Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1980 07-24 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 STUDY SESSION JULY 24, 1980 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Punning Commission met in study session and was called to order by Chairman William Hawes at 7:31 p.m. ROLL CALL Chairman Hawes, Commissioners Malecki , Manson, Lucht, Erickson and Simmons. Also present were Superintendent of Engineering James Noska and Planning Assistant Gary Shallc ross. The Planning Assistant pointed out that Commissioner Theis had called earlier in the day to say that he would be unable to attend the meeting. He also explained that the Director of Planning and Inspection, Ronald Warren, was unable to attend because he was recovering from minor surgery .to his knee. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - July 10, 1980 Chairman Hawes pointed out that there had been a brief discussion of stop signs for the exits at the Lutheran Church of the Master which was not contained in the minutes. He added that stop signs at each exit was a condition of approval which had not been included as well . Motion by Commissioner Malecki seconded by Com- missioner Erickson to approve the minutes of the July 10, 1980 meeting as correct- ed. Voting in favor: Chairman Hawes, Commissioners Malecki , Manson, Lucht, Erickson and Simmons. Voting against: none. The motion passed. APPLICATION NO. 80026 (David Brandvold) Following the Chairman's explanation, the Planning Assistnat introduced the first item of business, a request for preliminary plat approval comprehending variances from two provisions of the Subdivision Ordinance to subdivide three lots at Ewing and Drew immediately south of the I-94 right-of-way. The Planning Assistant re- viewed the information contained in Staff Report No. 80026 (attached) . Following the presentation of the Staff Report, Chairman Hawes asked where snow would be stored on the cul-de-sac option and the hammerhead option. The Super- intendent of Engineering explained that snow would be stored on what it is now Interstate 94 right-of-way if MN/DOT gives its approval and the cul-de-sac is installed. If the hammerhead cul-de-sac were constructed, he said, the Outlot to the west of Ewing would probably have to be acquired by dedication and would be used for snow storage. Commissioner Simmons asked whether the excess right-of-way to the south of the proposed noise wall would be returned to the City or to the abutting property owners. The Superintendent of Engineering answered that the excess right-of-way would be returned to the abutting property, but that the State would maintain an easement over that area for access to the wall for maintenance purposes. In answer to a question from Commissioner Erickson, the Superintendent of Engineer- ing explained that the excess right-of-way amounted to roughly ten feet to the south of the noise wall . In answer to Commissioner Lucht, the Superintendent of Engineering stated that the proposed Outlot could be owned by the developer or the neighboring property owner. 7-24-80 -1- Commissioner Erickson asked whether joint use of State Highway right-of-way by both the City and State has been done in the past. The Superintendent of Engineering answered that there have been cases in the past similar in nature though not precisely the same as the one being proposed where right-of-way was shared. Chairman Hawes asked whether emergency vehicles such as fire trucks would be able to use the excess right-of-way to gain access to the rear yard of any of the lots. The Superintendent of Engineering answered that the distance allowed would make such an attempt difficult, but that it would probably be feasible. PUBLIC HEARING Chairman Hawes then opened the meeting for a public hearing. Mr. Milton Voss, of 6607 Ewing Avenue North, expressed his concern that if the cul-de-sac were moved to the north into the State Highway right-of-way, it would also be en- larged to the west which would perhaps result in snow being stored on his property. The Superintendent of Engineering stated that this was a possibility, but that the effect would be slight and that any snow storage to the west of the cul -de-sac would be on the Outlot rather than on Mr. Voss's property. Mr. Voss inquired as to who owned the property being platted. The Planning Assistant explained that Mr. Brandvold has a purchase agreement to buy the property shown in the subdivision subject to the plat being approved. Chairman Hawes asked where the water from Mr. Voss's property drained to the north or the south. Mr. Voss answered that water drains to the south into a storm sewer in 66th Avenue North. Commissioner Lucht asked Mr. Voss what his objection would be to' a hammerhead-shaped cul-de-sac. Mr. Voss responded that his concern was over the effect on the north portion of his property. He stated that he had no problems with the circular cul-de-sac shown on the proposed subdivision. Mr. John Riley, Attorney for Mr. Gallagher of 6606 Drew Avenue North, addressed the Commission and stated that his client had maintained the property east of Drew and south of the highway right-of-way for the past 17 years. He stated that his client may claim ownership of the property and that Mr. Brandvold might be unable to obtain title. The Superintendent of Engineering asked whether a claim had been filed. Mr. Riley answered that none had yet been filed. The Planning Assistant explained that the property between Ewing and Drew, north of the existing houses, was owned by a Mr. Emmans and that the property to the east of Drew and north of the existing Drew right-of-way is owned by another party. Mr. Gallagher lives immediately south of that property and has apparently been maintaining it for the last 17 years. Chairman Hawes asked whether the ownership issue would have to be resolved before a decision could be made on the plat. The Planning Assistant responded that the dispute over ownership was a civil matter which need not be considered by the Planning Commission. The only action the Planning Commission must take, he explained, is to approve the proposed subdivision if it feels that the ordinance requirements are met for such a subdivision and for the variances comprehended. He stated that the dispute among private parties would have to be settled prior to filing the plat with the County and would consequently °affect the issuing of a building permit, but not the action on the plat itself. Mr. Voss commented that all of the owners whose property abuts the land in question have been maintaining the open land for many years and could all make similar claims. CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING Motion by Commissioner Lucht seconded by Commissioner Malecki to close the public hearing. Voting in favor: Chairman Hawes , Commissioners Malecki , Manson, Lucht, Erickson and Simmons. Voting against: none. The motion passed. 7-24-80 -2- ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 80026 (David Brandvold) Motion by Commissioner Lucht seconded by Commissioner Erickson to recommend approval of Application No. 80026, subdivision approval of a plat containing three lots and an outlot between Ewing and Drew, south of the I-94 right-of-way and comprehending variances from S ction 15-106-g and 15-106-c-10 of the Sub- division Ordinance, subject to the following conditions: 1 . Final plat approval is subject to the requirements of the Sub- division Ordinance with the exception of the lot width require- ment on the easterly lot which is acknowledged by variance to have a lot width of 65 feet and with the exception of an 80 foot diameter cul-de-sac rather than 100 feet. 2. The final plat is subject to the review and approval of the City Engineer. 3. The preliminary plat shall be modified prior to consideration by the City Council to indicate the following: (a) Each lot shall be given a lot number and two blocks should be indicated, divided by the Drew Avenue right-of- way. (b) The size and shape of the area to be dedicated for cul-de- sacs shall be modified in accordance with the recommend ions of the City Engineer. Commissioner Lucht noted in his motion for approval that no other variances regarding the subject property are acknowledged in the subdivision approval . Voting in favor: Chairman Hawes, Commissioners Malecki , Manson, Lucht, Erickson, and Simmons. Voting against: none. The motion passed. DISCUSSION ITEMS -- The Planning Assistant next reviewed with the Planning Commission a conceptual plan for a 40 stall parking lot on the property located on the northwest corner of Dupont Avenue North and 55th Avenue North. The parking lot would serve the Harron United Methodist Church located on the southeast corner of the same intersection. He explained that the proposed layout would require a variance from the Zoning Ordinance regarding greenstrip requirements and possibly an ordinance amendment comprehending compact car parking stalls. He stated that it was staff opinion at this time that the variances required would be justified on the grounds that approving them would allow for almost all the church-related parking to be handled off-street. Using an aerial photograph that happened to have been taken on a Sunday morning, the Planning Assistant pointed out there were indeed a number of cars in the vicinity of the church which were parking on the street. Commissioner Simmons asked whether the church felt it needed 40 stalls and what it would do to reduce cut-through and spin-around traffic in its lot. Mrs. Glenna Larson, representing Harron Methodist Church, stated that the church definitely needs 40 parking stalls on Sunday morning and added that a sub- stantial portion of those cars are compacts. Mr. Gilbert, Engdahl , a former Planning Commission member and also a member of Harron Methodist Church, stated that the church would use chains to close off the parking lot when not being used by the congregation. 7-24-80 -3- On a related matter, the Planning Assistant referred the.Commission's attention to a draft ordinance amendment allowing for the installation of compact car parking stalls for up to 20% of an establishment's parking requirements. Com- missioner Lucht asked who would be responsible for policing the use of the stalls for compact cars only. The Planning Assistant answered that other than the requirement for the stalls to be properly designated with signs approved by the Building Official , the City would not become involved in enforcing the compact car provision. He stated that it would probably not be wise to require that such stalls be placed close to the principal building on the site since such a location would invite violation by larger vehicles and thus, turn the savings of the compact car stalls into simply a narrower driving lane and aggrevation for motorists. Commissioner Erickson commented that the limit of 20% seems low in lieu of the recent surge in compact car sales. The Planning Assistant agreed, stating that a 20% maximum on the compact car option repre- sented a conservative first step which might be increased in future years as trends indicate. He explained that the National Parking Institute, a trade association of parking ramp owners, was in the process of developing a model zoning ordinance for compact car parking stalls. He added that other communities in the Metropolitan area have acknowledged compact car parking, for the most part, by variance and are awaiting the model zoning ordinance on compact cars before adopting an ordinance. The Planning Assistant next reported to the Commission on the deliberation of the City Council concerning the preliminary plat proposed by Commercial Partners for the Charlson property north of Brookdale Ford and south of Northwestern Bell on Shingle Creek Parkway. He explained that the Council , for all practical purposes, dropped the idea of a roadway from Shingle Creek Parkway to John Martin Drive along the same alignment as Earle Brown Drive. They had, however, indicated to the applicant that they preferred that the site be laid out in such a manner that the north access would definitely be the main access to the site. The plat, he noted, was referred back to the Planning Commission for revision in line with the direction to modify the site plan in such a way as to make the north access as much as possible, the major access to the site. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Commissioner Manson seconded by Commissioner Erickson to adjourn the meeting of the Planning Commission. Voting in favor: Chairman Hawes, Commis- sioners Malecki , Manson, Lucht, Erickson and Simmons. Voting aginst: none. The motion passed. The Planning Commission adjourned at 9:05 p.m. Chairman 7-24-80 -4-