Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1985 03-14 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 MARCH 14, 1985 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Planning Commission met in regular session and was called to order by Chairman Pro tem Nancy Manson at 7:33 p.m. ROLL CALL Chairman Pro tem Nancy Manson, Commissioners Lowell Ainas, Carl Sandstrom, Mike Nelson and Wallace Bernards. Also present were Director of Planning and Inspection Ronald Warren and Planner Gary Shallcross. Chairman Pro tem Manson noted Chairman Lucht and Commissioner Malecki had called to say they would be unable to attend and were excused. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - February 28, 1985 Motion by Commissioner Sandstrom seconded by Commissioner Bernards to approve the minutes of the February 28, 1985 meeting as submitted. Voting in favor: Chairman Pro tem Manson, Commissioners Ainas, Sandstrom, Nelson and Bernards. Voting against: none. The motion passed. APPLICATION NO. 85005 (Brookdale Christian Center) Following the Chairman's explanation, the Secretary introduced the first item of business, a request for site and building plan and special use permit approval to construct a family life center addition to the church at 6030 Xerxes Avenue North. The Secretary reviewed the contents of the staff report (see Planning Commission Information Sheet for Application No. 85005, attached) . He explained that no additional parking would be installed at this time because of the existing parking available on the church property and on the school property to the north. He also explained that the family life center generally would not be used at times when the church sanctuary was occupied. He briefly reviewed the proof-of-parking plan which provides for a potential 58 additional stalls. He also pointed out the handicapped access to the main building under a proposed canopy and the handicapped access to the family life center along the south side of the building. Chairman Pro tem Manson asked the applicant whether he had anything to add. Mr. Dennis Batty, the architect for the project, stated that he would answer any questions the Commission had. There being no questions, Chairman Pro tem Manson proceeded with the public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING (Application No. 85005) Chairman Pro tem Manson then opened the meeting for a public hearing and asked whether anyone present wished to comment on the application. Mr. Jim Swenson of 6000 Washburn Avenue North asked what the effect of the addition would be on the school traffic and enrollment at the school. Mr. Batty stated that the addition would not necessarily add enrollment, but would complete the facility. He stated that the addition could increase the enrollment from the present 90 to 95 students up to 150. He also explained that part of the addition would be for a new lobby. He stated that there is no parking problem at this time, that the church presently has one parking space for every two seats and that this would be increased to one stall for every three seats as a result of the addition. He noted that this will meet the City's ordinance requirements. 3-14-85 -1- Mr. Clarence Renstrom of 6007 Washburn Avenue North pointed out that the church causes parking on both sides of Washburn Avenue North. He complained regarding vandalism to property in the area and a lack of supervision of the school and day care center. He also complained about the two busses and a camper that are kept in the church parking lot. He stated that there would be problems with 50 additional kids and that the value of property in the neighborhood would go down. Mr. Donald Scanlon of 6006 Xerxes Avenue North asked whether there was anything the neighborhood could do to stop the church addition. He complained that a bigger church would devalue the property. He stated that he had moved to the suburbs to get away from the problems of traffic congestion in the City. Mr. Batty stated that the church has tried to make the addition so that it will have a minimal impact on the surrounding neighborhood. He pointed out the fact that the proposed gymnasium would be submerged somewhat below ground level so that its height would not be more than 18 feet above ground level. Mr. Scanlon asked how much land belonged to the church. Mr. Batty answered that there was a total of 8.5 acres on the church site. Mr. Scanlon asked whether the gymnasium could not be put on the north side of the church. Mr. Batty pointed out that this was the location of the church parking lot and that it would be unrealistic to detach the facility entirely from the church. He stated that most such facilities are attached and that this is a clear advantage over a detached gymnasium facility, both to the church and to the neighborhood. Mr. Swenson stated that he had not opposed the church originally, but that he had not bargained for a school to be part of the complex. Mr. Renstrom complained again regarding the kids from the school and the day care center who wander into his yard and blamed a lack of supervision for these problems. Mr. Kenneth Wong of 6006 Washburn Avenue North asked what the effect would be on Washburn Avenue. He asked whether there would be any screening of the facility and whether a buffer would be provided between the gymnasium and the residences to the south. He also asked whether Washburn would be closed off or whether it would still be used for an access to the church. Mr. Batty answered that he was not aware that there was a problem with traffic on Washburn. He also noted the distance from the gymnasium to the adjacent properties would be over 50 feet. There followed a discussion of the use of Washburn for access to the church. Mr. Wong asked whether there were plans to stop traffic from using Washburn to get to the church. The Secretary stated that such a closing off of Washburn was not comprehended in the proposed plan. He also explained that there is an extension of Washburn Avenue which is actually on the church property. The Secretary explained also that he had assumed the gymnasium addition was for the church and not for the school. Mr. Scanlon asked whether there would be an increase in parking demand, citing the traffic while the school is on and the church is functioning, etc. Mr. Batty pointed out that the church would be building a gymnasium whether the school was in operation or not. Mr. Renstrom then discussed some of the annoyances that come from the church. Chairman Pro tem Manson asked whether the City could regulate the operation so that these concerns would be answered. The Secretary stated that conditions could be attached to the approval of the application. He discussed the problems with parking and pointed out that a barrier could be erected at the end of Washburn Avenue to prevent through traffic. Reverend Cilke of Brookdale Christian Center then spoke to those present. He took note of the problems that had been cited regarding the church. He stated that he 3-14-85 -2- would like to work on these problems and asked for further input from the neighbors. He stressed that the church wanted to be a good neighbor to those in the neighborhood. Mr. Swenson asked whether the gym would be open during the day and the evening. Reverend Cilke responded in the affirmative. Mr. Swenson asked whether the addition was to accommodate further growth in the church and the school. Reverend Cilke explained that the church is presently busing children to other facilities to meet recreational needs. Chairman Pro tern Manson pointed out that church gymnasiums are not unusual and that others have been approved in Brooklyn Center in the past. Commissioner Sandstrom stated that there seemed to be a lack of communication. He pointed out that the church wanted to solve the problems, but that these problems have to be brought to their attention in order to be resolved. Mrs. Renstrom of 6007 Washburn Avenue North pointed out that they would be living right next to the gymnasium. She stated that she did not like this prospect. She expressed concern that their property value would go down as a result of the gymnasium. Chairman Pro tem Manson and Commissioner Sandstrom stated that they did not feel that property value would be adversely affected to any noticeable degree. The Secretary added that he did not think that the City Assessor would lower the value of the property because of the presence of the gymnasium. Mr. Renstrom again complained about the difficulties with kids from the school and the day care center. Chairman Pro tem Manson then related her experience of living next to an elementary school and that she did not mind it particularly. Mr. Wong suggested that screening of the gym be provided and that a barrier be put in place if traffic is a problem. Mr. Renstrom asked what the material of the gymnasium would be. The Secretary answered that the exterior treatment would be a decorative concrete block. Mr. Swenson asked how high it would be. Mr.Batty answered that it would 18' to lg' and noted that the school is presently 241 high. Mr. Swenson asked how far the gymnasium would be from the south property line of the church property. Commissioner Manson noted that it was 81' away. The Secretary added that the minimum setback is only 101 . Mr. Wong asked how far the gym would be from Washburn. Mr. Batty scaled the distance at roughly 401 . There followed a discussion between the Commission and the people present as to how to deal with the application. A gentleman from Brooklyn Drive pointed out that young people in cars use the church parking lot to race around. The Secretary stated that this was, to some extent, unavoidable. The Secretary explained that the special use permit process is intended to curtail some of the things that are a nuisance with new construction while allowing development to go forward. Reverend Cilke again stated that he wanted to be a good neighbor to the people in the neighborhood and also to people who want to use the parking lot for the school and the day care center. He asked those present whether they would be able to meet at the church on Monday, March 18, at 7:00 P.M. to discuss these problems. Chairman Pro tem Manson asked the Secretary whether a tabling of the application might be useful. The Secretary responded in the affirmative and noted that such a tabling is allowed under the ordinance. Mr. Batty stated that he did not want the family life center to be delayed because of concerns that were not related to the building. Commissioner Bernards stated that he felt the concerns can be resolved and that the proposed addition was not the subject of those concerns. He noted that the proposal is a permitted use in the district. The Secretary explained that any addition to the church is also a special use in the R1 zoning district. As a special 3-14-85 -3- use, he explained, it is subject to certain conditions and restrictions which are intended to protect property values of neighboring property and minimize the effects of traffic. Commissioner Sandstrom stated that he did not feel the concerns really related to the building addition. Commissioner Bernards stated that a meeting between the church and the neighborhood might add to the list of conditions which would be useful in any action recommending approval. Mr. Vern Bieraugel of 6215 Brooklyn Drive pointed out that one of the concerns regarding the site is traffic and asked what could be done on Washburn Avenue North. Mrs. Wong also expressed some concerns regarding maintenance of the old parsonage at the end of Washburn Avenue North. Reverend Cilke discussed some recent improvements made to the parsonage and stated that a youth pastor would soon be occupying the parsonage. He also added that the buses would be sold soon since there would no longer be a need to bus children to other facilities. Commissioner Ainas stated that he did not feel the Commission had a real legal reason to deny or table the application. Mr. Wong expressed a concern regarding the possibility of construction traffic going down Washburn Avenue North. Mr. Batty stated that it could be a condition of approval that such traffic not be allowed. He also noted the existence of a fence to the south of the church and stated that the church could put in more fencing or shrubs as a condition of approval. He again pointed out that the floor level would be below grade and that this would reduce the height impact of the proposed gymnasium. CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING Chairman Pro tem Manson asked whether anyone present had additional comments that had not already been made. Hearing rione, she called for a motion to close the public hearing. Motion by Commissioner Bernards seconded by Commissioner Ainas to close the public hearing. The motion passed unanimously. The Planning Commission then discussed the issues surrounding the application and whether to table the application or not. Chairman Pro tem Manson stated that she felt that leaving the issues unresolved for staff to decide on would be a lack of direction to the City Council. Commissioner Sandstrom stated that he could see no reason for holding up the application. The Secretary pointed out that a recommendation to the City Council by the Planning Commission must be based on the Standards for a Special Use Permit. He reviewed these standards from the City ordinances and pointed out that impact on property values and traffic are two key concerns of these standards. Commissioner Manson stated that she did not feel the Commission would be fulfilling its duties regarding the special use permit application if it did not address further the concerns regarding standards b and d of the Standards for Special Use Permits. Commissioner Ainas stated that the remaining concerns could be left up to the staff and the City Council to resolve. MOTION TO APPROVE APPLICATION NO. 85005 (Brookdale Christian Center) Motion by Commissioner Sandstrom seconded by Commissioner Ainas to recommend approval of Application No. 85005 subject to the conditions in the staff report. Voting in favor: Commissioners Ainas and Sandstrom. Voting against: Chairman Pro tem Manson, and Commissioners Nelson and Bernards. The motion failed. ACTION TABLING APPLICATION NO. 85005 WITH DIRECTION TO STAFF TO MEET WITH THE APPLICANT AFTER A MEETING WITH THE NEIGHBORS. Motion by Commissioner Ne-1so6--seconded by Commissioner Bernards to table Application No. 85005 with direction to staff to meet with the applicant after the meeting with the neighbors. Voting in favor: Chairman Pro tem Manson, Commissioners Nelson and Bernards. Voting against: Commissioners Sandstrom and Ainas. The motion passed. 3-14-85 -4- There followed a discussion with Mr. Batty regarding the action of the Planning Commission. Mr. Batty complained that the tabling was unnecessary and that the church could have brought out many people who would have been in favor of the project. The Secretary reminded the Commission of the case involving a group residential facility and the supposed need for hasty action at that time and the resulting problems. He told Mr. Batty that sometimes taking a slower approach at the beginning would smooth out problems rather than result in much longer delays later on. Mr. Batty stated that the neighbors probably wanted to close off Washburn Avenue North. The Secretary stated that he did not think this would be a great hardship for the church since it still had more than adequate access off Xerxes Avenue North. Reverend Cilke invited the staff to attend the meeting with the neighbors on Monday, March 18. He stated that he felt the church was being conciliatory toward the neighbors and was not insensitive to their feelings. Chairman Pro tem Manson added that public relations were also a function of the Planning Commission in holding public hearings and attaching conditions to approval. DISCUSSION ITEMS The Secretary briefly informed the Planning Commission that he had no material to offer them regarding the Tax Increment Plan that had been briefly discussed at the February 28 meeting. The Secretary then reviewed with the Commission a letter from Jim Thomson with the City Attorney's office regarding an ordinance to regulate residential facilities. He explained that the suggested ordinance revisions would meet the minimum requirements of the State law. He explained that up to six clients would be permitted in a facility in the R1 zoning district and that in multiple zones up to 16 would be permitted by a special use permit. He stated that his own recommendation would be that facilities in the multiple family zone with 7 to 16 clients be a permitted use rather than a special use. The Secretary added that the ordinances suggested by Mr. Thomson would not resolve the request of the Outreach Group Home in a positive way for them. (Outreach Group Homes seeks up to 8 residents in a facility in the R1 zone) . The Secretary concluded by saying that the letter and draft ordinances from the City Attorney are only an introduction to the discussion and asked the Commission how they would like to deal with the possibility of allowing more than six clients in the Rl zone by a special use permit. He also noted that more than 16 could be allowed in the multiple family zone by a special use permit. Commissioner Sandstrom stated that he would like to accommodate facilities with over 6 clients in the Rl zone. The Secretary pointed out that allowing over 6 by a special use permit would always invite resistance by neighbors. He endorsed most of the ordinance changes recommended by Jim Thomson. He explained that the Standards for Special Use Permits cannot be more restrictive in relation to Group Care facilities than to other uses in the same zoning district. Commissioner Sandstrom stated that he felt the City should accommodate more than 6 clients in the R1 zone by a special use permit. He stated that this would be better than telling people to complain to the State to have the statutory maximums increased. Commissioner Bernards asked for further review by the staff. Commissioner Nelson asked what other issues need to be looked into. The Secretary noted that one issue would be the possibility that some existing facilities which were approved for more residents than the proposal would allow might possibly become a nonconforming use. ADJOURNMENT Following further brief discussion of upcoming business, there was a motion by 3-14-85 -5- Commissioner Nelson seconded by Commissioner Sandstrom to adjourn the meeting of the Planning Commission. The motion passed unanimously. The Planning Commission adjourned at 10:07 p.m. Chairman 3-14-85 -6-