Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1981 01-29 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 JANUARY 29, 1981 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Planning Commission met in study session and was called to order by Chairman William Hawes at 7:50 p.m. ROLL CALL Chairman William Hawes, Commissioners Molly Malecki , Nancy Manson and George Lucht. Also present were Director of Planning and Inspection Ronald Warren and Planning Assistant Gary Shallcross . Chairman Hawes noted that Commissioner Theis had called to say he would be late and Commissioner Simmons that she would be unable to attend. Chairman Hawes reported that Commissioner Erickson, who served on the 1979 and 1980 Planning Commissions, has resigned his position on the Planning Commission. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - January 15, 1981 The . Planning Assistant_ informed the members of the Commission that Mr. Tom Wilhelmy, representing the appellant in Application No. 81009, had requested a change in the January 15 minutes on page 17 . Mr. Wilhelmy requested that Point 3 be changed to read that the gas pumps could be located on an area other than the parcel they are presently located on because of Section 35-414:11 . The Planning Commissioners discussed their recollection of the discussion and decided that the existing version of the minutes was , in fact, accurate and did not accept the change proposed by Mr. Wilhelmy . Commissioner Malecki pointed out that the minutes do not reflect any discussion of Application No. 81004 and suggested that this should be added, if only briefly. Motion by Commissioner Malecki seconded by Commissioner Lucht to approve the minutes of the January 15, 1981 Planning Commission meeting as corrected. Voting in favor: Chairman Hawes, Commissioners Malecki , Manson and Lucht . Voting against: none. The motion passed. APPLICATION NO. 81010 (Classic Electric Car Corporation) Following the Chairman's explanation, the Secretary introduced the first item of business , a request by Classic Electric Car Corporation for a determination that assembly of electric cars is similar in nature to other uses permitted in the I-1 zone . The Secretary re- viewed the contents of the staff report relating to the application (See Planning Commission information Sheet for Application No. 81010 attached) . The Secretary added that he and the City Manager had viewed the operation as it is carried on in Plymouth, but pointed out that not all of the functions carried on in Plymouth would be moved to the Brooklyn Center location . The manufacture of fiber- glass auto bodies, for instance, would not be transferred. He also noted that he had ,just been informed that the applicant proposes only using space in the Spec. 8 building (6870 Shingle Creek Parkway) not both Spec. 8 and Spec. 6 as indicated in the report . The Secre- tary also stressed that the Planning Commission gain a clear docu- mentation of the use before recommending any determination to the 1-29-81 _1- City Council . Commissioner Theis arrived at 8:05 P.M. Commissioner Manson asked whether autos would be stored inside the Spec. buildings in the Industrial Park. The Secretary responded that the Zoning Ordinance requi-xes .- what all storage be within a totally enclosed building ftkIv�bhe I-Z zone . Chairman Hawes asked whether the finding would be reviewed yearly so that if there were any violations, action could be taken to withdraw approval . The Secretary answered that such a procedure could be made a part of the recommendation to the City Council . He added, however, that violations of the Zoning Ordinance, as -defined by a finding, would be subject to normal legal process . The Secretary stated that the primary concern. of the staff. is' that the use in 'question not evolve into a larger auto manufacturing operation which would not be considered similar in nature to the uses permitted in the Industrial Park. The Secretary suggested that the finding include a condition that the use be subject .to review on a regular basis to check whether it is living up to the determination made by the City Council . Commissioner Lucht. noted. the difficulty of defining the use over the long term. The Secretary responded that the use permitted would be defined on the basis of 'information provided by the applicant, In answer to a question from Chairman Hawes regarding outside storage space, the Secretary stated that occasional and temporary storage of cars or materials outside may be understandable, but also pointed out that if such storage were done on a regular basis, it would be a violation of the Zoning Ordinance which forbids outside storage in the I-1 zone. Mr. Roger Newstrum, representing both Classic Electric Car Corpora- tion and Brooklyn Center Industrial Park, then addressed the Planning Commission . He explained that the process to be carried on in the Spec. 8 Industrial Building would be purely assembly . Commissioner Theis asked how many vehicles would be assembled per day. Mr. Newstrum answered that initially two per day would be assembled and stated that the company hopes to work up to four vehicles per day at the end of the year. He added that there is strong interest in the product,, particularly in the west and southwest parts of the country. He ex- plained that the Bradley Automotive Company is a leader in the field of developing electric automobile transportation. . Commissioner Lucht .asked what kind of manufacturing would take place at the site. - A representative of Classic Electric Car Corporation, answered that certain parts would be manufactured at the site using a punch press, but added that their punch press is not a heavy duty machine. Commissioner Lucht asked whether there would be a paint shop in this operation. The applicant responded in the negative. Noting that assembly would be carried on by teams , _Commissioner Theis asked how many people comprised a team. The representative of Classic Electric Car responded that there would be two experienced workers assembling a car, and sometimes a third person who is learning.. the process. He explained that it took a team five working days to put 1-29-8L -2 a single car together. Mr. Newstrum stated that his experience in bringing developments to the Industrial Park leads him to feel that the assembly of electric cars fits in the I-1 zone . He ex- plained that the company does not wish to be bound to a team assembly technique, that an assembly line may become the most efficient mode of operation as the volume of business grows . He stated that, in either case, the use should be able to fit into the I-1 zone. Chairman Hawes stated that the concern regarding assembly line is over the volume of materials that have to be stored to keep an assembly line going and the possibility that some of these materials could wind up being stored outside . Mr. Newstrum answered that he felt the company could handle the logistical problems of keeping available space and the demand for storage in equilibrium and they will abide by the regulations relating to this zoning district . Commissioner Lucht asked Mr. Newstrum whether he would have any problems with a finding that limited the use to the assembly of electric automobiles only. Mr. Newstrum answered that that would pose no problem. In response to a question from Commissioner Theis , Mr. Newstrum stated that automobiles are assembled only after an order has been received. The Secretary asked whether any body repairs would be undertaken at the Spec. VIII site, to which the .applicant answered in the negative. Chairman Hawes asked whether there would be any need for gas or oil at the site . The applicant's representative answered that only small quantities would be used for cleaning. The Planning Commission discussed among themselves , the best. pro- cedure for acknowledging the proposed use . Commissioner Lucht suggested that the company could occupy Spec. VIII on the basis of a finding by the City Council , and that this occupancy could be limited further by an ordinance amendment to follow later on. The. Se cretary agreed with this procedure. In answer to a comment from Commissioner Lucht, the Secretary pointed out that a body shop could not be permitted in this building because it abuts R-3 zoned property .at a street line . ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 81010 (Classic Electric Car Corporation) Following further discussion, there was a motion by Commissioner Lucht seconded by Commissioner Manson to recommend to the City Council , a finding that the assembly of electric cars is similar In nature to other permitted uses in the I-1 district, provided: 1) The finding acknowledges assembly of electric powered vehicles and does not acknowledge the manufacture of major automobile components . 2) There shall be no body repair, painting, or maintenance of electric vehicles conducted in the I-1 zone . 3) The use shall conform to all provisions of the Zoning Ordinance relating to X-1 buses . He also recommended that wording for an ordinance amendment to establish the status of the use in the Zoning Ordinance be. prepared. 1-29-81 -3- Voting in favor: Chairman Hawes, Commissioners Malecki , Theis, Manson and Lucht. Voting against : none. The motion passed. APPLICATION NO. 81011 (Youth Investment Foundation) The Secretary introduced the next item of business, a request for a special use permit by Youth Investment Foundation to use the single family residence at 4800-71st Avenue North for office counsel- ing and group meeting functions . The Secretary reviewed the contents of the staff report for the application (See Planning Commission Information Sheet for Application No . 81011 attached) . Commissioner Theis observed that the Zoning Ordinance disallows accessory off-site parking across a major thoroughfare. The Secre- tary clarified that informal agreements may exist for such parking, but that the City would not approve an off-site accessory parking arrangement as a way to meet ordinance parking requirements . The Secretary added that the applicant has indicated that youths are sometimes picked up by a counselor and brought to the home . He stated that he considered the organization worthwhile, but not one which is "required" for the public welfare in an RI District . He stated that he felt there might be circumstances in which the oper- ation could locate in the Rl zone (for instance, in a church building) but not at the proposed location. Chairman Hawes inquired whether group homes are permitted in the R1 district. The Secretary answered that state law mandated that such uses be permitted in the R1 zone with an occupancy of up to 8 persons . Chairman Hawes asked whether the status of a permitted group home is limited to homes for the mentally retarded. The Secretary answered that other troubled persons may occupy a group home in the Rl district . He pointed out that the proposed use did not constitute a group home in any way. Chairman Hawes stated that there was a potential for using the house as a place to stay overnight and asked whether such a use would be prohibited. The Secretary stated that no such intended use was expressed in the letter submitted with the application for a special use permit. He went on to add that if the applicant were to reside on the premises, there would be no requirement to even seek a special use permit for many of the activities that are intended. Chairman Hawes then called on the applicant to speak. Mr. Thyren first corrected a statement in the staff report which suggested that on-site parking was available at the building in Bemidji , Minnesota He stated that no such parking was available at that site. Mr. Thyren pointed out that he generally uses his van to pick up youths and bring them to his house in Maple Grove . Chairman Hawes asked Mr. Thyren whether he had any religious train- ing. Mr. Thyren answered that he . has not attended seminary, that he was formerly a teacher at Park Center High School . Asked what re- ligious affiliation he had, Mr. Thyren answered that Y.I.F. is not affiliated with any denomination, although Y.I.F. does . receive funding from a number of churches . Chairman Hawes then reviewed briefly the financial support for the organization. Chairman Hawes asked whether it was likely that a youth would need to stay overnight at the house . Mr. Thyren answered that if a situation arose where a youth did not feel he could return home, he would likely take that young person to his own home in Maple Grove, rather than spend the 1-29-81 -4- night in the house on 71st Avenue . Commissioner Malecki asked Mr. Thyren whether he was operating by himself. Mr. Thyren explained that he is an area director in the Youth Investment Foundation organization and that another part- time counselor would probably work with him in the house at 4800- 71st Avenue North. Commissioner Malecki noted the size of the house, and 'asked why that much space was needed. Mr. Thyren answered that he preferred to operate in a house which has informal-settings for group meetings . He stated that he did not like the atmosphere created by an office arrangement . Chairman Hawes asked whether Y.I.F. was recognized by the State . Mr. Thyren answered in the affirmative and stated that the organi- zation has had tax exempt status for 10 years. Chairman Hawes asked whether the counseling services offered by Y.I.F. had to be licensed by the State . Mr. Thyren answered that that was not necessary. In answer to a question from Commissioner Manson, Mr. Thyren stated that the problem of parking has never really come up at a Y.I.F. house. He stated that no one in the group of kids that he counsels even has a drivers license yet . Chairman Hawes asked whether any of the young people served by Y.I.F. is emotionally disturbed. Mr. Thyren answered that he does not treat people in need of psychiatric care or drug therapy , but simply normal . kids who are having minor problems . Chairman Hawes asked in what way the property would be improved by Y.I.F. 's occupancy . Mr. Thyren stated that they do landscaping, fencing, etc. He stated that 'the °o.rnaniz,ation: is very interested in being a good neighbor and that the property should look better In two years. Following a number of questions and answers regarding particulars of the Y.I.F. operation, the Secretary asked the applicant to explain to the Commission how he felt the Y.I.F. use is required for the public welfare of that neighborhood. Mr. Thyren stated that the organization would be involved with troubled teenagers and possibly their parents and that this would be a benefit possibly to people living within the immediate neighborhood. The Secretary asked Mr. Thyren what would be lacking to the community as a whole if this operation were not located at 4800-71st . Mr. Thyren stated there are benefits to the parents of a community when youths are involved with Y.I.F. at a turning point in their life. Commissioner Lucht commented that he felt, from his own knowledge of Y.I.F. , that it would be a tremendous asset to the community, perhaps not required, but a definite plus. He also noted the benefit from having Y.I.F. close to its clientele at Park Center High School and Northview Junior High .School . Commissioner Manson. acknowledged that the house in question would be a convenient location, but that it also presents potential problems for parking and the busy traffic along Brooklyn Boulevard. In answer to a comment from Commissioner Lucht, Mr. Thyren stated that once young people obtain a drivers license they usually join another group. He also pointed out that the young people come to the house by appointment and that he would discourage kids from just 1-29-81 -5- dropping in and hanging around for long periods of time. Asked what age group most of the young people are, Mr. Thyren answered mostly eighth or ninth .graders. Commissioner Lucht asked whether the officing function of the pro- posed use is the major problem from a zoning standpoint . The Secre- tary answered that he really did not know how to classify the use that is proposed. Therefore, he said, it is difficult to know how the use fits into any particular zone. He reviewed with the Com- mission other possible locations , including the CEAP .site and the Brookdale Christian Center Church on Xerxes Avenue North, which had been discussed with the applicant . He stated that there did not appear to be a problem with the proposed use in the Cl zone. Commissioner Lucht acknowledged that he did not see how the use would meet the ordinance restrictions for the R1 zone, but added that it is certainly a worthwhile organization and hoped a solution could be worked out. PUBLIC HEARING Chairman Hawes then opened the meeting for a public hearing. Mr. Dale Magnuson of 4830-71st Avenue North stated that he was neither for nor against the proposed use. He informed the Commission that ' the property at the corner of 71st and Brooklyn Boulevard has been a problem in the neighborhood for some time . He expressed a concern of those living in the area that pedestrian traffic will conflict with automobile traffic in that area . He explained that the property has been used for home occupations in the past and that the current owner uses the property as an upholstery shop and uses the rear yard to rebuild cars .. He asked Mr. Thyren what use the- property .might be sold for, perhaps a gas station? Mr. Thyren answered that the special use permit he was seeking would certainly be issued only for the Y.I.F. use and could not be transferred to some other use later. Mr. Magnuson asked Mr. Thyren if he would object to having 71st. Avenue North blocked off from Brooklyn Boulevard. Mr. Thyren answered that he would have no objection. Mr. Magnuson also stated that his neighbor Bill Legler of 4813-71st Avenue North was. unable to attend the meeting, but expressed concerns regarding cars and noise from the proposed use. Chairman Hawes assured Mr. Magnuson that a gas station would not be permitted at that site. Mr. Magnuson answered that he was aware that special use permits have certain restrictions . He complained, how- ever, that these restrictions are not really enforced. Therefore, he said, he has little confidence in the conditions legislated by the Planning Commission and City Council . Mr. Louis Terzich of 4825-71st Avenue North addressed a few questions to the applicant . He asked how serious the problems were that kids had who came to the Y.I.F. meetings; and whether a special use permit was required for Y.I.F. in Maple Grove . Mr. Thyren answered that Y.I.F. does not deal with violent 'youths. He pointed out that 73% of senior high school kids have some contact with drugs in some form and that certainly they are not all dangerous . He stated that no permit was required for Y.I.F. to operate in his home in Maple Grove. Mr. Terzich stated that he agreed with the report of the Secretary. He stated that he opposes the use in his neighborhood because it is deteriorating. Mrs. Pehrson of 4812-71st Avenue North expressed the concern that if the operation is a success, more and more people will be coming to 1-29-81 -6- the house . Mr. Thyren answered that a large group would require a different facility . He stated that his primary goal is to build relationships with a limited number of young people. Mrs . Pehrson asked how many young people he could carry in his van . Mr. Thyren answered three or four were usually picked up at a time . Mrs . Pehrson asked why it was necessary to have the Y.I.F. office in a house as opposed to in a regular office building. Mr. Thyren answered that meetings with 20 or 30 young people require more space than is found in the typical office . Louis Terzich -asked why the organization couldn' t use the school for officing. Mr. Thyren answered that it was totally impossible to office at the high school . He added that the school has allowed Y.I.F. to use the gymnasium. Mr. Jessie Pehrson, also of 4812-71st Avenue North, note. d that Mr. Thyren has no religious training as such and asked how he conducts studies of the Bible . Mr. Thyren answered that he simply reads through books of the Bible with the youth and asks questions about what each passage means to them. Mr. Pehrson asked whether there would be other employees working with him. Mr. Thyren answered that there would probably be one part-time counselor at the. house during afternoon periods. Mrs. Faith Dant of 4818-71st Avenue North asked Mr. Thyren whether a summer program with activities at the house is planned. Mr. Thyren answered that a program for the summer is planned, but not all of the activities would be at the house at 4800-71st Avenue North. Mrs. Dant stated that. her concern primarily relates to property values. She stated that she would not want to Zook for a house in a neighborhood with a youth home or similar operation located there. She asked why Mr. Thyren wanted to locate ` it ' in a 'resi.dential area . Mr. Thyren answered that the house in question is good because of its location and type of setting provided for meetings with young people. - Mr. Lawrence Pallum, the resident at 4800-71st Avenue North, com- planned about the presumptions that Mrs. . Dant and others had about the house at 4800-71st. CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING Chairman Hawes asked whether there were any others who wished to speak to the application. There being none, there was a motion by Commissioner Lucht seconded by Commissioner Malecki to close the public hearing. Voting in favor: Chairman Hawes , Commissioners Malecki , Theis , Manson and Lucht . Voting against: none . The motion passed. Commissioner Theis stated that he had a difficult time in evaluating the merits and demerits of the proposed use in a residential area . He stated that he felt the operation was worthwhile, but that it can' t be classified as a church . He stated that the only other category that the use might be classified in was the provision for "other noncommercial uses required for the public welfare . " He stated that he could not consider the proposed use to fall in that category because, - although the use may be worthwhile, it is not something that is necessarily "required. " He stated that he would prefer to see the proposed use in a commercial zone and not in an R1 residential neighborhood. 1-29-81 -7- Chairman Hawes polled the Planning Commission as to its feeling on the matter. Commissioner Lucht stated that he considered the Y.I.F. to be a worthwhile group and a potential asset to the community, but that the use as proposed does not fit in the RI zone . He noted that, ironically , if .Mr. Thyren were to live at 4800-71st, there would be no zoning problem in his making use of the building for meetings with young people . - Commissioner Manson agreed with Commissioner Lucht and went on to state that she saw problems with adding any ordinance language to allow the proposed use, because such language might allow other office uses in the R1 zone. Commissioner Malecki stated that the Commission is bound by the limitations in the zoning Ordinance and stated that the proposed° use cannot be .considered "required" for the public welfare in an R1 .district. Commissioner Theis stated that a rezoning would have to be pursued before the use could be allowed in the proposed location. Chairman Hawes commended the proposed use, but also stated that he did not feel it is truly permitted in the R1 district. He opposed allowing a single family residence to be used purely for the office of a nonresident. Mr. Thyren stated that the . Planning Commission in New Hope had raised all the same considerations , but that the Planning staff in that City had been able to find a way of allowing Y.I.F. in an R1 district . He asked how this was done in New Hope, but not here . The Planning Assistant answered that the house used in New Hope was located next to a church and that a condition of approval was a parking agreement with. the church. He stated that it was his understanding that conditional use permits are different and some- what more flexible than the special use permit category. ACTION RECOMMENDING DENIAL OF APPLICATION NO. 81011 (Youth Investment Foundation) Motion by Commissioner Theis seconded by Commissioner Manson to recommend denial of Application. No . 81011 , a request for special use permit to locate the Youth Investment Foundation in the resi- dence at 4800-71st Avenue North, on the following grounds : 1. The use of the property cannot be classified as a permitted or special use in the R1 district nor can it be classified as a non-commercial use ' required for the public welfare in the RI district. 2. The standards for a special use permit are not all met.. notably Standard (d) relating to parking, ingress and egress. 3. No ordinance change is recommended. Voting in favor: Chairman Hawes, Commissioners Theis, Manson and Lucht . Voting against: none . Not voting: Commissioner Malecki . Commissioner Malecki explained that she would vote to deny the 1-29-81 - -8- application, but not on the grounds that the special use standards are not met. She stated that in her opinion the only proper grounds for denial are because the use does not fall within the uses per- mitted in the Rl district and specifically cannot be included in those uses permitted by Section 35-310 :28. Mr. Louis Terzich stated to the applicant and to the rest of the Commission that he is not opposed to the operation per se, but does not feel it should be permitted in the Rl zoning district . OTHER BUSINESS The Secretary briefly reviewed for the Planning Commission upcoming business items and noted that the Assistant City Engineer will re- view for the Planning Commission a number of 1981 Engineering De- partment improvement projects . ADJOURNMENT Motion by Commissioner Theis seconded by Commissioner Malecki to adjourn the meeting of the Planning Commission . Voting in favor: Chairman Hawes, Commissioners Theis , Manson and Lucht . Voting against: none . The motion passed. The Planning Commission ad- journed at 10:53 p.m. Chairman 1-29-81 -9-