Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1989 02-16 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 FEBRUARY 16, 1989 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Planning Commission met in regular session and was called to order by Chairman Mike Nelson at 7:33 p.m. ROLL CALL Chairman Mike Nelson, Commissioners Molly Malecki, Wallace Bernards, Lowell Ainas and Ella Sander. Also present were Director of Planning and Inspection Ronald Warren, City Engineer Bo Spurrier and Planner Gary Shallcross. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - JANUARY 26, 1989 Motion by Commissioner Ainas seconded by Commissioner Malecki to approve the minutes of the January 26, 1989 Planning Commission meeting as submitted. Voting in favor: Chairman Nelson, Commissioners Malecki and Ainas. Voting against: none. Not voting: Commissioners Bernards and Sander. The motion passed. APPLICATION NO. 89005 (Border States Foods) Following the Chairman's explanation, the Secretary introduced the first item of business, a request for site and building plan and special use permit approval to construct a Hardees restaurant at the proposed intersection of Freeway Boulevard and James Circle (east leg). The Secretary reviewed the contents of the staff report (see Planning Commission Information Sheet for Application No. 89005 attached). The Secretary also explained the background of the plat which is to extend James Circle east and north of its present cul-de-sac location south of Freeway Boulevard. He also showed the location of the new lot on which the Hardees restaurant is proposed to be built. He added that the City is proposing to rezone the land south of Freeway Boulevard to C2 (General Commerce). Regarding landscaping, the Secretary suggested the Planning Commission may want to increase its requirement for smaller developments because the proposed landscaping seems inadequate for the site as proposed. Chairman Nelson asked the applicant whether he had anything to add. Mr. Paul Gray, the architect and contractor for the development, noted that representatives of the applicant have met with staff a number of times, but would also meet the concerns regarding lighting and landscaping for the proposed site. Commissioner Ainas asked Mr. Gray whether he would propose additional landscaping along Freeway Boulevard. Mr. Gray responded in the affirmative. PUBLIC HEARING (Application No. 89005) Chairman Nelson then opened the meeting for a public hearing and asked whether anyone present wished to speak regarding the application. Hearing no one, he called for a motion to close the public hearing. CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING Motion by Commissioner Ainas seconded by Commissioner Malecki to close the public hearing. The motion passed unanimously. 2-16-89 -1- Commissioner Bernards asked whether the lighting and landscaping concerns could be covered by Condition Nos. 13 and 15 in the information sheet. The Secretary responded in the affirmative, stating that the staff could work with the applicant to come up with an acceptable plan. Commissioner Bernards inquired as to the hours of operation. Mr. Gray responded that the hours would probably be from about 5:30 or 6:00 a.m. in the morning to 11:00 p.m. at night. Mr. Ron Ohe, another representative of the applicant, stated that, depending on the work force in the industrial park, the Hardees could become a 24 hour operation. The Secretary stated that he saw no problem with a 24 hour operation. He recalled that the proposed Embers restaurant in this general area was also going to be a 24 hour operation, though it has never been built. ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 89005 (Border States Foods) Motion by Commissioner Malecki seconded by Commissioner Ainas to recommend approval of Application No. 89005, subject to the following conditions: 1. The special use permit is issued for the construction and operation of a convenience food restaurant with a drive-up window. No other uses are comprehended. 2. The special use permit is subject to all applicable codes, ordinances and regulations and any violation thereof shall be grounds for revocation. 3. Building plans are subject to review and approval by the Building Official with respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance of permits. 4. Grading, drainage, utility and berming plans are subject to review and approval by the City Engineer, prior to the issuance of permits. 5. 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. 6. Any outside trash disposal facilities and rooftop mechanical equipment shall be appropriately screened from view. 7. 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. 8. An underground irrigation system shall be installed in all landscaped areas to facilitate site maintenance. 9. Plan approval is exclusive of all signery which is subject to Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances. 10. B612 curb and gutter shall be provided around all parking and driving areas. 2-16-89 -2- 11. The applicant shall submit an as-built survey of the property, improvements and utility service lines, prior to release of the performance guarantee. 12. The property owner shall enter in an Easement and Agreement for Maintenance and Inspection of Utility and Storm Drainage Systems. 13. Site lighting shall conform with the requirements of SEction 35- 712 of the Zoning Ordinance. Pursuant to this end, the plans shall be revised, prior to issuance of building permits to eliminate the tilt of the north and south lamps on all four light poles on the site. 14. One on-site hydrant shall be required in a location to be approved by the Fire Chief. 15. The landscape plan shall be revised, prior to consideration by the City Council to indicate berming in the greenstrips adjacent to Freeway Boulevard and James Circle to provide parking lot screening. The landscape plan shall be further revised, prior to the issuance of permits, to indicate additional plantings as requested by the Planning Commission and City Council in keeping with community standards. I 16. Building permits shall not be issued for the project until the plat comprehended under Planning Commission Application No. 88024 has been given final approval by the City Council and filed with Hennepin County. Voting in favor: Chairman Nelson, Commissioners Malecki, Bernards Ainas and Sander. Voting against: none. The motion passed. APPLICATION NO. 89006 (E and H Properties) The Secretary then introduced the next item of business, a request for rezoning approval of a small sliver of land at the southeast corner of Highway 252 and 66th Avenue North from R5 to C2. The Secretary reviewed the contents of the staff report (see Planning Commission Information Sheet for Application No. 89006, attached). Commissioner Sander asked whether the rezoning to C2 would allow something to be built on the property, that the property was essentially unbuildable now. The Secretary responded in the negative. He stated that some development could be built on the existing C2 land, but that the site design could be more efficient if some additional land were rezoned to C2. He stated that without the rezoning it was possible that some of the traffic exiting the site would wind up going down to Willow Lane to turn around to make their westbound movement onto 66th Avenue North. He stated that moving the zoning line would allow better use of the median opening in 66th. Commissioner Sander stated that she did not want to see traffic from this development going down Willow Lane. The Secretary answered that the City could refuse to allow access from the easterly parcel to Willow Lane. He stated that the R5 parcel, in this case, would have to serve as a buffer between the service station use and the residential neighborhood to the east. He stated that the staff wanted the applicant to show that an office development would fit in this location. He added that the City staff detects that the neighborhood would prefer an office development as a buffer rather than apartments and that perhaps the land should be rezoned to Cl to lock in this development option. 2-16-89 -3- Chairman Nelson asked the applicant whether he had anything to add. Mr. Howard Atkins, owner of the property in question, stated that his intention was to build a 12,000 sq. ft. office building on the land to the east of the service station site. He introduced architect Hal Pierce to show the Planning Commission some possible development layouts for the easterly property. Mr. Pierce then showed the Planning Commission potential site layouts for offices, apartments, and a day care center. During the Planning Commission's discussion, a neighbor who attended the meeting, stated that he objected to the traffic and noise from the Superamerica station across Highway 252. He stated that the service station development proposal would bring it closer to Willow Lane by developing the land east of Highway 252 for a service station. Chairman Nelson asked what was the feeling on the possibility of rezoning of the R5 land to Cl. An unidentified neighbor stated that there was an office development proposed two years ago and now a gas station is proposed. He stated that he wanted a buffer building to be constructed before a gas station. The Secretary stated that the City does not have the power to force one building to be built before the other. Mr. Howard Atkins explained that development of the easterly property depends on the sale of land adjacent to Highway 252 for a gas station. The Secretary indicated that there appears to be some concern about screening the gas station site. Commissioner Sander asked about screening of the gas station site from the office building. The Secretary explained that screening is not required between C2 uses and C1 uses, but that it would be appropriate to provide such screening anyway, especially if the office building is not built right away. PUBLIC HEARING (Application No. 89006) Chairman Nelson then opened the meeting for a public hearing and asked whether anyone wished to formally present their views. Mr. Jim Neuberger of 6546 Willow Lane expressed concern regarding traffic and noise from a 24 hour gas station and convenience store. He stated that the rezoning would only help the gas station and not the neighborhood. Chairman Nelson asked Mr. Neuberger if he had any problem f' rezoning the vacant land to the east from R5 to C1. Mr. Neuberger responded that he had no problem with such rezoning. Chairman Nelson noted the entrance to the site would probably be off the Highway 252 frontage road and that most cars would exit onto 66th. The Secretary stated that E the rezoning to C2 would help improve the access to 66th and may prevent movements down to Willow Lane. Mr. Neuberger stated that Superamerica is already a headache with the noise and litter and traffic that comes from that site. He stated that another gas station on the east side of Highway 252 would present even more problems. Mr. Richard Jewitt, of 6552 Willow Lane, complained about problems with Superamerica and the decline of property values and crime that has been prevalent in the area recently. He stated he was concerned about a decline in his own property values and yet he understood the fact Mr. Atkins has the right to develop his property. He stated he did not know what the best answer was. He complained that, at present, he cannot let his son play in the street in front of his house because of the traffic coming down to Willow Lane. He stated that he felt the new gas station would increase traffic on Willow Lane. He expressed his concern that he would be unable to sell his home and cited the example of another home in the area that has been for sale for a couple of years and has not been able to sell. He stated that the rezoning presents an issue of residents versus a commercial business. Chairman Nelson then asked the Planning Commission for their comments. Commissioner Malecki stated that the Commission needs more input from neighbors in the area. She urged that the application be tabled and referred to the Northeast 2-16-89 -4- it Neighborhood Advisory Group. Commissioner Ainas recommended that the rezoning include the rezoning of the R5 land to C1. Commissioner Malecki stated there were really two questions to look at. One was the rezoning of land to C2 for the service station site; the other was to look at the desirability of rezoning the R5 land to C1 whether or not the rezoning to C2 took place. i ACTION TABLING APPLICATION NO. 89006 (E and H Properties) Motion by Commissioner Malecki seconded by Commissioner Ainas to table Application No. 89006, continue the public hearing, and refer the application to the Northeast Neighborhood Advisory Group for review and comment, with the recommendation of the Planning Commission to evaluate rezoning of the R5 land to C1 . Voting in favor: Chairman Nelson, Commissioners Malecki, Bernards and Sander. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. Following the vote, one of the neighbors asked whether the advisory group would be told that it is a gas station that is proposed. The Secretary stated that the advisory group would be aware of the gas station proposal, but that the rezoning j really has to be decided on the merits of the basic use of the land. He explained j that a gas station is already allowed in the C2 zoning district which covers most of the land for the proposed service station site. The rezoning of a small portion of the property to C2 is one of the questions that needs to be addressed. APPLICATION NO. 89007 (Maranatha Place) The Secretary then introduced the next item of business, a request for variance approval to place an identification sign for Maranatha Place apartments on a retaining wall on the Maranatha Care Center property to the east. The Secretary i reviewed the contents of the staff report (see Planning Commission Information Sheet for Application No. 89007 attached). The Secretary added that the nursing home is allowed a 36 sq. ft. sign already. i Chairman Nelson then asked the applicant whether he had anything to add. Mr. David Viland, the administrator of the Maranatha Care Center, showed the Planning j Commission a site plan of the entire care center and apartment complex and the location of the proposed sign and the location of the driveway serving both aspects of the development. He explained that construction of the Maranatha Place apartments required soil corrections and 6,000 yards of fill to be disposed of. He explained that the fill was used to create a bermed area in front of the care center and that the retaining wall would help to buttress that berm. Commissioner Malecki asked whether the retaining wall would be brick. Mr. Viland responded in the affirmative. Commissioner Bernards asked whether the sign variance would set a precedent for other apartment complexes in the City. The Secretary stated that he did not think so because of the unique circumstance of the care center and the apartment complex j being attached and being one continuous use. The Secretary added that the Commission could look at an ordinance amendment on multiple-family signery. He stated that the limit for this particular building is rather stringent, limiting it I to only a 10 sq. ft. sign on the wall of the building. In response to another comment from Commissioner Bernards, the Secretary agreed that the sign was aesthetically attractive and should not be any detriment to surrounding properties. PUBLIC HEARING (Application No. 890071 Chairman Nelson then opened the meeting for a public hearing and asked whether anyone present wished to speak regarding the application. Hearing no one, he called for a motion to close the public hearing. 2-16-89 -5- CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING Motion by Commissioner Ainas seconded by Commissioner Malecki to close the public hearing. The motion passed unanimously. Chairman Nelson indicated some interest in looking at the sign ordinance and perhaps bringing back an ordinance amendment relating to signery for multiple- family complexes. The Secretary stated that staff could bring back some ordinance amendment in the future. ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 89007 (Maranatha Place) Motion by Commissioner Ainas seconded by Commissioner Sander to recommend approval of Application No. 89007, subject to the following findings and conditions: 1. Unified signery for the care center/apartment complex is appropriate and even desirable. Applying the ordinance literally would prevent such unified signery and would work a hardship on the applicant. 2. The continuum of services offered in the complex and the attachment of the buildings across zoning as well as property lines are unique conditions which are not common generally in either the R6 or R1 zoning districts. 3. The proposed signery is aesthetically attractive and will have no greater impact than two separate sign monuments. There should, therefore, be no detrimental effect on the public welfare, nor injury to other property in the neighborhood. 4. The proposed retaining wall serves a function in addition to providing a wall on which to place signery. Sign area, therefore, need not be computed as the total face of the retaining wall, but only that area covered by the proposed signery. 5. Variance approval acknowledges one 28 sq. ft. freestanding sign as proposed on the Maranatha Care Center property. No other identification signery for Maranatha Place is acknowledged by this variance approval. 6. The existing identification sign for the care center shall be removed prior to issuance of the sign permits for the proposed signs. Voting in favor: Chairman Nelson, Commissioners, Malecki, Bernards, Ainas and Sander. Voting against: none. The motion passed. The City Engineer left the meeting at 9:19 p.m. OTHER BUSINESS The Secretary then briefly reviewed with the Commission the action on Application No. 89001, a variance request by Lois Anderson to allow a garage to be less than 50' from 57th Avenue North. He explained that the Planning Commission had recommended an ordinance amendment to define major thoroughfares as all four lane streets in the city. He explained that the Director of Public Works had informed him that after 2-16-89 -6- the Planning Commission's actions that there was some possibility that 57th would also be widened to four lanes between Logan and Humboldt. The garage in question, therefore, would also become nonconforming. The Secretary explained that he had decided to recommend a different ordinance amendment to the City Council to deal with Mrs. Anderson's proposed garage. He recommended that the ordinance exclude from the major thoroughfare setback requirement all accessory buildings. He explained that accessory buildings in rear yards were already excluded. He explained that his rationale was that accessory buildings are not as sensitive to noise, odor, or vibration as a principal use such as a dwelling. He added that the City Council went along with the revised ordinance amendment. The Planner then distributed to the Planning Commission a copy of a report from Hennepin County entitled "Not in my Back Yard" regarding the location of group homes. The Secretary encouraged the Commission to read the report and any other information regarding group homes. He explained that Donn Wiski's report would tell the City that it would not be able to exclude group homes from multiple-family zones. The Secretary also stated that concentration of group homes would be a concern of any new ordinance. He also stated that the City may want to require that all residential facilities be licensed in order to receive zoning approval. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Commissioner Ainas to adjourn the meeting of the Planning Commission. The motion passed unanimously. The Planning Commission adjourned at 9:27 p.m. 00 0, Ch irman 2-16-89 -7- 1 1