Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1990 04-26 PCP PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER APRIL 26, 1990 STUDY SESSION 1. Call to Order: 7:30 p.m. 2. Roll Call 3. Approval of Minutes - April 12, 1990 4. Chairperson's Explanation: The Planning Commission is an advisory body. One of the Commission's functions is to hold public hearings. In the matters concerned in these hearings, the Commission makes recommendations to the City Council. The City Council makes all final decisions in these matters. 5. Brooklyn Center Strategies Plan for 1990 Review by City Manager Gerald Splinter of Goals and Strategies/Action Plan. 6. Brooklyn United Methodist Church 90010 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. 7. Brooklyn United Methodist Church 90011 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. 8. Keith Sturm/Reliance Real Estate 90009 Request for variance approval to allow retail use of the Golds Gym building at 2920 County Road 10 with fewer parking stalls than required by ordinance. 9. Other Business 10. Discussion Items 11. Adjournment a • • r y BROOKLYN CENTER STRATEGIC PLANNING 1990 GOALS: * To reaffirm the priorities (issues) previously established by the group and condensed by the City Council. * To increase the understanding of the group regarding the priorities, strategies and status for completion. * To establish a frame of mind and enhance the knowledge of the group in order- to prepare for the 1991 goal-setting session. STRATEGIES/ACTION PLAN: PHASE I. STRATEGY EVALUATION * One at a time, review each priority and its set of cooresponding strategies. * Immediately following each review, the group determines their level of satisfaction for each strategy. Level of Satisfaction 1... Low .5....................g - •Not Sure High * Feedback: is displayed and discussed. - Instant feedback helps determine those strategies which require more discussion time. - Purpose of the discussion is: • to clarify WHY people vote as they do. . to ask and answer questions. . to share further information. . to determine major differences among sub-groups. Major strategy/action plans which are different from original plans are discussed and recorded. Example• REVIEW CRIME/DRUGS and its six strategies. VOTE on each of the six strategies. DISPLAY AND DISCUSS. * Continue process for each priority/set of strategies. 2. PHASE II. PRIORITY EVALUATION * Two votes are taken. Vote fl, - prioritize the 7 priorities using the forced choice method which compares each priority with each other. Results will give us a ranking of priorities from highest to lowest in terms of relative CRITICALITY. Note: Assumption is that ALL priorities are important but that determining a sense of RELATIVE CRITICALITY is essential for achieving effective strategic planning. Vote 12 - Rate overall LEVEL OF SATISFACTION as to the perceived effectiveness of the set of strategies for each priority. (7 votes) Level of Satisfaction 1. ...................5...... ..... ..........9 Low Not Sure High * Combine,display and discuss the two vote matrix. See matrix. III. FOLLOW-UP * Meet with Council to review session's results and to reaffirm Council's role/responsibility to give direction in response to the decisions on revised priorities and strategies. * Establish framework for 1991 goal-setting session. I c I 2/1/90 STATUS OF 1989 BROOKLYN CENTER PRIORITIES 1. CRIME/DRUGS a. Drug Education/Prevention Programs -The primary program in this area is the DARE program. As of the first week in January, two Brooklyn Center police officers started the DARE program in all Brooklyn Center grade schools for fifth grade students. In addition, we are currently serving two grade schools immediately adjacent to Brooklyn Center in Brooklyn Park which have significant Brooklyn Center student Populations (Fair Oaks and Palmer Lake grade schools) . We are also seeking the DARE training for an additional Brooklyn Center Police officer to serve as a backup in case Of sickness or other unforeseen events. We anticipate training to occur in the first six months of 1990. Council approved Brooklyn Center police department's participation in the four cities (Brooklyn Center, Brooklyn Park, Coon Rapids, and Maple Grove) joint Powers drug enforcement program. This program is a joint effort among police departments of these four cities directed at handling drug cases and situations which extend beyond the borders of the individual cities. The Humboldt/Camden Task Force, with membership of property owners, business, School District #286, and the Brooklyn Center Police department, are assessing crime and drug activity in this area and will be making their report by June, 1990. b. Drug Task Force -The city manager's office is currently working with the Mayor's drug task force to prepare the necessary documents which will allow the Council to consider formalizing the task force into an official city advisory body. We would expect these documents to be complete and to the Council in March of 1990. C. Crime Watch Program -The crime watch program currently has 40 neighborhood crime watch groups in operation in Brooklyn Center. This program has grown quickly and now requires additional police personnel to operate it effectively. C -2- d. Battered Spouse/Youth Program -The battered spouse g currently handled through a contract with the "Duluth Project, " is effectively providing the Brooklyn Center police department with services to handle battered spouse counseling and social service needs required under state law. The police department is in the initial stages of developing a similar battered Youth. Program for program operational in September of 1990. a e. Crime Prevention Fund -The crime prevention fund, we believe, is operating very effectively in ing services and funding to complement the provi department operation. They are also working With other groups, such as the Mayor's drug task force, to coordinate initial funding of the DARE program and other similar drug prevention education programs. f• Police Master Plan Update -Brooklyn Center police department has a five Year master plan which is annually reviewed and updated in conjunction with the City Council 's budget process. We anticipate as a Part of the 1991 budget process to evaluate the needs in the area of drug enforcement/education and in the area of crime prevention programs. 2• HOUSING a. Maintenance Code for Commercial/Industrial Buildings -We anticipate submittal of ordinances to establish or extend phousing maintenance code commercial/industrial buildings requirements to nbe before the City Council by April 1, 1990. b• Housing Rehab-Program Initiatives -Currently the implementation of Publicorp is under consideration plan by the housing commission, and we anticipate a report to the City Council by April, 1990. -3- C. Subsidized Elderly Housing -The City Council should evaluate all aspects of elderly housing and service needs as a part of the review of the Publicorp housing implementation plan, which is due to be submitted to the City Council by April of 1990. d• Coordinated Housing Maintenance Program -City staff has an ad hoc committee composed of representatives of the police department, Planning and inspections department, EDA, health department, and the city attorneys Office, which develops and periodically reviews enforcement action on the most Problematic properties as they relate to housing, nuisance, and health code violations. This group meets quarterl to review the status of enforcement efforts on the properties on the target listing. This process has assured us of a continued, concerted effort on the "target list properties" until such time as all enforcement remedies are exhausted. e• Group Home Siting Process -The planning commission has received the "Ordinance Study" on group home sitings and is currently reviewing the report. We would anticipate a report to the Council before May 1, 1990. 3. BUDGET/FINANCES a. Legislative Impact -The staff will be meeting with Brooklyn Center state legislators and informing them of the need to stabilize fiscal policy direction to cities and to enact fiscal note process. These meetings will occur prior to the 1990 legislative session. b. Property Tax Change -As a part of the meetin representing Brooklyn Center, legislators reviewing our we will be s problems with the municipal state aid modifications system, levy limits, and to the property tax system which complicate communication and long term financial planning for cities. We are also working with the Association of Metropolitan Municipalities and the League of Minnesota Cities to seek stabilization of property tax Policies on the state level. C. Alternative Revenue Sources -The City staff is committed to reviewing all Possible alternative Part of the development eOfnthe 1991 p s as a budget, and the 1990 adopted City Council in January of the 3% hotel/motel tax which Will produce approximately $170, 000 of revenue for the 1990 budget. ' d. LGA Funding Equity -In meeting with state n legislators representing Brooklyn Center, we will encourage them legislative to develop a suburban allow suburbans inter es to be more opeoully, recognized in the , Properly state 's process of determining g distribution of local government Currently there is a definite bias in the formulas which distribute the aids more to the central cities and outstate communities. e• Financing Various Housing Programs -The implementation plan of Publicorp will be before the 1990• City Council in the spring of Potential This analysis will detail various funding sources. commission is currentl The housing y evaluating some of the Options presented in the preliminary information developed by Publicorp. I -5- 4 . ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT/REDEVELOPMENT a. Improve Business Climate in Community The EDA coordinator, in conjunction with Publicorp and the Chamber of Commerce, is currently in the final stages of developing a request for proposal (RFP) for a commercial and industrial analysis similar to the Maxfield Housing Study. We would expect this analysis to be complete late in 1990. At that time the City Council will have to make decisions on the direction of the development Of the remaining open commercial/industrial parcels in the community and also make decisions on the direction of redevelopment. b• Maintenance Code for Commercial/Industrial Buildings (see item 2a) -The City Council can expect to receive a proposed draft of necessary ordinances by April, 1990. C. Complete a Formal Development/Redevelopment Process or Policy -The City Council should receive a staff recommendation late in 1990. d. Examine Feasibility of Development Projects in the 50th and France Area, 69th and Brooklyn Boulevard, and Lynbrook Bowl Areas -The staff will be reviewing the redevelopment potential in the area of 69th and Brooklyn Boulevard in conjunction with the results of community informational hearings regarding the reconstruction of 69th Avenue in the area of Brooklyn Boulevard. Redevelopment projects in the 50th and France area and the Lynbrook Bowl area will be addressed as staff time becomes available after the Earle Brown Heritage Center is up and operating, and we have completed the work on 69th and Brooklyn Boulevard area. 5• COMMUNICATIONS a• Evaluate Expansion of City Newsletter -The City Council has authorized a Professional audit and evaluation of our newsletter and other communication devices, both existing and potential, and expansion of the newsletter will be considered as a part of this audit and evaluation. professional evaluation will be complete Tby June of 1990. i b. Evaluate Expanded Use of Cable Television -As a part of the Council authorized audit and evaluation of potential communication devices, the area of expanded cable television activity by Brooklyn Center will be considered and evaluated. C. Improve Effectiveness of Newspaper Coverage -The City staff is meetin representatives of Post Publi ations and With are discussing the feasibility of expanded coverage in their Weekender Buyer's Guide publication. With the appointment of a new editor we are now receiving regular coverage on municipal activities in the Brooklyn Center Post. d. Inform Public Regarding Redevelopment -As a part of the accompanying the redevelopment recommendations /development Policy and process, staff will, late in 1990, make recommendations on publicizing the projects and the process when adopted. 6. DEMOGRAPHIC CHANGES a• Housing Impacts The Publicorp housing program implementation Plan will be coming before the Council in the spring of 1990, and these projects and recommendations have carefully considered demographic changes and their effect on housing in Brooklyn Center. b. Senior Citizens Drop-in -In the late winte and spring of 1990, the City Council will be reviewing a staff proposal to consider a senior drop-in center facility as a part of a possible bond issue for improvements to the fire community center, stations, city hall, and facilities. park C. Recreation and Parks System Impacts -The park and recreation commission has _completed its review of a comprehensive park in study the southwest community in the area of Twin Lakes.of As the part of this review, the commission has recommended extensive use of bicycle and pedestrian trails to connect our parks and various community recreation facilities. The • • • I -7- commission has expressed the wish continually review and update our parks to system, and at this time they are stressing the need for expansion and completion of the remaining elements of our trail system. Demographics indicate active recreation activity such as trail type systems are what the current and projected population groups are interested in and need. d. Evaluation of Aging Population Needs -The needs of our aging population have been considered in detail in housing and park and recreation system evaluations and will be an integral part into the future.of City planning activities 7• PUBLIC FACILITIES a. Review City Building Needs -In March City staff will have completed the preliminary analysis of all the projected departmental building and facility expansion needs. They also alternat will have reviewed the ive of more efficient use of existing facilities. Upon completion of this work, the City Council will receive a report and recommendation which will include the option Of developing a citizens review committee to examine and evaluate the various public facility needs of the community. This committee would make recommendations to the City Council as to the feasibility, value; and financing of these various projects. The projects involved in this City staff review are as follows: city hall expansion, fire station expansion, community center expansion, senior drop-in center, Potential ice arena, and park system development and expansion in the Twin Lake area and completion of the remaining segments Of the master bike and Pedestrian rian trail b• Review Park Development/Redevelopment and Expansion -This project will be considered as a part of the overall review of public facility needs that will be presented to the March, 1990. Council in Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 90010 Applicant: Brooklyn United Methodist Church Location: 7200 Brooklyn Boulevard Request: Site and Building Plan/Special Use Permit The applicant requests site and building plan and special use permit approval to construct a combination of building additions totaling 4,454 sq. ft. and a greatly expanded on-site parking lot at the Brooklyn United Methodist Church at 7200 Brooklyn Boulevard. Also proposed is the conversion of a single-family home at 7204 Brooklyn Boulevard to use for church ministries. The property in question is zoned R1 and is bounded by Noble Avenue North on the east and south, by Brooklyn Boulevard on the west, and by single- family homes facing Wingard Lane on the north. The church has purchased, or agreed to purchase, the homes at 7204 Brooklyn Boulevard, 7207 Brooklyn Boulevard and 7215 Noble Avenue North. The two homes along Noble Avenue North would be removed and a new parking lot would be installed on that land and on a portion of the site where the remaining house at 7204 Brooklyn Boulevard is located. The entire area is to be replatted into a single parcel under Application No. 90011. There is a also an off-site parking lot serving the church at the southeast corner of Brooklyn Boulevard and Noble Avenue North. No significant changes are proposed for that site under this application. Churches are allowed by special use permit in the R1 zone, provided primary vehicular access shall be gained by a collector of arterial street. In this case, Brooklyn Boulevard is an arterial street and Noble is a collector. Access/Parking The major site change proposed by the plans is the addition of an 88 stall parking lot north of and contiguous to the church, including five (5) required handicapped stalls near what is to become a major entrance on the north side of the building. In addition to the 88 stalls on the new lot north of the church, there are 150 existing stalls on the off-site lot. Total off-street parking available to the church would increase from 168 spaces at present (there are presently 18 stalls next to the building) to 238 spaces, an increase of 70 spaces. The parking requirement for churches contained in the Zoning Ordinance is one stall for every three seats. The seating capacity of the sanctuary for Brooklyn United Methodist Church is estimated at 491. The parking ' requirement is, therefore, at least 164 spaces. No expansion of the sanctuary is proposed at this time, but we are aware of an existing demand for on-street parking in the neighborhood. The proposed additional parking should help alleviate some of this on- street parking problem, but we are not certain that it will be eliminated, especially if some on-street parking areas remain more convenient than some off-street parking areas. 4-26-90 _1_ Application No. 90010 continued Staff have received a letter (attached) from residents along Wingard Lane, abutting the expanded church site. One request made by those residents is that Noble Avenue North and Wingard Lane be posted "No parking during church service. " The City's Administrative Traffic Committee has considered the plan and the request by the neighbors to limit on-street parking. They have indicated that, if a majority of the property owners in the area petition for a limitation on on-street parking, the City will post the area for at least a year and re-evaluate at that time if property owners change their minds. The elimination of on-street parking during church services in this neighborhood would certainly force the church to provide adequate off-street parking and perhaps to reschedule services so that there is less overlap and more availability of parking. This issue should be explored with the applicant and the neighbors during the public hearing. As to access, staff and the applicant's architect have worked on this issue at some length. At present, there is one access on Brooklyn Boulevard and one on Noble Avenue North for the church. In addition, the three homes all have accesses. The proposed plan calls for widening the existing access drive off Brooklyn Boulevard to 24 ' in width and closing the driveway to the residence at 7204 Brooklyn Boulevard. Hennepin County has indicated this is acceptable to them. Along Noble Avenue North, the access drive for the church will be moved northward approximately 100' to an area about in the middle of the parking lot. The driveways for the existing residences will, of course, be eliminated. The net result is that three access drives will be eliminated off busy streets. We regard this as an improvement. One major concern of Hennepin County and of City staff is the possibility for cut-through traffic through the church site between Brooklyn Boulevard and Noble Avenue North. This is an existing problem. The proposed parking lot layout with a new access on Noble approximately 100' north of the existing driveway will be less convenient for cars to move through the lot to shortcut between Brooklyn Boulevard and Noble, though it will still allow access from both streets. Cut-through traffic certainly will not be eliminated, but we regard the proposed access arrangement as an improvement. The Director of Public Works has also expressed concern over the safety of the present access to the off-site lot from Brooklyn Boulevard. A better barrier needs to be placed in front of this driveway during weekdays to clearly mark that it is closed to through traffic. Landscaping The proposed plan calls for new landscaping in and around the new parking lot. Nothing is really proposed around the church building (where there are a number of existing mature trees) or around the 4-26-90 -2- � . i Application No. 90010 continued existing off-site lot. The plan calls for 3 new Greenspire Littleleaf Lindens, 3 Littleleaf Lindens and 3 Norway Maples. In addition, the plan calls for 7 Red Splendor Crabapple, 3 Spring Snow Crabapple, a Sugar Maple, and a Summit Green Ash. Five Crabs are proposed near the house at 7204 Brooklyn Boulevard and others are shown near the church and the access off Noble. Shade trees are indicated in perimeter green areas and in parking lot islands. The total point value of existing and proposed plantings is at least 241 points. This works out to about 73 points per acre for the church property. Churches are not really covered in the landscape point system, but 73 points per acre is roughly comparable to the light industrial requirement. The neighbors along Wingard Lane have called for Spruce trees adjacent to their property. While some trees could be added in the 15' wide northerly ,greenstrip buffer, we feel that more landscaping would probably be appropriate on the off-site lot. No plantings are documented on the site and the church seems to feel that that portion of their property is not relevant to this application. However, we would recommend that at least four shade trees be added in the Brooklyn Boulevard greenstrip, at approximately 40' on center. A couple trees could also be added along Noble Avenue North. An important aspect of the proposed plans is the provision of a 6' high, board on board, wood fence within the northerly greenstrip. The fence is proposed about 5' off the north property line with triangular sections every so often to add stability. Some of the residents along Wingard already have fences. Placing the fence on the property line might, therefore, create an unmaintained area between fences. A 5' separation should at least be adequate room for someone to get between with a mower. The property owners to the north have recommended that the fence be placed right next to the parking lot with the 15 ' buffer on their side and maintained by them. We do not feel this is an appropriate arrangement. Maintenance of church property should be by the church and green area between the parking lot and the fence is necessary for aesthetics, landscape plantings, and snow storage. The neighbors have also called for a 10' high fence. However, this would exceed what is required by ordinance (61 ) and would, we feel, be an imposing structure, difficult to maintain. The purpose of the screening device is to screen out cars in the parking lot, not the church. We would, therefore, recommend acceptance of the size and location of the fence as proposed. Grading, Drainage, and Utilities The land on which the proposed, new parking lot is to be constructed is fairly flat. One catch basin in the middle of the lot is proposed to collect most of the runoff. It will be connected by storm sewer to another catch basin in the southeast 4-26-90 -3- r Application No. 90010 continued corner of the lot and ultimately to City storm sewer in Noble Avenue North. The plan proposes a modest 1 ' high berm in the northerly buffer area following along the same general location as the fence. The purpose of the berm is to insure that any snow stored in the greenstrip area drains back into the parking lot and not into the neighboring residential lots. Drainage is also a concern of the neighbors and we feel the plan is adequate in this respect. Building The building additions are in various locations. New classrooms in the lower level and the pastor's offices in the upper level are proposed on the north side of the building. A new narthex and vestibule will be added between the nursery wing adjacent to Brooklyn Boulevard and the main part of the building. This is where a new major entrance will be established near the new north parking lot. A canopy is proposed to cover the walk in front of the building. In addition, there is to be a minor addition to the existing narthex toward Brooklyn Boulevard which will allow for a link up with the new narthex. Finally, there is to be an expansion of the Fellowship Hall into an open courtyard area in the middle of the building. This expansion area will have skylights above. The exterior treatment is to be a face brick to matching the existing exterior. The architect has also indicated that the church intends to fire-sprinkler the building. This will be a significant improvement. Lighting/Trash The plan calls for one light pole in the northerly greenstrip, one behind the church home at 7204 Brooklyn Boulevard, and one on the south side of the entrance drive off Brooklyn Boulevard, just west of the new entrance canopy. No specifications have been provided yet on the size of the poles, or wattage of the fixtures. The lighting appears somewhat sparse to us. We would recommend the addition of at least one pole toward the southeast corner of the new lot and/or one at the Noble Avenue North entrance. The proposed dumpster location is just off the parking lot behind the house at 7204 Brooklyn Boulevard. A screened enclosure with a gate is proposed. The neighbors on Wingard Lane have requested that the dumpster be placed away from their residences. The proposed location will be about 18 ' from the north lot line. It will be closer to the church house than to adjacent residences, but, on the scale of the entire site, is fairly close to the neighboring residences. The church does not want to put the dumpster right next to the church. The location proposed is generally out of sight and is acceptable to staff. 4-26-90 -4- Application No. 90010 continued i Use of House at 7204 Brooklyn Boulevard. Staff have requested from the applicant a statement as to the intended use of the house at 7204 Brooklyn Boulevard. Mr. David Anderson of the church building committee has responded with a brief letter (attached) . In it, he states that the church may put the house to a variety of uses, including adult and youth meetings and adult education classes. He notes that youth will not use the house without adult supervision. This appears to pose no problem. Parking associated with the house will be available in the adjoining parking lot. The separate driveway serving the residence will be closed. Special Use Standards As a special use in the R1 zone, the church and any expansion is subject to the standards contained in Section 35-220, Subsection 2 of the Zoning Ordinance (attached) . Regarding standard (a) , we do not believe the expanded church will be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, morals, or comfort. As to standard (b) , the expanded church and parking lot should not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity, nor should it adversely affect property values in the neighborhood. As to standard (c) the church expansion and parking lot should not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding property. Finally, pertaining to standard (d) , the new parking spaces constructed by the church should reduce traffic congestion in the public streets by accommodating more church parking off-street, on their own property. In addition, the proposed access arrangement should somewhat discourage (though it will not eliminate) cut-through traffic between Noble and Brooklyn Boulevard. The parking problems in the neighborhood associated with the church will be reduced, if not eliminated, by the provision of more off-street parking. At the same time, the additions proposed to the church should not generate significant additional traffic. Therefore, the net effect should be a reduction in parking problems benefitting the neighborhood as well as the church. Recommendation Altogether, the proposal appears to be in order and approval is recommended, subject to at least 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. 4-26-90 -5- Application No. 90010 continued 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. 6. 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 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 the 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. 4-26-90 -6- 1 '�� �i Application No. 90010 continued 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. 15. The house at 7204 Brooklyn Boulevard shall be provided with handicapped access and bathroom facilities as required by the Handicapped Code. 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. 4-26-90 -7- j, /g v April 10, 1990 The Planning Commission 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 Dear Sir: We homeowners on Wingard Lane, Brooklyn Center, have gnet to discuss the proposed changes sought by the Brooklyn United Methodist Church Council in regards to a new parking- lot adjacent to our homestead properties. Since this proposed change will effect our property values and the esthetic value of our neighborhood, we have deemed the following as major concerns to us and recommend the following. 1. PARKING LOT CONSTRUCTION a) Grade to drain water away from our property line. b) To meet city codes and not to overflow in heavy rain. c) Cement curb along perimeter of parking lot. d) Cement or aggregate from curb to extend underneath for weed control. 2. BUFFER ZONE AND LANDSCAPING a) 15 ' buffer between properties. b) To be sodded. c) Blue spruce trees. d) Property easement (homeowners to maintain buffer zone) . 3. FENCE a) 10 ' high fence. b) 15 ' Away from our property lines. c) Well built and decorative construction which is close to the ground (Maintenance Agreement for Fence) . 4. LIGHTING a) Sufficient lighting along property owners perimeter in direction of parking lot. For crime deterrent and safety. 5. STREET SIDE PARKING a) No parking during church services on Wingard Lane and Noble (posted both sides of street) . Page 2 April 10, 1990 6. PARKING LOT REGULATIONS a) City ordinance regulations in regards to non running or abandoned vehicles. b) Snow removal (snow not be piled up against or close to buffer zone) . 7. DUMPSTER a) Location to be away from homeowners. 8. BUY OUT a) Those of us directly adjacent to the proposed parking lot would be open to an offer to purchase our homes at a fair market price and eliminate a need for the buffer zone. Sincerely Yours, 7221 Noble Ave. No. Brooklyn Center, MN jayMharketon aeA .� 7221 Noble Ave. No. Brooklyn Center, MN Geraldine Mar eton 4707 Wingard Lane Brooklyn Center, MN Wlady r z ga /3a4w -0 4707 Wingard Lane Brooklyn Center, MN wiga L /I 4715 Wingard Lane Brooklyn Center, MN Mike Ho an 4715 Wingard Lane Brooklyn Center, MN athry H6 an 4721 Wingard Lane Brooklyn Center, MN Bernhard Meagi &Pll�AR �/L2 4721 Wingard Lane Brooklyn Center, MN Elleeonore Meaagi 91"—W2 4727 Wingard Lane Brooklyn Center, MN 'Ann Elms April 19, 1990 Via Fax April 20, 1990, to: Gary Shallcross Mr. Gary Shallcross, Planner City of Brooklyn Center 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430 RE: Brooklyn United Methodist Church Brooklyn Center, Minnesota Dear Gary: Per your request, this letter is to advise the city how we intend to use the white house we own on Brooklyn Boulevard. While this house is presently occupied by residents, we expect to use it for church purposes by October, 1990. We have studied various needs within our congregation and find that it will likely be utilized for both adult and youth meetings, as well as adult education classes. Further, it is not intended to be used by youth without adult supervision. We feel that by having multiple functions as opposed to exclusive use in the house, it will then be kept better maintained and controlled. Our studies are not yet complete on the utilization of this house, so exact programming is not yet been finalized. However, we believe that it will be used as discussed in this letter. Ver t my yours, R David K. Anderson, AIA Chairman, Building Committee Brooklyn United Methodist Church DKA:rm cc: Bruce Ericksonr� ,. Dee Lere Oa;��z122Z3�9 c' misc2/18lyy{ r Section 35-220. SPECIAL USE PERMITS 2. Standards for Special Use Permits A special use permit may be granted by the City Council after demonstration by evidence that all of the following are met: (a) The establishment, maintenance or operation of the special use will promote and enhance the general welfare and will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, morals, or comfort. (b) The special use will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity for the purposes already permitted, nor substantially diminish and impair property values within the neighborhood. (c) The establishment of the special use will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding property for uses permitted in the district. (d) Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress, egress and parking so designed as to minimize traffic congestion in the public streets. (e) The special use shall, in all other respects, conform to the applicable regulations of the district in which it is located. 3. Conditions and Restrictions The Planning Commission may recommend and the City Council may impose such conditions and restrictions upon the establishment, location, construction, maintenance and operation of the special use as deemed necessary for the protection of the public interest and to secure compliance with requirements specified in this ord- inance. In all cases in which special use permits are granted, the City Council may require such evidence and guarantees as it may deem necessary as part of the conditions stipulated in connec- tion therewith. 4. Resubmission No application for a special use permit which has been denied by the City Council shall be resubmitted for a period of twelve (12) months from the date of the final determination by the City Council; except that the applicant may set forth in writing newly discovered evidence of change of condition upon which he relies to gain the consent of the City Council for resubmission at an earlier time. 5. Revocation and Extension of Special Use Permits When a special use permit has been issued pursuant to the pro- visions of this ordinance, such permit shall expire without further action by the Planning Commission or the City Council unless the applicant or his assignee or successor commences work upon the sub- ject property within one year of the date the special use permit is granted, or unless before the expiration of the one year period the applicant shall apply for an extension thereof by filling out and submitting to the Secretary of the Planning Commission a "Special Use Permit" application requesting such extension and paying an additional fee of $15.00. Special use permits granted pursuant to the provisions of a prior ordinance of Brooklyn Center shall expire within one year of the effective date of this ordinance if construction upon the sub- ject property pursuant to such special use permit has not commenced within that time. In any instance where an existing and established special use is abandoned for a period of one year, the special use permit re- lated thereto shall expire one year following the date of abandon- ment. FTDEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS Engineering Division 320 Washington Ave. South HENNEPIN Hopkins, Minnesota 55343-8468 Phone: (612)935-3381 Mr. Sy Knapp October 16, 1989 Director of Public Works 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 Dear Mr. Knapp: RE: Proposed Plat - Brooklyn United Methodist Church CSAH 152, Northeast quadrant of Noble Avenue No. Section 28, Township 119, Range 21 Hennepin County Plat No. 1783 Review and Recommendations Minnesota Statutes 505.02 and 505.03, Plats and Surveys, require County review of proposed plats abutting County roads. We reviewed the above plat and make the following comments: - No additional right of way required by Hennepin County at this time along this segment of CSAH 152. - To help limit the number of access points to heavily travelled CSAH 152, Hennepin County supports the closure of the driveway from 7204 Brooklyn Blvd. to CSAH 152. - The widening of the driveway from CSAH 152 to the church parking lot is acceptable to Hennepin County. However, we see the potential of this full access driveway being used as a shortcut to Noble Ave. No. - The house driveway closure and the church driveway widening require an approved Hennepin County entrance permit before beginning any construction. Contact our Operations Division for entrance permit forms. - All proposed construction within County right of way requires an approved utility permit prior to beginning construction. This includes, but is not limited to, drainage and utility construction, trail development, and landscaping. Contact our Operations Division for utility permit forms. - The developer must restore all areas disturbed during construction within County right of way. - Please direct any response or questions to Les Weigelt. Sip e r e l y, ��p• /Y�Ii�Yr%7 X E't'c d W. Schmidt, P.E. A& Transportation Planning DWS/LDW: lw HENNEPIN COUNTY on equal opportunity employer I ' ll 1 F. WIWI ME ME UNION ME OEM a MCI ON NO 1 NOM � �� NOW MM ME I► ME � N ■1111 M - M IMAM MEN HOSE NOME NEINE SEEM NO N 3r�Z3- Miami ♦� IS swoo WE M EMIN OWNS PENO SEME NO SEEN NO ME MEN pe .00 SEES USES ME No SO � - , /111■/■� �SE �■ �� � BIN � N " S r Boom ■■���■■�■■�■�■■���II�, �r,�, 111111111 11111l111��• SUNNI so ME NO ummia /// ��■ MINIMUM :r= USE �� :C - :II i �� :; E : E U Z� :�SOM MEw all MEE no ME WE sosa•rsr Izln,ruoW OCl9f 4W44u4W'n4gw 410p44W Q r 1 1 11~ 4N1p 44q.411104 pg4 nu o 4.n IN1 +� ++{y p+ n w w MprW'/414i�wOw •w,gF1Y Yi.'�9 NN MN •CI111't3HlIWinMORIQ WMP li.g01 ss alroa:o lwnawa4w [ M/1H �-1M / 1 / py it • e. 1 ■ - `:- ,,�' � •\T �_ - TAI_ - _ 1. � -- -- OR 4 . r -• -' ,. __' � IL 111 � Af ♦ y a r �} 1 ---►- : • •�x+52'< n ,. 2Et Y. I � � c`_..�. _ 1 \ * ..s#},ms`s;•`•"7�►�'Y` is�, y v ' , ` Ti'�i-:�. .`s S-r�:a;:� a eK •gy 4�c�, �'�``'"'«*�i• ,,r bz'�s x 4 t a�!•'�W'i.9!�_!�„.pLZi`i4?+f•.{iP a.vtM•.-.I ..a •.'.'f-:PS.i�.r ..4... g1SY•riY lilq'twerp WN! ■pew"a'swe"wvwP dd .taw I ttw f ",P an"4"M024 wArniLL @.71:1 �'�� �_ 7 O A { QaOaadA IIIIO• wlaal• —� ••wl y�.�tppim m*Aiq pvap f1Yt1Oj 11�1aM•l:JOtO Y MN111D iA Y � {y�n—•11^-O aaaYOAlalO MWllJiwai/ ���tA N-ttY 'rnw tw aw wawa Yaw� aaM I ! Lill _ , I iiR IH, i ej lo � �� "� 1, � , -; ; _, •y_ e�� =a� !`�E°� t�:Y •f ����i l � ` '� � to C \ TT ygt; <:.`„ -ac: •..':i? Y wti`�:-;�a ,... - .�:,.Yr.,..Ytxxodl%4� .>,e. .7lrsvr,atr�w�1�AY� 9099•►9►I1191.awlN w,p"w-W 4Pw 99t 0 iM.,e...,aM." � —=�-- s ' *Wwi 1Npm MOM14 PM9p 4mbgw o.w.r�.a....1� IF�^ID p7YaMJ�W pawn a w 9 �!!� ww�" TrY UE f � 'MIL fNI"�1�Ml MY"Ib Y�i 1 `�'' ;fir 1 1 R4P fi !a i >n _ 1 � s A 111 "r______ 0 ! 1 :1 N14 Nqd '• •�19��N'JA YM►►ou •wm M•wYn�M�rM•w M"Ir YAr I/•I•YII.fY N � ►M111/►PM�Npw PCr �/q�1wn N•.. C-1/ ---------- as it If I Arrr.ow JM�M •.wv w rr uu.r rrr 1 I , Z taa y � i tt1 • •SG y�. - 1�i'i -- �.,b� �� �74fZn I � � low— ow • � I f� b ` a��R Y '� .. x ` i � �n do- '''s•�'i�,I- 3�F��x i '\, ~fe`•/i; as .. ... ..m%.at•,,d:;S'- a... J6c t .xs,: . . '.. .. �.: �•,, ..�]:.r .✓.a_.+v'2✓".W�.��Yi�aOW,aIi+�FR.':.�� ralrJ�11�y11,^. i • � oats Itowlw•sut4w►t•ol.su °'�' r _ . �tM; y� r W+013►IC VM••OIL w,ernes ��•"� - s ••nun•.•a.wlnu an 1~r 'o1M'91oWFp»Maatq PIMP iH4a• .a.wo.wYO"'0i IYp"'�°"a'�aw�i N�DaIP�WPpNAr9i�9 �!� •wt I I I I 1 I 1 1 1 I 1 , O i 1 � I 1 1 I � 1 1 � t JE] L - I i ' r I � I I 1 , r � I %s. _ . «.- .. i.-: ,.yv `..+5�sfi'<. ✓��tJfi1ai/ .r:.,:�• ,�+�7�1i..+�hrailk�°.X a Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 90011 Applicant: Brooklyn United Methodist Church Location: 7200 Brooklyn Boulevard Request: Preliminary Plat The applicant requests preliminary plat approval to combine into a single parcel the existing Brooklyn United Methodist Church site and three adjacent residential parcels in order to accommodate a church expansion and new parking lot north of the church. The land in question is zoned R1 and is bounded on the north by single- family homes which face Wingard Lane, on the east and south by Noble Avenue North, and on the west by Brooklyn Boulevard. Under Section 35-540 of the Zoning Ordinance, "multiple parcels of land which are contiguous and adjacent and which are proposed to serve a single development use and which are under common ownership shall be combined into a single parcel through platting or registered land survey. " In the present case, the four existing parcels will be under ownership and use of the church and, thus, the replatting is required. The proposed plat calls for a single parcel, to be known as Lot 1, Block 1, Brooklyn United Methodist Church Addition. The lot area is 112,800 sq. ft. or 2.59 acres. The plat proposes drainage and utility easements of 5' in width along the north, interior property line and 10' in width adjacent to Noble Avenue North and Brooklyn Boulevard. This conforms with ordinance requirements. There is also an existing 6' wide sidewalk easement along Brooklyn Boulevard. The requirement to combine adjacent parcels into a single lot would also normally apply to the off-site parking lot across Noble Avenue North which serves the church site. The parking lot site is composed of seven parcels plus some old vacated Noble Avenue North right-of-way. We have discussed the platting requirement with representatives of the church and they have indicated an interest in possibly subdividing off a portion of the off-site parking lot site in the next few years. They have asked that the platting requirement be deferred until that time. With the development of additional parking adjacent to the church, there will be some parking surplus, at least based on the sanctuary seating requirement. That parking surplus translates into a land surplus which could be subdivided off. Staff have indicated a willingness to defer the platting requirement for the off-site lot on condition that the church file a legal encumbrance binding the use of the off-site lot the church site. Such an encumbrance is required by Section 35-701.3f of the Zoning Ordinance. It would be amended when a future subdivision would take place. Given such an encumbrance, we believe the platting requirement for the off-site lot can be waived. 4-26-90 -1- Application No. 90011 continued In general, the proposed plat appears to be in order and approval is recommended subject to at least 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. 4-26-90 -2- • y as !-•yti- ' e aalsy;yfi!-r-:-i'..�.y-i f�= ss�Y;7 i.: s•.:Ei�is y.l.�". _ j`fl: 7r,,: � !y. n-s-lad_ y. -x s y 7t°-! 1-ji�ya�e•!,j aaa �i.- --zi• �aR�a���-�i�� �;S�-l"s_e=i�si �•�el: f� li- • • - �!_���<f3'- ll�,ye3�r:is � �- 8 �- !� - =,�e._ ; ,fy:l efy iy....ls !s. a!= f 3:_ q 'a:s,sFlF_ .;�1= -=� s;i„•!sj:ify ' a!_.s!a!':ls ! _ :!• ° - �rr fi 1!ciFd!1! rs l�^ el?y!�!"° ' of iia�t "H •• �1 : F� l-:ia"sil.-3 •!;:sins F 3i�1:•l�_lai °sF�: L yy..1"•.-.j i.-a-i!: � li itt y 1 �' pa lji.fri�°el Yi�i �1d!ia?�ii5g dliag:�3j1fsY!x �^ s x E e� is il -.i' s !a•'rtel ja•1 .!,il `Fr`ss zilPa?�a:r l•iy{sp e" $ "; CCII S i dy ti- l ityl':$ii°�= i�:�l�f�s i�l#i.,a:i���'�F?�-el•€�a�% si _:� p F-� a.Pil3lil!il: ,latyUM l■cdblayl!!:elie_°PI!-i2 a: aR r` j. it - -i t\Cll�`-- :�- , `Ziw s ,•_ I •.eye ( � \ - LL lk 6~ . j!F t • • Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 90009 Applicant: Keith Sturm/Reliance Real Estate Services Location: 2920 County Road 10 (Gold's Gym) Request: Variance The applicant requests a variance from Section 35-704 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow retail use of the Gold's Gym commercial building at 2920 County Road 10. The proposed tenant would be a Jo Ann Fabrics store. The property in question is zoned C2 and is bounded on the south by County Road 10, on the west by TCF Savings Bank, on the north by the St. Paul Book and Stationery retail building and Northway Drive, and on the east by First Minnesota Savings Bank. Retail sales of fabric and related items is a permitted use in the C2 zoning district. The variance is sought because there are only 56 parking spaces on the site. Section 35-704 of the Zoning Ordinance requires 83 parking spaces for retail use of the 9,961 sq. ft. building. Therefore, the site will be deficient in parking by 27 stalls if the retail use is allowed. The applicant, Mr. Keith Sturm, is not the owner of the building, but a real estate agent seeking to market the property. He has submitted some background information on the property and the proposed use and has also made written arguments addressing the standards for a variance contained in Section 35-240 of the Zoning Ordinance (see written submittal and ordinance section, attached) . A listing of the ordinance standards, a recitation of the applicant's arguments, and staff comments follow: (a) Because of the particular physical surroundings, shape,or topographical conditions of the specific parcels of land involved, a particular hardship to the owner would result, as distinguished from a mere inconvenience if the strict letter of the regulations were to be carried out. Applicant: "A hardship is created by virtue of the fact that no expansion capability exists for the subject property to allow additional parking facilities to be constructed to match the existing building size. If the strict letter of the parking regulations were exercised, the available uses to occupy the property are severely limited, thus contributing to the perception of blight associated with long term vacant buildings. Additionally, the limited street access to the property is not well suited for higher traffic uses. This makes the property only appropriate for a low traffic, destination type of operation. " Staff: The alleged hardship in this case is basically that the parcel is not large enough to provide the parking required for a permitted use within the zoning district. It is questionable whether this really constitutes a hardship. Restaurants are also 4-26-90 -1- Application No. 90009 continued permitted in the C2 zone, but a restaurant of 10 000 s q. ft. would require at least 150 to 200 parking stalls and there is no question that this site could not accommodate such a use. Alternatively, an office use of the building in question would require only 50 parking stalls, within the amount available on the site. There will be substantial costs in remodeling the building to either an office or a retail use. The fact that a retail use of the building does not "fit" within the site (at least based on the ordinance parking formula) probably does not constitute a hardship as that term is used in the Zoning Ordinance. The applicant seeks the variance because there is presently a market for retail uses in the area. Waiting for an office use might take longer since there is a surplus of such space right now. We would not recommend, however, that the City make zoning decisions on the basis of temporary market conditions, but rather on the long term best interests of the community. The practical consideration raised by the applicant in his written submittal is that Jo Ann Fabrics projects a need for a maximum of 20 parking stalls on most business days and 40 stalls on days with special sales. This demand would be accommodated by the 56 stalls available. The City has not in the past (and we not recommend now) used private parking forecasts to approve specific uses. Uses are approved and sites are designed on the basis of ordinance parking formulas. (Proof-of-parking has been acknowledged when an applicant does not feel so many parking spaces are required for the operation of their business, but the ordinance requirement is always met through the designation on a plan of "future" stalls. That is not the case here. ) The issue of whether the retail parking formula is excessive was considered four years ago. No change was adopted at that time through the Planning Commission and staff recommended a change. More consideration of the ordinance itself will be given later in this report. (b) The conditions upon which the application for a variance is based are unique to the parcel of land for which the variance is sought, and are not common, generally, to other property within the same zoning classification. Applicant: "The variance request is unique to this property because of the building age and its inherent functional obsolescence. However, newer properties developed under the guidelines of the ordinance that serve a variety of higher traffic retail uses would not require such a variance. Older buildings developed along specific zoning and parking criteria may currently exist in this zoning classification, and due to changing market conditions rising to their functional obsolescence, may result in similar hardships with other existing structures. " 4-26-90 -2- Application No. 90009 continued Staff: The applicant basically acknowledges that other existing buildings may face the same difficulties in finding a suitable re-use as the building in question. The present situation is, therefore, not particularly unique. The applicant implies that the City should be flexible in enforcing its regulations in order to bring about re-use of existing buildings rather than so limit the possible uses that long-term vacancy and blight result. This argument is not totally invalid, but it should also be recognized that there are legitimate public concerns which must be addressed in the re-use of buildings. Parking is one of these concerns. The City should not accept just any use of a building to keep it occupied. The City should not accept just any use of a building to keep it occupied. In some cases, it may be appropriate to even demolish an existing building because it is simply not appropriate to the site any longer. These are judgments which the City may affect by the enforcement of its regulations, but which are,. for the most part, made by property owners. It should be clear that the City is not obliged to grant a variance to save a building from functional obsolescence. (c) The alleged hardship is related to the requirements of this ordinance and has not been created by any persons presently or formerly having an interest in the parcel of land. Applicant: "The hardship is specifically related to the ordinance. Without such a stringent parking requirement the need for the variance would not exist. However, the hardship in effect, was created 21 years ago when the market demanded smaller health facilities. Because of the changes over time, health clubs have changed so dramatically that typical clubs are now 100,000 square feet or larger, as seen at the (new) Highway 100 Northwest Racquet and Swim Health Club. The small clubs that at one time thrived, have now become virtually extinct. This is evidenced by the many tenants they have had within the building that could not make ends meet financially. Because of these changes within the health club industry, and not because of any previous intentions, the referenced building, along with its parking facility, has become functionally obsolete as a health club. A parking variance, along with major interim renovations will make this obsolete facility functional again. To accommodate Jo Ann Fabrics within the strict letter of the current retail parking regulations would require the demolition of more than half the facility. This would create an inconceivable hardship economically as well as reduce the tax revenue the City currently enjoys. The existing parking is more than adequate for the proposed use of other potential low traffic generating retail tenants. " 0 4-26-90 -3- Application No. 90009 continued Staff: The applicant argues that the hardship is created by stringent ordinance requirement and by changing market conditions which make the original use of the building obsolete. The hardship was not caused by the owner. To some extent this may be true. Nevertheless, the building and parking were created by the owner, not the Zoning Ordinance. The issue appears to be how to treat an existing building and site in light of the ordinance. Should a parking variance be granted? Should a parking ordinance amendment be adopted? Or should the owner be given direction to market the building perhaps for an office use which would comply with parking requirements? Our judgment, as we reported to the Commission in 1986, is that the retail parking formula which requires more parking per 1,000 sq. ft. of gross floor area' for smaller buildings, appears to be excessive, at least for those buildings. We recommended an ordinance change at that time which would have given greater flexibility for the re-use of this and other small to medium sized commercial buildings. That change was recommended by the Planning Commission and received a 3 to 2 favorable vote from the City Council. However, a 4/5 vote was required to amend the Zoning Ordinance and the amendment, therefore, failed. If a variance is granted in this case, the City will probably be, in effect, amending its ordinance indirectly. We would prefer that a change in policy be indicated directly through an ordinance amendment, not indirectly through a variance. If the City Council does not amend the ordinance (and thus far it has not) , it would probably be more proper to deny the variance and direct the property owner to seek out an office user for the property. (d) The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood in which the parcel of land is located. Applicant: "The variance will not be detrimental to public welfare and should enhance the neighborhood in that this vacant building will be occupied by a long term national tenant and that existing parking will be more than adequate at the facility. Additionally the adjacent retail uses are compatible with this proposed use and will reenforce the retail vitality of the area. " Staff: We agree that a retail use of this building would be ` compatible with surrounding existing land uses. It would be a permitted use within the C2 zone. It would also probably live within the available parking on site. The issue is whether to apply the ordinance parking standard, to change it, or vary from it. Although an ordinance amendment has failed in the past, we believe it should at least be considered again as a possible route of resolving problems for this and other buildings. 4-26-90 -4- Application No. 90009 continued We are not recommending a variance at this time. However, if the Commission is inclined to recommend a variance, we will attempt to develop language addressing the ordinance standards at the Commission's direction. We will also supply the Commission with information on an ordinance change for your review. 4-26-90 -5- 35-2 40 applicant a written notice of the action taken. A copy of this notice shall be kept on file as a part of the permanent record of the application. V/1' . 2. Standards for Variances The Board of Adjustments and Appeals may recommend and the City Council may grant variances from the literal provisions of this ordinance in instances where their strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique and distinctive to the individual property under consideration. However, the Board shall not recommend and the City Council shall in no case permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under this ordinance in the district where the affected person's land is located. A variance may be granted by the City Council after demonstration by evidence that all of the following qualifications are met: a. Because of the particular physical surroundings, shape, or topographical conditions of the specific parcels of land involved, a particular hardship to the owner would result, as distinguished from a mere inconvenience, if the strict letter of the regulations were to be carried out. b. The conditions upon which the application for a variance is based are unique to the parcel of land for which the variance is sought, and are not common, generally, to other property within the same zoning classification. c. The alleged hardship is related to the requirements of this ordinance and has not been created by any persons presently or formerly having an interest in the parcel of land. d. The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood in which the parcel of land is located. 3• Conditions and Restrictions The Board of Adjustments and Appeals may recommend and the City Council may impose conditions and restrictions in the granting of variances so as to insure compliance with the provisions of this ordinance and with the spirit and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and to protect adjacent properties. Section 35-704. MINIMUM PARKING SPACES REQUIRED. 1. Residence a. Two spaces per dwelling unit 2. Commerce (Retail and Service/Office) a. Eating and drinking places: One space for every two seats, and one space for every two employees on the average maximum shift. (Parking spaces for "drive-in" customers shall not be credited as a part of the off- street parking area needed to serve the sales operation conducted within the buildings) . b. Automobile Service Stations: Three spaces for each enclosed bay plus one space for each day shift employee plus a minimum of two spaces for service vehicles and one additional space for each service vehicle over two in number. c. Other retail stores or centers and financial institutions: Eleven spaces for the first 1,000 square feet of gross floor area y or fraction thereof; eight spaces for each 1,000 square feet of gross floor area in excess of 1,000 square feet, but not exceeding 15,000 square feet; six spaces for each 1,000 square feet of gross floor area in excess of 15,000 square feet, but not exceeding 30,000 square feet; 5.5 spaces for each 1,000 square feet of gross floor area exceeding 30,000 square feet. In multitenant retail centers, no additional parking spaces beyond those required by the retail formula shall be required of restaurant uses which altogether occupy not more than 15% of the gross floor area of the center. The parking formula for eating and drinking establishments shall apply proportionately to the seats and employees occupying space in the center over and above 15% of the gross floor area. d. Motels and Hotels: One space for each unit plus one space for each employee on any one shift. , e. Bowling Establishments: Five spaces for each lane. Additional parking for food and refreshment facilities shall be determined according to subsection (a) above. Ing MM MM MM MM MM 05a up_ MM OR ,,, —M —M MM ale � tC= • •C! ■� MM MM MM MM am MM MW ML �mmg moms MW M dpg;;gm MM MMMM MM Mu all MM VL Imam 111111/ ' °♦ , ��� � Ins 0 ,v �N11/1�� an NORTHPORT SCHOOL � t ,♦ ♦ X11 1 Now so min 61L 115111 NMI son RWA • �l1 AF III f. APO U♦� sM �� 1111/ • C NOT t+m , ,JI �'.er�n-�. "T 3'• e.'�eJo Z a�"�• �•'a-r•-.:�...••,. 3 i i !'ANr13'b 137 3 eA,z 1 f; i= `15r 24' D r N a7� A 1 T 1'14 r+Rl••P ~ rani: r «ate ; , .��� •�4' ` ER ... f .- t'. 1 � r •4� z rw � .�+_' 1m'h ,� ' Sv,✓fit I i 'a T� ! 1 4 �h T �..� i - ••��khP t��` . 'w IS,_r� •fie.y+ �.;� _4�. }.a•, � �;�,�N c�3- t � 1 1�(•r 61•i. r /t ! .M t £�''7�. t' ! Ar g. :'.�'rq..�� a «T la .`�,J"; � •J }�1 � } , i'� •P � _ •F .,a,,a r..•al+aGvs.'7s.:��.:acrsrdw.�«:.-..r.a,+vav1•