Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1990 04-26 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 APRIL 26, 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 7:31 p.m. ROLL CALL Chairperson Molly Malecki, Commissioners Wallace Bernards, Lowell Ainas, Bertil Johnson and Kristen Mann. Also present were City Manager Gerald Splinter, Director of Planning and Inspection Ronald __ Warren, City Engineer Mark Maloney and Planner Gary Shallcross. Chairperson Malecki noted that Commissioner Sander had called to say she would not likely be able to attend at all and was excused and that Commissioner Holmes had called to say that he would be late. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - APRIL 12 , 1990 Motion by Commissioner Mann seconded by Commissioner Ainas to approve the minutes of the April 12, 1990 Planning Commission meeting as submitted. Voting in favor: Chairperson Malecki, Commissioners Bernards, Ainas, and Mann. Voting against: none. Not voting: Commissioner Johnson. The motion passed. The Secretary began the business of the meeting by introducing City Manager Gerald Splinter in order for him to review with the Commission the Goals and Strategies/Action plan for the 1990 planning session which would be coming up in one week. The City Manager reviewed with the Commission the 1990 Goals and Strategies/Action Plan on a point by point basis. The first priority area from the 1989 planning session was crime and drugs. He reviewed some of the drug education and prevention programs being pursued by the City, including the DARE program in the grade schools, including two grade schools in Brooklyn Park, a joint powers drug enforcement program and the Humboldt/Camden Task Force. He also reviewed what is happening with the drug task force, the crimewatch program, the battered spouse youth program, the crime prevention fund and the police master plan update. Commissioner Holmes arrived at 7:40 p.m. The City Manager went on to review the area of housing and noted that the City is working on developing a maintenance for commercial and industrial buildings. He also noted housing rehab program initiatives, subsidized elderly housing, a coordinated housing maintenance program in which the City develops and periodically 4-26-90 -1- reviews enforcement action on the most problematic properties in the City as they relate to housing, nuisance and health code violations. He also noted the group home siting process which has been under study for over a year. The City Manager next reviewed budget and finance priorities, including the impact of recent legislation, changes in the property tax and state aid system, alternative revenue sources, local government aid funding, and financing for various housing programs. The City Manager next went on to discuss priorities relating to economic development and redevelopment. He noted that the City is working on having a market analysis similar to the Maxfield Housing Study done for the commercial and industrial parcels in the City. He again mentioned the maintenance code for commercial and industrial buildings. He also stated that the City is working on a formal development and redevelopment process or policy and that the City is examining the feasibility of redevelopment projects in the areas of 50th and France, 69th and Brooklyn Boulevard, and the Lynbrook Bowl area. The City Manager went on to review priorities in the area of communications including the City Newsletter, cable television, newspaper coverage and ways of informing the public regarding redevelopment projects. The City Manager then noted the area of demographic changes in the community and the impacts on housing, the need for a senior citizens drop-in center, and the impact on the park and recreation system in the City. He added the need for evaluating the needs of an aging population. Finally, the City Manager noted the priorities for public facilities in the City, including City building needs and a review of the park system within the City. The City Manager asked the Commission whether they had any questions regarding the 1990 planning session and the goals and priorities. Commissioner Johnson asked for the time of the meeting. The City Manager responded that it would be on Thursday, May 3 at 6: 00 p.m. for dinner and meeting at 7:00 to 10: 00 p.m. Commissioner Bernards asked what was the effect of the funding cuts recently passed by the legislature. The City Manager noted that the final effect has not been determined, but that a preliminary estimate of the impact was that the City would lose about $137,000. He stated that he was not sure how that funding loss would be dealt with, but that it is manageable within a budget of over $10, 000, 000. Commissioner Bernards also asked about the impact of changes to Tax Increment Financing district laws. The City Manager responded that staff are looking at that development, but that most of the changes passed by the legislature were directed at new development projects on vacant land. He stated that redevelopment projects and housing projects would still be okay for the most part and that this is the area that Brooklyn Center is using tax increment financing for. Commissioner Bernards also asked about capital improvements and whether the City tries to tie in its planning with other agencies. The City Manager answered that the City meets annually with the Brooklyn Center School District and 4-26-90 -2- also invites representatives of the Robbinsdale, Anoka and Osseo districts to meet and compare notes and try to avoid surprises and duplication. APPLICATION NOS. 90010 AND 90011 (Brooklyn United Methodist Church) Following the Chairperson's explanation, the Secretary introduced the first two regular items of business, a request for site and building plan and special use permit approval to make some additions to the Brooklyn United Methodist Church to use the residence at 7204 Brooklyn Boulevard for church ministries, and to expand the parking lot north of the church. The second application introduced was a request for preliminary plat approval to combine into a single parcel the existing Brooklyn United Methodist Church site and three residential lots to the north being acquired by the church for expansion of the parking lot. The Secretary reviewed the contents of the staff reports pertaining to these two applications (see Planning Commission Information Sheets for Application Nos. 90010 and 90011 attached) . The Secretary also pointed out in his review of the site and building plan application that B612 curb and gutter would be required around all parking and driving areas in the parking lot and that this should assist drainage of the area. The Secretary also stated that any use of the house at 7204 Brooklyn Boulevard should be accessory to the church use; that it should not be used for day care or by another organization without amending the special use permit. He noted that there is no indication that such a use is intended, but he wished to make that clear. The Secretary also recommended revisions to Condition No. 6 and Condition No. 15 of the staff report for Application No. 90010 by adding wording that those conditions would be subject to a final determination by the Building Official with respect to the requirements of the Building Code. The Secretary also stated that there was a need to evaluate parking needs for the church after the new lot is built and that it was not automatically certain that there would be excess land available on the off-site lot for subdivision in the future. The City Manager left at approximately 8:30 p.m. Commissioner Johnson asked how old the house was at 7204 Brooklyn Boulevard. The Secretary responded that he was not sure. Commissioner Ainas stated that he would guess that. it was a pre World War II house. Chairperson Malecki asked whether it was likely that the house would need significant improvements for it to meet code. The Secretary responded that he was not aware that any review of the house had been made. He stated that the Building Official would have to review the house in light of the building code and especially to review the requirement for handicapped access to the house. Chairperson Malecki then asked the applicants whether they had anything to add. Mr. Tom Twohig, the architect for the project, pointed out that the church has been at the site for 136 years and 4-26-90 -3- that it is deeply ingrained in the community. He noted that the church is expanding and needs some elbow room in which to operate. He pointed out that the building has been added to a number of times and there are multiple levels in the building. He also pointed out that most of the parking for the church is across the street which is a safety problem. Mr Twohig said the church is working with Habitat for Humanity to relocate the houses that it has purchased along Noble Avenue North. He stated that the access location on Noble Avenue North will tend to cut down on the cut- through traffic between Brooklyn Boulevard and Noble Avenue North. He added that he had brought lighting details and pointed out that there is a fourth light pole on the site plan that was not noted by staff in their report. He pointed out that it is located in the southeast area of the parking lot. Mr. Twohig then went on to review the plans for the building additions and modifications. He pointed out that the building will be entirely handicapped accessible when the improvements are complete. Chairperson Malecki asked for a response to the list of conditions contained in the staff report. Mr. Twohig stated that he and Dave Anderson of the building committee had reviewed Condition Nos. 6 and 15 with staff earlier in the day and that he felt satisfied with the revision proposed by staff that would leave the matter of fire sprinklering the main building and handicapped access to the house up to a final determination by the Building Official. Chairperson Malecki asked about providing trees across the street on the off-site lot. Mr. Twohig responded that vegetation for that area was not shown on the survey and, therefore, was not included in the site plan. He pointed out that there a number of trees on the site and he hoped it would not be necessary to add as many as recommended by staff. Commissioner Johnson stated that he was concerned regarding the number of services at the church, the Sunday School attendance, the timing of the services and how all of these factors affected the flow of traffic into and out of the site. Mr. David Anderson, of the building committee at Brooklyn United Methodist Church, responded to this concern. Regarding the services, he stated that the church is experiencing growth in activity as well as in attendance. He stated that the church would like to have expanded the sanctuary, but that there were significant building constraints in doing so. He stated that another way of adding seats is to add a third service which the church has done. He stated that the church has had trouble getting the first service out before the second service arrives and that this has led to some traffic congestion. He stated that the church may space the first and second services further apart in order to allow the parking lot to be vacated and reduce the traffic problem. PUBLIC HEARING (Application Nos 90010 and 90011 , Chairperson Malecki then opened the meeting for a public hearing on 4-26-90 -4- the special use permit for the church expansion and the use of the house at 7204 Brooklyn Boulevard and also on the preliminary plat proposed by the church. She asked whether anyone present wished to comment. Mr. Mike Hoffman, of 4715 Wingard Lane, then addressed the Commission at some length and reviewed some of the concerns contained in a letter addressed to the Commission on April 10. He stated that the concerns include the fence and grade of the land relative to their properties. He stated that the residents to the north wanted a buffer zone which they would maintain. He stated that the fencing and landscaping would affect their property values. He stated that he has talked to realtors and that they say the expansion of the church parking lot will put a ceiling on their property values in the future. Mr. Hoffman stated that the plan that they were shown indicated pea rock between the church fence and the residents' fences and that the residents preferred sod and trees between the two fences. He also stated that the residents want a 10 ' high fence to be placed 15 ' from their property line. He also stated that the fence should be built low to the ground so that litter and children could not get through underneath the fence. He stated that placing the church fence 5' from the residents' fences would allow for pedestrian traffic through that area. He expressed concern for security if this area were allowed to exist. Mr. Hoffman stated that the residents were concerned about lighting for security. He encouraged the use of parking lot lights that would face the church and would not spill over onto the residents' property. Regarding the dumpster location, he stated that they were concerned regarding odors coming from the dumpsters, especially during the summer when winds would tend to be from the south and southwest. He concluded by stating that the property owners along Wingard Lane are willing to sell their houses to the church. Commissioner Bernards asked Mr. Hoffman whether the residents had been contacted by the church during the past two years while this project has been planned. Mr. Hoffman stated that the first contact was approximately three weeks ago. Commissioner Johnson asked whether their prime concern was with on-street parking. Mr. Hoffman agreed that that was a concern. He pointed out that there is refuse discarded from cars and that they sometimes park on the grass. He also stated that when cars are parked on both sides of Wingard Lane, there is a narrow channel to drive in. Chairperson Malecki noted that those present had heard the staff report. She stated that it seemed that some of the requests made by the neighbors were impractical. Mr. Hoffman asked that the buffer area required along the north side of the parking lot be incorporated into their yards. The Secretary pointed out problems 4-26-90 -5- with fences being too close to each other. The Secretary stated that it is best for the property owner to maintain his own property. He stated that there would be a need for someone to maintain the area between the fences. Mr. Hoffman asked who would be responsible for an injury if it were to occur in the area between the fences.. The Secretary stated that if the area belonged to the church, it would probably be their responsibility if there was negligence involved. He stated that, if the neighbors were opposed to putting the fences 5' apart, he would recommend that the new fence for the church be put along the property line. Mr. Wladymyr (Wally) Szulga, of 4707 Wingard Lane, expressed concern about problems with activity at the church, including unsafe conditions and fence maintenance problems. Mr. Hoffman added that the residents were concerned that lights would shine through the fence. The Secretary pointed out that the fence would be an opaque fence, made of board-on-board construction. Mr. Hoffman stated that the residents are willing to maintain the buffer area, that they would take down their own rear fences and tie their side fences into the new church fence. The Planner expressed concern about the possibility of an adverse possession claim being made someday in the future. He stated that if the residents close off the property and include it in their own lots and maintain it with the church's knowledge, that after 15 years an adverse possession claim might be filed. He recommended that the Commission not accept this arrangement to avoid these problems in the future. Commissioner Ainas stated that doing what Mr. Hoffman desired would put a legal cloud on the transfer of property in the future. Mr. Hoffman stated that he was willing to investigate the legality of his idea. Commissioner Bernards noted that the application would still have to go before the City Council and he asked whether the legality of the buffer area being maintained by the residents to the north could be investigated between now and then. The Secretary stated that it wasn't so much a question of whether it could be done legally as to whether it was advisable. He stated that it would open up a number of complications. He stated that, if the alleyway between the fences is undesirable to the residents, he would suggest that the fence be moved to the property line to eliminate this area. Commissioner Holmes agreed that the church may not want others maintaining its property if they are responsible. Mr. Dave Anderson, of the building committee for the church, stated that the church wanted to maintain its own fence and land. The Planner pointed out that one reason for the gap between the fences was so that there would not be two fences side by side. He stated that if the residents along Wingard Lane are willing to take down the back sides of their fences, he would suggest that the fence be placed along the property line and both parties can maintain the land up to the fence. Mr. David Anderson stated that he was concerned about maintenance of the fence and that the 5 ' area between fences would allow the church to get to the other side of the fence to maintain it. 4-26+90 -6- Mrs. Eleanore Maegi, of 4721 Wingard Lane, pointed out that she had lived in the area for many years and that she was beginning to feel crowded out. She stated that her main objection was to the location of the dumpster. She pointed out that she is allergic to insect bites and has to carry her own safety kit. She stated that she talked to Pastor Erikson and that he had told her that the dumpster would stay next to the church. Mrs. Maegi also stated that drainage runs onto their property now and that their lot is lower than the area where the parking lot would be. She stated that if this is not corrected, the drainage problem will get worse. The Secretary pointed out that the parking lot would be bounded by curb and gutter and that it would be pitched to drain toward a catch basin in the middle of the lot. This would be away from her property. Mrs. Maegi expressed her concern about snow melting on the side of the parking lot. The Secretary pointed out that a berm would be constructed approximately in the middle of the buffer area and that this would cause drainage of snow on the church side of the fence to be back toward the parking lot. Mrs. Maegi stated that she would like the fence 15' away from their property line. She stated that she felt she had a problem with the dumpster and that the fence was too close. She stated that they would have a harder time selling their house with the development as proposed. Mr. David Anderson then addressed the Commission regarding some of these concerns. He stated that the church had discussed the fence with the neighbors before submitting the plans. He also pointed out that the discussion between Mrs. Maegi and Pastor Erikson regarding the dumpster was three years ago and that plans have changed since then because the church has acquired more houses. He stated the drainage in the area will be improved. Mr. Anderson also pointed out that the two houses along Noble which the church has acquired are being donated to Habitat for Humanity, not sold. Mr. Anderson stated that the parking lot expansion was part of a ten year plan and that the church would not expand further before at least the year 2000. He stated that the church had talked to the residents along Wingard, that one resident was unable to talk with them and that one was unwilling. Mr. Anderson also pointed out that the total cost of the construction project for the church was $1.2 million and that this was a lot of money for only a 4,400 sq. ft. addition to the building. He also pointed out that the additions to the building would make the church handicapped accessible throughout. Regarding cut-through traffic, Mr. Anderson stated that the church is trying to deal with that in its proposed parking lot plan. He stated that the cut-through traffic is a result of closing the intersection of Wingard Lane and Brooklyn Boulevard. Regarding the residents request for Blue Spruce trees, he stated that he did not have a problem with them, but that he did not think they would be viable in the northerly greenstrip which would not be wide enough for mature Spruce trees. Regarding the possibility of selling all or part of the off-site lot to Edina Realty, Mr. Anderson stated that there have been no 4-26-90 -7- discussions regarding that to this point. He stated that the church's long term plan is to put all parking for the church on- site and that the off-site lot might be discarded in the future. Regarding parking on Noble Avenue, he stated that the church would agree to eliminate parking on the west side of Noble to alleviate sight lines for cars coming out of the parking lot. But he recommended continuing to allow parking on the east side of Noble. He stated that the church's parking lot would accommodate parking on-site 49 weeks out of the year, but Easter and Christmas services would probably still need some on-street parking. Mr. Anderson also stated that the house at 7204 Brooklyn Boulevard was built in about 1950. He stated that the house is in excellent condition. He stated that the church was making handicapped bathrooms and access possible in the main building and did not feel that it would be feasible to make these modifications to the house at 7204 Brooklyn Boulevard. Regarding the dumpster location, Mr. Anderson stated that the church is willing to put the dumpster a little further away, but he pointed out that the trash would be in bags and that the dumpster could certainly have a lid. He also pointed out that there would be an enclosure around the dumpster as well as a fence along the north side of the property. He stated that the church did not want the dumpster to be right next to the church or along Brooklyn Boulevard, but that it should be out of sight. Chairperson Malecki asked how deep the v cuts were in the fence. Mr. Tom Twohig stated that they would be about 4 1/2 feet deep and 12 feet wide. Chairperson Malecki asked whether the church intended to sprinkle the area between the fences. Mr. Anderson responded that that was not planned at this time, that the church would do manual sprinkling. Mr. Anderson stated that the church wanted to put rock on the parking lot side of the fence, but that they were willing to put sod on the side toward the residences. The Secretary pointed out that the ordinance requires that the buffer be a green area and that it should, therefore, be sodded entirely. Mr. Wally Szulga, of 4707 Wingard Lane, asked who he should sue when his basement floods, the City, or the church. Mr. Lutgen, of 7216 Brooklyn Boulevard, expressed concern about noise from the traffic. He stated that the changes proposed by the church would accelerate the problem of noise. He also stated that as property values dropped for the homes along Wingard Lane, it would be to the advantage of the church in acquiring those homes. He asked what would happen to the north side of Wingard Lane in the future when the church eventually expands up to Wingard Lane. He asked why he should upgrade his house if the houses across the street are going to go downhill. He also stated that he had never been approached by the church regarding the expansion project. Mr. Lutgen also expressed concerns regarding pedestrian traffic, safety problems on Noble and the possibility of traffic backing up in Brooklyn Boulevard trying to get into the church. 4-26-90 -g- Mr. Bruce Ericson, the senior pastor for Brooklyn United Methodist Church then addressed the Commission. He reviewed some of the past history of the church and the area along Brooklyn Boulevard and Noble. He pointed out that there has been tremendous growth in the community and of the church since the church began 136 years ago. He stated that the church was not here to make problems worse, but that it was trying to make problems go away. He pointed out that the church bought the homes along Noble and Brooklyn Boulevard at the highest value determined by realtors evaluating the properties. He pointed out that it would cost the church $5,000 for each parking space that it was providing. He pointed out that the members of the church are not rich, but blue collar people that live in the area. He expressed regrets about the problem with the fence at the off-site lot, but cited the recommendation of a carpenter that there was not much that could be done until the ground thawed. Pastor Ericson also stated that it would be possible to move the dumpster to another location. He stated that he did not want to cause any health problems for his neighbors. Pastor Erikson pointed out that some neighbors in the area are members of the church and that some neighbors have fears, some of which are real and some of which are silly. He stated that the church did not want to make things tough for the neighbors. He pointed out, however, that the church has to deal with the growth of its congregation with the widening of Brooklyn Boulevard in the past and with the traffic that results from people moving into the area. Mrs. Eleanore Maegi stated that it was accidents on Wingard Lane, one of which was fatal, which caused the closing of Wingard Lane. She then showed the Planning Commission a picture of her property. Chairperson Malecki asked whether anyone else wished to comment regarding the applications. Hearing no one she called for a motion to close the public hearing. CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING Motion by Commissioner Ainas seconded by Commissioner Johnson to close the public hearing on Application Nos. 90010 and 90011. The motion passed unanimously. Chairperson Malecki then asked the Commission for their comments. Commissioner Johnson stated that it should be possible to move the dumpster. The Secretary concurred, noting that the church appeared willing to move the dumpster. He stated that this should not be a big problem. Commissioner Bernards asked about closing off the 5' area between the church fence and the residents' fences. The Secretary asked that the Planning Commission give direction regarding the fence issue. He stated that he felt there would be problems if maintenance of this area were left to others besides the property owner. Commissioner Holmes stated that he felt there could be pedestrian traffic through the area if it were not closed 4-26-90 -9- off. He stated that he presumed that the 10 ' high fence request was out of the question. The Secretary pointed out that the Zoning Ordinance requires a 6' high fence to screen parking lots from residential property. He stated that a fence is generally better at providing effective screening on a year round basis than a hedge would be. He pointed out that the purpose of the fence was to screen out cars, not the church. There was a brief discussion regarding the type of trees requested by the neighbors. Commissioner Johnson stated Blue Spruce get to be bad news after awhile. Commissioner Holmes noted the problems on Noble from the church and asked whether there had been accidents in the area. The Secretary answered that he was not aware of the accident rate for that location, but he added that there is probably danger in crossing the street since it is a collector street. The Secretary pointed out that the parking requirement for the church is based on sanctuary seating. He stated that this works in most cases, but that when classes are going on at the same time as church services, there may be problems. There is also a problem if services overlap, or there is not sufficient time between services. The Secretary stated that what the church is doing is basically an improvement to the area by providing more on-site parking. He pointed out that businesses in the City and other uses have to have parking on their own site. He noted that it is not illegal to park on the street, but that on-street parking may be evaluated by the City if there is a safety concern and can be restricted, forcing parking to be on the church property only. Commissioner Holmes commented on the noise problem. He stated that he could see there will be an increase in noise in the area, but that the fence should help the noise issue. The Secretary stated that if the Commission is convinced that a higher fence will address noise problems, it could require a higher fence. He stated, however, that most of the noise in the area is coming from Brooklyn Boulevard, not from the church parking lot. He also pointed out that even though existing trees may tend to ameliorate noise problems, any property owner has a right to cut down trees on their property. Chairperson Malecki asked where the decision to put the fence where it was proposed came from. The Secretary stated that it may have come to some extent from the staff's recommendation as it was pointed out to the representative of the church what maintenance problems would exist with the fence. He stated that shrubs could also be used for screening, but it would take 10 years to become effective screening, whereas fences are effective immediately. Chairperson Malecki asked the Planning Commission for their opinions on the no man's land between the church's fence and the residents' fences. Commissioner Ainas recommended leaving the proposed fence as it is shown on the plans and that the area be 4-26-90 -10- closed off at either end. Commissioner Bernards also recommended closing the area off. Commissioner Holmes expressed concern that the grass on the north side of the fence would not be watered and that it would die. Commissioner Bernards stated that he did not see a problem with the area if there was a gate to prevent pedestrian traffic through it. Commissioner Mann stated that she felt the church was being very accommodating in its plans. She also endorsed the idea of a gate. She recommended allowing parking on-street for a year to see how the new parking lot functioned. She concluded by saying that she felt the plan was very appropriate. Commissioner Johnson encouraged the church to try to police the litter problem more from cars parking on Wingard Lane. The Secretary pointed out that parking lot screening across Noble Avenue North is also required under the Zoning Ordinance and recommended that the fence be continued at a 4 ' height along Noble to screen the lot from across the street. Commissioner Johnson stated that he did not like the proposed arrangement with two fences, one for the church and one for the private residents. He stated that the no man's land between the fences does not make sense to him. He recommended to the City Council that the two groups of people reach a compromise with a single fence. ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 90010 (Brooklyn United Methodist Church Motion by Commissioner Ainas seconded by Commissioner Bernards to recommend approval of Application No. 90010, subject to the following conditions: 1. The special use permit is granted for a church and accessory uses. The use may not be altered or expanded beyond this specific approval without first securing an amendment to this special use permit. 2 . Building plans are subject to review and approval by the Building Official with respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance of permits. 3 . Grading, drainage, utility and berming plans are subject to review and approval by the City Engineer, prior to the issuance of permits. 4. 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 and prior to construction of the new parking lot. 5. Any outside trash disposal facilities and rooftop mechanical equipment shall be appropriately screened from view. 4-26-90 -11- 6. Subject to a final determination by the Building Official with regard to applicable codes, 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. 7. Plan approval is exclusive of all signery which is subject to Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances. 8. B612 curb and gutter shall be provided around all parking and driving areas. 9. The applicant shall submit an as-built survey of the property, improvements and utility service lines, prior to release of the performance agreement. 10. The property owner shall enter in an Easement and Agreement for Maintenance and Inspection of Utility and Storm Drainage Systems prior to the issuance of permits. 11. The replat of the property shall receive final approval and be filed at the County prior to the issuance of permits. 12. Fire hydrants shall be installed and fire lanes designated in accordance with the requirements of the Fire Chief. 13. The barrier across the access to the off-site parking lot from Brooklyn Boulevard shall be improved in accordance with recommendations of the Director of Public Works. 14. The plans shall be modified, prior to consideration by the City Council to indicate: a) the addition of at least four shade trees in the greenstrip along Brooklyn Boulevard and the addition of two trees in the greenstrip along Noble Avenue North. b) the addition of a light pole at the entrance off Noble Avenue North and the provision of lighting details including height and type of fixture and a photometric plan giving light intensities near property lines. C) The extension of a 4 ' high fence within the Noble Avenue North greenstrip to screen the parking lot north of the church from residences across Noble. 4-26-90 -12- 15. Subject to a final determination by the Building Official with respect to the requirements of the Building Code, the house at 7204 Brooklyn Boulevard shall be provided with handicapped access and bathroom facilities. The use of the house shall only be for accessory church ministry purposes such as adult and youth meetings and education classes. No other use by a nonchurch organization is acknowledged with this approval. 16. The wood fence along the east side of the off-site parking lot shall be repaired on or before May 5, 1990 as ordered by the Building Inspector. 17. If there are two fences, one belonging to the church and another belonging to residents abutting Wingard Lane, access to the area between the fences shall be closed off with a lockable gate at both ends. Commissioner Johnson asked whether the conditions should address relocation of the dumpster. Commissioner Bernards stated that he felt, based on the statements from the church, that that matter would be addressed without a condition. Voting in favor of the above motion: Chairperson Malecki, Commissioners Bernards, Ainas, Johnson, Mann and Holmes. Voting against: none. The motion passed. ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 90011 (Brooklyn United Methodist Church) Motion by Commissioner Bernards seconded by Commissioner Ainas to recommend approval of Application No. 90011, 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 requirement to plat the parcels comprising the off- site lot is hereby waived. However, the church shall file a legal encumbrance with the title to the property at the County which will bind the use of the. off-site parking lot to the principal site of the church. Said encumbrance shall be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney prior to filing. The filing of the encumbrance shall be concurrent with or prior to the filing of the plat at the County. Voting in favor: Chairperson Malecki, Commissioners Bernards, Ainas, Johnson, Mann and Holmes. Voting against: none. The motion passed. 4-26-90 -13- The City Engineer and Commissioner Ainas left at 10:23 p.m. APPLICATION NO. 90009 (Keith Sturm/Reliance Real Estate Services Inc. The Secretary then introduced the next item of business, a request for variance approval to allow retail use of the Gold's Gym building at 2920 County Road 10 with fewer parking stalls than required by ordinance. The Secretary reviewed the contents of the staff report (see Planning Commission Information Sheet for Application No. 90009 attached) . The Secretary explained that the formula applied to the original Gold's Gym building was one space for every 200 sq. ft. which is a general commercial formula for uses not specifically listed. He stated that the building was technically not deficient in parking based on that formula. The Secretary also distributed to the Commission an April 25 letter from Chris Conroy, the owner of the St. Paul Book building, in which he stated he has no objection to the variance. Commissioner Bernards asked what agreement, if any, existed with the lot to the north of the Gold's Gym for parking. The Secretary stated that any agreement that existed was a private agreement that was not required by the City. The Planner stated that it was evident that the old parking formula for the health club was apparently not sufficient. He added, however, that the experience with the retail formula is that it places a heavy burden on smaller buildings. Chairperson Malecki asked the applicant whether he had anything to add. Mr. Pete Helger of Reliance Real Estate Services addressed the Commission at some length. Regarding the Standards for a Variance, he stated that he felt a hardship does exist because land cannot be added to the site in order to meet parking requirements. He noted that this is not an unusual situation for existing buildings. As to the example in the staff report of reusing the building as a restaurant, he agreed that the site simply would not work as a restaurant, that there was not enough parking. He stated that he felt the request by Jo Ann Fabrics to use the building is, in the long run best interest of the community. He pointed out that the lease would be 20 years. As to uniqueness, Mr. Helger stated that the building is functionally obsolete. He agreed that variances shouldn't be granted on the basis of market conditions, but should at. least be considered. He stated that the building and site in question are good for a low traffic use because of the circuitous access, not a high traffic use. He stated that Jo Ann Fabrics would be a destination type commercial use. He then reviewed other businesses in the area and stated that they, too, are all destination type businesses. He stated that they were asking the City to be flexible in enforcing its regulations. He stated that it was not practical to think of demolishing the building and that it was more cost effective to convert the building to retail than to office use. 4-26-90 -14- Mr. Helger stated that he agreed that the City was not obliged to grant a variance to accommodate a reuse of the building, but he felt that the Standards for a Variance are met in this case. He then distributed to the Planning Commission and reviewed on an overhead transparency the parking formulas for retail uses of other cities in the Metro area. He noted that most of them require five spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. of gross floor area and that if such a formula were adopted in Brooklyn Center, the retail use of the Gold's Gym building would be legal. He noted that planning staff agree that the Brooklyn Center parking formula for retail uses penalizes smaller buildings. Mr. Helger went on to state that they did not have time to wait for an ordinance change, but needed to act fast in order to make the deal work with Jo Ann Fabrics. Mr. Helger also pointed out that in 1986, David Otto applied for a variance for the St. Paul Book building which was ultimately approved. At that time the City Council questioned whether other buildings were in a similar situation. The conclusion at that time, he said, was that they did not think so. He stated, however, that the Gold's Gym building is in a very similar situation. He asked for approval of the variance application based on this precedent. Mr. George Vestrum, a real estate broker for Jo Ann Fabrics, pointed out that Jo Ann Fabrics is presently in Brookdale. He stated that they wanted to expand in a new building. He pointed out that the new building would be three times as much space as they have at Brookdale. He stated that Jo Ann Fabrics wants to stay in the community, but that they have a short time frame in which to make a decision. In response to a question from Chairperson Malecki, the Secretary stated that the thinking on the part of the two City Council members that voted against the retail formula in 1986 was that the retail formula had served the City well and that it shouldn't be changed now. He noted that one of the Council members looked for a tradeoff involving more landscaping. The Secretary explained that this would have led to nonconforming situations and was not adopted. The Secretary went on to explain that a study by the Urban Land Institute regarding parking at shopping centers concluded that somewhat more parking is actually demanded for larger shopping centers than for smaller shopping centers. He pointed out that the City's formula is just backwards from this finding. The Secretary concluded by pointing out that the variance granted in 1986 was probably not a very good decision, but was approved because it was thought that an ordinance amendment would soon be adopted that would legitimize the action taken in the variance. Commissioner Holmes asked whether the original Health Spa building was allowed by variance. The Secretary explained that the building and site met the parking formula of one space for every 200 sq. ft. 4-26-90 -15- which was the basic commercial requirement applied to the building at that time. Commissioner Johnson asked if the Commission made a recommendation to reconsider the ordinance amendment, should they not act on the variance and, therefore, hold up the deal. The Secretary answered that he felt that this case does not meet the variance standards. He stated that the hardship in question has been created by the owner and that the situation is not very unique. The Secretary recommended denial of the variance, but a change in the ordinance for the retail parking formula. He suggested that the Commission send the variance on to the Council with a recommendation to deny. Chairperson Malecki agreed that that was the best route, to recommend denial of the variance and adoption of an ordinance amendment. PUBLIC HEARING (Application No. 90009) Chairperson Malecki then opened the meeting for a public hearing and asked whether anyone present wished to comment regarding the application. Hearing no one, she called for a motion to close the public hearing. CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING Motion by Commissioner Bernards seconded by Commissioner Johnson to close the public hearing. The motion passed unanimously. The Planner then distributed to the Commission a packet of material relating to the retail parking formula and alternate formulas. He briefly reviewed some of the materials in the packet and stated that his own experience from living and shopping in Brooklyn Center was that there was a noticeable surplus of parking at smaller retail centers. He stated that the only retail center that used up all the parking that it had was Brookdale. He pointed out that one effect of an ordinance change would be to reduce the formula on smaller retail centers. Another issue that needed to be addressed, however, was whether the basic retail parking formula should be reduced to 5 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. or 5.5 per 1, 000 sq. ft. of gross floor area. He explained that if the formula were reduced to 5 spaces per 1, 000 sq. ft. of gross floor area, then Brookdale would come very close to being in compliance with parking requirements. However, he stated, if the basic formula were kept at 5.5 spaces per 1, 000 sq. ft. of gross floor area, then Brookdale would be deficient in parking by approximately 500 parking stalls. He pointed out that Brookdale is considering an expansion and that this parking deficiency would have to be addressed in the near future. Mr. Pete Helger approached the Commission and asked that they approve the variance and the ordinance change. He pointed out the time constraint they were faced with in dealing with Jo Ann Fabrics. The Secretary responded that the time constraint was not the City's problem and should not drive the decision on a basic policy issue. 4-26-90 -16- There followed a brief discussion of alternate parking formulas. The owner of the Gold's Gym building, Mr. Israel Krawetz. stated that the City wants the best environment for its citizens and for the businesses that operate in Brooklyn Center. He asked again that the Commission approve both the variance and the ordinance amendment. Chairperson Malecki asked the Planning Commission how they felt about the parking formula, whether it should be 5.5 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. of gross floor area or 5 spaces per 1, 000 sq. ft of gross floor area. Commissioner Holmes stated that, based on his experience at Brookdale, he would recommend that the formula be 5.5 spaces per 1, 000 sq. ft. of gross floor area. Commissioners Johnson and Bernards agreed that the formula should be 5.5 spaces. Chairperson Malecki stated that she did not feel that the Standards for a Variance were met. ACTION RECOMMENDING DENIAL OF APPLICATION NO. 90009 (Keith Sturm/Reliance Real Estate Services) and Recommendation for Adoption of an Ordinance Amendment Motion by Commissioner Mann seconded by Commissioner Johnson to recommend denial of Application No. 90009 on the grounds that the Standards for a Variance are not met and also, to recommend to the City Council that it adopt an ordinance amendment establishing a retail formula of 5. 5 spaces per 1, 000 sq. ft. of gross floor area no matter what the size of the building. Commissioner Bernards asked how long it would take for an ordinance amendment to be accomplished. The Secretary stated that it would take about 45 days for an ordinance to become effective following City Council action. Commissioner Johnson asked that it be communicated that the Commission would like to see Jo Ann Fabrics accommodated even though a variance is not warranted. Voting in favor of the above motion: Chairperson Malecki, Commissioners Bernards, Johnson, Mann and Holmes. Voting against: none. The motion passed. ADJOURNMENT Following a brief review of upcoming business, there was a motion by Commissioner Johnson seconded by Commissioner Bernards to adjourn the meeting of the Planning Commission The motion passed unanimously. The Planning Commission adjourned at 11:29 p.m. Chairperson 4-26-90 -17- 1 1