Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1983 03-03 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 MARCH 3, 1983 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Planning Commission met in study session and was called to order by Chairman George Lucht at 7:43 p.m. ROLL CALL Chairman George Lucht, Commissioners Molly Malecki, Mary Simmons, Nancy Manson, Lowell Ainas and Carl Sandstrom. Also present were Director of Planning and Inspection Ronald Warren, Planning Assistant Gary Shallcross, City Manager Gerald Splinter and Administrative Assistant Brad Hoffman. Chairman Lucht explained that Commissioner Versteeg had called to inform him that he would be unable to attend the evening's meeting and was excused. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - February 17 , 1983 Motion by Commissioner Sandstrom seconded by Commissioner Manson to approve the minutes of the February 17, 1983 Planning Commission meeting as submitted. Voting in favors Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Malecki, Simmons, Manson, Ainas and Sandstrom. Voting against: none. The motion passed. APPLICATION NOS. 83003, 83004 and 83005 (Elderly Housing Project) Following the Chairman's explanation, the Secretary introduced the first three items of business: A request to rezone from R3 to R6, the 7.15 acres of• land at the southeast corner of I-94 and Highway, 100; a request for site and building plan approval to construct a three story 65 unit rental building, a five story 73 unit condominium building, and 32 townhouses at the southeast corner of I-94 and Highway 100 and a request for preliminary plat approval to subdivide into three lots, the land at the southeast corner of I-94 and Highway 100. The Secretary reviewed the information sheet for the rezoning and the resolutions for recommending the Comprehensive Plan Amendment and the rezoning of the 7.15 acres to R6 . Commissioner Malecki noted that the Comprehensive Plan Amendment would allow for high-density elderly housing. She asked whether this would preclude R6 type housing on the site that was not elderly after the land was rezoned. The Secretary agreed, stating that the Comprehensive Plan Amendment would limit the rezoning to elderly housing. Commissioner Simmons asked what would happen if the pro- posed development fell apart and the land were rezoned R6. The Secretary answered that the rezoning will not be complete until the land is described in the ordinance through an `ordinance amendment. He stated that by the time this ordinance becomes effective, the land should be acquired and a contract with the developer should be signed. Commissioner Simmons concluded that if another plan were submitted, it would have to be for elderly housing. The Secretary agreed. He noted that elderly housing produces less traffic and that it was on this basis that the Comprehensive Plan Amendment was deemed to be acceptable. 3-3-83 -1- commissioner Sandstrom asked whether the building would be restricted to elderly occupants. He stated he thought that it was not legal to restrict it to certain ages. The Secretary stated that the age restriction would not be contained in the zoning, but in the contract. He added that the contract may not specify that only certain persons can apply for housing in the development, but that the type of housing by the contract would be attractive to elderly residents. He cited as an example, the high-rise building south of City Hall, which was not intended to be a purely elderly building, but has pretty much become so as more and more of the occupants are elderly. Commissioner Sandstrom asked if only those over 55 could apply for housing in the project. The Secretary answered that he was not. sure if the contract specifies an age limitation. Commissioner Simmons stated that the contract was very important because it spells out how the project will, in fact, be for elderly, The Secretary then .reviewed the staff reports for Application Nos. 83005 and 83004. He briefly reviewed what would be built on each parcel and also reviewed the roadway changes on North Lilac Drive at Fremont and at Humboldt which had been made since the Planning Commission lash reviewed the plans on January 27, 1983. He again reviewed the proof-of-parking plan for both the rental building and the condominium building. Commissioner Simmons stated that the fact that not all the parking was being installed was related to the fact that the project was for elderly residents. She stated that given this amount of parking, the City should want to ensure that the project is occupied by seniors. The Secretary resumed his review of the site and building plans. He stated that the townhouse plans had been changed from the January 27,' 1983 plans to provide for a half bath on the first floor in the three bedroom units. He explained that Building A and the townhouses would be held in a condominium form of ownership after construction of the units. He also explained that the Fire Department had indicated that they preferred to see the circular stands in the parking lot areas for Buildings A and B removed for easier access for fire-fighting equipment and a turn- around area in the townhouse complex for the same purpose. He then reviewed the conditions of approval for Application Nos. 83005 and 83004. The Secretary then pointed out that the Planning Commission also had, as another business item, action on the Tax Increment Plan for the elderly housing development. He recommended that the Plan- ning Commission make three findings as listed in a handout given to the Planning Commission with their agendas. Commissioner Simmons noted that the Tax Increment Financing Plan is to be consistent with the housing element of the City's Comprehensive Plan. She stated that in addition to providing housing for the elderly, the project should also provide housing for low and moderate income people. The Secretary agreed and stated that at least 20% of the units would have to be for low and moderate income people. Commis- sioner Simmons stated that she recognized that Brooklyn Center had done more than most other suburbs toward meeting their fair share allocation of low and moderate income housing, but she added that the City still has not met its goal and that more could still be done. Commissioner Sandstrom expressed a concern for providing housing opportunities for low and moderate income people. Mr. Brad Hoffman, Administrative Assistant to the City Manager, stated that at least 20% of the units in the rental building would 3-3-83 -2- have to be Teased to low and moderate income people He explained that this mandated by Federal Law in any case, where a building is built with tax exempt financing. Commissioner Sandstrom asked whether the goal should not be more than 20% Mr.. Hoffman stated that the Tax Increment Plan addresses the minimum required. He stated that it is assumed that most elderly persons moving into the rental building will be low and moderate income. Commissioner Sandstrom stated that tax increment financing should be used to help the elderly and that the goal should not be the minimum, but much more than the minimum. Mr. Hoffman stated that the City was trying to get as many low and moderate income persons in the rental building as possible. He stated that 20% is simply a statutory minimum. Commissioner Sandstrom stated that the contract should specify that the buildings built with Tax Increment Financing, should be for low and moderate income people. Commissioner Simmons stated that there are questions about who will benefit from the project, because the City is giving $1,000,000.00 in tax subsidy to the project. City Manager Gerald Splinter ex- plained that the City could not restrict the resale of units in the condominium building to elderly residents. Commissioner Simmons asked whether, once all the units were sold, the association could control who buys the condominium unit. Mr. Splinter explained that the contract would provide the condominium association with the right of first refusal; that is, the right to buy any unit within the building for sale. He stated that the law allows the City to restrict people only so far. He stated that the condominium build- . ing could probably be limited to elderly persons as a practical matter, but he could not guarantee that the building would only be occupied by elderly residents.. Commissioner Simmons acknowledged that these limitations on screening people out probably hark back to the time when courts ruled against such discriminatory devices. She asked whether the first purchasers of units within the condo- minium building would be elderly. Mr-. ,Splinter responded in the affirmative Commissioner Sandstrom asked what the price range would be of the condominiums and townhouses. Mr. Hoffman answered that they would be from the mid $50,000 's to mid $60 ,000 's. Mr. Splinter stated that, based on a marketing study done previously, he expected that there would be a lot of low and moderate income people buying units within the condominium building He also explained that the defini- tion of low and moderate income is set by Federal standards, not by the City of Brooklyn Center. He explained that, if the project were funded by Federal funds, the developer would be required to market the condominiums outside of Brooklyn Center first. He explained that this is why the City sought to do the project without Federal funds. Commissioner Simmons asked why there is a six month limit on re- serving mortgage money for low and moderate income residents and why the six month limit started on January 10, 1983. Mr. Splinter explained that the money made available was not simply to Brooklyn Center, but to a number of communities. He stated that only part of the money was set aside for this project. He stated that once the four month limit was over, the financing would be opened to those with incomes not exceeding 110% of the median income level. Chairman Lucht stated that, as far as the contract was concerned, it would certainly have to specify the things that have been 3-3-83 -3- guaranteed by the staff and asked for by the Planning commission. He stated that these provisions would be reflected in the minutes. Mr. Splinter stated that it was unfortunate that the contract had not yet been finalized. He stated that the Planning Commission t provisions an could suggesd he promised that the staff would try to get those things into the contract. He also explained that the rezoning would not take effect until the contract was signed. Mr. Splinter apologized for the 'lack of time to consider various aspects because of the importance of meeting deadlines. He asked the Planning Commission to have faith that the staff would follow through on the promises it has made about the project. In response to a question from Commissioner Simmons regarding the 20% low and moderate income units, Mr. Splinter explained that the 20% figure was not a goal, but a minimum. He assured the Planning Commission that the 'proposed development would not be like the Loring Park development in Minneapolis where tax increment financing was used for high-priced condominiums. He explained that that project was not even marketed to elderly persons. He added that he has no concern that Federal auditors would find anything wrong with the project. PUBLIC HEARING (Comprehensive Plan Amendment) Chairman Lucht thenlopened the meeting for a public hearing on the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment and asked whether anyone present wished to speak on that amendment. Hearing no one, he called for a motion to `close the public hearing. CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING Motion by Commissioner Malecki seconded by Commissioner Manson to close the public hearing. The motion passed unanimously. PUBLIC HEARING (Application No. 83003) Chairman Lucht then reopened the 'pub is hearing for the rezoning, Application No 83003, and asked whether anyone present wished to speak. Mr. Curtis Ward, of 6131 Emerson Avenue North, noted that the plan provides for two-way traffic on North Lilac Drive. He complained of the volume of traffic generated by the Church and stated that it would go past his house if North Lilac Drive were two-way. Mr. Splinter showed the Commissioners on an overhead transparency of the site plan what stretch of North Lilac Drive was being referred to. There followed a lengthy discussion regarding one-way as opposed to two-way traffic on North Lilac 'Drive. Chairman Lucht stated that if North Lilac Drive were designated one-way, the traffic would still go by Mr. Ward's house and would cause a great in- convenience for people who would live in the project. - Mr. Splinter stated that if two-way traffic posed a problem to the neighborhood, North Lilac Drive could be put back to one-way. He explained that one-way streets are usually found in pairs so that people can easily double back the other way. Mr. Hoffman also pointed out that the townhouse residents would have to travel along 62nd Avenue North to North Lilac Drive and then northeast along North Lilac Drive to the entrance to the townhouses if North Lilac Drive were made one-way going northeast. Chairman Lucht then 'called on former Brooklyn Center Mayor Phil Cohen to speak to this issue. Mr. Cohen stated that this matter had been discussed in a number of neighborhood meetings and that 3-3-83 -4- most of the people in the neighborhood like the roadway layout as proposed. He stated that certain travel habits would have to change since North Lilac Drive would be interrupted between Fremont and 62nd Avenues North. He suggested that the Church get together with the neighborhood to resolve parking and traffic problems Mr. Curtis Ward stated that it was his understanding that North Lilac Drive was going to be one-way. He stated that he had gone to many meetings and was not aware that it had been decided that North Lilac Drive would be a two-way street. He asked who decided that North Lilac Drive would be a two-way street. Mr. Cohen answered that there had been a number of meetings and that the options had been laid out to the neighborhood in meetings on January 13, 1983 and January 20, 1983. He stated that the two-way option was dis cussed as the preferred option at those meetings The Secretary left at 9 :20 p.m. and returned at 9 :23 p.m. Mr. Cohen again stated that if people are concerned about two-way traffic and if it does not work, North Lilac Drive can be changed back to a one-way street. Chairman Lucht then recognized Mr. Arnold Foslien. Mr. Foslien stated that he hoped the Planning Commission could move the appli- cation at this evening's meeting because he was anxious to see the project get under way so that he could move in as soon as possible. He asked Mr. Splinter whether it would be easy to make North Lilac Drive one-way again. Mr. Splinter stated that it could be done, but that people would have to be retrained, so to speak. Mr. Splinter stated that it would be preferable to get the traffic layout right the first time and reiterated that he felt the two-way street was a better option. Commissioner Simmons asked whether a substantial cost would be in- curred if the road was first widened for two-way traffic and then narrowed again for one-way. Mr. Splinter responded that most one- way streets are just as wide as two-way streets and, therefore, no narrowing would be necessary. Following further discussion with Mr. Ward regarding the traffic patterns in the neighborhood, Mr. Splinter stated that the staff would work with Mr. Ward between the Planning Commission meeting and the City Council meeting to arrive on an acceptable arrangement. He stated that if the street were desig- nated as one-way, other people would be disappointed. He also stated that, since the roadway matters were not a direct concern of the Planning Commission, it should be possible for the Commission to act on the applications without knowing precisely what will be done re- garding North Lilac Drive. CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING (Application No. 83003) Motion by Commissioner Sandstrom seconded by Commissioner Ainas to close the public hearing. The motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTIONS RESOLUTION NO. 83-1 Member Molly Ma ec i introduced the following resolution and moved its adoptions RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING AMENDMENT OF COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 82-255 (COMPREHENSIVE PLAN) RELATIVE TO R3 ZONED LAND AT THE SOUTHEAST QUADRANT OF I-94 AND T.H. 100 3-3-83 -5- The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Nancy Manson, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: George Lucht, Molly Malecki, Mary Simmons, Nancy Manson,, Lowell Ainas and Carl Sandstrom; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolu- tion was declared duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 83-2 Member Nancy Manson introduced the following, resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION REGARDING RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION OF APPLICATION NO 83003 SUBMITTED BY THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Lowell. Ainas, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof George Lucht, Molly Malecki, Mary Simmons, Nancy Manson, ,Lowell Ainas and Carl Sandstrom; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolu- tion was declared duly passed and adopted. PUBLIC HEARING (Application No. 83005) Chairman Luc t ten opened the meeting for a public hearing and asked whether anyone present wished to comment on the preliminary plat application. Hearing no one, he called for a motion to close the public hearing. CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING Motion by Commissioner Ainas seconded by Commissioner Sandstrom to close the public hearing. The motion passed unanimously. The Secretary recommended that the Commission note the roadway concerns and further review of those concerns in its motion on the preliminary plat. ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 83005 (Brooklyn Center Housing and Redevelopment Authority) Motion by Commissioner Manson seconded by Commissioner Sandstrom to recommend approval of Application No. 83005, noting the concern re- garding traffic on North Lilac Drive and directing staff to review those concerns, and that the approval be subject to 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 Condominium association documents for Lots 2 and 3 are subject to review and approval by the City Attorney. 4. The Brooklyn Center Housing and Redevelopment Authority shall enter a contract with the developer stipulating condominium form of ownership for Lots 2 and 3 prior to final plat approval. 5. Fremont Avenue North right-of-way shall be legally vacated by the City; prior to final plat approval. 3-.3-83 -6- 6. The preliminary plat shall be modified to indicate appropriate utility easements in accordance with the City 's site utility plan prior to final plat approval. 7. Building permits shall not be issued until the final plat has been filed at the County. Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Malecki, Simmons, Manson, Ainas and 'Sandstrom. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. The Secretary then asked whether there were any questions regarding the site and building plan. Commissioner Manson asked how much parking was 'provided for the townhouse development. The Secretary stated that, including the garage stalls, the townhouse plan provides three parking stalls per unit. He noted that the Zoning Ordinance requires only two parking stalls per unit, but that most townhouse developments have more spaces in order to accommodate guest parking. ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 83004 (Blumentals Architecture) Motion by Commissioner Ainas seconded by Commissioner Malecki to recommend approval of Application No. 83004, subject to the following conditions: 1. Building plans are subject to review and approval by the Building Official with respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance of permits 2. Grading, drainage, utility and berming plans are subject to review and approval by the City Engineer, prior to the issuance of permits. 3. A site performance agreement and supporting financial guarantee (in an amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be submitted prior to the issuance of permits to assure completion of approved site improvements. 4. Any outside trash disposal facilities and rooftop mechanical equipment shall be appropriately screened from view. 5. Building A and Building B are to be equipped with an automatic fire extinguishing system to meet NFPA Standards and shall be connected to a central moni- toring device in accordance with Chapter 5 of the City Ordinances. 6. Plan approval is exclusive of all signery which is subject to Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances. 7. B112 curb and gutter shall be provided around all parking and driving areas 8. Building permits for Buildings A and B are subject to completion of the rezoning process (description of the land in the Zoning Ordinance) and filing of the plat at Hennepin County. 3-3-83 -7 9. Plan approval acknowledges proof-of-parking for 40 spaces on Lot 2 '(Building A) and 38 spaces on Lot 1 (Building B) These parking stalls shall be installed if the City determines that installed parking spaces are insufficient to meet demand. Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Malecki, Simmons, Manson, Ainas and Sandstrom. Voting against none. The motion passed unanimously. There followed a brief discussion regarding action on the Tax Increment Financing Plan. Commissioner Simmons ,stated that she would like to add certain recommendations to the City Council in addition to the three findings which the Commission was asked to make regarding the Tax Increment Plan and the development plan. ACTION RECOMMENDING FINDINGS REGARDING ELDERLY DEVELOPMENT To BE FINANCED BY TAX INCREMENT FINANCING Motion by Commissioner Manson seconded by Commissioner Ainas to recommend to the City Council the following findings regarding the development plan for the elderly housing project proposed in Appli- cation No. 83004 to be financed by Tax Increment Financing: 1. The Tax Increment Financing Plan is consistent with the Land Use element of the City's Compre- hensive Plan as recommended for amendment by Planning Commission Resolution No. 83-1. 2. The Tax Increment Financing Plan is not incon- sistent with the City's Capital Improvements Program. 3. The Tax Increment Financing Plan is compatible with the goals outlined in the Housing Element of the City's Comprehensive Plan. Voting in favor: Chairman `Lucht, Commissioners Malecki, Simmons, Manson, Ainas and Sandstrom. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. Commissioner Simmons then entered the following statement into the record: "Since the taxpayers of Brooklyn Center are being asked to contribute $1,000,000 .00 to this development and since the contract between the City and the developer is not available for 'study prior to the Planning Commis- sion's required approval of the rezoning, etc. , the Planning Commission makes the following recommendations to the City Council: 1. The City Council will make sure that the contract gives every legally permitted assistance to Brooklyn Center's low and moderate income elderly residents, to make sure that they know that this alternative housing possibility willsoon exist in their City. 2. The City Council will make sure that Brooklyn Center's interested elderly low and moderate income residents are given full and clear in- 3-3-83 -g_ formation concerning the various methods of financing assistance which is being made available to them and to potential buyers of their existing homes to make it possible for them to move into this development; 3 The City Council will make sure that rents in the apartment building of this development are reasonable enough to make it possible for low and moderate income elderly people to live there, and 4. The City Council will make sure that the contract gives a reasonable assurance that the townhouse section of the development will be owner-occupied, using whatever means are customary when a developer plans to build town- houses in Brooklyn Center." Commissioner Simmons explained that "full and clear" means in language that elderly people understand and that it be repeated if necessary. The Planning Assistant pointed out that Point No. 4 of Commissioner Simmons ' statement is covered in the conditions of approval to Application No. 83005. By consensus it was agreed that that recommendation would be omitted in light of its inclusion in the conditions of approval for the plat. Commissioner Simmons asked why the townhouses would be held in a condominium form of ownership. She stated that in most townhouse _ developments, people own a small area of land behind their townhouse so that they can grow a private garden of their own. Chairman Lucht stated that the association can often limit what is done within this small private area. The Secretary stated that the common area would be owned by all the members of the association and that the association could allow people to grow small private gardens. Mr. Janis- Blumentals, the architect for the project, pointed out that there would be space in the patio areas between the townhouses and the garages to plant small gardens. MOTION FORWARDING RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY COUNCIL Motion by Commissioner Simmons seconded by Commissioner Sandstrom that the first three recommendations of Commissioner Simmons' state- ment be forwarded to the City Council for their consideration. Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Malecki, Simmons,. Manson, Ainas and Sandstrom. Voting against: none., The motion passed unanimously. Dr. Duane Orn, a member of the committee sponsoring the development and a member of CEAP, then thanked the Planning Commission for their review of the development plans and the rezoning. He stated that he felt the project would be a definite benefit to the City. TABLE CAR X MUFFLER SHOP APPLICATION NO. 83006 e Secretary ten explained to the Planning Commission that the - applicant for Application No. 83006 had verbally requested to with.. draw the application and asked that the Planning Commission not adopt the resolution of denial. He explained to the Commission that, while there would be no formal denial, the application would continue as a formal file in the Planning Commission's records. By consensus, it was acknowledged that the Car X application would not be acted on and that it would be held over, pending a letter of withdrawal from the applicant. 3-3-83 -9- DISCUSSION ITEM (Flood Plain Use Permit Fees) The Secretary tFien briefly rev ewed with the Planning Commission an ordinance amendment establishing use permit fees for flood plain uses. Commissioner Simmons asked why the ordinance allows for the extension of a nonconforming use. The Secretary responded that the language was meant to allow nonconforming uses to continue, not to expand. MOTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF' ORDINANCE AMENDMENT Motion by Commissioner Malecki seconded by Commissioner Simmons to recommend approval of an ordinance amendment establishing flood plain use permit fees. Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Commis- sioners Malecki, Simmons, Manson, Ainas and Sandstrom. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. ADJOURNMENT 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 10:07 p.m. Chairman i 3-3-83 10 Planning Commission Information Sheet Application Nos. 83003, 83004, 83005 Applicants: City of Brooklyn Center, Blumentals Architecture and Brooklyn Center HRA Location: Southeast quadrant of I-94 and Highway 100 Requests Rezoning, Site and Building Plan, Preliminary Plat These applications were all considered by the Planning Commission at its January 27, 1983 meeting. At that time, Application No 83003 was tabled and referred to the Southeast Neighborhood Advisory Group for review and comment. The other two appli- cations were also tabled at that time until the March 3, 1983 meeting. All appli- cations pertain to the proposed elderly housing and townhouse development at the southeast quadrant of I-94 and Highway 100. The land is presently zoned R3. Application No. 83003 seeks to rezone 7.15 acres to R6 for a 65 unit elderly rental building and a 73 unit condominium building. The Southeast Neighborhood Advisory Group met on February 9, 1983 and considered the proposed rezoning and development plan. - The Advisory Group recommended approval of the requested rezoning at that meeting (see minutes attached) . A draft resolution recommending approval of the rezoning is attached for the Commission's consideration. The public hearing for the rezoning was continued until this meeting. The Commission must complete the public hearing on the rezoning (new notices have been sent) and should also act on the Tax Increment Financing Plan submitted;to the Commission at its February 17, 1983 meeting. A draft motion of approval is attached. Prior to acting on either the rezoning or the Tax Increment Financing Plan, the Commission should take action on recommending amendment of the Comprehensive Plan to allow high-density elderly housing at the southeast quadrant of I-94 and Highway 100. A draft resolution recommending such a change has been prepared and is attached for the Commission's review. A public hearing has been called to review the proposed amendment. The site and building plans have been reviewed by the Commission at its January 27, 1983 meeting. The plans have been revised very slightly since that time to change the configuration of the cul-de-sac at the intersection of Fremont Avenue North and Noy Lilac Drive. We did not note in our initial report that lighting of sidewalks and parking lots will be with high pressure sodium (amber color) globe lamps, 10" and 14" in diameter on posts 10` in height. We feel this is a very attractive proposal for lighting and recommend its approval with the plans. The plans are generally in order and approval is recommended, subject to at least the following conditions: 1-. Building plans are subject to review and approval by the Building Official with respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance of permits. 2. Grading, drainage, utility and berming plans are subject to review and approval by the City Engineer, prior to the issuance of permits. 3. A site performance agreement and supporting financial. guarantee (in an amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be submitted prior to the issuance of permits to assure completion of approved site improvements. 3-3-83 -1- _Application Nos. 83003, 83004, 83005 continued 4. Any outside trash disposal facilities and rooftop mechanical equipment shall be appropriately screened from view. 5. Building A ,and Building B are to be equipped with an automatic fire extinguishing system to meet NFPA standards and shall be connected to a central monitoring device in accordance with Chapter 5 of the City Ordinances. 6. Plan approval is exclusive of all signery which is subject to Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances. 7. B612 curb and gutter shall be provided around all parking and driving areas. 8. Building permits for Buildings A and B are subject to completion of the rezoning process (description of the land in the Zoning Ordinance) and filing of the plat at Hennepin County. 9. Plan approval acknowledges proof-of-parking for 40 spaces on Lot 2 (Building A) and 38 spaces on Lot l (Building B). These parking stalls shall be installed if the City:determines that installed parking spaces are insufficient to meet demand. The preliminary plat was also tabled by the Planning Commission at its January 27 1983 meeting. The plat involves 'simply three lots and right-of-way for North Lilac Drive. Lots 2 (for the condominiums) and``3 (for the townhouses) will be held in condominium form of ownership after the structures are built. At that time, condominium associations will be declared in accordance with .state law. ` The preliminary plat appears to be in order and approval is recommended subject to 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 Chapterl5 of the the City Ordinances. 3. Condominium association documents for Lots 2 and 3 are subject to review and approval by the City Attorney. 4. The Brooklyn Center Housing and Redevelopment Authority shall enter a contract with the developer stipulating condominium form of owner- ship for Lots 2 and 3 prior to final plat approval . 5. Fremont Avenue North right-of-way shall be legally vacated by the City prior to final plat approval 6. The preliminary plat shall be modified to indicate appropriate utility easements in accordance with the City's site utility plan prior to final plat approval . 7. a ldin? permits shall not be issued until the final plat has been ed a the County. 3-3-83 _ -2- Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 83006 Applicant: Car-X Muffler Shop Location: 6810 Brooklyn Blvd. Request Site and Building Plan and Special Use Permit This application was tabled by the Commission at its February 17, 1983 meeting with a request to bring back a resolution recommending denial of the application. We have prepared such a draft resolution and it is attached for the Commission's consideration. The public hearing for this application has been closed. There- fore, action need only be taken on the resolution recommending denial . 3-3-83 1