Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1984 11-05 PCM MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA REGULAR SESSION NOVEMBER 5, 1981 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The`Plann g Commission met in regular session and was called to order by Chairman William Hawes at 7:36 p.m. ROLL CALL Chairman William Hawes, Commissioners Molly Malecki, Richard Theis, Nancy Manson, George Lucht, Mary Simmons and Lowell Ainas. Also present were Director of Planning and Inspections Ronald Warren, Assistant City Engineer James Grube, and Planning Assistant Gary Shallcross. APPROVAL OF MINUTES '—October 22, 1981 Motion by Commissioner Lucht seconded by Commissioner Manson to approve the minutes of the October 22 , 1981 Planning Commission meeting as submitted. Voting in favor: Chairman Hawes, Commis- sioners Malecki, Theis, Manson, Lucht, Simmons and Ainas. Voting against: none. The motion passed. APPLICATION NO. 81069 (C & G Transcontinental Developers) The Secretary briefly introduced App ication No. 81069f a request for preliminary plat approval to subdivide the land at the north- east corner of County Road 10 and Brooklyn Boulevard into three parcels (the site of the Brooklyn Crossings office development) . He stated that the applicant needed to make certain revisions in the plat and requested that the matter be tabled until the November 19, 1981 meeting, by which time those revisions should be completed. Chairman Hawes asked if anyone present wished to speak to Application No. 81069. None spoke to the matter. MOTION TABLING APPLICATION NO. 81069 (C & G Transcontinental Developers) Motion by Commissioner Lucht seconded by Commissioner The to acknowledge the applicant's request and table Application No. 81069 until the November 19, 1981 Planning Commission meeting. The motion passed unanimously. APPLICATION NO. 81056 (JoAnn Jorgenson) The Secretary introduced the next item of business, a request for preliminary plat approval to subdivide the land at 6610 and 6624 { Colfax Avenue North into three lots . The Secretary reviewed the I contents of the staff report for the application (see Planning j Commission Information Sheet for Application No. 81056 attached) . i Commissioner Theis asked whether rounding the measurement of lot width from 74 .66 feet to 75 feet has been done in the past. The Secretary stated that he could think of no specific examples, but was fairly certain that such rounding has been done previously. PUBLIC HEARING Chairman Hawes then reopened the public hearing and asked if anyone present wished to speak on the application. No one spoke. Chairman Hawes, therefore., called for a motion to close the public hearing. 11-5-81 -1- CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING Motion by Commi.ssi.oner Lucht seconded by Commissioner Ainas to close the public hearing. The motion passed unanimously. ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 81056 (JoAnn Jorgenson) Motion by Commissioner Lucht seconded by Commissioner Malecki to recommend approval of Application No. 81056, preliminary plat approval to subdivide the land at 6610 and 6624 Colfax Avenue North into three lots, subject to the following conditions : 1. The final plat is subject to approval by the City Engineer. 2. The final plat is subject to the provisions of Chapter 15 of the City Ordinances. 3. Lot width for Lot 2 of ' 74.66 ' at the front setback line is considered to meet the minimum lot width requirement of 75' by virtue of rounding the measurement to the nearest foot. 4. No building permit for the proposed Lot 2 shall be issued until the final plat has been approved by the City Council and filed with the County. Voting in favor: Chairman Hawes, Commissioners Malecki, Theis, Manson, Lucht, Simmons and Ainas. Voting against: none. The motion passed. The Secretary then explained to the Planning Commission that Application No. 81057, which accompanied Application No. 81056, for a variance was no longer necessary and the applicant wished to withdraw the application. He instructed the Planning Commission that a motion to acknowledge the withdrawal of Application No. 81057 would be in order. MOTION TO ACKNOWLEDGE WITHDRAWAL OF APPLICATION NO. 81057 (JoAnn Jorgenson) Motion by Commissioner Theis seconded Ey Commissioner Manson to acknowledge withdrawal of Application No. 81057, a request for a variance to allow two substandard lots on the property at 6610 Colfax Avenue North,* on the grounds that the revised plat meets ordinance standards. The motion passed unanimously. APPLICATION NO. 81068 (Karen Kotila-Goga) The- Secretary introduced the next item of business, a request for - special use permit approval to operate a beauty shop in the base- ment of the home at 3701-69th Avenue North. The Secretary reviewed the contents of the staff report concerning the application (see Planning Commission Information Sheet for Application No. 81065 attached) Commissioner Simmons asked whether past approvals of home beauty shops allowed for any consistent pattern of operating hours or whether the operating hours varied from shop to shop as each appli- cant requested. The Secretary answered that the hours of operation vary from shop to shop as each operator prefers. Commissioner Simmons suggested that it might be useful to collect information 11-5-8I -2- on the hours of operation approved for past beauty shops to get a picture of what is typically allowed. PUBLIC HEARING C airman Hawes next opened the meeting for purposes of a public hearing. In answer to questions from the Planning Commission, the Secretary explained that the sidewalk to be installed would go around the outside of the garage to the back entrance of the house. He also pointed out that the property has access off Drew Avenue North and not 69th Avenue North. A brief discussion ensued regarding the hours of operation. Mrs. Goga stated that she wished to operate Wednesday through Friday and Saturday mornings. Chairman Hawes asked Mrs. Goga whether she understood the conditions of the special use permit and accepted them..' Mrs. Goga answered in the affirmative. CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING Motion by Commissioner Lucht seconded by Commissioner Manson to close the public hearing. The motion passed unanimously. During further discussion, the Secretary recommended that the approval acknowledge that the operation may be conducted between 9:00 a.m. and 9:OO p.m. , Wednesday through Friday, leaving to the applicant which day she prefers to work later than 5:00 p.m. Commissioner Lucht suggested that the Saturday hours be limited to 8:00 a.m. to noon. Mrs. Goga stated this would be acceptable. ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 81068 (Karen Kotila-Goga) Motion by Commissioner Manson seconded y Commissioner Malecki to recommend approval of Application No. 81068, subject to the following conditions: 1. The permit is issued to -the applicant as operator of the facility and is nontransferable. 2. The permit is subject to all applicable codes, ordinances, and regulations and violation thereof shall, be grounds for revocation. 3. A copy of the current State operator's license shall be kept on file with the City. 4 All parking related to the special use shall be off-street on improved space provided by the applicant. 5. - The hours of operation shall be Wednesday through Friday from 9 :00 a.m. to 9 :00 p.m. and Saturday from 8:00 a.m. to noon. All customers will be received on an appointment-only basis. 6. The operation shall conform to the recommendations of the Building official's report prior to the issuance of the special use permit. 11-5-81 -3 7. The applicant shall provide a chemical type fire extinguisher within the home beauty shop area prior to the issuance of the special use permit. Voting in favor: Chairman Hawes, Commissioners Malecki, Theis, _Manson, Lucht, Simmons and Ainas. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. DISCUSSION ITEMS a. Home Occupations Ordinance Language. The Secretary next reviewed an ordinance amendment prepared by the City Attorney to revise the definitions of home occupation and special home occupation in the Zoning and Sign Ordinances. He also reviewed proposed Sections 35-405 and 35-406 which enum- erate the conditions applying to home occupations and special home occupations respectively. The Secretary explained that retail sale of things which are produced on the premises (e. g. hobby crafts) is permitted under the existing and proposed ordinance. The Secretary also stated that home occupations such as selling Avon is considered to be an office use; and so long as no merchandise is sold at retail on the premises, such home occupations would be considered permitted home occupations. Commissioner Simmons asked the Secretary what would the working definition of "traffic congestion on the lot" as used in Subsection 7 proposed Section 35-405. The Secretary answered that determining traffic congestion on the lot would be an administrative judgment, which can be appealed to the Planning Commission. Commissioner Simmons stated that traffic congestion could be considered differ- ently in different circumstances. The Secretary responded that the language under Subsection 7 of 35-405 would allow neighbor's the recourse to complain to the City regarding a home occupation which appears to be doing things beyond what is allowed in the residential use district. Commissioner Lucht, noting that the Standards for Special Use Permits already address traffic conges- tion in the public streets, asked whether it would be necessary to include a provision regarding such traffic congestion in the home occupation section. The Secretary answered that by including such language in the provisions for permitted home occupations, he felt it made it much more clear that such problems would not be acceptable with either type of home occupations. The Planning Commission briefly discussed the phenomenon of bible studies and whether these could in any case be considered home occupations. The Secretary answered that as long as such meetings are not undertaken' by persons who conduct them as part of gainful employment, they would not be considered home occupations. He stated that if a group continually uses a home for church gatherings, the operation might be considered a church and, therefore, possibly subject to the special use permit provisions of the Zoning Ordinance. There followed a lengthy discussion regarding the number of cars which should be allowed to park at a residence in connection with a permitted home occupation. Commissioner Simmons suggested that four cars would be an acceptable number of vehicles. Commissioner Theis disagreed and stated that he felt only one or two cars should be allowed to come to a permitted home occupation and that anything- 11-5-81 -4- more than that should be required to seek a special use permit., Commissioner Ainas stated that he felt a limit of four cars would be difficult to enforce by itself and that a provision for less than four cars would be almost impossible to enforce. He stated that people would hardly notice if less than four cars came to a residence. During the discussion on the number of cars to be allowed for a permitted home occupation, Commissioner Malecki asked how the State could require that the City allow up to ten nonresident children to be included in a permitted home day care operation. The Secretary explained that the City had no choice under the law as passed, but that if an operation with ten children involved an outside employee, it would become subject to the special use permit process on the grounds that a nonresident is employed in the home occupation. He added that when the City receives notification of a home day care operation, it is seldom that more than three children are to be cared for. Chairman Hawes polled the Planning Commission regarding their feelings on the number of cars to be allowed as part of a per- mitted home occupation. Commissioners Malecki, Manson, Lucht, Simmons and Ainas allstated they were satisfied with the proposal of four cars. Commissioner Theis stated that he felt one or two would be more appropriate. Chairman Hawes expressed a preference for a limit of three cars. MOTION REGARDING ORDINANCE LANGUAGE Motion by Commissioner Simmons seconded by Commissioner Malecki to recommend that the proposed home occupation ordinance language allow for four parking spaces to be used in connection with a per- mitted home occupation as provided in Section 35-405, Subsection 8. Voting in favor: Commissioners Malecki, Manson, Lucht, Simmons and Ainas. Voting against: Chairman Hawes and Commissioner Theis. ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF ORDINANCE LANGUAGE Motion by Commussioner Lucht seconded by Commissioner Simmons to recommend approval of proposed ordinance language regarding home occupations and special home occupations to be contained in Sections 34-110, 35-900, 35-405 and 35-406 . Voting in favor: Chairman Hawes, Commissioners Malecki, Manson, Lucht, Simmons and Ainas. Voting against: Commissioner Theis. Commissioner Theis explained that he felt the ordinance language was satisfactory, but could not vote in favor of the ordinance, as long as it contained a recommendation for four parking spaces in connection with permitted home occupations. b. Ordinance Language for Off-Site Accessory Parking. The Secretary next reviewed with the Planning Commission proposed ordinance language deleting Section 35-701, Subsection 3a and amending Subsection b to read as follows: Accessory off-site parking shall be permitted only on properties located in districts zoned Commercial (Cl, C1A and C2) and Industrial (I-1 and I-2) , and on properties which are institutional uses in residential zones. Accessory off-site parking shall be permitted on land having the same or less restrictive zoning 11-5-81 -5- classification as the principal use and may be permitted in more restrictive zones if the buffer and setback provisions required of the principal use are met on the property containing the off-site accessory parking. For the purpose of this section of the ordinance, institutional uses in residential zones shall have the same status as Cl zoned property. Commissioner Lucht stated that the proposed ordinance language would make it more restrictive for the property of the northeast corner of 50th and France Avenues North to be used as a parking lot for the industrial use to the south of 50th Avenue. The Secretary stated that residential property cannot be used for off-site accessory parking, unless that property is part of an institutional use. He stated the property would have to be zoned Cl for it to be used in any commercial manner at all. Commissioner Manson noted that the proposed amendment would allow the property next to the CEAP office building at 7231 Brooklyn Boulevard to be used for off-site accessory parking. The Secretary acknowledged this and stated that the buffer zone established by the Shingle Creek right-of-way would be far more than the 35 ft. buffer required when a C2 use abuts Rl, R2 or R3 use at a property line. MOTION TO RECOMMEND ORDINANCE LANGUAGE Motion by Commissioner Lucht seconded by Commissioner Manson to recommend approval of ordinance language concerning off-site accessory parking to delete Section 35-701, Subsection 3a and to revise language for the Section presently enumerated as 35-701, Subsection 3b. Voting in favor: Chairman Hawes , Commissioners Malecki, Theis, Manson, Lucht, Simmons and Ainas. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. ADJOURNMENT Following_a brief review of upcoming planning items, there was a motion by Commissioner Manson seconded by Commissioner Malecki to adjourn the meeting of the Planning Commission. The motion passed unanimously. The Planning Commission adjourned at 9 :42 p.m. Chairman i t 11-5-81 -6-