Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1983 04-28 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 APRIL 28, 1983 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Planning Commission met in study session and was called to order by Chairman George Lucht at 7:30 p.m. ROLL CALL Chairman George Lucht, Commissioners Molly Malecki , Mary Simmons, Lowell Ainas and Donald Versteeg. Also present were Director of Planning and Inspection Ronald Warren, Assistant City Engineer James Grube and Planning Assistant Gary Shallcross. Chairman Lucht explained that Commissioners Manson and Sandstrom had both called to say that they would be late. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - larch 31, 1983 Motion by Commissioner Ainas seconded by Commissioner Versteeg to approve the, minutes of the March 31, 1983 Planning Commission meeting as submitted. Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Ainas and Versteeg. Voting against: none. Not voting: Commissioners Halecki and Simmons. APPLICATION NO. 83013 (Stanley Hahn) Following the Chairman's explanation, the Secretary introduced the first item of business , a request for Preliminary Plat approval to subdivide the large parcel of land north of 69th Avenue North between Grimes and Halifax into three residential lots. The Secretary reviewed the contents of the staff report (see Planning Com- mission Information Sheet and Addendum for Application No. 83013 attached) . Following the Secretary's report, Commissioner Ainas asked whether there had been any movement to put the house on the historical register. The Secretary responded that he had no knowledge of such an effort. Chairman Lucht then called on the applicant to speak. Mr. Stanley Hahn stated that he has approached the Brooklyn Center Historical Society about putting the house on the list of historic places. He pointed out that the house is the second oldest house in Brooklyn Center. He added that he plans to upgrade the exterior of the house, but that he wants to retain as much authenticity as he can. In response to a question from Commissioner Ainas regarding preserving historic structures, Mr. Hahn explained that the barn has no real historic value and is not really salvageable. Mr. Hahn also explained that he plans to sell. the two lots to the north of the residence in order to finance the renovation of the house exterior. The Assistant City Engineer asked Mr. Hahn whether he was on a private well . Mr. Hahn responded in the affirmative. The Assistant City Engineer explained that water and sewer was extended to the large outlot between Grimes and Halifax, north of 69th and that four sets of services are available. He stated that no assessments or hookup charges have been collected. He, therefore, noted that the applicant would have to pay assessments and hookups at the time of connection to City water. He explained that this is an equitable charge to help recover the cost of the City's well system. He suggested that the applicant be required to enter into a subdivision agreement for the payment of hookup charges at the time any of the lots were connected to water service. Mr. Hahn asked how much the charges would be. The Assistant City Engineer answered that it would be around $2,300.00 per hookup. 4-28-83 -1- PUBLIC HEARING�A lication No: 83013) Chairman Lucht then opene--the meeting for a public hearing and asked whether anyone present wished to speak on the application. Hearing none, he called for a motion to close the public hearing. CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING Motion by Commissioner Ainas seconded by Commissioner Malecki to close the public hearing. The motion passed. Commissioner Simmons asked whether it was necessary to direct staff to proceed with the classification of 69th Avenue North as a major thoroughfare. The Secretary answered that the plat application could be handled separately from any action on the status of 69th Avenue North. He stated that the house in question is noncon- forming as to setback and will be more so if 69th Avenue North is classified as a major thoroughfare. He explained that this would have no bearing on the separation of the lots , however. The Secretary stated that the staff recommend the major thoroughfare status for 69th Avenue North from Brooklyn Boulevard to Shingle Creek Parkway. He noted that west of Brooklyn Boulevard, 69th Avenue North is still a County road and a major thoroughfare by definition. Commissioner Simmons asked why 69th Avenue North, east of Shingle Creek Parkway would not be a major thoroughfare. The Secretary stated that traffic counts don't justify the higher classification in that location. In response to a question from Chairman Lucht, the Secretary stated that the staff could prepare an ordinance amendment relating to the classification of 69th Avenue North as a major thoroughfare. ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 83013 (Stanley Hahn) Motion by Commissioner Ainas seconded by Commissioner Malecki to recommend approval of Application No. 83013, 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. The existing barn shall be removed prior to final plat approval . 4. The plat shall be modified to eliminate the 5' wide utility and drainage easements along the north side lot lines of Lots 1 and 2. 5. The plat shall be modified to indicate dedications of 7' of additional right-of-way adjacent to 69th Avenue North. 6. The applicant shall enter into a subdivision agreement with the City to provide for the payment of hookup charges and assessments for water at.the time residences within the subdivison connect to water service. Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Malecki , Simmons , Ainas and Versteeg. Voting against: none. The motion passed. Motion by Commissioner Simmons seconded by Commissioner Versteeg to direct staff to prepare an ordinance amendment classifying 69th Avenue North .as a major thoroughfare west of Shingle Creek Parkway. Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Malecki , Simmons, Ainas and Versteeg. Voting against: none. The motion passed. Commissioner Manson arrived at 8:07 p.m. 4-28-83 -2- APPLICATION NOS. 83014 and 83015e nexttitemeoal usiness,&aLorequest for site and The ecretary ten intro uce building plan approval to construct a five lane drive-up canopy at the First Federal Savings & Loan at Northway Drive and County Road 10. The Secretary re- viewed the contents of the staff report (see Planning Commission Information Sheet for Application No. 83014 attached) . Commissioner Simmons asked whether somebody might possibly enter the bank at the easterly access going in the wrong direction. The Secretary stated that the best movement into the site was at the west access. Commissioner Simmons stated that she thought there would be a visibility problem exiting the site at the easterly exit drive. The Secretary answered that there was more westbound traffic on Northway Drive than eastbound. He explained that the movement of the driveway to the east was to try to improve the visibility of the westbound traffic and to avoid conflict with left turns out. The Secretary then reviewed the staff report for Application No. 83015, a request for a variance from Section 35-700 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow a 4' wide greenstrip adjacent to the turning lane from Northway Drive onto County Road 10. Following his report, the Chairman asked whether anyone had questions. Commissioner Manson asked whether there had been previous right-of-way takings and whether the bank existed first. The Planning Assistant answered it was his understanding that the original right-of-way line was different than it is now, and that it was moved back when the turn lane was put in. Commissioner Simmons observed that the traffic leaving the drive-up would be channelled from five lanes down to one and expressed some concerns that this would create traffic congestion. The Secretary answered that the narrowing of the exit drive allows only one car to exit at a time and that this is an advantage in controlling traffic flow onto public streets. He states that the bottleneck would be on the bank property rather than in the public streets and that cars could make left turns out onto Northway Drive by using the westerly access point. Commissioner Simmons stated that she recognized the logic of the proposal , but felt that there could be a lot of competition in trying to get out of the bank site. The Secretary acknowledged that there would be some people that would try to turn left out of the easterly exit drive, but that the exits would be signed so that people wishing to go westbound would be directed toward the westerly access. Commissioner Simmons also stated that she was concerned the snow banks along Northway Drive would create a visibility problem for-cars exiting form the easterly drive during the winter. Chairman Lucht noted that cars coming out the easterly exit drive would be higher than the street for some distance and would give them an elevation advantage to see cars coming over the snow banks. He asked whether the applicant had anything to add. Ms. Jane Nibbe, representing First Federal , stated that she had nothing to add to the Secretary's report. Chairman Lucht noted that the landscape plan calls for the relocation of a couple of Evergreen trees near the- easterly access. He asked whether the bank would replace these with 22" diameter trees if the Evergreen trees did not survive. Jane Nibbe answered in the affirmative and explained that the bank is always concerned about its appearance to its customers. Mr. Jim Moeller of Albitz Design stated that the bank would replace the trees, perhaps using larger Spruce trees rather than shade trees. PUBLIC HEARING (Application No. 83015) Chairman Lucht then opened the meeting for a public hearing and asked whether anyone present wished to speak on the application. Hearing none, he called for a motion to close the public hearing. 4-28-83 -3- CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING Motion by Commissioner Ainas seconded by Commissioner Malecki to close the public hearing. The motion passed unanimously. ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 83015 (First Federal Savings & Loan) Motion by Commissioner Manson seconded by Commissioner Ainas to recommend approval of Application No. 83015 on the grounds that the Standards for a Variance are met. Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Malecki , Simmons, Manson, Ainas, and Versteeg. Voting against: none. The motion passed. ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 83014 (First Federal Savings & Loan) Motion by Commissioner Malecki seconded by Commissioner Manson to recommend approval of Application No. 83014, 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. 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. 6. An underground irrigation system shall be installed in all land- scaped areas to facilitate site maintenance. 7. Plan approval is exclusive of all signery which is subject to Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances. 8. Existing curb shall be continued around all parking and driving areas. 9. The applicant shall obtain from the County a temporary construction easement to relocate the slope from the driving lane to the boule- vard southeast of the building. 10. If the relocated trees do not survive, they shall be replaced with 2z" to 3 diameter trees or greater. Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Malecki , Simmons, Manson, Ainas and Versteeg. Voting against: none. The motion passed. APPLICATION NO. 83016 (Glen Schutz) The Secretary then introduced the next item of business, a request for a special use permit to conduct a small engine repair home occupation in the garage of the residence at 3801-72nd Avenue North. The Secretary reviewed the contents of the staff report (see Planning Commission Information Sheet for Application No. 83016 attached) . 4-28-83 -4 Following the Secretary's presentation, the Chairman asked whether the applicant had anything to add. Mr. Schutz asked how far the sign had to be from the street. The Secretary answered that it would have to be on his property which usually begins about 15' back from the street pavement. PUBLIC HEARING (Application No. 83016) Chairman Lucht then opened the meeting for a public hearing and asked whether anyone present wished to speak on the application. Hearing none, he called for a motion to close the public hearing. CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING Motion by Commissioner Malecki seconded by Commissioner Simmons to close the public hearing. The motion passed unanimously. ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 83016 (Glen Schutz) Motion by Commissioner Versteeg seconded by Commissioner Manson to recommend approval of Application No. 83016, 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 any violation thereof shall be grounds for revocation. 3'. The hours of operation shall be from 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, and 9:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. Saturday. 4. All parking associated with the home occupation shall be off- street on improved space on the property. 5. A 5 lb. fire extinguisher shall be installed in the area of the home occupation prior to the issuance of the permit. 6. Permit approval is exclusive of all signery which is subject to Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances. Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Malecki , Simmons, Manson, Ainas and Versteeg. Voting against: none. The motion passed. RECESS The Planning Commission recessed at 8:50 p.m. and resumed at 9:19 p.m. APPLICATION NOS. 83010 and 83017 (Rod Bernu) Commissioner Ainas asked to be excused from the Commission during the consideration of Application Nos. 83010 and 83017 because of a possible conflict of interest. The Secretary then introduced Application Nos. 83010 (site and building plan) and 83017 (preliminary plat) for 24 additional townhouse units in the Earle Brown Townhouses at 69th Avenue North and York Place. The Secretary reviewed the contents of the staff report (see Planning Commission Information Sheet for these applications attached) . The Secretary added that the City Attorney has had some discussions with Mr. Cy Sheehy, the owner of the other 20 units in the Earle Brown Farm Townhouses and a proportionate share of the common area, regarding acquisition of land for right-of-way. The Secretary explained that the maximum number of units allowable on the site would be 26 additional units plus the 8 existing units if a full density credit were granted. He explained that the maximum allowable without a density credit was 21 units. He went on to explain the density credits have been granted in cases of small parcels to allow the rounding off of the number of units to an even or realistic number. He pointed out also that credits are a vehicle within the Zoning Ordinance for the Planning Commission and the .City Council to use to 4-28-83 -5- accomplish certain site plan objectives. Chairman Lucht then called on the applicant to speak. Mr. Rod Bernu stated that he had made changes in the roof line and the site layout since the last meeting at which the plans were considered in order to satisfy some of the concerns of the Planning Commission and the neighborhood. He explained that the greater density helps make the development feasible because he is spending more on land and build- ings and the design phase. Commissioner Simmons noted- that the units are the same size as before. She asked whether they would cost more. Mr. Bernu stated that there was more wall area created by splitting the eight unit building and that this additional outside wall area would cost more. Commissioner Simmons recalled that one of the complaints voiced by the residents in the Townhouse Association was the location of the long eight unit building and the large blacktop area between one of the quad homes and that building. She noted that the large blacktop area hasn't changed. Mr. Bernu stated that the City Engineer recommended using the blacktop that is already there. He stated that the eight units would require at least that much blacktop in another configuration. Commissioner Sandstrom arrived at 9:48 p.m. Commissioner Simmons concluded that Mr. Bernu wanted more units to be approved in order to make more money. Mr. Bernu stated that he could also add more amenities to the site if there is more revenue from more units. Commissioner Simmons stated that she did not agree with that explanation. Commissioner Manson asked whether any rooms would be added to the high attic area in the townhouses. Mr. Bernu responded in the negative, stating that the area would have more insulation but no additional rooms. Commissioner Simmons inter- preted the change in the roof line to be decorative. Mr. Bernu stated that he had changed the plan since the last time they were reviewed by the Planning Com- mission to try to address some of the concerns expressed at that meeting. Commis- sioner Simmons stated that she still considered the plans boring. Commissioner Sandstrom asked whether there had been a change in the number of units. "`Chairman Lucht stated that the number of units had been reduced to 24 from 26. Commissioner Simmons reminded Commissioner Sandstrom that three Commis- sioners had wanted 21 units and the other three had accepted 24. She noted that Mr. Bernu had elected to propose 24 units. PUBLIC HEARING (Application No. 83017) Chairman Lucht then opened a public hearing on the preliminary plat application and asked whether anyone present wished to speak. Mr. Larry Ellis of 6831 York Place stated that he did not want to be entirely negative in that he thought Mr. Bernu had made some compromises. He recommended changing the alignment of units in Lots 1 through 4 and 17 through 20 to put in more green area. He also stated that he felt the density was still rather tight. He asked what would happen to the cost of the units. Mr. Bernu stated that with more exterior wall area the price of the units would tend to go up. Mr. Ellis stated that he recom- mended smaller driveways to accommodate more green area. Mrs. Barbara Dilley of 6845 York Place noted that the applicant was asking for 24 units. She stated that only 20 units would have been built on more land area if the original project had been completed. Commissioner Simmons asked how the original 28 units had been approved. The Secretary stated that the original plan was actually for 36 units, but that the site was eventually platted for only 28. He pointed out that developers do not have to build the maximum number of units allowed under the Zoning Ordinance. He noted that most other projects in the City are not built. to the max.imum. Mrs. Dilley went on to point out that people 4-28-83 - purchase their townhouse with certain assumptions. She argued that the builder has a moral obligation to complete the project along the lines of its original proposal , which is in line with the assumptions people had when they purchased their units. Commissioner Simmons stated that it struck her as a "bait and switch strategy. The Secretary pointed out that it had been ten years since the original 8 units had been built and that one could argue that not building any units at all was as -cruel a strategy as changing the design. Commissioner Simmons acknowledged this, but stated that the complex would look very different with different units in the remaining part of the complex. Mrs. Marion Sanderson of 6833 York Place stated that Mrs. Anderson of 6827 York Place had asked her to argue against the "sea of blacktop" between the existing southerly four-plex and the proposed 8 units to the south. She stated that the people in the development wished to protect their investment. She stated that Mrs. Anderson had recently bought a unit for $81,000.00 and felt that she would lose a great deal of her investment if many smaller units were built in the project. Mrs. Sanderson showed a picture of a different townhouse design and asked for a better, more expensive, unit to be built. Chairman Lucht pointed out that a majority of the blacktop already exists right now and that the ex- pression "sea of blacktop" seemed to be something of an exaggeration. Mr. Sven Schold of 6843 York Place stated that when he bought his unit, he ex- pected to see the other units in the project built. He stated that he felt he was damaged by the proposed roadway and asked that the units be built as they had been planned. Mrs. Irene Meier of 6839 York Place stated that she wanted to see her investment maintained. She pointed out that she had received an offer from a couple of friends for $85,000.00 for her townhouse. She stated that when she told these friends of the roadway realignment and the new development plans for the project, the offer dropped to less than $60,000.00. Mr. Al Seran, the attorney for the eight owners in the development, stated that the biggest complaint the owners have is that Mr. Sheehy never finished the project. He showed the Planning Commission a layout prepared by Sheehy showing the loss of two of the five remaining quad homes as a result of the roadway re- alignment. Regarding the outlot for future right-of-way, Mr. Seran stated that the Homeowners Association documents require that 3/4 of the owners vote to convey land for right-of-way. He pointed out that of the 28 existing lots, Mr. Sheehy controlled 20 lots, which was one less than the three quarters needed to convey this land. Mr. Seran also pointed out that there is more of a legal problem than whether the residents accept the design of the units proposed. He pointed out that more units are proposed than were originally platted, that these are row houses rather than quads, and are cheaper and smaller units. He stated that such a change in the original plat would require a decision by the District Court and that the local platting authority does not have the authority to approve a replat of the property without such a decision. Mr. Tom Nipper, the architect for the project, stated that the site plan had been developed with three elements in mind: design quality, site amenities, and economics. He stated that the design could be revised to meet anyone's particular tastes, but that these three elements have to be met, including economics. He stated that the existing design does combine these three elements as best as possible. 4-28-83 -7 Mrs. Sanderson stated that all of the townhouses in the project had been re- assessed and that they were paying $_300 more per unit in property taxes. She asked whether these new units would pay the same amount of property taxes. She reiterated that the people in the project wish to save their investment. Chairman Lucht stated that the Planning Commission is not qualified or in a positi.on to judge what the market for the townhouses is. He stated that if the developer feels that a particular price level offers him a better market, the Planning Commission cannot require him to build better units. Mrs. Dilley pointed out that the driveway realignment that would be caused by the realignment of 69th Avenue North would cause problems for her to turn around in her driveway.. CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING Motion by Commissioner Malecki seconded by Commissioner Sandstrom to close the public hearing. The motion passed unanimously. Commissioner Sandstrom stated that he felt the Planning Commission had heard some- thing from the owners. He stated that he knew something about the market, since he was in the real estate business. He stated that he thought a higher quality townhouse could be sold and he asked Mr. Bernu for his reaction. Mr. Bernu stated that he still had trouble getting people qualified for higher priced townhouses. He pointed out that the $60,000.00 to $80,000.00 price range is what is selling in Brooklyn Center and Brooklyn Park and added that he did not want to build something that he could not turn around and sell . Commissioner Sandstrom stated that he still felt a quality townhouse could be saleable. Mr. Bernu commented that he had°lost$18,000.00 building a house because no one could qualify for it at the price it had cost him to build it. He stated that his strategy was to build more units and sell to more buyers and that this would allow him to build in more amenities to the site. Commissioner Simmons stated that many of the people who buy into townhouses are people with existing homes who have plenty of equity to put into a new, more expensive, townhouse. Mr. Bernu countered that the land has been sitting for 8 years and the existing units cannot be built and sold profitably, or Mr. Sheehy would have done it long ago. In answer to a question from Chairman Lucht regarding the legality of the plat, the Secretary stated that the staff recommended that the plat be finaled and filed before building permits would be issued. He pointed out that the platting of the outlot does 'not constitute conveyance and would not require the vote of the Association. He pointed out that the outlot would belong to the Association until acquired for right-of-way by the City. He again noted that the City Council has authorized the City Attorney to enter into negotiations for this property with Mr. Sheehy. Mr. Al Seran, the lawyer for the 8 existing townhouse owners, stated that he believed the State Law does not allow the City to approve a replat, but that the District Court would have to approve changes in a dedicated plat. Chairman Lucht stated that the Planning Commission could deny, approve or table the application. Commissioner Maiecki asked why they should table the application. The Secretary stated that the Commission could ask the City Attorney for legal advice on whether to act on the plat at all . He stated that he did not agree that the plat could never be changed, although he acknowledged that it could require an action by the District Court. Mr. Al Seran stated that Section 505.4 of the State. Statutes is clear on the procedure of changing a dedicated plat. The Secretary recommended to the Commission that it table the application and refer it to the City Attorney for advice. He stated that he could not give that legal advice to the Commission. In answer to a question from Commissioner Simmons regarding denying the application, the Secretary stated that it would be well to document the reasons for such a denial . 4-28-83 -8- Mr. Bernu then briefly addressed the Commission and stated that, after consulting with his architect, he had decided that it would be possible to reduce the number of units to 21 . There followed a discussion amongst the .Planning Commission as to what action to take at this point. It was decided that the best action would be to table the application and ask for legal advice while, at the same time, directing the applicant to prepare a plan with no more than 21 units. ACTION TABLING APPLICATION NOS. 83010 and 83017 (Rod Bernu) Motion by Commissioner Simmons seconded by Commissioner Sandstrom to table Application Nos. 83010 and 83017 and directing the developer to prepare a plan with no more than 21 townhouse units. While the motion was on the floor, Commissioner Manson stated that although she had voted to accept 24 units at the previous meeting, and while the plan had been changed for the better, she had changed her mind and would also vote for limiting the new project to 21 units. Voting in favor to table Application Nos. 83010 and 83017: Chairman Lucht, Commis- sions, Malecki , Simmons, Manson, Sandstrom and Versteeg. Voting against: none. Not voting: Commissioner Ainas. The motion passed. The Secretary left at 11 :04 p.m. and returned at 11 :07 p.m. APPLICATION NO. 83018 (Howe, Inc.) The Secretary then introduced the next item of business, a request for a variance from Section 35-700 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow a 5' wide greenstrip adjacent to Brooklyn Boulevard, south of 49th Avenue North. The Secretary reviewed the contents of the staff report (See Planning Commission Information Sheet for Appli- cation No. 83018 attached) . The Secretary reviewed with the Planning Commission a survey of the proposed right-of-way lines at the intersection of 49th Avenue North and Brooklyn Boulevard. He explained that the right-of-way line for 49th would be a continuation of the right-of-way line on the east side of Brooklyn Boulevard, and that the right-of-way line for Brooklyn Boulevard would lie roughly at the bottom of the slope where the street began its ascent over the Soo Line Railroad tracks. He explained that Howe, Inc. does not wish to buy the land in question without a variance being granted. He suggested that the Planning Commission could table the application with an indication to the applicant as to how it would vote on the variance and wait for a site plan and preliminary plat to catch up with the variance. Chairman Lucht then called on the applicant to speak. Mr. Tom Howe explained that the variance was needed to provide parking and a turning lane to the scale behind the office building. He stated that he would like the Planning Commission to act on the variance tonight, but that the application would not have to go to the City Council until a preliminary plat and site plan had been acted on. There followed a discussion as to how to act on the variance application. PUBLIC HEARING Chairman Lucht then opened the meeting for a public hearing. Mr. Tom Howe noted that Mr. Leo Hanson and Mr. Larry Butler had previously been at the meeting to express some concern about the variance since they thought it was. from the buffer .strip adjacent to 49th Avenue North. He stated that he showed the plan to Mr. Hanson and Mr. Butler and explained that the variance was from the greenstrip adjacent to Brooklyn Bouevard rather than 49th Avenue North. He stated that, when the two had seen what the variance was about, they were content and left the meeting. CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING Motion by Commissioner Malecki seconded by Commissioner Versteeg to close the public hearing. The motion passed unanimously. 4-28-83 -9- ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 83018 (Howe, Inc. ) Motion by Commissioner Malecki seconded by Commissioner Manson to ,recommend approval of Application No. 83018 on the grounds that the Standards for a Variance are met, and subject to the submittal of a preliminary plat and site plan agreeing with the proposed variance. Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Malecki , Simmons, Manson, Ainas, Sandstrom and Versteeg. Voting against: none. The motion passed. OTHER BUSINESS (Withdrawal of Application No. 82042, Universal Sign Company) The Secretary then explained that he had received a letter from Universal Sign Company requesting the withdrawal of Application No. 82042, a variance from the Sign Ordinance to allow a 50' high freestanding sign at the Budgetel Motel at 6415 James Circle North. He suggested that the Planning Commission acknowledge the withdrawal of the application through a formal motion. ACTION ACKNOWLEDGING WITHDRAWAL OF APPLICATION NO. 82042 (Universal Sign Company) Motion by Commissioner Malecki seconded by Commissioner Versteeg to acknowledge the withdrawal of Application No. 82042 on the basis of the letter from the appli- cant to the Planning Director dated April 15, 1983. Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Malecki , Simmons, Manson, Ainas, Sandstrom and Versteeg. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. DISCUSSION ITEMS The Secretary noted that the agenda had called for discussion of the Madsen Floral - property and the townhouses that were proposed as a result of the rezoning of the property about four years ago. He stated that Mr. Kvamme had wanted to discuss the question of density. He explained that he had wished to seek a density credit to allow up to 32 townhouse units rather than the 28 that were originally proposed. He stated that Mr. Kvamme had asked to discuss this in two weeks rather than at this current meeting because the purchase agreements were not all in order and because he had not yet met with the Bellevue Neighborhood Association. Commissioner Simmons stated that she had talked with Mr. Kvamme about setting up such a meeting with the Neighborhood Association. MANUFACTURED HOUSING The Secretary then reviewed briefly the proposed language for regulating manufactured housing along with all other one and two family housing in the City. He noted that, based on a survey of residences less than 650 sq. ft. in area, there were about six houses in the City that were less- than 18' wide or 18' deep. He suggested that the language of the ordinance stipulate that the 18' minimum width and depth apply to one and two family dwellings built after the adoption of the ordinance rather than making existing one and two family dwellings less than 18' nonconforming ,and, therefore, unable to expand. Commissioner Sandstrom stated that he thought 18' was too small a dimension and suggested that the ordinance require at least 20' . Chairman Lucht stated that this might invite more nonconformities. The Planning Assistant stated that, among those houses less than 650 sq. ft. , there were only five more houses that were 18' or 19' wide. He stated that the Planning Commission should not require more than 20' wide on a one or two family residence since there are a number of 40' wide lots in the City which require the house to be no more than 20' wide if 10' sideyard setbacks are to be met. There followed further discussion of the 18' wide requirement. Commissioner Sandstrom expressed concern about the 18' wide requirement being inadequate. The Secretary stated that the 18' wide standard would still require that manufactured homes be double wide since there are as yet no manufactured homes more than 16' wide. 4-28-83 -10= ADJOURNMENT Motion by Commissioner Manson seconded by Commissioner Sandstrom to adjourn the meeting of the Planning Commission. The motion passed unanimously. The Planning Commission adjourned at 11:45 p.m. C airman 4-28-83 -11- 1 1