Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1980 05-08 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 May 8, 1980 • CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Planning Commission met in regular session and was called to order by Chairman William Hawes at 7: 34 p.m. ROLL CALL Chairman Hawes, Commissioners Malecki, Theis, Manson and Erickson. Also present were Director of Planning and Inspections Ronald Warren, Superintendent of Engineering James Noska, Building Official Will Dahn, and Planning Assistant Gary Shallcross. The Secretary noted that Commissioner Lucht had called earlier in the day that he would be unable to make the meeting because of frost warnings. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - April 24, 1980 Motion by Commissioner Malecki seconded by Commissioner Theis to approve the minutes of the April 24, 1980 meeting as submitted. Voting in favor: Chairman Hawes, Commissioners Malecki, Theis, Manson and Erickson. Voting against: none. The motion passed. Following the Chairman's explanation, the Secretary suggested that the Commission pass over Application No. 80015 in that no represent- ative for the applicant was present at the time. APPLICATION NO. 80016 (Dominion Development Corporation) The Secretary introduced the next item of business, a request for site and building plan approval by Dominion Development Corpora- tion to construct--two speculative industrial buildings totalling 171,000 square feet of floor space on land located west of Shingle Creek Parkway and north of 67th Avenue North. He reviewed the in- formation and Staff Report No. 80016 , but excluded any discussion of a tentative addition to the site and building plan regarding an enclosed dock area on the north side of the east building because the applicant-withdrew that amendment to the site plan, (See Planning Commission Information sheet for Application No. - 80016 attached) Commissioner Simmons arrived at 7: 45 p.m. Following the presentation of the staff report, the Secretary added two recommended conditions to the site plan approval regarding re- platting of the property in question and the provision of an internal concrete sidewalk network to serve pedestrian traffic within the larger industrial complex. Chairman Hawes asked whether the drainage ditch method of handling runoff had been included in the proposed site plan. The Superin- tendent of Engineering responded that underground storm sewer piping would be less expensive given the roadway desired by the developer. He noted, however, that a ponding area on the western May 8, 1980 -1- edge of Tract C of the proposed R.L.S. would be provided to convey the storm sewer runoff to Shingle Creek. Commissioner Theis inquired what the separation distance was between the proposed buildings and the speculative industrial building to the north. The Secretary answered that the separation would be 140 feet and briefly recalled the policy on such separations upheld in the approval of the Shingle Creek Plaza site plan. Commissioner Erickson asked questions regarding traffic movement into and out of the site. The Superintendent of Engineering pointed out the two curb cuts serving the Spec. IX site and the one median cut serving Spec. IX. He stated that there would be left turn lanes off Shingle Creek Parkway and stop signs on 67th Avenue North. He stated . that the intersection at 67th would probably accommodate most of the northbound traffic exiting the proposed site. Commissioner Theis noted that most truck traffic exiting the site going south- bound would likely use the easterly curb cut at Spec. IX. In re- sponse to a question about leveling out the Spec. IX exit from Chairman Hawes, the Superintendent of Engineering stated that it is preferable to provide 900 angle entrance onto public right-of-way. He also noted that the berming plans in the area north of the pro- posed office could be questionable since it might produce visibility problems for trucks exiting ,the site at 67th Avenue onto Shingle Creek Parkway. Commissioner Theis noted that the proof of parking plan for Tract B resulted in excess. area for parking and asked whether Tract C would. have adequate area to provide parking for the industrial buildings proposed for that site. The Secretary responded that each parcel must have enough land area to provide all required parking for the uses located on it. He stated also that the excess land area on Tract B to be used for parking could serve developments on Tract C through deed restrictions to that effect. He compared the parking arrangement in this industrial complex to the one being sought by the Earle Brown Farm between the proposed restaurant and the Earle Brown Office Tower. In response to a question from Commissioner Erickson regarding the exterior treatment of the proposed buildings, Mr. Al Beisner of Dominion Development Corporation stated that the exterior of the warehouse portions of the project would be very similar to the earth tone exterior treatment of the Spec. IX building to the north and that the office would have a brick exterior. In response to a question from Chairman Hawes regarding the height of the building, Mr. Beisner explained that the buildings would be 26 feet in height from grade to the top of the building with 20 feet of clear space for warehouse use inside the building. Commissioner Manson asked where the location of the trailway on Shingle Creek would be in this area. The Superintendent of Engineer- ing answered that because of Type III Wetlands on the west side of the creek in this area, the trailway would be located on the east side of the creek adjacent to the MTC property and Tract C. ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 80016 (Dominion Development Corporation) Motion by Commissioner Manson seconded by Commissioner Eric son to recommend approval of Application No. 80016 , site and building plan for two speculative buildings on Tract B, west of Shingle Creek May 8, 1980 -2- . Parkway at 67th Avenue North, 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' finan- cial guarantee (in an amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be submitted prior to the issuance of permits to assure completion of approved site improvements. 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 in accordance with Chapter 5 of the City Ordinances. 6._ An underground irrigation system shall be installed in all landscaped areas to facilitate site maintenance. 7. Plan approval is exclusive of all identification signery which is subject to Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances. 8. B612 curb and gutter shall be provided around all driving and parking areas completely with the con- struction limits of this development. 9. Plan approval comprehends deferral of improvements to Tract B from the south edge of the main private roadway (67th Place) to the southernmost portion of Tract B. 10. Plan approval comprehends deferral of some curb and gutter improvements on the south side of the private roadway for a period not to exceed 3 years, pending development to the south. The financial guarantee shall not be released in its entirety until such improvements are completed. 11. Traffic control signs for the management of traffic on the site will be installed in accordance with the recommendations of the City Engineer. 12. Plan approval is subject to the review and approval of the Fire Marshal with regard to emergency access to all areas of the site. 13. The property is subject to replatting in accordance with Chapter 15 of the City Ordinances. Building May 8, 1980 -3- permits will not be issued until the final plat has been approved by the City Council and filed with the County. 14. An internal concrete sidewalk network, as approved by the City Engineer, shall be provided in .order to accommodate pedestrian movements between buildings and parking areas on the site of the R.L.S. Voting in favor: Chairman Hawes, Commissioners Malecki, Theis, Manson, Erickson and Simmons. Voting against: none. The motion passed. PUBLIC HEARING FOR APPLICATION NO. 80015 (Darrel Farr Development Corporation) Following approval of Application No. 80016, the Secretary noted that the applicant for Application No. 80015 was still not present, but some residents from the area were in attendance. Commissioner Simmons suggested that a public hearing on the application be opened in order to receive the comments of those who had bothered to come to the meeting. Chairman Hawes opened the meeting for a public hearing on Application No. 80015, a request for a variance from the - Sign Ordinance. Mrs. Bonnie Forsman of 4703 Lakeview Avenue North stated simply that she was opposed to a large sign in front of the complex because it would be unsightly for the surrounding neighbor- hood. The Secretary briefly explained to Mrs. Forsman, the nature of the application and the staff recommendation against granting the variance. He added that under the City' s Zoning Ordinance, the applicant must be present at the time the Planning Commission holds a hearing on the variance. He recommended that the Planning Commis- sion hold the application over until the end of the meeting and, if no one arrived, to table it and continue the public hearing until the next meeting. RECESS The Planning Commission recessed at 8:32 p.m. and resumed at 8 :55 p.m. Following the recess, the Secretary reported that he had attempted to contact the applicant for Application No. 80015, Darrel Farr Development Corporation, without success. ACTION TABLING APPLICATION NO. 80015 (Darrel Farr Development Corporation) Motion by Commissioner Theis seconded by Commissioner Erickson to table and continue the Public Hearing for Application No. 80015, a request for a variance from the Sign Ordinance Section 34-140 2, 1 (3) , until the next Planning Commission meeting. Voting in favor: Chairman Hawes, Commissioners Malecki, Theis , Manson, Erickson and Simmons. Voting against: none. The motion passed. REVIEW OF 1981-19t`'-:' CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM The Planning AsszMkMnt briefly reviewed the contents of the 1981- 1985 Capital Improvements Program and asked for questions from the Commission. Commissioner Erickson and Commissioner Simmons asked about the Projected Revenues in Table C-1 of the Program. The Planning Assistant answered that the important projection for reve- nues was the total revenues excluding Special Assessments and Con- struction Grants. He explained that Construction Grant Revenues 5-8-80 -4 vary sharply from year to year depending on proposed projects, and that the day-to-day operation of the City depended on other revenues such as property taxes , local government aid, utility revenue, and charges for service. He stated that while various components of the City' s revenues would do better than others during the next five years, the overall trend would roughly keep pace with inflation. Commissioner Theis asked for an explanation of "other income" . The Planning Assistant answered that most of the revenues in this Cate- gory come from interest on trust and agency fund accounts in which the City has cash balances. The Planning Assistant stated that the most significant changes in the table of five year projections would be in the area of the City's tax base. He stated that the large real increases in the City' s tax base would result from three factors: 1. New construction of primarily commercial and industrial buildings; 2. Increases in the value of existing real property over and above the rate of inflation; 3. The elimination of "limited value" . He ex- plained that the figures for "market value" in the previous five years referred to limited market value, but that in the coming five years that term would refer to "estimated market value" which has not been- subject to the constraints of the limited value law. The Planning Assistant directed the Commission' s attention to the addendum on Local Streets and stated that staff would not recommend the initiation of -a local street reconstruction program until a special assessment policy is adopted and until the City Council determines that the need for the program exists. In a discussion of the proposed schedule for completing Capital Improvement Projects, the Planning Assistant pointed out that while maintenance cost information was not included in the schedule, the impact of almost all of the proposed projects would be to reduce maintenance costs. Commissioner Erickson noted the variation in capital expenditures from year-to-year and wondered whether this would result in underutilized staff during the less busy years. The Superintendent of Engineering explained that most of the street projects in the five year plan were MSA streets and that the engineering costs incurred by the City for those projects would be reimbursed by the State. He added that if, and when, the local street reconstruction program is put in place, the year-to-year workload would be much the same since it is recommended that roughly four miles of street would be reconstructed each year on a 20 year rotating basis. Commissioner Theis asked a number of questions regarding specific projects, particularly in the Parks section of the 'Capital Improve- ments Program. The Planning Assistant stated that the Parks Section of the Program was not ready because he had wanted to wait until the bond election was decided before preparing that section of the Capital Improvements Program. He added that the proposed improve- ments program in the Parks portion of the Capital Improvements 5-8-80 -5- Program was a result of many years of input from the Parks and Recreation Commission and local neighborhood groups as well as consultants and City staff. For this reason and in light of the approval of the voters at the recent bond election, the Planning Assistant stated that further revisions of the Park Capital Im- provements Program would be untimely. The Planning Assistant concluded the review of the Capital Im- provements Program by stating that the City's level of debt is presently low in relation to its assessed valuation. Level of debt projected at the end of the five year Capital Improvements Program would still be low unless the local street reconstruction program were begun. He concluded by saying that the City is in a very sound fiscal position at this time and should remain so in the foreseeable future. DISCUSSION ITEMS The Secretary next reviewed some draft ordinance amendments to the joint parking and off-site accessory parking sections of the Zoning Ordinance and some definitions of those two terms. He briefly explained the difference between off-site accessory parking and joint parking and gave examples of each. He also noted that one of the amendments to the off-site accessory parking section would treat R1 institutional uses such as churches the same as C-1 uses, thus allowing them to participate in such agreements. He encouraged the Commission to study the draft amendments for further discussion at the study meeting. The Secretary next reviewed with the Planning Commission, a proof of parking plan for the proposed Trader and Trapper Restaurant in the• horsebarn and hippodrome of the Earle Brown Farm. He stated that based on projected seating and employees for the restaurant and nightclub, a total of 487 parking stalls would be required under the Zoning Ordinance. He stated that the Meridian Construction Company was negotiating for purchase of enough land to place all of the required parking on it if that became necessary. He added, however, that they are still pursuing a joint parking agreement in conjunction with purchase of the property in order to avoid having to install all of the parking for the use. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Commissioner Theis seconded by Commissioner Malecki to adjourn the meeting of the Planning Commission. Voting in favor: Chairman Hawes, Commissioners Malecki, Theis, Manson, Erickson and Simmons. Voting against: none. The motion passed. The Planning Commission adjourned at 10:19 p. m. Chairman 5-8-80 -6-