Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout96-1 PCR Member Graydon Boeck introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 96-1 RESOLUTION REGARDING RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION OF PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION NO. 96005 SUBMITTED BY NORTH MEMORIAL HEALTH CARE WHEREAS, Planning Commission Application No. 96005 submitted by North Memorial Health Care proposes rezoning from R-1 (single family residence) to PUD/R-1 of the property located at 4201 58th Avenue North; and WHEREAS, this proposal comprehends the rezoning of the above mentioned property and site and building plan approval for a residential hospice care facility for more than six clients; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly called public hearing on April 25, 1996 when a staff report and public testimony regarding the rezoning and site and building plans were received; and WHEREAS, the Southwest Neighborhood Advisory Group met to consider this matter on May 9, 1996, at the City Hall and unanimously recommended approval of this Planned Unit Development proposal; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission resumed consideration of this matter on June 13, 1996, received an additional staff report and took further testimony during a continued public hearing; and WHEREAS, the Commission considered the rezoning and the site and building plan request in light of all testimony received, the guidelines for evaluating rezonings contained in Section 35-208 of the City's Zoning Ordinance, the provisions of the Planned Unit Development Ordinance contained in Section 35-355, and the City's Comprehensive Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Brooklyn Center Planning Advisory Commission to recommend to the City Council that Application No. 96005 submitted by North Memorial Health Care be approved in light of the following considerations: 1. The Rezoning and Planned Unit Development proposal are compatible with the standards, purposes and intent of the Planned Unit Development section of the City's Zoning Ordinance. 1 1 2. The Rezoning and Planned Unit Development proposal will allow for the utilization of the land in question in a manner which is compatible with, complimentary to, and of comparable intensity to adjacent land uses as well as those permitted on surrounding land. 3. The utilization of the property as proposed under the Rezoning and Planned Unit Development proposal will conform with City Ordinance standards with the exception of the limitation of six or fewer persons being served in a licensed residential program. Variation from this Zoning Ordinance limitation to allow up to eight hospice patients is justified on the basis of the development plan submitted and the unique characteristics of the property under consideration such as its large size (in excess of two acres), its remote and secluded location, and the fact that access to the property does not require traffic to go through adjacent residential neighborhoods. 4. The Rezoning and Planned Unit Development proposal are considered compatible with the recommendations of the City's Comprehensive Plan for this area of the City. 5. The Rezoning and Planned Unit Development appear to be a good utilization of the property under consideration in that it maintains the residential character of the property and provides for the ability to meet the needs of dying persons who are unable to care for themselves, but do not require hospital or nursing care services. 6. In light of the above considerations, it is believed that the guidelines for evaluating rezonings as contained in Section 35-208 of the City's Zoning Ordinance are met and that the proposal is, therefore, in the best interests of the community. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Brooklyn Center Planning Advisory Commission to recommend to the City Council that approval of Application No. 96005 be subject to the following conditions and considerations: 1. The building plans are subject to review and approval by the Building Official with respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance of permits. 2. Grading, drainage, and utility plans are subject to review and approval by the City Engineer, prior to the issuance of permits. 3. A site performance agreement and supporting financial guarantee (in an amount to be determined) shall be submitted prior to the issuance of permits to assure completion of approved site improvements. 4. Any outside trash disposal facilities and rooftop or on ground mechanical equipment shall be appropriately screened from view. 1 1 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. Plan approval is exclusive of all signery which is subject to Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances. 7. B-612 curb and gutter shall be provided around all driving and parking area including the access drive leading to this site from County Road 10. 8. The applicant shall submit an as-built survey of the property, improvements and utility service lines, prior to release of the performance guarantee. 9. The property owner shall enter into an easement and agreement for maintenance and inspection of utility and storm drainage systems, prior to the issuance of permits. 10. The applicant is subject to the requirements and regulations of the Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commission with respect to this site. The storm drainage system shall be acceptable to the Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commission prior to the issuance of permits. 11. The applicant shall enter into a development agreement with the City based on applicable ordinances and shall be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney, prior to the issuance of building permits. Said agreement shall acknowledge the use of this site as a licensed residential hospice serving no more than eight clients at any one time, acknowledge all the previous stated conditions of approval and assure compliance with development plans submitted by the applicant. Date Chair ATT T: / ------o a (� J Secretary The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Mark Holmes and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Chair Tim Willson, Commissioners Mark Holmes, Donald Booth, Dianne Reem and Graydon Boeck and the following voted against the same: None whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. 1 1