -feel. this, arrangement- is in' keeping with previous variances. In conclusion, staff recommend that the variance application be granted on the grounds that the standards for a variance are met in this case. A public hearing on this application has been scheduled and notices have been sent. 8-11-83 -2- CITY OF BROOKLYN CFNTER PLANNING COt�1 s`.iSi f4 APPLICATION Application No. 83037 Please Print Clearly or Type Street Location of Property I-94 and Brooklyn Boulevard (southwest corner) Legal Description of Property Lot 1, Block 1, Northgate Owner James Pearson Address - 3528 Irving Avenue South Phone No. 823-3370 Applicant Cramer, Pearson, Samuelson - Cramer Company Address 5500 Lincoln Drive - Edina 55436 Phone No. 935-8482 Type of Request: Rezoning Subdivision Approval Variance Site & Bldg. Plan Approval X Special Use Permit Other: Description of Request: Special Use Permit for office Condominiums in an R5 district. The applicant requests processing of this application and agrees to pay to the City of Brooklyn Center, within fifteen (15) days after mailing or delivery of the billing state- ment, the actual costs incurred by the City for Engineering, Planning and Legal expenses reasonably and necessarily required by the City for a rocessing Qf. the application. Such costs shall be in addition to the applicati fe describe a in. Withdrawal of the application shall not relieve the applican of oblig o o pay costs incurred prior to withdrawal . Fee $ 50.40 C Applicant' Signature Receipt No. 61781 te: d PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Dates of P.C. Consideration: H--563 T(*a c -3 Approved ZDenied this day-of U491- 19 ubject to the following conditions: C airman - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - y,,n,- CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MIN14ESOTA 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway 55430 PROCEDURES AND REQUIREMENTS FOR FILING APPLICATION FOR SITE AND BUILDING PLAN APPROVAL Prior to submission of an application for plan review and approval, prospective applicants should arrange an informational, meeting with the Planning Staff to discuss preliminary plans and to.become familiarized with applicable ordinance and policy provisions. Three (3) copies of the following documents and information shall be submitted, at least 14 days prior to the date of the regular Commission meeting, concurrent with filing the application (required documents must be consistent with ordi- nance and policy provisions before an application may be accepted): 1. .A certified site survey drawing by a registered engineer or land surveyor showing pertinent existing condition, accurately dimensioned. 2.* An accurately scaled and dimensioned site plan indicating: a) parking layouts including access provisions; b) designations and locations of .accessory buildings; c) fences, walls or other screening, including heights and type of material d) outside lighting provisions, type and location; e) curbing. 3.* A landscape plan showing areas to- be sodded or seeded; location, size and species of trees and shrubbery. 4.* Building floor plans, elevations, sections and specifications, including materials proposed. 5.* Existing and proposed land elevations, drainage provisions, and utility provisions. 6. Additional drawings, plans or information deemed necessary by the Secretary. *Must be prepared by a registered architect or person registered with the State Board of Registration for Architects, Engineers and Land Surveyors, and said drawings/plans shall be so certified. NOTE: Upon approval of plans by the Council and prior to issuance of permits, a Performance Agreement as to approved site improvements and a supporting finan- cial guarantee, in an amount to be determined by the City, are required. Accept- able financial instruments include cash escrow; certificate of deposit; and performance bond. Copies of the Zoning Ordinance may be obtained from the Administrative Office. Questions should be directed to the Planning and Inspection Department. P/I Form No. 19 Pl(nning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 83037 Applicant: Cramer Company Location: I-94 and Brooklyn Boulevard Request: Special Use Permit, Site and Building Plan This application involves the land at the southwest corner of I-94 and Brooklyn Blvd. and was reviewed by the Planning Commission on July 14, 1983. The action at that time was to table the application and continue the public hearing. As the Commis- sion probably recalls, this application is for an office park on land that is zoned R5 (office uses are allowed by special use permit in the R5 zone) . The complex would contain 20 one-storey office units at approximately 1 ,000 sq. ft. each. The Commission is also probably aware that the granting of a special use permit for this proposed use would run counter to the recommendation of the Comprehensive Plan for this area of the Boulevard (the current Plan recommends mid-density residential , or townhouse, use for this location) . Staff have, therefore, prepared a draft Com- prehensive Plan amendment to allow office or mid-density residential development on an interchangeable basis under the Plan. A public hearing to consider such an amendment has been called for the August 4, 1983 meeting. Action on the Plan amend- ment is recommended prior to action on the special use permit application. During the last 3 weeks, the applicant has held one informational meeting with residents of the neighborhood (see summary of meeting attached). The applicant has informed us that, aside from the access question, the residents raised concerns that the development be fenced off where fences do not already .exist,'-that`berming not block existing drainage patterns, and that parking lot lighting not produce glare into the neighborhood. The applicant has expressed willingness to address these concerns. Concerns regarding access and traffic have been expressed by neighboring residents along Brooklyn Boulevard. Essentially, they argue that the traffic resulting from the proposed use would have a detrimental effect on their property. Certainly the proposed use will add to traffic on Brooklyn Boulevard, but the total amount gener- ated will be an insignificant fraction of the total traffic on Brooklyn Boulevard. It should also be noted that, under the R5 zoning, the 4.48 acre site could support up to 72 apartment units which would likely generate considerably more traffic and have a greater visual impact on the surrounding neighborhood. Owner-occupied residential , such as townhouse, is made difficult by the freeway abutment, though this could be mitigated by extension of the noise wall . In short, it is felt that normally permitted uses in this zoning district would generate comparable or greater traffic than the proposed use. We have asked for comments from MnDOT regarding access to this site. The following are the comments received as of August 1, 1983: 1. Access to site should be limited to right turn in and out. 2. TH.16-2should be widened to include a right turn lane for turns into property: access should be 32' radii . 3. The median should be extended 100' ± southerly. 4. Proposed mounding should be placed so as not to interfere with sight lines. 5. Storm sewer in TH 152 has some capacity available, but a review of the plans is necessary. Staff have also received comment from the owner of the lot immediately south of the office complex. He contends that the value of his property (which he presently rents out) will be adversely affected by the proposed development, particularly the location of the access to the development. This concern and the concerns regarding 8-4-83 -1- Application No. 83037 continued traffic congestion do raise issues relating to Standards (b) and (d) from the Standards for a Special Use Permit (attached) . Staff certainly recognize that the proposed access is not ideal . A better situation would be obtained if the two lots to the south along Brooklyn Boulevard were acquired and the access shifted to the south. However, even though the proposed development is a special use and subject to the standards contained in Section 35-220, there are reasons for accepting the access as proposed. One is that the property has a legal right to access on Brooklyn Boulevard. Secondly, the traffic impact of the proposed use is no greater and perhaps less than the traffic which would be generated by permitted .uses not subject to the standards. Third, there is a private covenant °on the three lots south of the site in question which prohibits commercial use of those properties. A developer using those properties for a commercial access would, therefore, be open to a lawsuit imposing the sanctions of the private covenant. Fourth, the proposed median exten- sion in Brooklyn Boulevard should mitigate the traffic problems caused by the access to the new development. Finally, to require that other properties be ' acquired to improve the position of the access would tend to prejudice negotiations for the property in favor of existing owners. While we would prefer an access further to the south, we do not believe the proposed access is unacceptable. Regarding Standard (b), we do not believe the proposed access will have a noticeable effect on property values if it is located 15' north of the common property line with the parcel to the south and if it is a right-in/right-out access. The proposed use represents an insignificant increase in the traffic on Brooklyn Boulevard. The location of the access 15' north of the residential property to the south is all that is required by ordinance and all that should be sought in lieu of the location of the freeway exit ramp. The applicant has indicated the desire to have the office complex a condominium. Platting or compliance with the State Condominium Act is required to accomplish this. In general and in light of the available alternatives, we feel that the Standards for a Special Use Permit are met in this case. Approval is therefore recommended, subject to at least the following conditions: 1 . The special use permit is subject to all applicable codes, ordinances, and regulations and any violation thereof shall be grounds for revocation. 2. Opaque fencing shall be installed along property lines abutting neigh- borifig residences where none presently exist. Where fences do exist, a dense row of shrubbery shall be planted and maintained. 3. The median in Brooklyn Boulevard shall be extended 100' to prevent turns into and out of the proposed ,complex. Said median extension shall be the responsibility of the applicant under permit from the MN/DOT. The median extension shall be approved by MNIDOT prior to the issuance of building permits and construction of the median shall be in conjunction with construction of the office complex. 4. Medical occupancy of the office complex shall be limited by the parking available on the site or shown on a proof-of-parking plan to be sub- mitted by the applicant. 8-4-83 -2- 1 Application No. 83037 continued 5. The applicant acknowledges that no access to this site from Indiana/66th Avenue North (to the west of the site) shall be granted now or in the future. 6. Building plans are subject to review and approval by the Building Official with respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance of permits. 7. Grading, drainage, utility and berming plans are subject to review and approval by the City Engineer, prior to the issuance of permits. 8. 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 to assure completion of approved site improve- ments including median construction on Brooklyn Boulevard. 9. Any outside trash disposal facilities and rooftop mechanical equipment shall be appropriately screened from view. 10. 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. 11. An underground irrigation system shall be installed in all landscaped areas to facilitate site maintenance. 12. Plan approval is exclusive of all signery which is subject to Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances. 13. B612 curb and gutter shall be provided around all parking and driving areas. 8-4-83 -3- • Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 83037 Applicant: Cramer Company Location: Brooklyn Boulevard and I-94 (southwest corner) Request: Site and Building Plan/Special Use The applicant requests site and building plan and special use permit approval to construct an office condominium complex at the southwest quadrant of I-94 and Brooklyn Boulevard. The parcel in question is zoned R5 and is bounded by an I-94 exit ramp on the north, by Brooklyn Boulevard on the east, and by single- family residences on the south and west. Office uses are a special use in the R5 zone. As the Planning Commission is aware, the recommendation of the Comprehensive Plan for this area of the Boulevard is for mid-density residential development (ie.townhouses) . In order to issue a special use permit for office use on this parcel, it is felt that an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan must be adopted allowing office uses within areas recommended for mid-density residential (and vice versa) . Such an amendment has been discussed by the Planning Commission and a draft amendment is attached for its consideration. A public hearing to consider this amendment to the Comprehensive Plan has been scheduled for the Planning Commission's study meeting on July 28, 1983. The proposed use consists of five separate buildings with a total of 20 office units at roughly 1,000 sq. ft. of floor space per unit. The complex provides a total of 21,400 sq. ft. of office space which, at the general office formula, (one space/ 200 s.f. gross floor area) requires 107 parking spaces. A minimum of 110 have been provided on the plan and staff have asked the applicant to provide addi- tional spaces to allow for more medical uses which have a more stringent parking requirement (one space/150 s.f. gross floor area) . Access to the site would be from a single driveway on Brooklyn Boulevard. No access is proposed from Indiana Avenue North at the northwest corner of the site. The plan shows an extended median in Brooklyn Boulevard which would allow the development to have right-in/right-out access only. Such a median extension would require a permit from the State. Although the median extension is shown on the plan, we recommend that it be included as a condition of approval. The landscape plan for the site calls for sod in all landscaped areas. Under- ground irrigation has not been noted on the landscape plan; however, it is noted in the site work specifications which have been submitted with the plans. Section 35-411 of the Zoning Ordinance requires screening when Cl uses abut RI, R2 or R3 zoned property as is the case along the south and west sides of this develop- ment. When this screening is fulfilled' by a fence, it is to be 4' high. No fencing is proposed. There is a fairly continuous row of plantings along the west property line, but not along the south property line. Staff would recommend that dense vegetation be planted where private fences already exist and that 4' high fencing be provided where no fencing exists. Proposed plantings include a wide variety of shade trees (35 total trees) , decorative trees (37), conifers (24) , shrubs (162) and flowers (230) . As to drainage, the entire site drains toward the west central area of the site into a large holding pond. This holding pond is connected by storm sewer to an existing 15" storm sewer near the southwest_ corner of the property. Water service would be obtained from a 16" main running along the south side of the freeway right-of-way. Sanitary sewer service would be connected to an 8" existing service extending from Brooklyn Boulevard. 7-14-83 -1- n- 4 Application No. 83037 continued The office units themselves have 6" wide cedar lap siding exterior with cedar shingles on the roofs. To the rear of each unit would be two wood decks 4' deep by 8' wide. These decks would face the pond area while the front entrance faced the outer ring of parking. Restrooms and mechanical rooms would be located in common areas shared by two units. The applicant has expressed a desire to sell individual units to office clients. If so, he must either submit a preliminary plat similar to a townhouse subdivision with association documents or an office condominium must be declared in accordance with the State Condominium Act. This form of ownership probably cannot be controlled through the zoning approval process. A public hearing has been scheduled and notices have been sent. Following discussion of the site plan and the opening of the public hearing, we would recommend that the application be"tabled until the public hearing on the Compre- hensive Plan amendment is held on July 28, 1983. 7-14-83 -2- CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER • I'L/1Nfd[t;G CUt°itl l t Cti �'PL I CAT I UN Application No. 84032 Please Print Clearly or Type Street Location of Property Brooklyn Blvd. at Interstate 94 Legal Description of Property I Owner James Pearson (FctatPAdministrator) Address 35 28 Trying AvanuP Smith Phone No. 823-337a Applicant L. Cramer Co. , Inc. i Address 5500 Lincoln Drive - Edina, MN 55436 Phone No. 935-8482 Type-of Request: Rezoning Subdivision Approval Variance Site & Bldg. Plan Approval X Special Use Permit Extension Other: Description of Request: Request for renewal of special use permit for one year to enable us to solve some of the engineering and soil correction problems so that we could begin the project in March/April 1985. See File No. 83037. The applicant requests processing of this application and agrees to pay to the City of Brooklyn Center, within fifteen (15) days after mailing or delivery of the billing state- ment, the actual costs incurred by the City for Engineering, Planning and Legal expenses reasonably and necessarily required by the City for the. processing of the application. Such costs shall be in addition to the application fee described herein. �11'thdrawal of the application shall not relieve the applicanLof' t 'o bligation to pets incurred prior to withdrawal . Fee $ 25.00 Applicant-s Signeture Receipt No. 65078 Date: /z PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Dates of R.C. Consideration: Approved Denied this _� day of �� 19 f _, subject to the following conditions: Chairman Three (3) copies of the following documents and information shall be submitted, at least 14 days prior to the date of the regular Commission meeting, concurrent with filing the application (required documents must be consistent with ordi- nance and policy. provisions before an application may be accepted) : 1. A certified site survey drawing by a registered engineer or land surveyor showing pertinent existing condition, accurately dimensioned. 2.* An accurately scaled and dimensioned site plan indicating: a) parking layouts including access provisions; b) designations and locations of accessory buildings; c) fences, walls or other screening, including heights and type of material; d) outside lighting provisions, type and .location; e) curbing. 3.* A landscape plan showing areas to be sodded or seeded; location, size and species of trees and shrubbery. 4.* Building floor plans, elevations, sections and specifications, including materials proposed. 5.* Existing and proposed land elevations, drainage provisions, and utility provisions. 6. Additional drawings, plans or information deemed necessary by the Secretary. *Must be prepared by a registered architect or person registered with the State Board of Registration for Architects, Engineers and Land Surveyors, and said drawings/plans shall be so certified. NOTE: Upon approval of plans by the Council and prior to issuance of permits, a Performance Agreement as to approved site improvements and a supporting finan- cial guarantee, in an amount to be determined by the City, are required. Accept- able financial instruments include cash escrow; certificate of deposit; and performance bond. Copies of the Zoning Ordinance may be obtained from the Administrative Office. Questions_should be directed to the Planning and Inspection Department. P/I Form No. 19 Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 84032 Applicant: L. Cramer Company Location: Southwest corner of I-94 and Brooklyn Boulevard Request: Special Use Permit Extension The applicant requests extension of the special use permit approval granted a year ago for an office condominium development on the R5 zoned parcel at the southwest quadrant of Brooklyn Boulevard and I-94. The property in question is bounded by I-94 on the north, by Brooklyn Boulevard on the east and by single-family homes on the south and west. Access to the development would be off Brooklyn Boulevard only. Low rise (1-3 storey) office uses are allowed by special use permit in the R5 zoning district. The proposed use was granted approval under Application No. 83037 on August 22, 1983 following approval of a Comprehensive Plan amendment (Planning Commission Resolution 83-3 and City Council Resolution 83-130) to allow office or mid-density residential development interchangeably along Brooklyn Boulevard. The project has been delayed in attempts to line up financing, but should proceed with soil correction this fall and winter and construction next spring. The proposed plan is Unchanged from that approved last year. Site plan approvals are not subject to a one-year limitation. Therefore, the primary questions to be addressed are concerning the office use itself which requires the special use permit approval . For background on the site development plan, we have included the staff report and minutes pertaining to Application No. 83037 for the Commission's con- sideration. A public hearing regarding this special use permit extension has been scheduled and notices have been sent. Approval of the extension is recommended with all original conditions to be continued. In addition, the following condition is recommended: 15. Soil correction and introduction or removal of fill on the site shall be subject to the issuance of a grading authorization by the Director of Public Works and the Director of Planning and Inspection. A cash escrow, in an amount to be determined by the City Manager, shall be submitted to defray the cost of street cleaning associated with the site preparation. 10-4-84 rT CITY OF BPOOKLYN CENTER, PLANNING AHIL I CI',i I0N Application No. 84036 Please Print Clearly or Type Street Location of Property 62nd & Unity Avenues North Legal Description of Property (homer Metropolitan Airports Commission Cry at 1 Airport Address P O. Box 1700 Twin Cities Airport 55111 - Phone No. 726-1892 Applicant City of Brooklyn Park Address 5800 85th Avenue North 55443 Phone No. 425-4502 Type of Request: Rezoning Subdivision Approval Variance Site & Bldg. Plan Approval Special Use Permit Other: III Description of Request: Flood Plain Special Use Permit for Brooklyn Park drainage project. and agrees to a to the City of L The applicant requests processing of this application g p y y Brooklyn Center, within fifteen (15) days after mailing or delivery of the billing state- ment, the actual costs incurred by the City for Engineering, Planning and Legal expenses reasonably and necessarily required by the City for the processing of the application. Such costs shall be in addition to the application fee described herein. Withdrawal of the application shall not relieve the applicant of the obligation to pay costs incurred prior to withdrawal . Fee $ no charge &I Applicant's Signature Receipt No. Date: Il Z 7l b'1y PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Dates of P.C. Consideration: Approved fie```Denied this 'j day of J 19 , subject to the II following conditions: :5 . Ch an Three (3) copies of the following documents and information shall be submitted, at least 14 days prior to the date of the regular Commission meeting, concurrent with filing the application (required documents must be consistent with ordi- nance and policy. provisions before an application may be accepted) : 1. A certified site survey drawing by a registered engineer or land surveyor showing pertinent existing condition, accurately dimensioned. 2.* An accurately scaled and dimensioned site plan indicating: a) parking layouts including access provisions; b) designations and locations of accessory buildings; c) fences, walls or other screening, including heights and type of material; d) outside lighting provisions, . type and location; e) curbing. . 3.* A landscape plan showing areas to be sodded or seeded; location, size and species of trees and shrubbery. 4.* Building floor plans, elevations, sections and specifications, including materials proposed. 5.* Existing and proposed land elevations, drainage provisions, and utility provisions. 6. Additional drawings, plans or information deemed necessary by the Secretary. *Must be prepared by a registered architect or person registered with the State Board of Registration for Architects, Engineers and Land Surveyors, and said drawings/plans shall be so certified. NOTE: Upon approval of plans by the Council and prior to issuance of permits, a Performance Agreement as to approved site improvements and a supporting finan- cial guarantee, in an amount to be determined by the City, are required. Accept- able financial instruments include cash escrow; certificate of deposit; and performance bond. Copies of the Zoning Ordinance may be obtained from the Administrative Office. ;questions should be directed to the Planning and Inspection Department. P/I Form No. 19 Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 84036 Applicant: City of Brooklyn Park .Location: Crystal Airport Property Request: Flood Plain Special Use Permit The City of Brooklyn Park requests special use permit approval to alter the contour of the floodway on the Crystal Airport property south of 63rd Avenue North. The project would involve dredging of the ditch in this area and placement of spoil alternately on either bank of the ditch. The purpose of the project is to facilitate drainage in the area in Brooklyn Park between 63rd Avenue North and the I-94 freeway. Depositing fill or the spoils from dredgingis a special use in the floodway zone. An engineering analysis of the project is contained in a memo from Director mf P011c Works, Sy Knapp (attached) . Floodway special uses are subject to procedures set forth in Section 35-2184 and to standards or requirements set forth in Section 35-2140 (see both sections attached). Many of these provisions relate to structures or development associated with struc- tures rather than with alteration of the flood plain contours themselves. The Y " found ' 1 rmit ou provisions that correspond most with the standards fora special use permit," in Section 35-220, are the "Factors Upon Which the Decision . . . shall be Based" in subsection 4 of 35-2184. Subsections a, b, e, i , and k seem to be relevant to the proposed project. The rimar concern of staff is that the proposed ditch dredging will allow drainage p y to flow faster thus leading to higher flood levels downstream in Brooklyn Center and Robbinsdale. The conclusion of the hydrologic analysis by Barr Engineering is that these effects will be minimal . Accordingly, staff recommend that the special use permit application submitted by the City of Brookly n Park approved subject to the conditions outlined in the memo , a k be app o ed s b,7 of Director of Public Works Sy Knapp, dated January 22, 1985. 1-31-85 i APPLIChTION FOR FLOOD PLAIN USE PERMIT A, General Information and Required Documents. 1. Except fora change in occupancy, all use permit applications shall be accompanied by a certified survey drawn by a registered land surveyor depicting the topography of the land in question to 50 ' beyond the boundaries of the parcel at 1' contours. 2. The survey shall show all existing and proposed structures with their finished floor elevations and the elevation of streets serving the subject property. L 3. The survey shall be drawn at a scale not exceeding 50 ' to one inch. 4. In the case of grading, filling, or soil correction, a proposed grading plan shall be submitted showing proposed contours at one foot intervals and all drainage control provisions. 5. Existing and proposed easements shall be shown on surveys and grading plans, denoting width, extent, and legally encumbered purpose. All Applicants Complete. 1. Street Address ',,�.u'} .4 iV 1.b se, �U . 2. Owner's Name, Address Aeh-,i ��' K 41-nod, pd box 1700 3. Applicant's Name, Address, Phone e; o f3rco Park 5800 f Av,Av. �+'ook yr► nett , �IJ S�'�f�f3 �te`.no,Sl.'�-'f d 4. Proposed Change: Build Alteration Addition Occupy x Fill or Soil Correction Regrade 5. Use Type: New X Existing Residential Commercial Industrial Accessory 6. Valuation of Work: $ 1-24 z/ 3 ', SD 7. - Estimated Completion Date: Su,IAc C. For All Construction. 8. Lowest Finished Floor Elevation: a) Existing' b) Proposed : 9. Elevation of Flood Proofing: a) Existing b) Proposed 10. Direction of longitudinal axis relative to flood flow: Parallel Skewed Perpendicular 11. Materials stored in flood plain: D For A Grading, Filling, Soil Correction. 12. Volume of new fill IVA cu. yds. 13. Volume of excavated soil �'3c0 cu.; yds. 14. Net addition (subtraction) of material cu. yds. 1:. Easements. 21 . Describe impact on existing easements and how purpose of easements will be protected i F. Drainage Provisions. 22. Does proposed construction alter existing storm water drainage pa terns or rate of storm water runoff from site? er- 4-p cei. aQ 178 )e-#r-r o,,, �a q- 0,Kee " 1e K Cio, 23. Is connection to City storm sewer proposed? A. If yes, please provide the following information for each storm sewer connection to the City system: t Estimated rate of storm,water runoff from site upon completion of proposed improvement based upon: 5 Year Frequency, 20 Minute Duration - 25 Year Frequency, 6 Hour Duration - 100 Year Frequency, 24 Hour Duration - (provide supporting documentation) 24. Does proposed construction provide for storm water retention or detention basin? N© A. If yes, provide storm water drainage calculations and other pertinent design criteria including control elevations. 26. Does proposed construction result in overland flow of storm water runoff onto private property? SECTION G. ALL APPLICANTS READ AND SIGN. 26. Notice: THIS IS NOT A PERMIT. DO NOT COMMENCE WORK UNTIL"A PERMIT HAS BEEN ISSUED. SEPARATE PERMITS ARE REQUIRED FOR WATER AND SEWER WORK, ELECTRICAL, PLUMBING, MECHANICAL AND CONSTRUCTION WORK. PERMITS EXPIRE IF WORK IS NOT STARTED WITHIN 60 DAYS OF ISSUANCE, OR IF WORK IS SUSPENDED OR ABANDONED FOR A CONSECUTIVE PERIOD OF 120 DAYS AT ANY TIME AFTER SAID WORK HAS COMMENCED. AT LEAST ONE DAY NOTICE IS REQUIRED FOR INSPECTIONS. > 27. Application: THE UNDERSIGNED HEREBY MAKES APPLICATION FOR THE WORK HEREIN SPECIFIED, AGREEING TO DO ALL WORK IN STRICT ACCORDANCE WITH CITY ORDINANCES, APPLICABLE CODES, AND RULINGS OF THE BUILDING OFFICIAL AND, HEREBY DECLARES THAT THIS APPLICATION HAS BEEN REVIEWED AND THAT ALL THE INFORMATION STATED HEREIN, INCLUDING ALL PLANS ANb } SPECIFICATIONS, IS TRUE AND CORRECT. 1� App ica t s ignature ate SECTION H. TO BE FILLED OUT BY ENGINEERING STAFF. 28'. Classification of Use: Permitted Special Use Nonconforming 29. 100 yr. Flood Elevation Regulatory Flood Protection Elevation ` 30. Structure is in: Floodway Flood Fringe 31 . Compaction Test Required: Yes No 32. Other Information Required by City Engineer: i X33. City Engineers Comments/Conditions: CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER PLANNING C"),'MISSION APPLICATION Application No. 85009 Please Print Clearly or Type Street Location of Property I 694 and Brooklyn Boulevard ( SW Corner ) Legal Description of Property Lot 1 , Block 1 Northgate Addition Owner JCNT Properties Address 8053 E . Bloomington Freeway , B1 oomi ngton Phone No. 884-7397 Applicant FSM, Inc . d/b/a Camden Church Address 4213 Webber Parkway, Mpl s Phone No. ;Rq-n5,4g Type of Request: X Rezoning Subdivision Approval Variance Site & Bldg. Plan Approval Special Use Permit Other: Description of Request: Change zoning from R-5 -to r-1 Preparatory to building a church on the site The applicant requests processing of this application and agrees to pay to the City of Brooklyn Center, within fifteen (15) days after mailing or delivery of the billing state- ment, the actual costs incurred by the City for Engineering, Planning and Legal expenses reasonably and necessarily required by the City for the processing of the application. Such costs shall be in addition to the application fee described her in. Withdrawal of the application shall not relieve the applicant of the obligation pay costs incurred prior to withdrawal . I:o r F S,oO. .Z74t, ' ..Fee $ 175 - 00 Applicant's Signature , Receipt No. 65901 Date: April 18 , 1985 PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Dates of P.C. Consideration: IF �5 Approved !� Denied this day of 19�, subject to the following conditions: Chap - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway 55430 PROCEDURES AND REQUIREMENTS FOR FILING APPLICATION FOR SITE AND BUILDING PLAN APPROVAL Prior to submission of an application for plan review and approval, prospective applicants should arrange an informational meeting with the Planning Staff to discuss preliminary plans and to become familiarized with applicable ordinance and policy provisions. Three (3) copies of the following documents and information shall be submitted, j at least 14 days prior to the date of the regular Commission meeting, concurrent with filing the application (required documents must be consistent with ordi- nance and policy. provisions before an application may be accepted) : 1. A certified site survey drawing by a registered engineer or land surveyor showing pertinent existing condition, accurately dimensioned. 2.* An accurately scaled and dimensioned site plan indicating: a) parking layouts including access provisions; j b) designations and locations of accessory buildings; -- c) fences, walls or other screening, including heights and type of material; d) outside lighting provisions, . type and location; e) curbing. 3.* A landscape plan showing areas to be sodded or seeded; location, size and species of trees and shrubbery. 4,* Building floor plans, elevations, sections and specifications, including materials proposed. 5.* Existing and proposed land elevations, drainage provisions, and utility provisions. 6. Additional drawings, plans or information deemed necessary by the Secretary. *Must be prepared by a registered architect or person registered with the State Board of Registration for Architects, Engineers and Land Surveyors, and said drawings/plans shall be so certified. ?COTE: Upon approval of plans by the Council and prior to issuance of permits, a Performance Agreement as to approved site improvements and a supporting finan- cial guarantee, in an amount to be determined by the City, _are required. Accept- able financial instruments include cash escrow; certificate of deposit; and ierformance bond. Copies of the Zoning Ordinance may be obtained from the Administrative Office. ;questions should be directed to the Planning and Inspection Department. Planning Commission Information Sheet G N e-P c: • Application No. 85009 Applicant: Foundation Stone Ministries, Inc. Location: Southwest corner of I-94 and Brooklyn Boulevard Request: Rezoning This application is a request to rezone the 4.5 -acre parcel of land at the southwest corner of I-94 and Brooklyn Boulevard from R5 to C1. The property in question is bounded by I-94 on the north, by Brooklyn Boulevard on the east, and by single-family homes on the south and west. This application was reviewed by the Planning Commission at its May 9, 1985 meeting and referred to the West Central Neighborhood Advisory Group for review and comment. That advisory group met on June 6, 1985 at the City Hall Council Chambers. Minutes of that meeting have been submitted by Chairman Ron Blake. The minutes of the advisory group meeting indicate that the group recommended a rezoning of the property in question to C1 with the following stipulations: "a. The median in Brooklyn Boulevard be extended southward to make access to the site right-in/right-out only. b. Brooklyn Boulevard be widened north of the access to permit a "right turn only" lane into the church. c. There be no access to the site from the residential neighborhood to the west along Indiana Avenue North. " The minutes also indicate some specific concerns regarding the proposed church use including the possibility of outside loudspeakers, parking in the neighborhood, and activities such as day care during the week (see minutes from Ron Blake attached) . Staff can see no significant conflict between the rezoning proposal and the Guidelines for Evaluating Rezonings contained . in Section 35-208 of the Zoning Ordinance (attached) . The rezoning to Cl would be consistent with the City's amended Comprehensive Plan. The C1 zoning and the proposed church use would also seem to be consistent and compatible with surrounding land uses. Finally, the existing R5 residential zoning does not seem to be the most appropriate zoning for this parcel which has high traffic exposure. No development plans have yet been submitted for the proposed church use. It is expected that plans will be submitted in time for review by the Commission at its August 15, 1985 meeting. We do not recommend that action on this appli- cation be delayed until such plans are submitted. A draft resolution recommend- ing approval is attached for the Commission' s consideration. can ^-�- Q . A A -/At-j!! tr" 4,'a' C� 7-11-85�� Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 85009 Applicant: Foundation Stone Ministries, Inc. Location: Southwest corner of I-94 and Brooklyn Boulevard Request: Rezoning The applicant requests approval to rezone from R5 to Cl the 4.5 acre vacant parcel of land at the southwest corner of I-94 and Brooklyn Boulevard. The property in question is bounded on the north by I-94, by Brooklyn Boulevard on the east; and by single-family homes on the south and west. This parcel was the subject of Appli- cation No. 83037 by Cramer Company for site and building plan and special use permit approval to build an office condominium development. The present application arises out of a desire to use the property for a church. Churches are not allowed in the R5 zone as either a permitted or a special use. Churches are allowed by special use permit in the Rl and R2 zoning districts and "religious uses" are a permitted use in the C1 district. Staff have advised that a rezoning to C1 would be more in keeping with the Comprehensive Plan for Brooklyn Boulevard than a rezoning to R1 or R2. The applicant, in the person of Mark Anderson, -President of Church on the Move Inter- national , has submitted a letter (attached) addressing the guidelines for evaluating rezonings from Section 35-208 of the Zoning Ordinance (also attached) . The letter states that each guideline for rezoning is met in this case. It notes that the Comprehensive Plan recommends either office or townhouse development in this area of Brooklyn Boulevard and, therefore, the Cl zoning classification is appropriate. The letter points out that the intended use of the property is for a 1 ,000 seat church, the members of which reside primarily in Brooklyn Center, Brooklyn Park and north Minneapolis. Mr. Anderson also points out that the proposed C1 zoning is consistent and compatible with surrounding land use classification since much of the land along Brooklyn Boulevard is zoned C1 or C2. Mr. Anderson also states that the subject property will bear fully the ordinance development restrictions for the C1 zoning district and that the property is better suited to C1 zoning than to R5 because of its proximity to major traffic arteries. No proposed site layout has been submitted with this application as supporting infor- mation. In theory, it would seem that a 1 ,000 seat church could fit on the subject property. The building itself is expected to be about 40,000 sq. ft. in area. Park- ing for 1 ,000 seats would be 333 spaces at one stall per 3 seats. With driving lanes, each stall occupies approximately 300 sq. ft. of land. Parking area would, therefore, be approximately 100,000 sq. ft. This leaves about 50,000 sq. ft. for greenstrips and recreational space. Some churches in the community have consider- able area for recreational space, but many do not and there is no ordinance require- ment for such space. A major question confronting any use of the parcel in question, of course, is access to the site. The City has refused, in the past, to allow any access to this property through the residential neighborhood to the -west along Indiana Avenue North. . Access must, therefore, be off Brooklyn Boulevard and this access is very difficult because of the level of traffic on Brooklyn Boulevard and because of the proximity of a high- way exit ramp. Approval of the office condominium proposal was subject to the developer installing a deceleration lane north of the access and extending the median in Brooklyn Boulevard southward to make the access to the site right-in/right-out only. Access to the parcel will certainly have to be closely examined if the rezoning is approved and development plans are submitted. 5-9-85 -1- Application No. 85009 continued Regarding the general question of the use of the property raised by the application to rezone to Cl , staff see some merit in the proposal , especially in light of the specific use contemplated. The Comprehensive Plan, prepared in the late 1970's and adopted in 1§82, originally recommended mid=density residential (townhouse) develop- ment in the area of Brooklyn Boulevard between 63rd Avenue North and I-94, except the K-Mart si e. The application by Cramer Company (Application No. 83037) for an office condom nium development on this property stimulated a review and eventual amendment of he Comprehensive Plan to allow either office uses or townhouses inter- changeably along areas of Brooklyn Boulevard recommended for either service/office or townhouse development (see City Council Resolution No. 83-130 amending the Com- prehensive Plan, attached) . The proposed rezoning to C1 is, therefore, consistent with the amended Comprehensive Plan. We also certainly agree that a residential use at the intersection of two major traffic arteries and with direct access to one of them is not really appropriate. The existing R5 zoning of the property is, therefore, probably inappropriate. The merit of allowing service/office uses in this location has already been accepted in the granting of a special use permit for office condominiums. Rezoning the property to C1 would eliminate the option of residential use of the property, but we do not feel this is much of a loss to the public welfare in this particular location. Service/office uses would tend to add to peak hour traffic volumes, however. In light of this traffic concern and the particularly difficult access problems with this property, the contemplated church use has positive merit. We would recommend that any rezoning approval be withheld until an acceptable development plan has also been submitted, reviewed and approved. As to the zoning scheme for this general area, the rezoning of this individual parcel to C1 does not seem to constitute spot zoning since there is other C1 zoned property in the vicinity. The question arises as to whether it might be appropriate to rezone other parcels in this area of the Boulevard to C1 at the same time. The general policy regarding rezonings along Brooklyn Boulevard has been to wait until a specific development proposal is presented and then consider rezoning consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. We would recommend continuing that policy in this case. If other parcels along Brooklyn Boulevard must be acquired to provide suitable access, the rezoning would, of course,have to be extended to cover them. The parcels immediately south of the 4.5 acre parcel at the corner of I-94 and Brooklyn Boulevard are covered by a private covenant which prohibits commercial use of those lots without the consent of all parties that are a part of the covenant. The City is not obligated to observe the restrictions of the covenant in its zoning of property, but development of the lots may be curtailed by private enforcement of the covenants through civil suit. Nevertheless, it may be that a church use of these lots would be considered noncommercial and, therefore, not barred by the restrictive covenant. It might be beneficial for all parties if additional land could be attached to the site in question for the purpose of providing better access to the site. As is the procedure with all rezonings, it is recommended that the Commission con- tinue the public hearing, table the application and wefer, it to the West Central Neighborhood Advisory Group for review and comment. It is also recommended that the applicant be directed to submit development plans for the proposed church use by or before reconsideration of the rezoning application by the Planning Commission. 5-9-85 -2- CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION Application No. 85041 Please Print Clearly or Type Street Location of Property Northeasterly of Summit and Earle Brown Drives. Legal Description of Property see attached legal notice Owner City of Brooklyn Center Address Phone No. Applicant Brooklyn Center HRA Address 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Phone No. Type of Request: Rezoning Subdivision Approval Variance Site & Bldg. Plan Approval Special Use Permit _x Other: Registered Land Survey Description of Request: To subdivide the property. The applicant requests processing of this application and agrees to pay to the City of Brooklyn Center, within fifteen (15) days after mailing or delivery of the billing state- ment, the actual costs incurred by the City for Engineering, Planning and Legal expenses reasonably and necessarily required by the City for the processing of the application. Such costs shall be in addition to the application fee described herein. Withdrawal of the application shall not relieve the applicant o obligation to pay costs incurred prior to withdrawal . Fee $ n/c icant Signature pP s 9 Receipt No. Date: December 6, 1985 PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Dates of P.C. Consideration: Approved Denied this day of 19 , subject to the following conditions: C a an CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway 55430 PROCEDURES AND REQUIREMENTS FOR FILING APPLICATION FOR SITE AND BUILDING PLAN APPROVAL Prior to submission of an application for plan review and approval, prospective applicants should arrange an informational meeting with the Planning Staff to discuss preliminary plans and to become familiarized with applicable ordinance and policy provisions. Three (3) copies of the following documents and information shall be submitted, at least 14 days prior to the date of the regular Commission meeting, concurrent with filing the application (required documents ,must be consistent with ordi- nance and policy provisions before an application may be accepted) : 1. A certified site survey drawing by a registered engineer or land surveyor showing pertinent existing condition, accurately dimensioned. 2.* An accurately scaled and dimensioned site plan indicating: a) parking layouts including access provisions; b) designations and. locations_ of accessory buildings; c) fences, wails or other screening, including heights and type of material; d) outside lighting provisions, type and location; e) curbing. 3.* A landscape plan showing areas to be sodded or seeded; location, size and species of trees and shrubbery. 4.* Building floor plans, elevations, sections and specifications, including materials proposed. 5.* Existing and proposed land elevations, drainage provisions, and utility provisions. 6. Additional drawings, plans or information deemed necessary by the Secretary. *Must be prepared by a registered architect or person registered with the State Board of Registration for Architects, Engineers and Land Surveyors, and said drawings/plans shall be so certified. NOTE: Upon approval of plans by the Council and prior to issuance of permits, a Performance Agreement as to approved site improvements and a supporting finan- cial guarantee, in an amount to be determined by the City, are required. Accept- able financial instruments include cash escrow; certificate of deposit; and performance bond. Copies of the Zoning Ordinance may be obtained from the Administrative Office. Questions should be directed 'to the Planning and Inspection Department. P/I Form No. 19 y ! Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 85041 Applicant: City of Brooklyn Center HRA Location: Northeasterly of Summit Drive and Earle Brown Drive Request: Preliminary R.L.S. The Brooklyn Center Housing and Redevelopment Authority seeks approval of a prelimi- nary Registered Land Survey which subdivides for conveyance purposes the land at the northeast corner of Earle Brown Drive and Summit Drive. The land includes two r p arcels presently owned by Ryan Construction Company along the east and south sides of Earle Brown Drive. It also includes the Earle Brown Farm site and the site of the old bank/office building, both presently owned by the City. The land in question is zoned I-1 and is bounded on the west, north, and east by Earle Brown Drive, on the southwest by Summit Drive, and on the southeast by vacant, I-1 zoned land owned by Texas Air Corporation. The proposed R.L.S. contains nine tracts, A through I. Tracts A and B are essent- ially the existing Ryan property divided into south and north parcels for phased development in the future. Tracts G and H are the westerly portion of the City's Earle Brown Farm property to be conveyed to Ryan Construction for office development. Tract F is the historic farm site. Tract I, south of the farm, will be joined with the Texas Air property in the future for high-rise housing development. Tracts C, D and E at the north end of the R.L.S. will have parking spaces constructed over them and will be conveyed in the future subject to fulfillment of aspects of the de- velopment contract between the City and Ryan Construction. The areas of the proposed tracts are listed below: Area Tract A 1 .94 acres Tract B 3.58 acres Tract C .24 acres Tract D .26 acres Tract E .37 acres Tract F 6.78 acres Tract G 2.01 acres Tract H 3.86 acres Tract I 1 .84 acres Total 20.9 acres Two tracts, C and G are landlocked. Tract I has only 24.64' of frontage on Summit Drive, which is substandard in the I-1 district. These deficiencies will disappear when all of the conveyances are complete and tracts are recombined to form new parcels for development. The proposed R.L.S. is generally in order and approval is recommended subject to at least the following conditions: I� 12-17-85 -1- Application No. 85041 continued 1 . The final R.L.S. is subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. 2. The final R.L.S. is subject to the provisions of Chapter 15. 3. Approval of the proposed R.L.S. is for reconveyance purposes only. No permits for new construction may be issued without a replatting of landlocked parcels with other parcels or an amendment of the development contract between the City and Ryan Construction Company. f CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION Application No. 86037 Please Print Clearly or Type Street Location of Property North of the Easterly intersection of Earle Brown Drive and Summit Drive Legal Description of Property Tract A, R.Z.S. 1380, Tract I, R.L.S. 1594, The Westerly 50 feet of Tract H, R.L.S. 1380 adjacent to Tract A, R.L.S. 1350, The vacated right of way of Earle Brown Drive as platted in Twin qiti es nterc ange Park Owner City of Rrooklyn'lenter HRA Address 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Phone No. 561-5440 Applicant same Address Phone No. Type of Request: Rezoning X Subdivision Approval Variance Site & Bldg. Plan Approval Special Use Permit Other: Description of Request: Revise Preliminary Plat creating 2 lots and approving final R.L.S. The applicant requests processing of this application and agrees to pay to the City of Brooklyn Center, within fifteen (15) days after mailing or delivery of the billing state- ment, the actual costs incurred by the City for Engineering, Planning and Legal expenses reasonably and necessarily required by the City for the processing of the application. Such costs shall be in addition to the application fee described herein. Withdrawal of the application shall not relieve the applicant the obligation to pay costs incurred prior to withdrawal . Fee $ waived / pp icant s Signature- Receipt No. Date: y PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Dates of P.C. Consideration: Approved Denied this day of 19 _, subject to the following conditions: _�ao WtA,Afoa 41 man 1 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA t 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway 55430 PROCEDURES AND REQUIREMENTS FOR FILING APPLICATION FOR SITE AND BUILDING PLAN APPROVAL Prior to submission of an application for plan review and approval , prospective applicants should arrange an informational meeting with the Planning Staff, to discuss preliminary plans and to bec9me familiarized with applicable ordinance and policy provisions. Four (4) copies of the following documents and information shall be submitted, at least 14 days prior to the date of the 'regular Commission meeting, concurrent with fi inv t e application (required documents must be consistent with ordinance arid. Noiicy provisions before an application may be accepted): 1 . A certified site survey drawing by a' registered engineer or land surveyor showing pertinent existing condition, accurately dimensioned. 2. *An accurately scaled and dimensioned site plan indicating: a) parking layouts and access provisions,.'including calculation of ordinance parking requirements; b) designations and locations of all proposed buildings and required setback lines; c) fences, walls or other screening, including heights and type of material ; d) outside lighting provisions, type and location (foot candle strength at property line must be calculated) ; e) curbing (B612 curb and gutter is required) . Indicate radius measurements; f) building information, including: gross floor area, type of construction and occupancy classification. 3. *A landscape plan showing areas to be sodded or seeded, quantity, location, size and species of trees and shrubbery. (Note: underground irrigation is required in all landscaped areas in commercial and industrial districts . Plans must be so noted) . 4. *Building floor plans, elevations, sections and specifications, including materials proposed. 5. *Existing and proposed land elevations, drainage provisions, and utility provisions, including the diameters of utility lines. 6. Additional drawings, plans or information deemed necessary by the Secretary. *Must be prepared by a registered architect or person registered with the State Board of Registration for Architects , Engineers, Landscape Architects and Land Surveyors, and. said drawings/plans shall be so certified. NOTE: Upon approval of plans by the Council and prior to issuance of permits,. a Performance Agreement as to approved site improvements and a supporting financial guarantee, in an amount to be determined by tTe City, are required. Acceptable financial instruments include cash escrow; certificate of deposit; and performance bond. b i 1 Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 86037 Applicant: City of Brooklyn Center HRA Location: 6100 Summit Drive Request: Preliminary Plat This application is a request for preliminary plat approval to resubdivide into two lots the land south of the Earle Brown Farm complex to be developed as the Earle Brown Commons. The land in question is now zoned R7 (as per Application No. 86010) and is bounded on the north by the Earle Brown or Brooklyn Farm, on the east and southeast by Earle Brown Drive, on the southwest by Summit Drive, and on the west by the Brookdale Corporate Center III building now under construction. The existing legal description of the property includes Tract I, R.L.S. 1594, Tract A, R.L.S. 1380 and land under vacated Earle Brown Drive. The new legal description would be Lot 1 and Outlot A, Brooklyn Farm 2nd Addition. The proposed subdivision would create two lots, one for each phase of the Earle Brown Commons development. The first phase parcel, Lot 1, is to be 142,098 sq. ft. or 3.26_. acres. In terms of the density requirements of the Zoning Ordinance, the first phase of 140 units requires 140 x 1400 sq. ft. = 196,000 sq. ft. of land prior to density credits. The master plan for the Earle Brown Commons provides for 108 covered parking stalls on the first phase parcel. A density credit of 500 sq. ft. per covered stall, which is permitted by the Zoning Ordinance, would reduce the required land area by 54,000 sq. ft. to 142,000 sq. ft. The proposed parcel is, therefore, just large enough to meet ordinance requirements. Some additional land will be added in the future when the westerly 10' of the Earle Brown Drive right-of- way is vacated. The parcel for the second phase is proposed as an outlot at this time. As an outlot, the property will be unbuildable until it is replatted. The purpose of this designation is to insure that, if the second phase of the residential development is detached and independent from the first phase, the zero-lot line created by this subdivision will be eliminated and a 20' side interior building setback established as required by the Zoning Ordinance. The 20' setback cannot be established now and eliminated later because the mortgage on the property cannot suffer a reduction in land, but can be expanded over a larger area of land. If the second phase is attached as planned, the property line can be eliminated altogether or remain as is with a reclassification of the outlot to a buildable lot. The proposed plat shows an existing utility easement running east-west through the northern half of the plat. This easement will be relocated somewhat to allow for the realignment of the storm sewer. Water and sanitary sewer mains will be completely relocated north of the proposed buildings. The new easement location for the relocated utilities has not been shown. Also, not shown is the location of a ponding easement to meet the requirements of the Shingle Creek Watershed District. These easements must be indicated on the final plat. Altogether, the preliminary plat appears to be in order and approval is recommended subject to at least the following conditions: 1. The final plat is subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. 9-25-86 -1- Application No. 86037 continued 2. The final plat is subject to the provisions of Chapter 15 of the City Ordinances. 3. The developer shall execute an easement for storm sewer and the detention pond and said easement shall be indicated on the final plat prior to final plat approval. 4. The developer shall execute an easement for sanitary sewer and water and said easement shall be indicated on the final plat prior to final plat approval. 9-25-86 -2- CITY BR OKLYN CENTER PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION Application No. 86019 Please Print Clearly or Type Street Location of Property 66th and West River Road Legal Description of Property 9 P P Y Owner E and H Properties (Howard Atkins) Address 3213 Lawrence Road Phone No. 566-8960 Applicant same Address Phone No. Type of Request: Rezoning Subdivision Approval Variance X Site & Bldg. Plan Approval X Special Use Permit Other: Description of Request: Site and building plan and special use permit approval to construct an office building on land zoned C2 and R5. The applicant requests processing of this application and agrees to pay to the City of Brooklyn Center, within fifteen (15) days after mailing or delivery of the billing state- ment, the actual costs incurred by the City for Engineering, Planning and Legal expenses reasonably and necessarily required by the City for the processing of the application. Such costs shall be in addition to the application fee described herein. Withdrawal of the application shall not relieve the applicant of the obligation to pay costs incurred prior to withdrawal. Fee $ 150.00 Applicant's Signature Receipt No. 70854 Date: PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Dates of P.C. Consideration: Approved (/ Denied this day f pp y o 19 ubdect to the following conditions: Chafimdn i CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway 55430 PROCEDURES AND REQUIREMENTS FOR FILING APPLICATION FOR SITE AND BUILDING PLAN APPROVAL Prior to submission of an application for plan review and approval, prospective applicants should arrange an informational meeting with the Planning Staff to discuss preliminary plans and to become familiarized with applicable ordinance and policy provisions. Three (3) copies of the following documents and information shall be submitted, at least 14 days prior to the date of the regular Commission meeting, concurrent with filing the application (required documents must be consistent with ordi- nance and policy provisions before an application may be accepted): 1. A certified site survey drawing by a registered engineer or land surveyor showing pertinent existing condition, eccutely dimensioned. 2.* An accurately scaled and dimensioned site plan indicating: a) parking layouts including access provisions; b) designations and locations of accessory buildings; c) fences, walls or other screening, including heights and type of material d) outside lighting provisions, . type and location; e) curbing. 3.* A landscape plan showing areas to be sodded or seeded; location, size and species of trees and shrubbery. 4.* Building floor plans, elevations, sections and specifications, including materials proposed. 5.* Existing and proposed land elevations, drainage provisions, and utility provisions. 6. Additional drawings, plans or information deemed necessary by the Secretary. . *Must be prepared by a registered architect or person registered with the State Board of Registration for Architects, Engineers and Land Surveyors, and said drawings/plans shall be so certified. NOTE: Upon approval of plans by the Council and prior to issuance of permits, a Performance Agreement as to approved site improvements and a supporting finan- cial guarantee, in an amount to be determined by the City, are required. Accept- able financial instruments include cash escrow; certificate of deposit; and performance bond. Copies of the Zoning Ordinance may be obtained from the Administrative Office. Questions should be directed to the Planning and Inspection Department. P/I Form No. 19 .Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 86019 Applicant: E and H Properties Location: 66th and West River Road Request: Site and Building Plan/Special Use The applicant requests site and building plan and special use permit approval to construct a three storey office building between the easterly frontage road of wa 2 an Willow Lane south of 66th Avenue North and south of Atkins Highway 25 d , Mechanical. The property in question is zoned C2 on the west and R5 on the east and is bounded by Atkins Mechanical and 66th Avenue North on the north, by Willow Lane on the east, by an 18 unit apartment complex and Brookdale Motel on the south, and by the easterly Highway 252 frontage road on the west. Office developments are permitted uses in the C2 zone and are special uses in the R5 zone. It is expected that a rezoning application to Cl and/or C2 will be filed in the future to put the entire property under a single zoning classification. However, it is not necessary for the rezoning to precede the approval or construction of the proposed development since that development is already acknowledged under existing zoning. I Access/Parking Access to the site will be available from the West River Road frontage road on the west and from 66th Avenue North on the north via an extended access drive which lines up with a median opening in 66th Avenue North. The site plan calls for 86 parking stalls for a 15,875 sq. ft. office building. This does allow for some medical space within the building since it is more than the 79 stalls required for general office use. (Note: general office use requires 1 space/200 sq. ft. ; medical uses require 1 space per 150 sq. ft.) Approximately 4,000 sq. ft. of gross floor area can be devoted to medical tenants. The City Engineer has expressed concern that the access onto 66th Avenue North needs a wider radius to avoid a need for a third lane. Landscaping/Screening The proposed landscape plan calls for plantings concentrated around the building and along the greenstrip adjacent to Willow Lane. The landscape schedule calls for 8 shade trees (all Marshall's Ash), 3 coniferous trees (Colorado Spruce), 7 decorative trees (Red Splendor Crab) and 93 shrubs (including Arcadia Juniper, Mint Julep Juniper, Gold Flame Spirea, Compact Viburnum, and Dwarf Euonymus) . The point total of the proposed plan, based on the point system policy recently agreed upon by the Planning Commission is 155 points. The site area in question is approximately 1.06 acres (this does not include an approximate .43 acre area on the northeast portion of the parcel that is to be left undeveloped apart from the access drive to 66th Avenue North). Based on the requirement of 100 points per acre for an office development up to 2 acres, the site in question is required to have 106 points (149 if the undeveloped area is included) . It, therefore, appears that the proposed plan meets the landscape standard policy. The plans also indicate a 6' high board on board wood fence for parking lot screening along Willow Lane. Grading, Drainage, Utilities The City Engineer has indicated that the grading, drainage, and utility plan must be modified to take account of a new 8" water line to be installed in the West River Road frontage road which will result in the need to abandon some existing services. He has also indicated that the storm sewer system downstream (15" line in Willow Lane) may not be adequate to accommodate a five year storm. He requests that drainage calculations be provided so that the need for allowing occasional ponding on the 5-8-86 -1- I Application No. 86019 continued site may be determined. One possible way of dealing with a lack of storm sewer capacity would be to depress the berm in the Willow Lane greenstrip to allow any sizeable backup in the parking lot to overflow toward Willow Lane. Again, the drainage calculations should help determine the need, if any, for ponding on the site. Sanitary sewer service will be provided via a connection to an 18" line in Willow Lane. The plans also indicate bituminous curb at the northeast corner of the parking lot in anticipation of future expansion to the north. The remainder of the lot is to be appropriately delineated with B612 curb and gutter. Building The proposed building is set back 35' from the westerly frontage road of West River Road. Although Highway 252 is a major thoroughfare normally requiring a 50' setback, the intervening frontage road eliminates the need for the extraordinary setback. The building height is 35' , the maximum permitted in the Mississippi River Critical Area. The exterior treatment is to be face brick with bronze aluminum window frames. The main access will be on the south side of the building with a second access on the east end. Lighting/Trash The plan proposes a single light standard with two high pressure sodium (amber) luminaires located roughly in the middle of the site. The plans do not indicate specifications, but the architect has stated that the pole will likely be 20' to 25' high to provide 5 foot candles of illumination over the parking lot. The fixture will likely be a box type that directs the beam downward. The Zoning Ordinance limits light intensity to 3 foot candles at a property line adjacent to a residential district and to 10 foot candles adjacent to a public street or to commercially zoned property. In this case, the south lot line is adjacent to a residential district along the easterly 135' . We would also encourage an adequate, but subdued level of lighting on the east side of the site, given the single-family homes across Willow Lane. The plans show an outside trash enclosure, north of the parking lot, just off the access drive leading to 66th Avenue North. Special Use Standards The proposed office building is a permitted use in the C2 zoning district, but it a special use in the R5 zoning district. The site in question is zoned C2 on the west half and R5 on the east half. The proposal is, therefore, subject to the standards set forth in Section 35-220 and Section 35-314.3b (attached) Many of these standards have to do with the relationship of the proposed office use with surrounding development; whether it is consistent and compatible with surrounding uses and whether it will have any adverse effect on neighboring property values or the development of adjacent land. Staff believe that the proposed office use answers all of these concerns in a positive manner. It is a use compatible on the one hand with Highway 252 on the west and the hotel to the south, but also with the residences to the east. Given the alternatives (such as retail, convenience food restaurants, apartments) , it appears to us that the proposed office use is the best possible buffer between the residential neighborhood along the river and the busy highway to the west. In terms of ingress, egress and parking, the proposed development plan is appropriate in keeping access onto the frontage road and 66th Avenue North. No access will be allowed onto Willow Lane. The parking and stacking space available to the proposed office development should be more than adequate. While it will create some additional traffic in this neighborhood, it will occur primarily 5-8-86 -2- Application No. 86019 continued on 66th Avenue North during the 4-6 p.m. period. The existing level of traffic in this area is not terribly high at present and the addition of 45 peak hour trips (assuming a trip generation rate of 2.8 vehicles per 1,000 sq. ft. of gross floor area) will not be critical though it will be noticeable. The proposed development will have the drawback of increasing the traffic on 66th Avenue North during the 4-6 p.m. period, but should generate less traffic than retail, restaurant, or apartment developments during evening and weekend periods. In general, we feel that the traffic standards are met in this case. All in all, this application appears to be in order and approval is recommended, subject to at least the following conditions: 1. Building plans are subject to review and approval by the Building Official with respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance of permits. 2. Grading, drainage, utility and berming 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. 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. B612 curb and gutter shall be provided around all parking and driving areas with the exception of the northeast corner of the lot and the access drive where permanent curb may be deferred for up to five years. 9. The applicant shall submit an as-built survey of the property prior prior to the release of the performance guarantee. 10. The applicant shall provide drainage calculations for the site to the City Engineer for evaluation of possible on-site storage of runoff, prior to issuance of permits. 11. The replat of this site combining the land into a single parcel shall receive final approval and be filed at the County prior to the issuance of permits. 5-8-86 -3- r ' Application No. 86019 continued 12. Site lighting shall provide adequate illumination of the parking lot, but light intensity shall not exceed 3 foot candles along the south property line in accordance with Section 35-712 of the Zoning Ordinance. 13. The special use standards are deemed to be met in this case, in consideration of the following: a) the proposed office use is an appropriate buffer between Highway 252 and the single-family residences along the Mississippi River. b) the proposed office use is consistent and compatible with all adjacent land uses. c) traffic generated by the proposed office use can be accommodated by the abutting nonresidential streets and on the subject site and should not overburden public streets and signals in the area. 14. No access to the site shall be allowed from Willow Lane. Access onto 66th Avenue North shall line up with the median opening indicated on the MN/DOT plans for road construction of the Highway 252 project. 15. The special use permit is subject to all applicable codes, ordinances and regulations. 5-8-86 -4- t CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION Application No. 86020 Please Print Clearly or Type Street Location of Property 66th and West River Road Legal Description of Property See file Owner E and H Properties Address 3213 Lawrence Road Phone No. 566-8960 Applicant same Address Phone No. Type of Request: Rezoning X Subdivision Approval Variance Site & Bldg. Plan Approval Special Use Permit Other: Description of Request: Preliminary Plat to subdivide the property into two lots to be known as Lots 1 , 2, E and H Properties Addition. The applicant requests processing of this application and agrees to pay to the City of Brooklyn Center, within fifteen (15) days after mailing or delivery of the billing state- ment, the actual costs incurred by the City for Engineering, Planning and Legal expenses reasonably and necessarily required by the City for the processing of the application. Such costs shall be in addition to the application fee described herein. Withdrawal of the application shall not relieve the applicant of the obligation to pay costs incurred prior to withdrawal . Fee $ 60.00 Applicant's Signature Receipt No. 70857 Date: 4-25-86 PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Dates of P.C. Consideration: Approved Denied this day of 19 ri t; subject to the . following conditions: C airman � - T r r CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway 55430 PROCEDURES AND REQUIREMENTS FOR FILING APPLICATION FOR SITE AND BUILDING PLAN APPROVAL Prior to submission of an application for plan review and approval, prospective applicants should arrange an informational meeting with the Planning Staff to discuss preliminary plans and to become familiarized with applicable ordinance and policy provisions. Three (3) copies of the following documents and information shall be submitted, at least 14 days prior to the date of the regular Commission meeting, concurrent with filing the application (required documents must be consistent with ordi- nance and policy provisions before an application may be accepted) : 1. A certified site survey drawing by a registered engineer or land surveyor showing pertinent existing condition, accurately dimensioned. 2.* An accurately scaled and dimensioned site plan indicating a) parking layouts including access provisions; b) designations and locations of accessory buildings; c) fences, walls or other screening, including heights and type of material; d) outside lighting provisions, type and . location; e) curbing. 3.* A landscape plan showing areas to be sodded or seeded; location, size and species of trees and shrubbery. Y 4.* Building floor plans, elevations, sections and specifications, including materials proposed. 5.* Existing and proposed land elevations, drainage provisions, and utility provisions. 6. Additional drawings, plans or information deemed necessary by the Secretary. *Must be prepared by a registered architect or person registered with the State Board of Registration for Architects, Engineers and Land Surveyors, and said drawings/plans shall be so certified. NOTE: Upon approval pproval of plans by the Council and prior to issuance of permits, a Performance Agreement as to approved site improvements and a supporting finan- cial guarantee, in an amount to be determined by the City, are required. Accept- able financial instruments include cash escrow; certificate of deposit; and performance bond. Copies of the Zoning Ordinance may be obtained from the Administrative Office. Questions should be directed to the Planning and Inspection Department. P/I Form No. 19 Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 86020 Applicant: E and H Properties Location: 66th and West River Road Request: Preliminary Plat The applicant requests preliminary plat approval to resubdivide into two parcels the land south of 66th Avenue North, east of the Highway 252 right-of-way. The land in question has a split zoning with C2 zoning on approximately the west half of the plat and R5 on the eastern half. It is bounded by the easterly frontage road of Highway 252 (West River Road) on the west, by 66th Avenue North on the north, by Willow Lane on the east, and by an 18 unit apartment complex and the Brookdale Motel on the south. The plat consists of Lots 4, 51 6, and 7, Block 1 of Olson's Island View Terrace Addition and two unplatted parcels from Lot 15, Auditor's Subdivision Number 310. The northwest quadrant of the plat is occupied by the Atkins Mechanical office building. The remaining area is vacant. The proposed plat places the existing office building on the new Lot 1. The vacant land is to be Lot 2. The office development proposed under Application No. 86019 is to be located on the southerly portion of Lot 2, with the northeast portion of the property left vacant for future development. The two lots are contained in one block, the plat to be titled E and H Properties Addition. The proposed plat is 1.916 acres in area. No lot areas have been provided, but Lot 2 is approximately 1.5 acres and Lot 1, approximately .65 acres. The setback lines shown on the preliminary plat are not entirely consistent with the Zoning Ordinance, but with the complexity of Lot 2, which abuts three different streets, it is difficult to judge precisely which setback provisions apply where. Because the abutment with Highway 252 is buffered by a frontage road, it is staff's judgment that neither lot width, setback, nor 1 acre lot area requirements for office uses adjacent to major thoroughfares apply in this case. Drainage and utility easements are designated at 10' widths adjacent to public right-of-way and 5' widths adjacent to interior property lines in accordance with the Subdivision Ordinance. There are four sets of water and sanitary sewer services within Willow Lane which serve Lot 2 of this plat. Most of these services will have to be abandoned. Disposition of these services should be handled under a Subdivision agreement to be concluded prior to final plat approval. No right-of-way dedication has been indicated on the proposed plat. The needs for widening 66th Avenue North to allow for a median and other improvements in association with the upgrading of Highway 252 should be evaluated prior to approval of the final plat. Approval of the proposed plat should be subject to at least the following conditions: 1 . The final plat is subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. 2. The final plat is subject to the provisions of Chapter 15 of the City Ordinances. 5-8-86 -1- Application No. 86020 continued 3. Setback lines indicated on the preliminary plat are non-binding and are subject to ordinance interpretation by the City Council. 4. The applicant shall enter into a subdivision agreement with the City relating to utility hookups and abandonments and other items deemed appropriate by the City Engineer prior to final plat approval. 5. The City Engineer shall report on the need, if any, of right-of-way dedication for 66th Avenue North prior to consideration of the preliminary plat by the City Council. 5-8-86 -2- CITY=OE BvIkOKLYN CENTER tr PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION Application No. 88024 Please Print Clearly or Type Street Location of Property North of I-694 and west of Humboldt Av n � North Legal Description of Property Lots 1-5. Block 1 , Richardson Addition, and Tract B, R.L.S. 1482. Owner Shingle Creek Land Company Address 6100 Summit Drive 55430 Phone No. 560-6829 Applicant same Address Phone No. Type of Request: Rezoning X Subdivision Approval Variance Site & Bldg. Plan Approval Special Use Permit Other: Description of Request: AApra9A1-"nf Preliminarg_•Plat for-Richardson Park Addition_ The applicant requests processing of this application and agrees to pay to the City of Brooklyn Center, within fifteen (15) days after mailing or delivery of the billing state- ment, the actual costs incurred by the City for Engineering, Planning and Legal expenses reasonably and necessarily required by the City for the processing of the application. Such costs shall be in addition to the application fee described herein. Withdrawal of the application shall not relieve the applicant of the obligation to pay costs incurred prior to withdrawal . Fee $ 100.00 Applicant's S gnature Receipt No. 78988 Date: November 22, 1988 PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Dates of P.C. Consideration: Approved _ Denied this day of 19 subject to the following conditions: Chairman t. CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway 55430 PROCEDURES AND REQUIREMENTS FOR FILING APPLICATION FOR SITE AND BUILDING PLAN APPROVAL Prior to submission of an application for plan review and approval , prospective applicants should arrange an informational meeting with the Planning Staff to discuss preliminary plans and to become familiarized with applicable ordinance and policy provisions. Four (4) copies of the following documents and information shall be submitted, at least 14 days prior to the date of the regular Commission meeting, concurrent with fi ing the application (required documents must be consistent with ordinance and policy provisions before an application may be accepted): 1 . A certified site survey drawing by a registered engineer or land surveyor showing pertinent existing condition, accurately dimensioned. 2. *An accurately scaled and dimensioned site plan indicating: a) parking layouts and access provisions, including calculation of ordinance parking requirements; b) designations and locations of all proposed buildings and required setback lines; c) fences, walls or other screening, including heights and type of material ; d) outside lighting p-rovisions, type and location (foot candle strength at property line must be calculated) ; e) curbing (B612 curb and gutter is required) . Indicate radius measurements; f) building information, including: gross floor area, type of construction and occupancy classification. 3. *A landscape plan showing areas to. be sodded or seeded, quantity, location, size and species of trees and shrubbery. (Note: underground irrigation is required in all landscaped areas in commercial and industrial districts. Plans must be so noted). 4. *Building floor plans, elevations, sections and specifications, including materials proposed. 5. *Existing and proposed land elevations, drainage provisions, and utility provisions, including the diameters of utility lines. 6. Additional drawings, plans or information deemed necessary by the Secretary: *Must be prepared by a registered architect or person registered with the State Board of Registration for Architects , Engineers, Landscape Architects and Land Surveyors, and said drawings/plans shall be so certified. NOTE: Upon approval of plans by the Council and prior to issuance of permits, a Performance Agreement as to approved site improvements and a supporting financial guarantee, in an amount to be determined by 6—eCity, are required. Acceptable financial instruments include cash escrow; certificate of deposit; and performance bond. t Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 88024 Applicant: Shingle Creek Land Company Location: North of I-694 and West of Humboldt Avenue North Request: Preliminary Plat The applicant requests preliminary plat approval to resubdivide into five lots the land north of I-694 and bordering on Earle Brown Bowl. Dedication of public street right-of-way is also a part of this plat. The land is presently zoned I-1 (there will be a City-initiated rezoning to C-2 covering this land in early 1989) and is bounded on the north by Freeway Boulevard, on the east by Days Inn and Humboldt Avenue North, on the south by I-694 and on the west by Budgetel and partially by Earle Brown Bowl (see area map attached). The name of the proposed plat is Richardson Park Addition. The plat is to be divided into two blocks. Block 1 is to be located immediately south of Freeway Boulevard, west of the proposed Irving Avenue North and east of Earle Brown Bowl. Block 2 is to be located immediately adjacent (north of) the freeway and south of the proposed 64th Avenue North, extending from the existing James Circle on the west to the Humboldt Avenue North bridge on the east. Block 1 is to have two lots, and Block 2 , three lots. The sizes of the lots are as listed below: Block 1 Lot 1 1.07 acres Lot 2 1.12 acres Total 2.19 acres Block 2 Lot 1 1.27 acres Lot 2 2.00 acres Lot 3 4.62 acres Total 7.89 acres The new right-of-way for 64th Avenue North is 1.59 acres. Part of an existing Irving Avenue North right-of-way is to be vacated. It is 80' wide and will be reduced to 60' width (the right-of-way width for 64th will also be 60' ) except toward the intersection with Freeway Boulevard where it will widen to 74' to allow two lanes out and one lane in. The new right-of-way will make the greenstrip for Days Inn on the west and Earle Brown Bowl on the south nonconforming. The greenstrip for Days Inn is 5' in width adjacent to the proposed Irving Avenue right-of-way. The boulevard on the east side of Irving will be extra-wide, with 10' of green, then a 5' wide sidewalk, and then 9' of green adjacent to Irving Avenue North. Earle Brown Bowl has approximately an 8' greenstrip adjacent to the proposed 64th Avenue North. There will be no sidewalk on the north side of 64th. There will be an approximate 16' boulevard in this area; so, the total green space will average about 241. The applicant has also submitted construction plans for the two streets, including a drainage plan. The drainage plan provides for a ponding area at the northwest corner of Lot 3, Block 2. The pond will provide both water detention for flood control and water purification. The plan proposes 15" diameter storm sewer pipes in both 64th and Irving flowing to an inlet in the pond. The City Engineer feels at this time that these inlet pipes may need to be enlarged to 21" in diameter. The outlet pipe is proposed at 24" in diameter and will flow northward in Irving Avenue 12-8-88 -1- • � Application No. 88024 continued to a 60" storm sewer line in Freeway Boulevard. An emergency overflow to the freeway right-of-way is also proposed. The drainage plan will have to be approved by the West Mississippi Watershed Management Commission prior to approval of the final plat. The ponding area will have to be protected by an easement, to be filed with the plat. The overflow to the freeway is to be protected by a temporary drainage and utility easement to expire when Lot 3 is developed and storm sewer is provided for the overflow. Also of concern is the amount of sanitary sewer flow from this plat to the sanitary sewer line in Freeway Boulevard. That line is only 10" in diameter and narrows to 811 in diameter between Humboldt and Dupont. Consequently, development of the land in this plat will have to generate a limited amount of sewer flow or will have to provide some on-site holding capacity to live within the constraints of the public sewer system. Altogether the proposed plat appears to be in order and approval is recommended, subject to at least the following conditions: 1. The final plat is subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. 2. The final plat is subject to the requirements of Chapter 15 of the City Ordinances. 3. The drainage plan for the plat shall be reviewed and approved by the West Mississippi Watershed Commission prior to final plat approval. 4. The owner of the property shall execute an easement to protect the ponding area and the overflow swale on Lot 3, Block 2 prior to final plat approval. 5. The owner shall execute, prior to final plat approval, a Subdivision Agreement covering at least the following items: a) Submission of a subdivision bond to insure completion of required improvements within public right-of-way. b) Construction of Irving Avenue North and 64th Avenue North including storm sewer, sanitary sewer, water mains, sidewalk, curb and gutter and street paving. c) A maintenance and inspection agreement for the drainage system. d) A hook-up agreement for the water main. e) Limitation on sanitary sewer flow generated by development within the plat. 12-8-88 -2- CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER PLANNING COVMISS"yON APPLICATION t Application No. 89002 Please Print Clearly or Type Street Location of Property 6451 through 6533 Brooklyn Boulevard Legal Description of Property Lots 1 through 5, Block 1 , Northgate Addition Lot 2, Block 1 , Hamm's Addition; Tract A, R.L.S. No. 970 Owner Garden City Construction Company Address 8053 Bloomington Freeway Bloomington, MN 55420 Phone No. Applicant City of Brooklyn Center Address 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Phone No. 561-5440 Type of Request: X Rezoning Subdivision Approval Variance Site & Bldg. Plan Approval Special Use Permit Other: Description of Request: To rezone from R5 to Cl the vacant parcel at the southwest quadrant of I94 and Brooklyn Boulevard and the R5 zoned single-family homes to the south. The applicant requests processing of this application and agrees to pay to the City of Brooklyn Center, within fifteen (15) days after mailing or delivery of the billing state- ment, the actual costs incurred by the City for Engineering, Planning and Legal expenses reasonably and necessarily required by the City for the processing of the application. Such costs shall be in addition to the application fee described herein. Withdrawal of the application shall not relieve the applicant of the obligation to pay costs incurred prior to withdrawal . Fee $ waived Applicant's Signature Receipt No. Date: December 20, 1988 PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Dates of P.C. Consideration: 1/14/Rq a40 -�? PC Resolution 89-3 Approved Denied this day of 19-64 -, subject to the . following conditions: oChai - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway 55430 PROCEDURES AND REQUIREMENTS FOR FILING APPLICATION FOR SITE AND BUILDING PLAN APPROVAL Prior to submission of an application for plan review and approval , prospective applicants should arrange an informational meeting with the Planning Staff to discuss preliminary plans and to become familiarized with applicable ordinance and policy provisions. I Four (4) copies of the following documents and information shall be submitted, at least 14 days prior to the date of the regular Commission meeting, concurrent with fi ink g e a plp ication (required documents must be cons i sten t with ordinance an d P olicy provisions before an application may be accepted): . 1 . A certified site survey drawing by a registered engineer or land surveyor showing pertinent existing condition, accurately dimensioned. 2. *An accurately scaled and dimensioned site plan indicating: a) parking layouts and access provisions, including calculation of ordinance parking requirements; b) designations and locations of all proposed buildings and required setback lines; c) fences, walls or other screening, including heights and type of material ; d) outside lighting provisions, type and location (foot candle strength a t property linemu st `becalculated) ; e) curbing (8612 curb and gutter is required) . Indicate radius measurements; f) building information, including: gross floor area, type of construction and occupancy classification. 3. *A landscape plan showing areas to be sodded or seeded, quantity, location, size and species of trees and shrubbery. (Note: underground irrigation is required in all landscaped areas in commercial and industrial districts_ Plans must be so noted) . 4. *Building floor plans, elevations, sections and specifications, including materials proposed. 5. *Existing and proposed land elevations, drainage provisions, and utility provisions, including the diameters of utility lines. 6. Additional drawings, plans or information deemed necessary by the Secretary. *Must be prepared by a registered architect or person ,registered with the State Board of Registration for Architects, Engineers, Landscape Architects and Land Surveyors, and said drawings/plans shall be so certified. NOTE: Upon approval of plans by the Council and prior to issuance of permits, a Performance Agreement as ,to approved site improvements and a supporting financial guarantee, in an amount to be determined by tTFe—City, are required. Acceptable financial instruments include cash escrow; certificate of deposit; and performance bond. Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 89002 Applicant: City of Brooklyn Center Location: Southwest quadrant of I94 and Brooklyn Boulevard Request: Rezoning Application No. 89002, submitted by the City of Brooklyn Center, proposes to rezone from R5 to C1 the lots located at 6451 to 6533 Brooklyn Boulevard, including a 4.5 acre vacant parcel at the southwest quadrant of I94 and Brooklyn Boulevard. The property is bounded on the north by I94, on the east by Brooklyn Boulevard, on the south by some four plexes and single-family homes, and on the west by single-family homes. This application was considered by the Planning Commission at its January 12, 1989 meeting, at which a public hearing was opened. The application was tabled by the Commission and referred to the West Central Neighborhood Advisory Group for review and comment. The West Central Neighborhood Advisory Group met on February 21, 1989 at City Hall to consider the matter. (Minutes of that meeting are attached for the Commission's review.) The neighborhood advisory group unanimously recommended the C1 zoning as proposed. One property owner, Mr. Dave Paulat of 6521 Brooklyn Boulevard, was mildly opposed to the rezoning since it would prohibit any further expansion of his home. We feel this area is simply not a good location for single-family homes and any further additions to these properties would be counterproductive. Other property owners generally favored the rezoning. Neighbors were generally concerned regarding access to the large vacant parcel and screening of that parcel from the single-family homes around it. We explained that the City is still opposed to any access from Indiana Avenue North to the west. We also noted the requirements for a 15' buffer and a minimum 4' high fence. The neighbors expressed a desire for higher fences. Representatives of Public Storage also made a presentation at the neighborhood meeting. They desire to build a mini-storage development on the 4.5 acre vacant parcel at the southwest quadrant of 194 and Brooklyn Boulevard. (see appeal Application No. 89011 in this agenda packet.) As we stated at the neighborhood advisory group meeting, mini-storage is not acknowledged as either a permitted or special use in the C1 zoning district. The purpose of the City-initiated rezoning to C1 is in no way intended to accommodate the mini-storage use. Public Storage wishes the City to amend its Zoning Ordinance to allow mini-storage as a special use in the C1 zone and has set forth its arguments and draft ordinance language under appeal Application No. 89011. Staff are opposed to allowing warehousing and storage in the C1 zone. The neighborhood advisory group did not comment on the question of mini-storage. The public hearing on Application No. 89002 has been continued to this Thursday's meeting. Notices of the hearing, scheduled for 8:00 p.m. , have been sent. A resolution recommending approval of the rezoning application has been drafted and is attached for the Commission's review. Adoption of the resolution is recommended. 3-30-89 Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 89002 Applicant: City of Brooklyn Center Location: Southwest quadrant of 194 and Brooklyn Boulevard Request: Rezoning The City requests that the vacant parcel of land at the southwest quadrant of 194 and Brooklyn Boulevard and the adjacent single-family homes to the south be rezoned from R5 (multiple family) to C1 (service/office). The properties in question are all presently zoned R5 and are bounded by 194 on the north, by Brooklyn Boulevard on the east, by three four-plexes on the south end, and by single-family homes on the south and west (see area map attached). Background In the past five years, there have been two development proposals for the large (4.5 acre) vacant parcel at the southwest quadrant of 194 and Brooklyn Boulevard. In 1983, Larry Cramer proposed an office condominium development of about 20 units, approximately 1,000 sq. ft. each. Although allowed by special use permit in the R5 zone, it was not consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan recommendations for this area of Brooklyn Boulevard. The Plan recommended mid-density residential development (townhouses) along the boulevard from approximately 63rd Avenue North up to the freeway. The City responded to the proposal by adopting a Comprehensive Plan amendment to recommend service/office uses interchangeably with mid-density residential uses all along Brooklyn Boulevard. A special use permit was approved in 1983 and extended in 1984. The R5 zoning was left intact for the time being. The office proposal did not go forward, however, because Mr. Cramer was unable to obtain financing for the project. In 1985, Foundation Stone Ministries proposed a church for the large, vacant parcel. Churches were not a permitted or special use in the R5 zone, so they applied for a rezoning to Cl, in which "religious uses" are listed as a permitted use. The rezoning request was recommended by staff and the Planning Commission, but was denied by the City Council. Instead, the City Council acted to allow churches in the R5 zone as a special use. A special use permit for the church was granted; however, for reasons which were never made clear, the church chose to locate elsewhere. It is likely that the soil problems on the site played at least some part in the church's decision to go elsewhere. There are severe soil problems on the site which will require correction for full development of the site. Another factor which may inhibit development of the rezoned district is that the single-family lots to the south along Brooklyn Boulevard are under a restrictive covenant which prohibits commercial use of those lots. Thus, even if the single- family lots are rezoned to Cl, development of the properties for service/office use may be blocked unless all the other property owners in the plat release these lots from the restrictive covenant. The covenant is coming up for renewal in the relatively near future. This may, therefore, be a good time to seek such a release. Guidelines for Evaluating Rezonings All rezoning requests are evaluated under a set of guidelines contained in Section 35-208 of the Zoning Ordinance (attached). The following comments are offered to address the guidelines. a) Is there a clear and public need or benefit? 1-12-89 -1- Application No. 89002 continued We do not believe that the lots in question are any longer appropriate for residential use. We believe there is a benefit in zoning the property to Cl, allowing for a low-intensity commercial use and precluding residential development of the property. b) Is the proposed zoning consistent with and compatible with surrounding land use classifications? The C1 zoning is very compatible with single-family uses and is often used as a buffer zone between single-family homes and more intense zoning districts. We believe a low-rise office development will perform such a buffering function in this case also. c) Can all permitted uses in the proposed zoning ;district be contemplated for development of the subject property? Yes they can. A higher zoning district such as C2 would have some limitations because some uses comprehended in the C2 zoning district cannot abut R1 zoned property. Likewise, some uses allowed in the R5 zone - namely the residential uses -are not really appropriate for these properties. We believe, therefore, that the R5 zoning is no longer really appropriate. The Cl permitted and special uses more closely fit the constraints of developing and redeveloping these lots. d) Have there been substantial physical or zoning classification changes in the area since the subject property was zoned? No, there have not been significant changes, except for an increase in traffic along the freeway and along Brooklyn Boulevard. The increased traffic is one key reason why a residential zoning of the property is no longer appropriate. Another change that has occurred over the past ten years is that the Comprehensive Plan has been amended to recommend service/office use as well as mid-density residential in this section of Brooklyn Boulevard. High density residential development as is comprehended by the exiting R5 zoning is not recommended by the Comprehensive Plan. e) In the case of City-initiated rezoning proposals, is there a broad public purpose evident? The purpose of this rezoning proposal is to insure that development and redevelopment of this property is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. At present, the R5 zoning would allow for high-density residential development which would be inconsistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. A low-rise office development will be the most compatible land use in this location, given the surrounding land uses and roads. f) Will the subject property bear fully the ordinance development restrictions for the proposed zoning district? Yes, but there will be difficulty in redeveloping the single-family lots for any use. It is hoped that some or all of the single-family lots will be combined with the large, vacant parcel so that an improved access can be arranged for the site. The one acre minimum lot size for Cl lots along major thoroughfares will require that there be some combination of land parcels among the single-family lots before, or in conjunction with, redevelopment. It would probably be easier for the single- family lots to be used for access and parking. However, there are office 1-12-89 -2- w ' _ Application No. 89002 continued developments on Brooklyn Boulevard with similar lot depths; so it is certainly possible that the single-family lots could be converted to smaller office developments. We do not recommend home conversions in this area as a long run use of the property. The most efficient use of the land would result from clearing the existing houses and building new office buildings on parcels at least one acre in size and with consolidated access. g) Is the subject property generally unsuited for uses permitted in the present zoning district, with respect to size, configuration, topography or location? We feel generally that this is not a good location for residential development. The single-family lots in particular have insufficient depth to buffer residences from Brooklyn Boulevard and arrange for parking and driveways on the site. It is possible, but not really desirable. Again, most of the single-family lots are too narrow to meet the minimum R5 width of 1001 . This lack of width would require consolidation of land parcels for redevelopment. The same would be the case, of course, with office redevelopment. 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? The proposed rezoning is certainly warranted by the City's Comprehensive Plan which recommends service/office development in this area of the boulevard. As to the lack of developable land in the C1 district, there is a lack of vacant land in almost all zoning districts, except perhaps the industrial districts. Finally, we believe the rezoning proposal is in the best interests of the community in that it should provide eventually for an appropriate use that is compatible with both the adjacent roadways and the adjacent single-family homes. i) Does the proposal demonstrate merit beyond the interests of an owner or owners of an individual parcel? This is a City-initiated rezoning. As we have stated above, there is definitely merit to the proposed rezoning beyond the interests of the property owners. The property owners would probably prefer a rezoning to C2 since that would allow for more intense development. Such a rezoning would, however, exceed the recommendations of the Comprehensive Plan for this area. Procedure The standard procedure with rezoning applications is for the Planning Commission to hold a public hearing and then table the application, referring it to a neighborhood advisory group (in this case the West Central Neighborhood Advisory Group). The neighborhood advisory group will meet sometime within the next month or so and then convey its recommendation to the Planning Commission. The Commission will then continue the public hearing and finally make its recommendation to the City Council. The City Council then holds a hearing and ultimately makes the final decision. Based on this procedure, we recommend that the application be tabled and referred to the West Central Neighborhood Advisory Group. 1-12-89 -3- CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER PL�,NING COMMISSION APPLICATION -- Application No. 8901 Please Print Clearly or Type street Location of Property Brooklyn Blvd. & I-694 _egal Description of Property Lot 1 , Block 1 , Northgate, Hennepin Cty. )wner Mr. James Pearson Address 8053 E. Bloomington Freeway, Blmgton Phone No. .884-7397 4pplicant Public Storage, Inc. Address 1 Appletree Sq. , Suite 1382; Blmgton , 55425 phone No. 854-6579 Type of Request: Rezoning Subdivision Approval . Plan Approval Site & Bldg.9 Special Use Permit X Other: 6Ae ZV° Description of Request: To amend the C-1 zoning to District to allow self storage as a special use with performance standards as proposed and determined by the City Council. Siteplans submitted as backup data to indicate quality of proposal. The applicant requests processing of this application and agrees to pay to the City of Brooklyn Center, within fifteen (15) days after mailing or delivery of the billing state- ment, the actual costs incurred by the City for Engineering, Planning and Legal expenses reasonably and necessarily required by the City for the processing of the application. Such costs shall be in addition to the application fee described herein. Withdrawal of the application shall not relieve the applicant of the obligation to pay costs incurred prior to withdrawal . AZW -I /J�� .Ap licant s Signature Fee $ 25.00 Ao �y� Receipt No. 79697 Date: as �40- PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Dates of P.C. Consideration: Approved Denied �_ this , day of . 19a, subject to the following conditions : i hairman r e v Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 89011 Applicant: Public Storage Location: Southwest quadrant of 194 and Brooklyn Boulevard Request: Appeal This application is classified as an appeal. However, it is actually a request for an ordinance amendment to allow self-storage as a special use in the C1 zoning district. The appellant wishes to develop the vacant, 4.5 acre parcel at the southwest quadrant of 194 and Brooklyn Boulevard with mini-warehouses. Staff have conveyed to the appellant that warehousing and storage are acknowledged uses only in the I-1 and I-2 zoning districts and are not acknowledged in the C1 district. The property in question is included in a City-initiated rezoning proposal for this area to C1 from R5 (see Application No. 89002) . The purpose of the rezoning is to eliminate multi-family residential development as an option for the land at the southwest quadrant of I94 and Brooklyn Boulevard and to allow service/office development, but it is not to allow for self-storage development which we feel is more appropriately located in the I-1 and I-2 zones as presently provided for. The appellant's representative, Mr. Tim Malloy with Dahlgren, Shardlow and Uban, has submitted written arguments (attached) which address the guidelines for evaluating rezonings from Section 35-208 of the Zoning Ordinance (also attached) . He has also submitted draft ordinance language (attached) for Sections 35-320, Subsection 3 (special uses in the C1 zone) and Section 35-411 (special requirements in C1 and C1A districts) . The appellant's arguments are summarized below: A. Is there a clear and public need or benefit? The appellant argues that mini-storage provides a valuable service to the general public. The facilities are used by a variety of groups. Elderly residents who move to smaller accommodations, renters who have limited storage space in apartment buildings, small businesses and offices seeking temporary storage of surplus stock or old files - all these users have a need for storage space. Mr. Malloy notes that industrial districts tend to be more secluded and less frequently patrolled making safety an issue for elderly and single females who frequently use mini-storage facilities. Allowing mini-storage in the C 1 zone by special use permit would make it more accessible to the people who use it. B. Is the proposed zoning consistent with and compatible with surrounding land use classifications? Mr. Malloy notes that C1 zoning has been cited by the City as a buffer use. He states mini-storage could be required to provide generous landscaping making them "ideal as a buffer use between major thoroughfares or more intense uses and residential or other sensitive uses." Mr. Malloy points out that mini- storage is compatible with other C1 uses because it is a low traffic generator and, therefore, does not contribute to traffic congestion in a commercial district. Mini-storage also can provide convenient storage to surrounding office uses. 3-30-89 -1- A pP licatioi-. No. 89011 continued C. Can all permitted uses in the proposed zoning district be contemplated for development of the subject property? Mr. Malloy notes the specific use proposed and offers an alternative question: "could the development of this use be contemplated on any given vacant parcel within the C1 District? In answer, Mr. Malloy points out that the draft language proposes the use as a special use which would "give the City substantial control of how the facilities are constructed and operated." Secondly, location would be limited to properties in the C1 district which are located with primary vehicular access off a major thoroughfare or arterial street. The sites would thus be limited and there would be no traffic generated on residential streets. D. Have there been substantial physical or zoning classification changes in the area since the subject property was zoned? Not applicable. E. In the case of City-initiated rezoning proposals, is there a broad public purpose evident? Self-storage is not proposed by the City. The rezoning should be based on sound planning principles. The applicant believes that the benefits outlined in item A demonstrate a broad public purpose for allowing mini-storage as a special use in the C1 district. F. Will the subject property fully bear the ordinance development restrictions for the proposed zoning district.? Mr. Malloy states that this question is not directly applicable, but raises important issues that might be better addressed separately as follows: 111) Do the development characteristics of mini-storage facilities generally comply with the development restrictions set forth in the Zoning Code for the C1 District, as well as the general requirements of the Code? Yes. 2) Are the development restrictions outlined in the Code adequate enough to ensure that the development of mini-storage facilities within the C1 District will be compatible with surrounding land uses and that they will meet the health, safety and welfare standards of the City of Brooklyn Center?" Mr. Malloy answers this last question by making two points: a) classification of mini-storage as a special use will allow the City to address inadequacies in the existing requirements through conditions of approval; and b) the ordinance proposed would place restrictions on lot size, building coverage, security, screening, aesthetics, etc. and thus mini-storage can be adequately controlled. ,3-30-89 -2- I Application No. 89011 continued G. Is the subject property generally unsuited for uses permitted in the present zoning district, with respect to size, configuration, topography, or location? "Not Applicable." 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? "The proposed rezoning does not expand the area of a district." I I. Does the proposal demonstrate merit beyond the interests of an owner or owners of an individual parcel? "See Item A." We will not review the proposed ordinance language point by point in this report. It is attached for the Commission's consideration. The ordinance language calls for mini-storage to be allowed as a special use in the C1 zone provided the facility is located with the primary vehicular access off a "thoroughfare or minor arterial street." A minimum lot size of 2 acres and a maximum lot coverage of 40% (by buildings) is proposed. Hours of operation would be determined by the City Council. Dead storage only would be permitted; no transfer stations would be allowed. No garage sales would be permitted. Security provisions would include a minimum 6' high barrier around the perimeter of the site, a gate for vehicular access, and a resident manager. Parking requirements would be one space per 35 storage units, equally distributed throughout the site. The draft ordinance proposes driveway and parking stall widths below the City's current standards, but adds that drive widths and turning radii must be adequate for emergency vehicles. Landscape requirements would be applied "to minimize the environmental impacts of self-service storage facilities such as: visual blight, parking or recreational vehicle storage, lighting, noise, and dust, on adjacent properties or public streets." A"view obstructing barrier not less than 6 feet in height and providing a minimum year-round opaqueness of 60 percent" would be required. Further specifications of landscape treatment and screening devices are added. The draft ordinance also calls for fairly vague aesthetic controls. Exterior materials would have to be "attractive" and "durable", and "harmonious with surrounding developments." Restrictions governing noise, waste handling and storage, vibration and odor, glare and heat would be the same as applied in the I-1 and I-2 districts under Section 35-413, Subsections 3 through 8. Staff Response aff are opposed to the draft ordinance language as it applies to the Cl zoning district. We feel that the proposal would simply introduce an industrial use (warehousing and storage) into the service/office zoning district. The building to land ratio, the parking requirement, the use itself, and the restrictions applied to environmental impacts such as noise, odor, and vibration - all are similar toor precisely the same as for industrial uses. Conveniently, the buffer provisions are 3-30-89 -3- v Application No. ,89011 continued not. While the draft ordinance language spends a lot of verbage on landscaping and screening requirements, the bottom line is that they are not much different than for a standard C1 use. A C1 use that abuts Rl zoned land at a property line must provide a 15' buffer and a 4' high fence. An industrial use that abuts R1 zoned land at a property line must provide a 100' buffer and an 8' high fence. We believe that our landscape point system and the requirement for underground irrigation, for the most part, adequately addresses the landscape issue. The appellant will no doubt show the Commission renderings of similar projects around the country with stucco walls and hip roofs. The aesthetic criteria proposed, however, are fairly vague and will not insure quality. We believe the most effective way to insure quality development in the C1 zone is to restrict it to service/office uses which invest far more per square foot of building than any mini- warehouse, however designed and landscaped. As Mr. Orgas stated at the West Central Neighborhood Advisory Group meeting, mini-storage is an interim land use until market forces dictate a more intense use of the land. It does not tend to be a permanent use, justifying substantial investment. We do not argue that there is no need for mini-storage facilities, but we simply do not believe they are appropriate for the C1 or even the C2 district. They are an industrial use and belong in the industrial district. Security can be adequately addressed in the I-1 and I-2 zones. A proposal in those zoning districts involving a resident manager would certainly have merit and some of the proposed ordinance provisions could be considered for the industrial districts, including allowing a resident manager. The Commission should be aware that there was a proposal for mini-warehouses in 1973 for the property now occupied by the Osseo-Brooklyn Bus Company Company at 68th and Lee Avenues North. That proposal was considered at some length over a period of approximately one year and was denied by both the Planning Commission and City Council. The resolution of denial adopted by the City Council (attached) , cited three basic reasons for the denial: 111) The proposed use is neither a recognized permitted or special use in the C2 District per Section 35-322 of the Zoning Ordinance. 2) The proposed use is not deemed similar in nature to other recognized C2 District uses per Section 35-322 (j) of the Zoning Ordinance. 3) The proposed use is deemed similar to and more compatible with recognized uses in the I-1 (Industrial Park) and I-2 (General Industry) Districts." While simply put, these findings state the basic facts of the case in 1973 and, we believe, today as well: namely, that mini-storage is an industrial use and should only be comprehended in the industrial zoning districts. Finally, we have noted the appellant's point that the proposed mini-storage use is a low traffic generator (they have estimated that their facility would generate only about 60 trips per day) . While the site in question certainly has access problems and people may find it difficult to enter and exit the site, we do not feel that this is a good case for allowing mini-storage in the C1 zone. Industrial uses do tend to involve less traffic than commercial uses. This is why traffic counts on Shingle Crerak Parkway north of Freeway Boulevard are much lower than counts south of Freeway Boulevard. Commercial uses generate more traffic. That is why they are located in commercial districts and why commercial streets tend to be congested. Traffic 3-30-89 -4- i Application No. 89011 continued generation may be a reason for limiting development options, for rezoning, and/or for designing ingress, egress and parking so as to avoid traffic congestion in the public streets. We do not believe low traffic generation is an appropriate basis for opening up the C1 zone to industrial uses. And, we do not believe that the land at the southwest quadrant of I94 and Brooklyn Boulevard should be zoned industrial, given its residential abutment. We do not find a broad public purpose for allowing this industrial use in a C1 zoning district. There is vacant, undeveloped land in the I-1 and I-2 zones that can appropriately be put to use for such development in a manner consistent with the Zoning Ordinance. This proposal does not demonstrate merit beyond the interests of the owners and those proposing the development. Based on the above considerations, we recommend denial of the appeal and the associated proposed ordinance language for the C1 zoning district. The appellant has submitted site and building plans with the appeal application. A reduction of the site plan is attached and the drawings will be presented to the Commission at Thursday night's meeting. However, we have not performed a detailed analysis of the plans (nor did we request them) because the basic use question identified in the appeal must be answered first. No site and building plan application is before the Commission for review. 3-30-89 -5- CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION Application No. 86030 Please Print Clearly or Type Street Location of Property (Pq P. � �Q�j/�G, �}✓. �l/, �(�Q�'—� �7 Legal Description of Property kyT 1- MUM f4f hbP117 6U Owner S & G ASSOCIATES Address 360 West Larpenteur Ave, P.O. Box 6457O,St.Paul , MN 55164 Phone No. 488-6691 Applicant S & G ASSOCIATES Address 360 West Larpenteur Ave. ,P.O.Box 64570,St. Paul MN 55164 phone No. 488-6691 Type of Request: Rezoning Subdivision Approval Variance x Site & Bldg. Plan Approval Special Use Permit Other: Description of Request: A 5RrM&krr 1 U/[-b (NG, The applicant requests processing of this application and agrees to pay to the City of Brooklyn Center, within fifteen (15) days after mailing or delivery of the billing state- ment, the actual costs incurred by the City for Engineering, Planning and Legal expenses reasonably and necessarily required by the City for the processing of the application. Such costs shall be in addition to the application fee described herein. Withdrawal of the application shall not relieve the applicant of the obligation to pay costs incurred prior to withdrawal . Fee $ 100.00 C. E. Sheehy Applicant's Signature Receipt No. 7160 Date: PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Dates of P.C. Consideration: Approved Denied this y day of 19 subject to the following conditions : irman CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway 55430 PROCEDURES AND REQUIREMENTS FOR FILING APPLICATION FOR SITE AND BUILDING PLAN APPROVAL Prior to submission of an application for plan review and approval, prospective applicants should arrange an informational meeting with the Planning Staff to discuss preliminary plans and to become familiarized with applicable ordinance and policy provisions. Three (3) copies of the following documents and information shall be submitted, at least 14 days prior to the date of the regular Commission meeting, concurrent with filing the application (required documents must be consistent with ordi- nance and policy provisions before an application may be accepted) : 1. A certified site survey drawing by a registered engineer or land surveyor showing pertinent existing condition, accurately dimensioned. 2.* An accurately scaled and dimensioned site plan indicating: a) parking layouts including access provisions; b) designations and locations of accessory buildings; c) fences, walls or other screening, including heights and type of material; d) outside lighting provisions, type and location; e) curbing. 3.* A landscape plan showing areas to be sodded or seeded; location, size and species of trees and shrubbery. 4.* Building floor plans, elevations, sections and specifications, including materials proposed. 5.* Existing and proposed land elevations, drainage provisions, and utility provisions. 6. Additional drawings, plans or information deemed necessary by the Secretary. *Must be prepared by a registered architect or person registered with the State Board of Registration for Architects, Engineers and Land Surveyors, and said drawings/plans shall be so certified. NOTE: Upon approval of plans by the Council and prior to issuance of permits, a Performance Agreement as to approved site improvements and a supporting finan- cial guarantee, in an amount to be determined by the City, are required. Accept- able financial instruments include cash escrow; certificate of deposit; and performance bond. Copies of the zoning Ordinance may be obtained from the Administrative Office. Questions should be directed to the Planning and Inspection Department. n • Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 86030 Applicant: S & G Associates Location: 69th Avenue North, east of Earle Brown Farm Apartments Request: Site and Building Plan The applicant requests site and building plan approval to construct a three-storey, 24 unit apartment building on the vacant 1.52 acre parcel of land east of the Earle Brown Farm Apartments and south of 69th Avenue North. The land in question is zoned R5 and is bounded on the north by 69th Avenue North, on the east by the Humboldt Court Apartments, on the south by the Spec. 7 Industrial Building (TCR) , and on the west by the Earle Brown Farm Apartments. Apartment buildings two and one-half to three stories in height at a density of up to 16 units per acre are permitted uses in the R5 zoning district. Land/Density The parcel in question is 66,438 sq. ft. Two and one-half to three-storey apartments in the R5 zone are allowed at a density of one unit per 2,700 sq. ft. of land. Based on this requirement, 24.6 units are allowable on the property. The proposed 24 unit building, therefore, meets density limitations on this property. It should be noted that the plat (Tanami Addition) creating this parcel has not been released for filing at the County. The plat must be filed prior to issuance of buildings permits. Access/Parkin Access to the site is proposed via a 24' wide driveway off 69th Avenue North, 28' east of the west lot line. The City Engineer has advised that the radius of the curb opening be softened to a 25' radius. The plans do not indicate a measurement of the radius, but it is quite sharp. The parking requirement for multiple family dwellings is two spaces per unit. The plan shows 36 stalls outside and 12 stalls within a garage on the south end of the site for a total of 48 spaces as required. Parking is provided along the westerly and southerly portions of the site. One handicapped stall is designated. Two should be provided and any such stalls in the open lot should be properly signed. Landscaping/Screening The landscape plan provides screening of parking areas with a hedgerow of Alpine Current shrubs along the west side of the lot and around the southerly parking area. Some Redtwig Dogwood are also employed. A condition of the plat approval creating this lot was that a 10' easement be reserved along the west property line for greenstrip purposes to provide a visual break between this lot and the larger parking area to the west. The Zoning Ordinance requires one 6" diameter tree for the first 6 units and one for each 7 additional units up to 97 units (Section 35-410) . Under this provision, the site in question is required to have four 6" diameter trees. The plan calls for four Marshall's Green Ash at 6" diameter. It also calls for four (4) Black Hills Spruce, six (6) Snowdrift Crab, 12 Amur Maple, and two (2) small Sugar Maple. The point total of all proposed plantings, based on the schedule reviewed previously by the Commission (attached) is 169.5 points. This seems to be an appropriate overall level though the number of shade trees is somewhat low. Grading/Drainage/Utilities The grading plan shows contours at 2' intervals and is very rough. A fairly substantial berm (4') is indicated in the green area adjacent to 69th Avenue North. Catch basins are indicated in the northerly green area and at the southeast corner of the site. At some points on the site the grade would be 10% to 40%. Storm sewer 8-14-86 -1- Application No. 86030 continued lines are existing. In general, it appears that water would tend to be conveyed away from the building and into the storm sewer in a fairly rapid manner. Although this site is not subject to review by the Shingle Creek Watershed Commission, some modification of the grading plan may be necessary to reduce some slopes and storm sewer sizes. In addition, the plan shows no water service connection. The City Engineer recommends that two hydrants be provided on the property with an 8" connection to the City main in 69th Avenue North. The 5" diameter sanitary sewer line must be evaluated on the basis of the fixtures in the building. In general, the grading, drainage and utility plan is subject to considerable revision prior to issuance of permits. However, such revisions are not likely to affect the basic site plan and can be pursued under the standard administrative review called for in condition No. 2. (See City Engineer's memo dated August 8, 1986 for further details) . Building Plan The proposed building plan calls for 11 one-bedroom units at 729 sq. ft. , 12 two- bedroom units at 906 sq. ft. and a one-bedroom handicapped unit at 729 sq. ft. (one handicapped unit is required by the Uniform Building Code) . The main corridor on each floor is 5' 6" wide. The exterior of the building is predominantly face brick with stucco panels in the vertical wall spaces between the windows. Each unit would have a balcony or patio approximately 5' x 10' off the living room. The roof is a gabled roof. There is an entrance to the building on the east and west sides. The plan proposes a sidewalk between the westerly entrance and the parking lot. The easterly entrance would have only a concrete stoop. Staff strongly recommend that considerably more sidewalk be provided to connect both entrances with the full parking lot. The plan also provides elevations for the proposed garage on the south end of the property. The garage would be flat-roofed with brick exterior on the ends and wood frame on the sides (east and west) where openings would exist. A wood fascia is indicated around the top of the garage. The building and garage are thus quite similar to the Earle Brown Farm Apartments to the west. Lighting/Trash The plan shows four flood lights at the corners of the building and two at the northerly corners of the garage. The Housing Maintenance and Occupancy ordinance (Chapter 12) in Section 12-315 requires simply "effective illumination in all exterior parking lots and walkways." Staff have recommended the addition of one light standard on the westerly parking area of the site. Likewise, trash containers and enclosures must be indicated on the plan. Poorly planned trash con p Y containers can be a source of serious health and sanitation as well as visual complaints at apartment complexes. We recommend that the plans be amended to indicate appropriate lighting and trash enclosures prior to review by the City Council. Recommendation While there are some deficiencies in the plan, they are not so serious that the basic proposal is in doubt. We would recommend that approval be subject to at least the following conditions: 1 . Building plans are subject to review and approval by the Building Official with respect to applicable codes and the Housing Maintenance and Occupancy Ordinance prior to the issuance of permits. 8-14-86 -2- Application No. 86030 continued 2. Grading, drainage, utility and berming 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. 14. Any outside trash disposal facilities and rooftop mechanical equipment shall be apppropriately screened from view. 5. Plan approval is exclusive of all signery which is subject to Chapter 314 of the City Ordinances. 6. B612 curb and gutter shall be provided around all parking and driving areas. 7. The applicant shall submit an as-built utility survey of the property prior to release of the performance guarantee. 8. The plat creating the parcel for this development shall be filed at the County prior to the issuance of permits. 9. The plans shall be revised, prior to consideration by the City Council, in the following respects: a) Lighting provisio ns sh all be indicated to provide effective illumination of all parking and walkway areas in accordannce with Sections 12-315 and 35-712 of the City ordinances. b) Location of trash containers and appropriate screening shall be indicated . c) Sidewalk shall be provided between all parking areas and building entrances at a minimum width of 141 . d) The grading and utility plan shall be revised to indicate a water service and other grades and utilities in accordance with the City Engineer's memo dated August 8, 1986. 10. On-site hydrant locations shall be in accordance with the recommendations of the Fire Marshal. 11. Outdoor handicapped parking spaces shall be signed in accordance with the handicapped code. 8-14-86 -3- , �.. .►� ..� .�. ■■ 111111 ■ � Elm ■ ■ �® �� ■ ■ ■■� i■i m MEN son �� ii ■i iii . .� WIN ■■■ OMEN won INIM om WIN AP INE oil ZI 67 HL Mo AP 1C ,, _ s �!(w 4 a r 3 AS CENa+1Y 7n tE1M11 , SoD 9 fl - 1 e 9 �9 p►epefed 61do 9 h � s'�,L tale r✓S / .9 _ -- �•r it ;' 9 � ' e s s 9 mirk v o r q �. LRA 5 b04 t1AP 5 e PST rs S S S S a""f 6 �oD f1 "-LAN ;! •eels 1 Z0'