Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1985 05-23 PCM MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BROOKYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA STUDY SESSION MAY 23, A 985 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Planning Commission met in study session and was called to order by Chairman Pro tern Nancy Manson at 7:32 p.m. ROLL CALL Chairman Pro tem Nancy Manson, Commissioners Lowell Ainas, Carl Sandstrom, and Mike Nelson. Also present were Director of Planning and Inspection Ronald Warren and Planner Gary Shallcross. Chairman Pro tem Manson stated that Chairman Lucht and Commissioner Bernards had called to say they would be unable to attend and were excused. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - May 9, 1985 Motion by Commissioner Sandstrom seconded by Commissioner Nelson to approve the minutes of the May 1985 Planning Commission meeting as submitted. Voting in favor: Chairman Pro tem Manson, Commissioners Ainas, Sandstrom and Nelson. Voting 1 against: none. The motion passed. i I APPLICATION NO. 85014 (Silver Lake Leasing) o lowing heCha rmian Pro tem's explana on, the Secretary introduced the first item of business, a request for special use permit approval to operate a car leasing office in the commercial building at 4315 70th Avenue North. The Secretary reviewed the contents of the staff report (see Planning Commission Information Sheet for Application No. 85014 attached). Commmissioner Malecki arrives at 7:34 p.m. Chairman Pro tem Manson asked the applicant whether he had anything to add. Mr. Gaetke with Silver Lake Leasing stated that he had nothing to add, but would answer questions. Commissioner Sandstrom asked whether his company leased cars without the customer seeing them first. Mr. Gaetke explained that leasing was really an alternate method of financing the use of an automobile. He stated that he had hopes that his business would be quite successful and that he would soon outgrow the office space he was seeking to rent. He stated that there would be no parking of vehicles on the lot and that transfer of vehicles would take place at car dealerships where the vehicles would originate. Chairman Pro tem Manson asked whether cars would be dropped off at the leasing office after a customer was through with it. Mr. Gaetke responded that that could happen. He stated that he would certainly not store cars on the property overnight. He explained that it was a small office space that he was renting and that the landlord would not accept any leased cars on the property. PUBLIC HEARING (Application No. 85014) Chairman Pro tem Manson then opened the meeting for a public hearing and asked whether anyone present wished to speak regarding the application. Mr. Gaetke further explained that used cars would be returned to a lot in Circle Pines which his company owns for sale of used cars. Hearing no other comments, Chairman Pro tern Manson called for a motion to close the public hearing. 5-23-85 -1- CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING oI tion by Commissioner Nelson seconded by Commissioner Ainas to close the public hearing. The motion passed unanimously. ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 85014 (Silver Lake Leasing) Motion by Commissioner Sandstrom seconded by Commissioner Ainas to recommend approval of Application No. 85014, subject to the following conditions: 1. There shall be no storage or transfer of vehicles at the site or on the neighboring Legion Club property. Office use only is permitted at 4315 70th Avenue North. 2. The permit is issued to the applicant as operator of the facility and is nontransferable. 3. The permit is subject to all applicable codes, ordinances and regulations and any violation thereof shall be grounds for revocation. Voting in favor: Chairman Pro tem Manson, Commissioners Malecki, Ainas, Sandstrom and Nelson. Voting against: none. The motion passed. DISCUSSION ITEMS a. Short-Elliott-Hendrickson Study The Secretary then reviewed with the Planning Commission a memo from the City Manager to the City Council regarding- the moratorium on retail development and implications of the traffic study by Short-Elliott-Hendrickson for the City's development policies. The Secretary explained that the Council had accepted the recommendations in the memo in their action to allow the moratorium to lapse and approve the plans for the Target retail development. The Secretary stated that the Planning Commission was to review potential ordinance changes that would be needed to insure that proposed developments did not pose an unreasonable burden on the traffic system. The Secretary stated that the probable and maximum land use scenarios contained information that might be useful in shaping ordinance requirements related to traffic analysis. The Secretary pointed out that the study just completed showed potential problems at the intersection of County Road 10 and Shingle Creek Parkway and John Martin Drive and Shingle Creek Parkway. He stated that the problems at John Martin Drive would mostly be alleviated by the installation of a traffic signal at that intersection. He added that there was a potential for significant problems at Shingle Creek Parkway and Summit Drive and that some modifications to the intersection would be necessary to accommodate even the probable scenario. The Secretary stated that the traffic analysis shows that maximum development of the area would bring a breakdown in traffic movement in the 4:00 to 6:00 p.m. peak hour period. He reviewed the graphics and the basic format of the report and urged the Commission to become better acquainted with it. Chairman Pro tem Manson asked whether the bank in the high-rise office building at Shingle Creek Parkway and Summit Drive was looked at in developing the traffic analysis. The Secretary answered in the negative. He stated that the main traffic impact of the bank would probably be felt on the office building lot. 5-23-85 -2- There followed a brief discussion regarding the proposed Ramada Inn and the problems that had been experienced in that project getting off the ground. The Commission also discussed briefly the possible changes to the County Road 10 and Shingle Creek Parkway intersection to address the problems expected there. The Secretary stated that the left turn on County Road 10 might be lengthened and/or a double lane installed and that a possible right turn lane on southbound Shingle Creek Parkway might be installed to allow freer movement of cars turning right at that intersection. b. Community Based Residential Facilities The Secretary then introduced a discussion of community based residential facilities and how to regulate them in the Zoning Ordinance. He noted that the Commission had received two letters from Jim Thomson of the City Attorney's office, a plan for dispersal of such facilities prepared for Hennepin County, and portions of State statutes dealing with local residential facilities and their status under the Zoning Enabling Act. He stated that such facilities are moving into the suburbs because of a past overconcentration in certain areas of Minneapolis. He explained that a high concentration of such facilities would exist if more than one-half the population in a given neighborhood were residents of such a facility. The Secretary also stated that, under State law, such facilities with up to six residents must be considered a permitted use in a single family-residential district and facilities with seven to sixteen clients are allowed in multiple- family districts. The Secretary then reviewed with the Commission some of the significant changes suggested by Attorney Jim Thomson. He stated that one basic change would be to adopt the State definition of a residential facility. This would not just include mentally ill or the mentally retarded, he said, but also correctional facilities, half-way houses, etc.. He stated that residential facilities should be listed specifically as a special use if that is how they are to be treated. He was not sure whether to eliminate a category including "other commercial uses required for the public welfare in an R1 district", because of other uses that might fall into that category. The Secretary stated that the most basic policy question before the Planning Commission was whether to allow more than six clients in the R1 zone and more than sixteen in multiple-family zones. He stated, if the City allowed more than six in the Rl zone, it should probably be by a special use permit with a cap on the maximum number of clients allowed. He also pointed out, that if the City did allow more than six, it would not really be able to deny such facilities. There followed a lengthy discussion regarding whether to allow more than six in the single-family district and more than sixteen in the multiple-family districts. Commissioner Sandstrom generally argued that more clients should be'allowed if space was available under the limitations of the Housing Maintenance and Occupancy Ordinance. The Secretary reminded the Commission that, if it allowed more than six clients by a special use permit, the court decision against the City in the Diane Wright case basically foreclosed the option of denying a special use permit to such a facility. He also reminded the Commission that all types of residential facilities would have to be allowed, including half-way houses for sex offenders or other convicts. Commissioner Nelson and Commissioner Ainas cited the goal of dispersing residential facilities as "mainstreaming" those with disabilities and recommended a limit of eight in the single-family zone by special use permit. After further 5-23-85 -3- discussion as to what the Commission could and could not do in the case of a special use permit, it was agreed by all of the Commissioners present that eight clients should be allowed by a special use permit in the R1 zone. In discussing such facilities in multiple-family districts, Commissioners Ainas and Sandstrom suggested that from seven to sixteen clients be a permitted use and seventeen or eighteen be allowed by a special use permit. Chairman Pro tem Manson and Commissioners Malecki and Nelson, however, preferred to allow only up to sixteen clients as a permitted use in multiple-family districts. They recommended that no such facilities be comprehended as a special use in the multiple-family zones. c. Real Estate Signs Commissioner Sandstrom then brought up the subject of real estate signs advertising space for lease in commercial buildings. He stated that he felt the existing size limitations were too restrictive and did not allow adequate space for advertising space for lease. The Secretary reviewed the provisions of the Sign Ordinance relating to real estate signs and suggested that Commissioner Sandstrom develop a specific recommendation if he did not feel the amount of signery allowed was adequate. The Secretary added that, in his opinion, adequate signery was allowed by the ordinance. Commissioner Sandstrom stated that he felt the existing ordinance was very restrictive and that signs advertising space for lease can't be seen easily enough to do any good. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Commissioner Sandstrom seconded by Commissioner Nelson to adjourn the meeting of the Planning Commission. Voting in favor: Chairman Pro tem Manson, Commissioners Malecki, Ainas, Sandstrom and Nelson. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. The Planning Commission adjourned at 9:20 p.m. Chairman Pro tem 5-23-85 -4-