Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1990 03-01 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 s MARCH 1, 1990 STUDY SESSION CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Planning Commission met in study session and was called to order by Chairperson Molly Malecki at 7:32 p.m. ROLL CALL Chairperson Molly Malecki, Commissioners Wallace Bernards, Lowell Ainas, Kristen Mann and Mark Holmes. Also present were Director of Planning and Inspection Ronald Warren and Planner Gary Shallcross. Chairperson Malecki noted that Commissioner Johnson had indicated that he would be absent and was excused. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - FEBRUARY 1. 1990 Motion by Commissioner Bernards seconded by Commissioner Mann to approve the minutes of the February 1, 1990 Planning Commission meeting as submitted. Voting in favor: Chairperson Malecki, Commissioners Bernards, Ainas, Mann and Holmes. Voting against: none. The motion passed. APPLICATION NO. 90001 (Duane Saari Following the Chairperson's explanation, the Secretary introduced the first item of business, a request for approval of a variance to subdivide by metes and bounds, redrawing the common property line between 5113 Paul Drive and 6412 Scott Avenue North to eliminate an encroachment of the Saari driveway on the neighboring lot. The Secretary reviewed the contents of the staff report (See Planning Commission Information Sheet for Application No. 90001 attached) . Commissioner Sander arrived at 7:34 p.m. Commissioner Holmes asked whether there was any problem with the existing easement. The Secretary responded in the negative and stated that the easement would continue to apply. Chairperson Malecki asked the applicant whether he had anything to add. Mr. Saari responded in the negative. PUBLIC HEARING (Application No. 90001) Chairperson Malecki then opened the meeting for a public hearing and asked whether anyone present wished to comment on the application. Commissioner Holmes asked who owned the redwood fence along the 3-1-90 1 south lot lines of the properties. Mr. Saari indicated that it was the property owner to the south. CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING There being no other comments from those present, there was a motion by Commissioner Bernards seconded by Commissioner Mann to close the public hearing. The motion passed unanimously. ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO 90001 (Duane Saari) Motion by Commissioner Mann seconded by Commissioner Ainas to recommend approval of Application No. 90001, subject to the following conditions: 1. The new legal descriptions and necessary deeds for transfer of property shall be filed with the titles to the property at the County. Voting in favor: Chairperson Malecki, Commissioners Sander, Bernards, Ainas, Mann and Holmes. Voting against: none. The motion passed. DISCUSSION ITEMS a) Ordinance Amendment Regarding Uses Permitted in the C1, C2 and I-1 Districts and Rezoning Application No. 89003 The Secretary then introduced a discussion item with the Planning Commission regarding the City initiated rezoning under Application No. 89003 and a companion zoning ordinance amendment which would eliminate some commercial uses from the I-1 zone. The Secretary explained that the City Attorney had had concerns regarding the ordinance amendment recommended by the Planning Commission in March of 1989. He stated that the staff was also working on a PUD ordinance at the time and that it was decided to hold off the consideration on the amendment to the I-1 zone until the PUD ordinance was in effect. The Secretary added that the PUD ordinance is now effective and that it is, therefore, appropriate to recommend consideration of the rezoning and ordinance amendment. He stated that it was appropriate at this time to reaffirm the actions on the Comprehensive Plan amendment and the rezoning which were taken under Planning Commission Resolution Nos. 89-1 and 89-2. The Secretary then reviewed the background of the rezoning application which had been initiated by the City. He stated that one of the reasons-the rezoning was initiated was because the owner of some of the industrial land north of the Freeway, Richardson and Sons, began marketing some of their parcels for sale about two years ago and that some of the parties who were interested in those parcels would have made use of them for convenience food restaurants and budget hotels. The Secretary stated that staff did not believe those sorts of uses were appropriate in the I-1 zone, especially in the area north of Freeway Boulevard and were not in 3-1-90 2 keeping with the conceptual plans put forth by the owner over the years. The Secretary went on to explain that the Zoning Ordinance pertaining to the I-1 district was amended twice in the past to allow more commercial uses by special use permit in the I-1 zone. He stated that along with those uses, there were standards added to the I-1 zone which were to apply to those commercial uses, namely, that the uses would be of comparable intensity and compatible with existing I-1 uses and other uses allowed in the I-1 zone generally. He explained that the City, at the time it adopted these ordinances, thought it had control over development through its ability to deny a special use permit. He pointed out, however, that recent history of legal cases showed that cities have very little ability to deny a special use permit. He stated that the burden of proof has fallen on the City rather than on the developer. Because of this, staff became concerned when some commercial uses were proposed for the I-1 zone a year and a half ago. Therefore, staff initiated the rezoning application and an ordinance amendment to eliminate some commercial uses from the I-1 zone. The Secretary then showed the Commission a transparency of the areas that were affected by the rezoning application, including the Holiday Inn and the La Casita restaurant and parcels between the freeway and Freeway Boulevard east of Shingle Creek Parkway. He added that there were parcels south of the freeway and east of Shingle Creek Parkway which would also be included in the rezoning. He pointed out that the uses in this area are generally commercial and that none of them would become nonconforming by being rezoned to C2. The Secretary then explained the action that had been taken in March of 1989 to recommend a Comprehensive Plan amendment along with an ordinance amendment. He stated that the Comprehensive Plan amendment was forwarded to the Metropolitan Council for their review and comment and that the Met Council had no objection to the Plan amendment. The Secretary then reviewed with the Commission the contents of a staff memo on the draft ordinance amendment before the Planning Commission. (See memorandum attached) . The Secretary explained that the previous ordinance amendment had called for allowing certain single tenant retailers selling large or expensive items to be allowed by special use permit. He stated that the City Attorney had expressed reservations about limiting retail establishments to only single tenant establishments and those selling certain products. He stated that the land use impacts could really not be differentiated from other types of establishments. The Secretary pointed out that the draft ordinance amendment would eliminate retail sales as a principal use in the I-1 zone, but that retail sales as an accessory use to a manufacturing, wholesaling, or warehousing type use would still be allowed by special use permit. He stated that the Schmitt Music operation would sti1'1 be considered a conforming use since its retail operation is more of an incidental part of the use of the building rather than the 3-1-90 3 principal use. He then reviewed with the Commission uses to be eliminated from the I-1 zone and others to be added by special use permit. Commissioner Bernards asked about projected traffic impact as a result of the ordinance amendment. The Secretary stated that staff do not envision more traffic than was projected by the 1985 Short- Elliott (SEH) Traffic Study of the Industrial Park and the Brookdale area. He stated that the study had projected peak hour traffic that would result from maximum development of this area. He stated that there may have to be some modifications to certain intersections if the traffic levels increase, but that these modifications were foreseen by the traffic study. The Planner indicated that the draft ordinance amendment would make the I-1 zone more of an employment zone rather than a zone open for commerce. He stated that the likely effect of this restriction would be to perhaps increase the 4: 00 to 6: 00 p.m. peak hour traffic along Shingle Creek Parkway, north of Freeway Boulevard, but that it would reduce the 6: 00 to 8:00 p.m. traffic in that area from what it might otherwise be. Commissioner Bernards asked whether any existing uses in the Industrial Park would become nonconforming as a result of the ordinance amendment. The Secretary responded in the negative. The Secretary recommended to the Commission that it reaffirm the actions to amend the Comprehensive Plan and the rezoning and also to act on the draft ordinance amendment. He added that there would be no nonconforming uses in the area to be rezoned to C2. ACTION REAFFIRMING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT AND REZONING APPLICATION NO. 89003 (PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NOS. 89-1 AND 89-2) Motion by Commissioner Bernards seconded by Commissioner Mann to reaffirm the Planning Commission's action on the Comprehensive Plan amendment contained in Planning Commission Resolution No. 89-1 and also to reaffirm the rezoning recommendation contained in Planning Commission Resolution No. 89-2. Voting in favor: Chairperson Malecki, Commissioners Sander, Bernards, Ainas, Mann and Holmes. Voting against: none- The motion passed unanimously. MOTION RECOMMENDING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT REGARDING USES PERMITTED IN THE C1, C2 AND I-1 ZONING DISTRICTS Motion by Commissioner Mann seconded by Commissioner Sander to recommend adoption of an ordinance amendment regarding uses permitted in the C1, C2 and I-1 zoning districts, especially uses allowed by special use permit in the I-1 zone. (See draft ordinance attached) . Voting in favor: Chairperson Malecki, Commissioners Sander, Bernards, Ainas, Mann and Holmes. Voting against: none. The motion passed. 3-1-90 4 The Secretary indicated that he would try to bring Donn Wiski to the Planning Commission's next meeting on March 15 to discuss the Group Home Study. Commissioner Mann also informed the Commission that there would be a grand opening of the Earle Brown Heritage Center on April 20, 22 and 25. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Commissioner Mann to adjourn the meeting of the Planning Commission. The motion passed unanimously. The Planning Commission adjourned at 8:22 p.m. Chairperson 3-1-90 5 1 1