HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987 07-16 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
JULY 16, 1987
CITY HALL
CALL TO ORDER
The Planning Commission met in regular session and was called to order by Chairman
George Lucht at 7:32 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Chairman George Lucht, Commissioners Molly Malecki, Mike Nelson, Lowell Ainas and
Ann Wallerstedt. Also present were Director of Planning and Inspection Ronald
Warren, City Engineer Bo Spurrier and Recording Secretary Mary Lou Larsen.
Chairman Lucht noted that Commissioners Wallace Bernards and Carl Sandstrom were
unable to attend this evening's meeting and were excused.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES - June 11, 1987
Motion Sy Commissioner Nelson seconded by Commissioner Ainas to approve the minutes
of the June 11, 1987 Planning Commission meeting as submitted. Voting in favor:
Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Nelson, Ainas and Wallerstedt. Not voting:
Commissioner Malecki. Voting against: none. The motion passed.
APPLICATION NOS. 87008, 87010 AND 87011 (Maranatha Conservative Baptist -Home)
Following the Chairman's explanation, the Secretary introduced the f r�tems of
business, a request for rezoning from R1 (One-Family Residence) to R6 (Miltiple-
Family Residence) of approximately the westerly 3.2 acres of the approximate 7 acre
Maranatha Nursing Home site located at 5401 69th Avenue North, site and building
plan, and preliminary plat approval to allow construction of a four storey, 65 unit
apartment complex for the elderly. The Secretary reviewed the staff reports (see
Planning Commission Information Sheets for Application Nos. 87008, 87010 and 87011
attached).
The Secretary stated the rezoning application was tabled at the May 21, 1987
Planning Commission meeting and referred to the Northwest Neighborhood Advisory
Group for review and comment. The Neighborhood meeting was held on June 2 at Willow
Lane School and was poorly attended due to late delivery of the notices by the Post
Office. He added that the Neighborhood Advisory Group supports the rezoning and
have submitted the minutes from that meeting.
Chairman Lucht stated that the required notices have been sent and the public
hearing is continued to this evening's meeting,. The applicant's representative is
present to answer any questions.
Commissioner Wallerstedt inquired about density requirements for the two
properties. The Secretary responded that following the division of land proposed
under Application No. 87011, the parcels would be in compliance with the R6 density
of 2,200 sq. ft. per dwelling unit and the nursing home density limitation of 50 beds
per acre. He added that these density limits could also be met even if the applicant
were not dividing the land.
Chairman Lucht asked what the appropriate screening would be for the residential
property abutting the nursing home. The Secretary stated there is no fence along
7-16-87 _1_
the existing nursing home. He noted that the ordinance requires a minimum of 4'
opaque fencing or an acceptable landscape screening between the property proposed
for the elderly multiple residential and the Rl property. He urged the Commission
to make a specific recommendation if they believed landscaping to be an acceptable
substitute for the fence.
Chairman Lucht then called on the applicant to speak. Mr. David Viland briefly
summarized the project. He stated that the project is unique, noting that older
seniors have different needs now, and that the apartments are to be attached to the
existing nursing home. Mr. Viland explained that there had been a market analysis
done and postcard surveys sent to seniors asking for information on number, income,
needs, and age group. A study comparing rent fees of Maranatha's competitors in the
northern suburbs had also been done. Rent charged for the Maranatha apartments
range from $535 to $830 per month.
Commissioner Wallerstedt inquired about handicapped apartments. Mr. Viland
stated that all of the apartments are equipped with handicapped features such as
extra wide doors, grab bars and lower cupboards. He added that 5% of the units would
be fully handicap accessible.
Dave Wolterstorff, representing the architectural firm, reviewed new drawings for
the project. He stated the building would be of brick and stucco with a gabled roof
to make it look more residential. Almost all units have a solarium, dropped
ceilings, and generous storage areas.
Commissioner Wallerstedt asked the architect if they had built many apartments for
the elderly. Mr. Wolterstorff stated they have built about a dozen.
Chairman Lucht stated that one concern is screening and asked Mr. Wolterstorff why
they had indicated certain shrubs with a lower height on the landscape plan. Mr.
Wolterstorff stated he didn't know why, but that his firm would have no problem with
changing shrubs to provide higher screening if this is a requirement.
PUBLIC HEARING (Application No. 87008)
Chairman Lucht then opened the meeting for a public hearing and asked if anyone
present wished to speak regarding the application.
Larry Snaza, of 5406 68th Avenue North, stated he had moved into the area in March and
was enjoying the wildlife and view, but was concerned if this would all be taken away
with construction of the apartment complex. Mr. Wolterstorff stated that some of
the landscaping will be preserved, the creek area will be improved and a ponding area
created.
Arvid Sorenson, of 6901 Toledo Avenue North, lives across the street from the
nursing home and explained that Maranatha has been a good neighbor, but he is still
concerned with the R6 zoning if Maranatha is no longer there. Chairman Lucht
explained R1 zoning will not allow a 4 storey apartment complex. The Secretary
stated that the property has to be rezoned to R6 to allow the plan submitted and there
is no guarantee that in 10 years it will always be used for elderly housing.
Mr. Viland stated bond issue restricts use to elderly housing and that the bonds
expire in 25-30 years. Mr. Sorenson asked if anyone can buy out this bond. Mr.
Wolterstorff stated he would have to contact the underwriter.
7-16-87 -2-
CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING
Motion by Commissioner Ainas seconded by Commissioner Nelson to close the public
hearing. Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Malecki, Nelson, Ainas
and Wallerstedt. Voting against: none. The motion passed.
Commissioner Nelson asked if shrubbery is acceptable as screening rather than a
fence. Chairman Lucht stated Euonymus or Cranberry shrubs.would be better as they
would grow to a height of 10 to 12 feet. The Secretary suggested altering the
conditions regarding screening. City Engineer Bo Spurrier pointed out that a
condition should be added to provide for execution of a utility maintenance
agreement.
APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 87008 (M,aranatha Conservative Baptist Home)
Motion by Commissioner Nelson seconded by Commissioner Malecki"fo -approve
Application No. 87008. Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Malecki,
Nelson, -Ainas and Wallerstedt. Voting against: none. The motion passed.
RESOLUTION NO. 87-1
Member Mike Nelson introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION REGARDING RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION OF APPLICATION NO. 87008 SUBMITTED BY
MARANATHA CONSERVATIVE BAPTIST HOME
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member
Molly Malecki and the motion passed.
ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 87010 (Maranatha Conservative
Baptist Home)
tion by Commissioner Nelson seconded by Commissioner Ainas to approve Application
No. 87010 subject to the following conditions:
1. Building plans are subject to review and approval by the Building
Official with respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance
of permits.
2. Grading, drainage, utility and berming plans are subject to
review and approval by the City Engineer, prior to the issuance of
permits.
3. A site performance agreement and supporting financial guarantee
(in an amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be
submitted prior to the issuance of permits.
4. Any outside trash disposal facilities and rooftop mechanical
equipment shall be appropriately screened from view.
5. The building is to be equipped with an automatic fire
extinguishing system to meet NFPA standards and shall be
connected to a central monitoring device to accordance with
Chapter 5 of the City Ordinances.
6. Plan approval is exclusive of all signery which is subject to
Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances.
7. B612 curb and gutter shall be provided around all parking and
driving areas.
7-16-87 -3-
8. The applicant shall submit an as-built survey of the property
prior to the release of the performance guarantee.
I
9. Fire hydrants shall be provided on the site at locations to be
approved by the Fire Chief.
10. The grading and drainage plan is subject to review and approval by
the Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commission prior to the
i
issuance of permits.
11. Plan approval acknowledges the existence of 11 trees on the site
greater than 6" in diameter. If these trees are removed or die as
a result of construction, they shall be replaced with new trees at
least 6" in diameter.
12. . The plat of the property containing the parcel for this project
shall receive final approval and be filed at the County prior to
the issuance of building permits.
13. The ponding area on the site shall be protected by an easement
over the affected area. Said easement document shall be
executed and filed with the title to the property at the County
prior to the issuance of permits.
14. The applicant shall execute a covenant agreement to provide up to
35 additional parking stalls on the site upon a determination of
need for such stalls by the City. Said covenant shall be filed
with the title to the property at the County prior to the issuance
of permits.
15. The plans shall be amended prior to the issuance of permits to
indicate the following:
a) Looping of the 8" watermain on the site with the existing 6"
line.
b) Screening provisions in the southerly buffer strip shall be
clearly indicated.
16. Plan approval acknowledges landscape screening in lieu of an
opaque fence per Section 35-410 subdivision 3 where the R6 zoned
property abuts Rl zoned property. The landscape screening shall
be Euonymus (non-dwarf variety), American Cranberry or
comparable shrubs capable of attaining a height of 10 to 12 feet.
17. The applicant shall enter into a standard utility maintenance
agreement as approved by the City Engineer.
Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Malecki, Nelson, Ainas and
Wallerstedt. Voting against: none. The motion passed.
ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 87011 (Maranatha Conservative
a$p st Home)
Motion by'Mmmissioner Nelson seconded ,by Commissioner Malecki to approve
Application No. 87011 subject to the following conditions:
7-16-87 -4-
i
1. The final plat is subject to review and approval by the City
Engineer.
2. The final plat is subject to the requirements of Chapter 15 of the
City Ordinances.
3. Easement documents for drainage and utilities and ponding shall
be executed and filed with the plat at the County.
4. A cross access agreement between Lots 1 and 2 of the proposed
subdivision shall be executed and filed with the plat at the
County.
Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Malecki, Nelson, Ainas and
Wallerstedt. Voting against: none. The motion passed.
The Secretary stated the three applications would be referred to the City Council
agenda for July 27, 1987.
APPLICATION NO. 87012 (Bill Kelly House)
The Secretary introduced the next item of business, a request for special use permit
approval to operate a group care home for 23 mentally ill and chemically dependent
adults at 5240 Drew Avenue North. The Secretary reviewed the staff report (see
Planning Commission Information Sheet for Application No. 87012 attached). The
Secretary explained that there were two letters from residents in the agenda packet
and he had received another letter after the agenda had been typed from Nancy Behling
Dillon, a pyschiatric specialist nurse, who has worked with this type of program.
The Secretary stated that information entitled "DO YOU WANT MENTALLY ILL DRUG
ADDICTS TO RESIDE IN LARGE NUMBERS IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD???" had been copied by an
anonymous person and placed on the back of the original notice sent by the City to
neighboring property owners and had been distributed in the neighborhood. He
wanted to clarify for the record that this item had not been sent by the City nor
should any of the material contained under that title be assumed to represent the
opinion or attitude of the City with respect to this application.
Chairman Lucht called on the applicant to speak. Mr. Felix Phillips, an attorney
representing the applicant, addressed the Commission and noted that Richard Ellis
and Henry Norton, the applicants, are also.present. Mr. Phillips stated there are
two situations to be considered in the proposal; legal and equitable. Regarding the
legal situation Mr. Phillips stated he hoped to receive fair treatment and that the
special use permit would be granted in accordance with State of Minnesota
requirements. He referred to the Northwest Residence case stating group homes are
allowed in residential areas by law.
Based on state policy and law, as well as the legal precedent, his client has the
right to use the property in the manner proposed. Mr. Phillips stated that the
equitable argument is that property values are not affected by group homes. He
claimed that this has not been the case where other group facilities have located in
residential areas.
Commissioner Wallerstedt inquired if the group home could be denied based on the
type of treatment offered. She stated that fear of chemical dependency has been
7-16-87 -5-
E expressed by neighboring residents. Mr. Phillips pointed out 0 incidents of
complaints against group homes. He also stated one out of ten Americans experience
depression and the mentally ill are victims of depression. He explained that
people have a right to be fearful and the right to get information about the
facility. He noted that the people served in the facility suffer from mental
illness and are not criminals. He said there is a difference between mental illness
and criminal behavior and added that there are no sex molestors or child abusers in
the program.
Mr. Richard Ellis stated applicants are screened and patients with certain types of
problems are not accepted. He explained that their program is not designed to treat
sex offender and/or criminal behavior.
Commissioner Malecki referred to Northwest Residence case where that applicant was
required to upgrade the parking and asked Mr. Phillips if he disagrees with the staff
recommendation to alter the parking. Mr. Phillips stated they will be glad to do
what is required.
Commissioner Wallerstedt asked for information and studies on negative and positive
effects on the neighborhood. Mr. Phillips referred to other cases that indicated
group homes do not cause trouble in neighborhoods and that property values do not go
down. Commissioner Wallerstedt asked if there are dangerous people there. Mr.
Phillips answered there are not.
Commissioner Wallerstedt asked Mr. Ellis to describe a typical day for a resident in
a group home. Mr. Ellis stated the day starts at about 8:00 a.m. and ends at 7:30
p.m. with recreational activity in the evening. He added that the typical day
involves participation in treatment and recreation. Commissioner Wallerstedt
inquired if activities are all in-house. Mr. Ellis stated that there is 100%
participation and as a resident improves, they spend less time in-house. -In
response to Commissioner Wallerstedt, Mr. Ellis discussed the staffing of the
facility.
Chairman Lucht asked at what stage are the chemically dependent sent to the group
home. Mr. Ellis answered that the residents have gone through treatment for
chemical dependency before coming to the facility and that their primary problem is
their mental illness.
Commissioner Nelson asked if a resident is discharged if they have a drink or other
misbehavior occurs. Mr. Ellis responded that one incidence of misuse of alcohol or
chemicals may not necessarily cause immediate dismissal of a resident. He noted
they try to counsel and work with the problem before a person is removed from the
program. However, continuous use or abuse of alcohol and drugs is grounds to remove
that person from the facility. Chairman Lucht asked what determines a normal
discharge. Mr. Ellis stated residents must learn coping strategies and techniques
as well as structuring their lives and also need to find alternative housing and
employment. He added that as improvement-progresses in these areas a resident
would leave the program.
Chairman Lucht asked if employment and housing are found for discharged residents.
Mr. Ellis responded that they do try to find employment and housing for residents.
Commissioner Wallerstedt asked what kind of employment is found. Mr. Ellis stated
residents do volunteer work and obtain other employment such as McDonalds.
7-16-87 -6-
Commissioner Malecki inquired if the group home receives referrals from psychiatric
hospitals. Mr. Ellis stated that they do. Commissioner Malecki asked what the
requirements are for therapists. Mr. Ellis stated they have to be licensed mental
health workers with a masters degree in some kind of human services like a
psychologist. Commissioner Malecki asked what are the residents doing 12 hours a
day. Mr. Ellis stated the residents day starts at 7:30 a.m. with breakfast,
housekeeping, bath and medications. At 9:30 a.m. there is a group session in mental
health therapy. At 11:00 a.m. residents participate in an exercise session.
Lunch is from 11:30 a.m. to 12:00 noon. 12:00 to 1:00 p.m. is spent in free time.
Independent living skills classes are held from 1:00 to 3:00 p.m. An individual
therapy session is held once week. Dinner is at 4:30 p.m. with recreation
following.
Commissioner Malecki asked if residents are there voluntarily. Mr. Ellis stated
they are. Commissioner Malecki asked what restrictions are placed on residents.
Mr. Ellis responded they are not allowed to leave the premises until they have
progressed in treatment to a certain point. Once they reach this point they may
leave. Also, there is a buddy system with a resident having full privileges.
Residents that receive full privileges are required to sign in and out at all times.
Passes are given on weekends to those with full privileges. Commissioner Malecki
asked who dispenses residents' medication. Mr. Ellis stated the staff dispenses
medication and residents are eventually trained to give themselves their
medication.
Commissioner Wallerstedt asked why a Brooklyn Center location was chosen. Mr.
Henry Norton responded that they are now located in a high crime area of Minneapolis
which is not a conducive atmosphere for their residents. , He noted that some of the
residents have been abused. He added that it is just not a wholesome neighborhood
for vulnerable people to live. They sought a suburban location such as with good
transportation and an uncrowded lot. He stated that the Brooklyn Center location
fit their needs. He added that they had primarily looked in the suburbs with the
smallest percentage of residential treatment facilities, that being primarily St.
Louis Park, Crystal and Brooklyn Center. They felt the Brooklyn Center site
offered the best opportunities.
PUBLIC HEARING
h(, airman Lucct then opened the meeting for a public hearing and asked if anyone
present wished to speak regarding the application.
Jill Sherritt, of 5237 Drew Avenue North, stated she was the spokesperson for over
300 neighboring property owners. She requested tabling or denial of the
application until research could be done by her group as they had not had time to
gather enough information to present in order to show that the Bill Kelly House
program should not be permitted.
Mrs. Sherritt read and presented a statement requesting the tabling or denial of the
application. She noted that many new facts have come to light since the 1984
lawsuit that the City was involved in. She requested that her group be given the
opportunity to research this information and submit.
Mrs. Sherritt stated at the July 8 meeting between neighbors and representatives of
Bill Kelly House Mr. Ellis presented the program as a Rule 36 Program facility when
it is actually a Rule 35/36 Program One Facility. Rule 35 is a program for
chemically dependent residents and Rule 36 is a program for mentally ill
residents, and she stated there is a difference between these types of facilities.
In her group's research it was found that the Oasis House located in Golden Valley is
7-16-87 -7-
C
not located in a nice residential area but, rather, on a busy street across from
residential homes next door to a a Christian Science reading room. She stated that
Mr. Ellis claims that persons with mental illness have no higher crime rate than the
general public; then had no statistics to back that up.
Mrs. Sherritt stated that severe mentally ill, chemically dependent persons with
behavior problems will be living at the Bill Kelly House. She noted that the
Minneapolis Police Department, which has been gathering data for her, say crime
related to chemical dependency is a major problem in all areas. She added that the
representative of Kelly House cannot guarantee that all of the clients will be non-
violent. She listed examples describing severe mental illness and added that she
believed the Kelly House presentation to be vague and full of misconceptions
regarding the violence and mental illness.
Mrs. Sherritt next commented on the Supreme Court ruling and the standards for
granting special use permits. She stated she believed the location of this
facility would be detrimental or endanger the public health, safety, morals or
comfort due to its proximity (within 3 blocks) to an elementary school with about 700
children. She pointed out that Fridley residents located near Community Options
Ltd. will attest to the fact that their neighborhood has deteriorated, has become
transient, and property values fallen due to location of that facility in the
neighborhood. She further noted her belief that none of the standards could be met.
In her closing statement Mrs.-Sherritt stated that the group home cannot guarantee a
safe environment for their clients; kids can get nasty and so can adults; drugs and
alcohol are present in the Brooklyn Center area proving unsafe for clients; and the
group home may present a risk to the health, safety and welare of neighboring
property owners. Finally, she added if the group home is approved and any harm comes
to their children because of it, the neighboring property owners will hold the City
of Brooklyn Center responsible.
Chairman Lucht next recognized Marge Otten, 5311 4th Street N.E., Fridley who spoke
regarding the application. She stated incidents that have happened in Fridley
because of a group home locating in her area. She stated property values do go down
and crime rate and traffic impact are affected. Renters have moved out when they
learned there was a group home in the area; landlords no longer take pride in their
property; and cars have been vandalized. This is in a 6 or 7 block area only.
Police are called to look for missing residents. She urged officials to find out
the background of staff who select future residents of the facility to prevent this
from happening in our city.
Chairman Lucht then recognized Phil Carruthers, State Representative, and resident
of Brooklyn Center. He stated he supports the neighbors opposition to the group
home and requests tabling of the application to give the neighbors more time to
understand the nature of the home and gather more information. He stated the
proposed group home is a large facility to include 23 residents, as compared to the .7
to 16 residents provided for in State Law. He urged the Commission to continue the
hearing in order to get more facts and noted that the public only became aware of the
proposal a couple of weeks ago and needs more time and information.
Mr. Carruthers next commented on the Northwest Residence decision. He stated he
believed this case should be looked at narrowly rather than in the broad manner it is
being used. He stated that the court found that there was not an adequate factual
record established for the City to make its decision. He urged the Commission to
establish the needed record. He noted that the effect on property and safety has to
be established and does this proposal meet the requirements. Mr. Carruthers stated
that he doesn't believe the proposed facility is the same as the facility in the
7-16-87 -8-
Northwest Residence case in that the present case involves a facility for the
mentally ill and chemically dependent while Northwest Residence is for the mentally
ill only and a larger facility as well. He stated the Kelly House is more of an
institutional facility rather than a residential facility. He urged the
Commission to carefully review all the issues and continue the matter.
Chairman Lucht asked Mir. Carruthers how the facts can be sorted out. Mr. Carruthers
suggested listening to testimony and making decisions.
Commissioner Ainas stated he lives near the Northwest Residence group home and there
are facts already shown in our community that there have been no significant
problems. Police calls have been for medical emergencies or other incidents within
the facility. He has also checked with merchants in the surrounding area and they
have had no problems with the residents of the group home. He pointed out there is
no guarantee of behavior of any persons whether they are residents of a group home or
not. He explained that Willow Lane School and Park are as close to Northwest
Residence as the proposed Kelly House is to Northport School and Park and there have
been no incidents related to the facility.
Chairman Lucht stated more information was needed on property values affected
because there are a number of factors and variables that will affect property
values.
The Secretary pointed out that in the Northwest Residence case many hours were spent
in trying to establish a factual basis for the City's position and that in his
opinion the matter was well presented as evidenced by the District Court finding.
He stated he resented the implication by Mr. Carruthers that the City did not put
together a good case. The Secretary further stated that it was his opinion that the
Appeals Court only looked at the fact that the State has preempted.local control and
regulation of residential treatment facilities; Billy Kelly House is a residential
treatment facility and will in all likelihood be viewed the same as Northwest
Residence in terms of the State Mandate.
Commissioner Wallerstedt asked what purpose a delay would serve. Mr. Carruthers
stated the system would be served if neighbors had more time.
Chairman Lucht next recognized Bruce Nelson, 5250 Ewing Avenue North, who requested
that common sense be used in a determination and asked if anyone present would want
to buy a home near this group home. He feels it is a money making facility, chemical
dependency is being white-washed, treatment has not improved behavior and parking
will be a problem.
Curtis Wuollet, 5233 Drew Avenue North, stated the neighbors deserve reasonable
consideration. He has fears for his children and stated there is not a neighborhood
in Brooklyn Center that wouldn't feel the same way. He stated he feels the home will
be approved and there probably is nothing the neighbors can do about it.
Leslie Rogge, 5445 E. Twin Lake Blvd., stated no one wants it so why not junk the
request.
Judy Niewind, 3507 53rd Place, stated she has participated in Alanon and people with
chemical dependency "falloff the wagon." She asked how many of these residents are
repeaters and does it work to have men and women residents in the program together.
She feels these programs are supported with taxpayer money and they don't work well
and she is tired of footing the bill.
Chairman Lucht asked if anyone else wished to be heard. No one spoke.
7-16-87 -9-
ACTION RECOMMENDING TABLING APPLICATION NO. 87012 (Bill Kelly House)
Following further discussion, there was a motion by Commissioner Nelson seconded by
Commissioner Malecki to table Application No. 87012 for 30 days and to continue the
public hearing to that time to give the neighborhood additional time and to further
review the issues raised. Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Commissioners
Malecki, Nelson, Ainas and Wallerstedt. Voting against: none. The motion
passed.
RECESS
The Planning Commission recessed at 10:50 p.m. and resumed at 11:10 p.m.
APPLICATION NO. 87013 (David Brandvold)
The Secretary introduced the next item of business, a request for preliminary plat
approval to subidivide into two lots the parcel of land at 5819 Bryant Avenue North.
The Secretary reviewed the staff report (see Planning Commission Information Sheet
for Application No. 87013 attached).
Chairman Lucht noted that a public hearing is required and notices have been sent.
PUBLIC HEARING
Chairman Lucht then opened the meeting for a public hearing and asked if 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 Nelson seconded by Commissioner Ainas to close the public
hearing. Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Malecki, Nelson, Ainas
and Wallerstedt. Voting against: none. The motion passed.
ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 87013 (David Brandvold)
Motion by Commissioner Nelson seconded by Commissioner Ainas to approve Application
No. 87013 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 existing garage shall be relocated with at least a 3' side
yard setback onto Lot 1 prior to release of the final plat for
filing.
Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Malecki, Nelson, Ainas and
Wallerstedt. Voting against: none. The motion passed.
APPLICATION NO. 87014 (David Brandvold)
The Secretary introduced the next item of business, a request for variance approval
to subdivide the lot at 5819 Bryant Avenue North into two lots including a lot with a
width of only 72.72' rather than the 75' required by ordinance. The Secretary
reviewed the staff report (see Planning Commission Information Sheet for
Application No. 87014 attached).
PUBLIC HEARING
hha rman Lucht then opened the meeting for a public hearing and asked if anyone
7-16-87 -10-
i
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 Wallerstedt to close the
public hearing. Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Malecki, Nelson,
Ainas and Wallerstedt. Voting against: none. The motion passed.
ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 87014 (David Brandvold)
Motion by Commissioner Ainas seconded by Commissioner Nelson to recommend approval
of Application No. 87014, subject to the following conditions:
1. The proposed lot has extra depth which produces ample lot area.
2. Extra water and sewer laterals have been extended to the property
and have been paid for.
3. The variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a
substantial property right of the petitioner.
4. The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public
welfare or injurious to other property in the neighborhood.
5. The extent of the variance has been minimized by creating one lot
of 75' width and another of 72.721 .
6. The property shall be platted in accordance with the provisions
of Chapter 15 of the City Ordinances.
7. An existing detached garage shall be relocated onto the proposed
Lot 1 with a minimum side yard setback of 3' .
Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Malecki, Nelson, Ainas and
Wallerstedt. Voting against: none. The motion passed.
DISCUSSION ITEMS
A discussion ensued regarding upcoming business items for the July 30, 1987 meeting.
ADJOURNMENT
Motion by Commissioner Nelson seconded by Commissioner Wallerstedt to adjourn the
Planning Commission meeting. Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Commissioners
Malecki, Ainas, Nelson and Wallerstedt. The motion passed. The Planning
Commission adjourned at 11:25 p.m.
Chairman
7-16-87 -11-
1
1