Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1989 12-07 PCM MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA REGULAR SESSION DECEMBER 7, 1989 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Planning Commission met in regular session and was called to order by Chairperson Molly Malecki at 7:33 p.m. ROLL CALL Chairperson Molly Malecki, Commissioners Wallace Bernards, Lowell Ainas and Kristen Mann. Also present were Director of Planning and Inspection Ronald Warren and Recording Secretary Mary Lou Larsen. The Secretary noted Bertil Johnson was out of town and was excused and that Commissioner Ella Sander would be late. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - November 16, 1989 Motion by Commissioner Ainas seconded by Commissioner Mann to approve the minutes of the November 16, 1989 Planning Commission meeting as submitted. Voting in favor: Chairperson Malecki, Commissioners Bernards, Ainas and Mann. Voting against: none. The motion passed. APPLICATION NO. 89025 (Mary Ziebarth) The Secretary stated the applicant called this morning to withdraw her application as she has found another location for her home occupation. Motion by Commissioner Ainas seconded by Commissioner Mann to acknowledge withdrawal of Application No. 89025 submitted by Mary Ziebarth for special use permit approval to conduct group dance/baton twirling lessons in her home at 5329 4th Street North. Voting in favor: Chairperson Malecki, Commissioners Bernards, Ainas and Mann. Voting against: none. The motion passed. 1990 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SCHEDULE The Secretary asked for a motion to approve the 1990 Planning Commission meeting schedule previously sent to the Commissioners. Motion by Commissioner Mann seconded by Commissioner Ainas to approve the 1990 schedule for Planning Commission meetings. Voting in favor: Chairperson Malecki, Commissioners Bernards, Ainas, and Mann. Voting against: none. The motion passed. The Secretary stated that Chairperson Malecki and Commissioners Johnson and Sander's terms would be expiring on December 31, 1989 and asked if they wished to continue for another two year term. Chairperson Malecki answered in the affirmative. The Secretary explained that Commissioner James McCloskey had moved out of the City and would no longer be a member. DISCUSSION ITEM a) Land Use Study of area at 66th Avenue North and West River Road The Secretary stated the last item of business on this evening's meeting is the Land Use Study of the area at 66th Avenue North and West River Road. He explained the matter had first come to the Planning Commission's attention through a rezoning proposal (Application No. 89006) submitted by the owner of the property, Howard Atkins, for approval to rezone a sliver of land adjacent to the existing C2 zone south of 66th Avenue from R5 to C2 .to accommodate a gas station, convenience store 12-7-89 -1- .and car wash. He stated the , was first considered by the Planning Commission on February 16, 1989 tabled and referred to the Northeast Neighborhood Advisory Group for review and comment: He stated the Northeast Neighborhood Advisory Group was scheduled to meet on March 14, 1989 but was cancelled due to a snowstorm, however, some interested citizens did come to the meeting and an informal discussion was held. He stated the meeting was rescheduled for March 21, 1989, and at that meeting the neighborhood group recommended against the C2 rezoning and recommended instead that the property between 66th, 65th and Willow Lane and'252 be rezoned to C1 . He noted the neighborhood group believes that C1 would be the best use of the property and a good buffer for the residential area. He stated the application went back to the Planning Commission for consideration on April 13, 1989 whereby a recommendation was made to set aside the application and establish a moratorium to prohibit certain development until a land use study of the area could be undertaken and completed. The Secretary then introduced Randy Thoreson, a consultant with Short-Elliott- Hendrickson (SEH), who is doing the land use study. Mr. Thoreson stated that a meeting had been held with the Northeast Neighborhood Group and residents of the area on November 28, 1989 to discuss various alternatives and to allow the residents an opportunity to express their opinions. He stated that of 45 various land use alternatives considered, it had been narrowed down to 5. He then reviewed transparencies illustrating the various areas and alternatives. He explained Study Area 1 is 1 acre, Study Area 2, 4.75 acres and Study Area 3 is 5.75 acres. He noted that the following alternatives are being considered: Alternative Awould be to leave the zoning the way it currently is with the exception of Study Area 1, which should be rezoned to Rl (Single Family Residential). Alternative B comprehends Area 1 being R1 (Single Family Residential) ; Area 2 being a combination of C2 (Commerce) on the west and C1 (Service/Office) on the east; and Area 3 being R5 (Multiple Family Residential). Alternative C comprehends Area 1 being R1 (Single Family Residential) ; Area 2 being all C1 (Service/Office) ; and Area 3 as R5 (Multiple Family Residential). At this point Mr. Thoreson noted that it was recommended, as indicated in all of the various alternatives,that Study Area 1 be changed to Rl (Single Family Residential). He explained that the City has looked at, and is committed to, seeking a redesign of the West River Road frontage road in the area immediately north of 66th Avenue which will "soften" the curve, necessitating using a portion of the MN/DOT property. The redesign also envisions a teardrop shaped island that will better control traffic in this area that is using the 66th Avenue/T. H. 252 intersection and also West River Road and Willow Lane. He briefly reviewed the proposed redesign on an overhead transparency. Mr. Thoreson further noted that with all the alternatives being considered, Study Area 3 is comprehended as R5 (Multiple Family Residential). He explained, that, from a zoning or land use perspective the multiple family residential as allowed under the City's Zoning Ordinance is an appropriate buffer from T. H. 252 to the single family residential land use east of Willow Lane. He cautioned that he was not saying the existing apartments were necessarily a good neighbor, but that the land use (multiple residential) was appropriate. He added that it was his 12-7-89 -2- understanding that the City was attempting to correct the maintenance problems 'at these complexes through its licensing procedures. Mr. Thoreson also noted that there could be a couple of sub alternatives off of Alternative C for Study Area 2, that being all R5 or all C2. He pointed out that the area under study is unique in that you get a different perspective of the area depending upon where you are located. He explained that if you are at the intersection of T. H. 252 and 66th Avenue North, you are in a high traffic area which seems that a highly commercialized zone would be appropriate; while if you are looking at the area east of Willow Lane at 65th Avenue North, a lower density residential use seems most appropriate. Alternative D comprehends Area 1 being R1 (Single Family Residential) and Area 3 being R5 (Multiple Family Residential). With respect to Area 2, the City would be involved by acquiring and developing an area which would be designed in such a way as to provide a new access to the North Willow Lane residential area and also a large buffer/landscape/berm area to screen and buffer the area from some of the adverse effects of the T. H. 252 area. The City would acquire all of the Atkins property and later decide, or try to influence a redevelopment of this area, perhaps with a mixture of uses. Alternative E also comprehends Area 1 being R1 (Single Family Residential) and Area 3 being R5 (Multiple Family Residential) and a roadway redesign involving a buffer/landscaping/berm area with the City only acquiring the necessary land from the Atkins property to construct the roadway and buffer area and to then allow the existing C2 (Commerce) land use to continue. This would allow the gas station/convenience store/car wash proposal to proceed as a special use permit. Mr. Thoreson then reviewed the minutes of November 28, 1989 Northeast Neighborhood Advisory Group meeting . He pointed out various portions of the minutes that were concerns for residents in the area. A discussion ensued regarding traffic concerns. Mr. Thoreson showed a graphic illustrating level of service E and F. He stated a redesign of the intersection would help the traffic problem, but explained that this study is not a traffic study, but rather a Land Use Study. He noted a correction to the minutes at the bottom of page 3. He stated that he is attributed with saying "if Mr. Atkins property is developed, the level of service for that intersection (T. H. 252/66th Avenue North) will almost certainly go to "F". Mr. Thoreson clarified that the intersection of T. H. 252/66th Avenue North will go to a level service "F" regardless of whether Mr. Atkins property is developed/redeveloped or not, or what land use is eventually developed/redeveloped there. The Secretary summarized the five alternatives as leaving the area alone on one hand, to the City acquiring property and providing a redesigned access to Willow Lane with a buffer/landscape/berm area on the other hand. In between, he noted, could be various different land uses in Study Area 2, with Study Area 1 being Rl (Single Family Residential) and Study Area 3 remaining R5 (Multiple Family Residential). 12-7-89 -3- Further discussion ensued regarding traffic in the Willow Lane area and City acquisition and participation in development of the property. The Secretary asked the Commission for direction and suggested that the meeting be opened for public comment. PUBLIC HEARING Chairperson Malecki then opened the meeting for a public comment and asked if anyone present wished to speak. Bill Hannay, 6432 Willow Lane, asked for clarification of the Northeast Neighborhood Advisory Group's recommendation of rezoning Area 2 to C1 (Service/Office). The Secretary explained that the Northeast Neighborhood Advisory Group, in March, 1989, recommended the area be rezoned to C1 . He explained that if the City had rezoned this area to C1 , the Brookdale Motel and the apartment complex would then have become nonconforming uses in that zone. He added that the proposal would have prevented development of the gas station as well. He explained that the Neighborhood Advisory Group recommendation is one of the Alternatives noted by the consultant, at least as it relates to Study Area 2. The Secretary stated that the City would, in all likelihood, pursue the redesign of the intersection at West River Road north of 66th no matter how the property in the study was rezoned. Mr. Hannay stated he favors the teardrop intersection design, Rl zoning for Area 1, but has concerns for Area 2 if zoned C2. He asked what the City can do if a business is abandoned. The Secretary answered that it would depend on the zoning. For instance, C2 allows General Commerce which is a variety of businesses and uses which could be allowed in the future, but particular uses would have to meet ordinance requirements such as parking requirements. Mr. Hannay asked if action can be taken by the City to demolish an abandoned building. The Secretary answered that is an option if that building becomes a hazard. Richard Jewitt, 6552 Willow Lane, stated that even with a berm there will still be a traffic problem. He stated that he has trouble getting out onto West River Road now and with a gas station added, it will be a bigger problem. The Secretary stated that with the redesign, traffic could exit north onto T. H. 252 better. Mr. Jewitt stated a gas station would create more traffic and chaos. Mr. Thoreson .again reviewed the transparency and explained traffic flow. Mr. Jewitt stated his child cannot cross that intersection with his bike now and it will only get worse with a gas station there. The Secretary commented on the walkway proposal on West River Road and indicated that in this area it might be better to have it on the east side. Mr. Jewitt stated that a berm is fine, but a business on the Atkins property will cause more traffic. A discussion ensued regarding traffic in the area. The Secertary stated the proposed redesigned intersection is to help prevent traffic from coming into Willow Lane that does not belong there. Patrick Murphy, 6524 Willow Lane, asked why the traffic couldn't be moved further down on Willow Lane. The Secretary explained the design needs to be worked out and that the access from 65th Avenue North may be closed. Mr. Murphy stated that when snow is plowed from the apartment complex it comes into his yard. Howard Atkins stated he favors SEH's intersection redesign. He stated it is not a good reason to deny a development because of traffic impact. He added he does accept the berm suggestion. The Secretary stated that staff had looked at Mr. Thoreson's design alternative. He stated possibly a mixture of uses in Area 2 would be a good solution and have less adverse impact on the residential area. 12-7-89 -4- { Commissioner Mann asked if a Planned Unit Development (PUD) had been looked into. The Secretary answered in the affirmative and explained that a PUD would allow a development with a mixture of uses. Mr. Jewitt stated all office traffic moves in different directions. A discussion ensued between Mr. Thoreson and Mr. Jewitt regarding traffic generation. Mr. Rod Snyder, 6408 Willow Lane, stated that there are a lot of ways to look at this problem. He requested the Commission try and visualize what the area might look like 50 years from now and then make their decision on the basis of what zoning and development would be appropriate. He stated that this is a good opportunity to decide on an appropriate future development of the area and the Commission should consider what is best for Brooklyn Center and its residents. He stated people living in this area are locked in with the river on one side, 1694 and T. H. 252 on the other and only one way to enter or exit this neighborhood. He explained that some of the residents have their homes for sale and are moving because of problems in the area. He stated a gas station will only add more cars in addition to the traffic that is already there now. He thanked the Commission for their consideration and stated it is a challenge to envision what that area could be. Chairperson Malecki asked Mr. Snyder what his vision is for the area. Mr. Snyder stated he believed the area should be a people area and he would like to see something else in the river area, possibly a senior housing complex. He added that there is a need to provide space and an environment for children to play. Mr. Atkins stated he does have the right to develop his property and that there is a price to pay for development of this area as a playground. Arlo Johnson, owner of the Brookdale Motel, suggested that the roadway redesign is an excellent idea and he would support closing 65th Avenue North also. He stated that whatever decision the Commission makes today will have impact for years to come. He thanked the Commission for their consideration and his opportunity to voice his opinion. Richard Cameron, 6620 Willow Lane, stated he is not necessarily in favor of a gas station, but that he definitely favors any alternative that would redesign the entry into the North Willow Lane residential area. CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING Chairperson Malecki inquired if anyone else wished to comment. Hearing none, she called for a motion to close the public hearing. Motion by Commissioner Ainas seconded by Commissioner Mann to close the public hearing. Voting in favor: Chairperson Malecki, Commissioners Bernards, Ainas, and Mann. The motion passed unanimously. The Secretary stated that it would be desirable for the Planning Commission to make a recommendation regarding the various alternatives. Commissioner Bernards asked when the moratorium for this study would expire. The Secretary responded that the moratorium will expire on December 16th. He noted that it is not anticipated that the consultant's report to the Council will be ready until the Council's first meeting in January. He added that in all likelihood the City Council will consider an extension of the moratorium at its next Council meeting in order to protect the planning process until the study can be completed. He noted that the Planning Commission can take additional time, if it wishes, before making any recommendations on the various alternatives suggested. He noted that some alternatives involve rezoning while others involve roadway redesign and property acquisition. These matters would all take some time to accomplish. 12-7-89 -5- 1 Chairperson Malecki stated the zoning issue would still have to be dealt with even if Mr. Atkins property is acquired. The Secretary stated that if the City is the landowner, it can control what uses are appropriate. He referred to the Earle Brown Farm acquisition as an example. Commissioner Ainas stated that he preferred to make a recommendation on the alternatives this evening. He further stated that there seems to be no dispute that Study Area 1, containing the remaining MN/DOT property should be rezoned to R1 (Single Family Residential) and incorporated into the existing single family neighborhood. He also stated that he believed the current R5 (Multiple Family Residential) zoning on the property south of 65th Avenue North between T. H. 252 and Willow Lane was appropriate and should remain. He suggested that a service/office land use designation is most appropriate for Area 2, however, a Planned Unit Development District (PUD) with a C1 orientation allowing mixed uses would also be appropriate. He added that the existing uses, such as the Brookdale Motel and the Atkins Mechanical Contractors office are certainly acceptable uses and the City should take the necessary action to allow thses uses, perhaps as special uses, if the property is zoned C1 . Finally, Commissioner Ainas stated that the proposed roadway redesign invluding a new way of accessing Willow Lane and the creation of a buffer/landscape/berm area should be pursued with the necessary property acquisition being undertaken. Commissioners Bernards and Mann concurred with Commissioner Ainas I recommendation. Chairperson Malecki stated that she favors C1 orientation in Study Area 2. She did not favor the development of a gas station/convenience store/car wash. She felt a PUD allowing the existing Brookdale Motel and Atkins Mechanical to continue, or allowing them as special uses in the C1 zone, would be appropriate. ACTION RECCMMENDING A PROPOSED ALTERNATIVE FOR THE LAND USE STUDY Motion by Commissioner Ainas seconded by Commissioner Bernards to recommend to the City Council the following Alternative regarding the T. H. 252/66th Avenue North land use study: that Study Area 1 be rezoned to Rl; Study Area 3 remain R5; that Study Area 2 be rezoned to C1 or PUD-C1 with a definite Service/Office orientation (the Brookdale Motel and Atkins Mechanical uses), however, are acceptable uses in this area and that the necessary land area be acquired in order to redesign the access to North Willow Lane and to provide and maintain a buffer/landscape/berm area. The motion passed unanimously. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Commissioner Ainas seconded by Commissioner Mann to adjourn the meeting of the Planning Commission. The motion passed unanimously. The Planning Commission adjourned at 10:10 p.m. 1. Chairperson 12-7-89 -6-