Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1985 09-26 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 SEPTEMBER 26, 1985 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Planning Commission met in study session and was called to order by Chairman Pro tem Nancy Manson at 7:34 p.m. ROLL CALL Chairman Pro tem Nancy Manson, Commissioners Malecki, Sandstrom, Nelson, and Bernards. Also present were Director of Planning and Inspection Ronald Warren, Director of Public Works Sy Knapp and Planner Gary Shallcross. Chairman Pro tem Manson stated that Commissioners George Lucht and Lowell Ainas were excused. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - September 12, 1985 Motion by Commissioner Nelson seconded by Commissioner Sandstrom to approve the minutes of the September 12, 1985 Planning Commission meeting as submitted. Voting in favor: Chairman Pro tem Manson, Commissioners Malecki, Sandstrom, Nelson and Bernards. Voting against: none. The motion passed. APPLICATION NO. 85026 (Ryan Construction Company) Following the Chairman's explanation, the Secretary introduced the first item of business, a request for preliminary plat approval to subdivide into two lots the parcel of land at the northeast corner of John Martin Drive and Shingle Creek Parkway. The Secretary reviewed the contents of the staff report (see Planning Commission Information Sheet for Application No. 85026 attached). Chairman Pro tem Manson asked the applicant whether he had anything to add. Mr. Scott Nettel l of Ryan Construction Company stated that he had nothing to add. PUBLIC HEARING (Application No. 85026) Chairman Pro tem Manson then opened the meeting for a public hearing and asked whether anyone present wished to speak regarding the application. Hearing none, she called for a motion to close the public hearing. CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING Motion by Commissioner Sandstrom seconded by Commissioner Nelson to close the public hearing. The motion passed unanimously. ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 85026 (Ryan Construction Company) Motion by Commissioner Sandstrom seconded by Commissioner Nelson to recommend approval of Application No. 85026, 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. Agreements for cross access and parking between both lots in this subdivision and the Target lot shall be filed with the plat at the County. 9-26-85 -1- Voting in favor: Chairman Pro tem Manson, Commissioners Malecki, Sandstrom, Nelson and Bernards. Voting against: none. The motion passed. APPLICATION NO. 85027 (FOUNDATION STONE MINISTRIES, INC.) The Secretary then introduced the next item of business, a request for site and building plan and special use permit approval to construct a church on the 4.5 acre parcel of land at the southwest corner of I-94 and Brooklyn Boulevard. The Secretary reviewed the contents of the staff report (see Planning Commission Information Sheet for Application No. 85027 attached). The Secretary pointed out that the long-range plan for access to the site is right-in/right-out only and that the City desires the median within Brooklyn Boulevard to be extended all the way to 65th Avenue North. Commissioner Bernards asked when the 60 day review period allowed to the Planning Commission began. The Secretary stated that it began now at this meeting. The Director of Public Works reiterated the concern for the City's long-range plan for Brooklyn Boulevard to extend the median all the way to 65th Avenue North. He stated that this improvement may not be that far in the future. The Secretary also explained that the City Council had looked at the possibilities of acquiring lots to the south of the church site. He stated that the Council had decided to pass on the option of acquiring any land because of the cost and the legal difficulty of defining a public purpose for such acquisition. The City Engineer also pointed out that staff are concerned regarding the storm drainage of the church site. He stated that there is a concern whether the existing storm sewer facilities built for the site are adequate for the proper drainage of the site. Chairman Pro tem Manson then asked the applicant whether he had anything to add. Mr. Mark Anderson of Foundation Stone Ministries, Inc. stated that the church had planned on building this fall and that it cannot now because of the delays in receiving zoning approval. He stated that delays are expensive and asked the Planning Commission not to table the site and building plan and special use permit application because it would cost more money every day that construction was delayed. Chairman Pro tem Manson responded that delays of major construction projects are not unusual. She assured the applicant that the Commission was not trying to single out the church for any harsh treatment, but that the Commission does want to have a thorough analysis completed before recommending approval to the City Council. - Mr. Anderson responded that most of the concerns raised by the staff in a meeting with the architect have been met with the new site and building plan. Commissioner Sandstrom asked Mr. Anderson whether the church could live with the requirement for the extension of the median in Brooklyn Boulevard. Mr. Anderson responded in the affirmative. He stated that the church is willing to live with a single access off Brooklyn Boulevard that is right-in/right-out only. Mr. Dennis Batty, the project architect, stated that the church was not trying to slide anything through the Planning Commission and City Council without proper review. He stated that he had met with the staff the previous week and that most all of the concerns expressed at that time have been met with the new plan. Regarding site drainage, Mr. Batty pointed out that the drainage plan does call for a single catch basin on the site and that, in the event of a major rainfall, the runoff would be contained on the site for some time since the storm sewer line can only handle so much water during a given period. Mr. Batty also pointed out that a 6' high wood fence has been added along all sides of the property adjacent to single family for 9-26-85 -2- screening and to make the site secure. He added that berming has been provided on the west and south sides of the development so that screening should be quite effective. Chairman Pro tern Manson stated that she wanted to give staff adequate time to analyze the plans and to recommend appropriate conditions of approval. Commissioner Sandstrom suggested moving along the application subject to certain conditions. He stated that the Commission has consistently stated that they favor a church use on the site. Chairman Pro tem Manson asked the Secretary what he would suggest. The Secretary responded that the staff could recommend conditions if the Planning Commission does want to move the application along. Regarding the length of the process that the church had gone through, the Secretary stated that the time spent prior to the present application was on a land use question. He pointed out that the present application is a special use permit application and that it is a separate question from the zoning request reviewed during the summer. Commissioner Sandstrom stated that he would like to move the application along if possible. Commissioner Bernards stated that he did not want to put staff on the spot to respond hastily. He stated that he wanted a careful review of the proposal. Commissioner Malecki agreed. She pointed out that the Planning Commission could probably act on the application in two weeks, rather than take the full 60 days allowed under the ordinance. PUBLIC HEARING (Application No. 85027) Chairman Pro tem Manson then opened the meeting for a public hearing and asked whether anyone present wished to speak regarding the application. Mr. Peter Stalland, an attorney for the present owners of the site, stated that his clients wish to see the application moved along. Mrs. Pat Johnson of 4207 66th Avenue North asked whether a study had been done of the level of traffic on Brooklyn Boulevard between 9:00 a.m. and 1:00 p.m. on Sundays. She stated that there was an existing traffic problem on Brooklyn Boulevard during those hours from other churches. The Director of Public Works stated that he was not aware of any study of traffic on Brooklyn Boulevard at that time. He stated, however, that the capacity of Brooklyn Boulevard is approximately 750 cars per lane per hour, or 1500 cars in each direction. He stated that this definitely exceeds the volume of traffic that would be generated by the church. Mrs. Johnson also noted the provision of a basketball court on the site plan and wondered whether there would be a school operated on the property. Chairman Pro tem Manson responded in the negative. Mr. Dennis Batty, the architect for the project, stated that the basketball court is only for recreational use by youth groups. He stated that this would not draw a significant amount of traffic. Mrs. Johnson pointed out that the long range plan of the church is for 1500 people. She stated that this would double the traffic problems presented by the proposed plan. There followed a brief discussion of the possibility of expanding the church in the future. Chairman Pro tern Manson explained that any expansion of the church would have to come back for an amended special use permit approval in the future. The Director of Public Works also pointed out that the Engineering Department had done a review of alternate uses for the site: residential, commercial and the church. He stated that the church has by far the lowest traffic generation of the three options. 9-26-85 -3- Mrs. Esther Jensen of 4213 66th Avenue North stated that the neighborhood had waited a long time for the City to install a light at 65th Avenue North. She stated that the traffic from the church would certainly cause problems for people in the neighborhood getting on Brooklyn Boulevard. She asked whether the City would consider giving access from 66th Avenue North in the future. Chairman Pro tem Manson responded in the negative. Mrs. Jensen asked how long it would likely take to empty the church lot. The Director of Public Works estimated approximately 20 minutes. Mrs. Jensen noted that the traffic signal at 65th Avenue North is activated by traffic and asked whether this would mean that the light would not change for 20 minutes. The Director of the Public Works responded in the negative. He explained that the signal is activated by traffic, but that the maximum wait on the 65th Avenue North leg of the intersection is 4 minutes. The Secretary stated that it was impossible to rule out forever the possibility of access to the site from 66th Avenue North. He stated, however, that such a change in access would require an amendment of the special use permit and action by the City Council before such action would be taken. Mrs. Jensen went on to point out that an office development would not dump 250 cars onto Brooklyn Boulevard at one time. Chairman Pro tem Manson acknowledged this, but added that the office traffic would be concentrated at the peak hour periods for Brooklyn Boulevard. Mrs. Jensen also pointed out the fact that the church would probably have funeral services during weekday hours which might cause greater traffic problems. Commissioner Sandstrom pointed out that this can happen anywhere there is a funeral. Chairman Pro tem Manson stated that the other activities of the church such as a bible study or a funeral would not draw full attendance as would church services. Mr. Gary Zimmermann, owner of the property at 6527 Brooklyn Boulevard, stated that he did not like the idea of extending the median past the front of his property. He stated that it was difficult to get out onto Brooklyn Boulevard now and that it would be more difficult if the median were put in. Chairman Pro tem Manson responded that any development of the property at the southwest corner of Brooklyn Bouelvard and I- 94 would require an extension of the median. Mr. Zimmermann also pointed out difficulties presented by the off ramp from eastbound I-94 onto southbound Brooklyn Boulevard. Ms. Pat Kinch of 4218 66th Avenue North briefly expressed her appreciation to the Planning Commission for taking the concerns of the neighborhood into account in their deliberations. There followed a lengthy discussion amongst the Planning Commission as to the options for action at this meeting. Mr. Lenny Samuelson, part owner of the parcel in question, stated that the church has been very patient in seeking approval of their development plans from the City. He stated that if the Planning Commission chose to table the matter, it would be beneficial for the Commission to give some direction to the applicants so they would know how to proceed. Mr. Mark Anderson, pastor of the Church on the Move, stated that the church has complied with everything that has been requested by staff and the Planning Commission. He stated that the church was not trying to irritate anyone or to threaten, but that if the approval were delayed for two more months, the church would have to look for another site. Chairman Pro tem Manson explained that the Planning Commission is a voluntary organization and that it relies upon the staff to analyze development proposals in detail and to provide reports to the Planning Commission. She stated that the most recently submitted plan had not been 9-26-85 -4- thoroughly reviewed by the staff and that the Planning Commission was, therefore, hesitant to act on those plans without further staff review. Mr. Anderson asked that the Commission specify why the application is to be tabled if that is the action taken. CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING Motion by Commissioner Sandstrom seconded by Commissioner Nelson to close the public hearing. The motion passed unanimously. Commissioner Sandstrom stated that the proposed church is a good use for the site and suggested that the Planning Commission could move the application subject to certain conditions, or specify what needs to be done with a tabling action. Commissioner Nelson stated that, if the application were tabled it would be for staff review and that, therefore, the Commission may as well entrust the matter to the staff and send it onto the City Council. Commissioner Bernards stated that he did not want to abdicate the advisory responsibility of the Planning Commission which is to oversee the work and review of the staff. The Secretary then reviewed with the Planning Commission some possible conditions which could be attached with any motion recommending approval, if the Planning Commission chose to move the application along. Regarding the drainage of the site, the Director of Public Works stated that calculations regarding the drainage of the site should be submitted to the Engineering Department prior to the consideration by the City Council. He stated that, if a ponding area were required to accommodate normal drainage of the site, the plan may have to be changed significantly. The Secretary added that he felt the site could be better landscaped and recommended that additional landscaping be provided on the plan. In response to a question from Chairman Pro tem Manson regarding the deceleration lane, the Secretary stated that the design of the deceleration lane would be subject to review by the County. He stated that some comments regarding the deceleration lane were received from the Minnesota Department of Transportation two years ago when Brooklyn Boulevard was still a State Highway. There followed a discussion of timing for approval of the application and the effective date of an ordinance that would make churches a special use in the R5 zoning district. Commissioner Malecki pointed out that the Planning Commission has indicated support for the church use in the past and that, it would be unlikely, if the plans were in order, that the application would be tabled at the next Planning Commission meeting. She stated that she did not feel the Planning Commission would be doing its job if it sent the plans on without further review. There followed further discussion of the merits of tabling versus acting on the application at this time. It was pointed out that the effective date of the ordinance to allow churches by special use permit would be October 19, 1985 and that the City Council would have the application before it on October 21, 1985, assuming action by the Planning Commission at the October 10, 1985 meeting. ACTION TABLING APPLICATION NO. 85027 (FSM, Inc.) Motion by Commissioner Malecki seconded by Commissioner Bernards to table Application No. 85027 on the grounds that the recently submitted plans have not been adequately reviewed by the staff and because of questions regarding storm drainage, landscaping and traffic. Voting in favor: Chairman Pro tem Manson, Commissioners Malecki, Nelson and Bernards. Voting against: Commission Sandstrom. The motion passed. 9-26-85 -5- There followed a further brief discussion regarding when the application would be considered by the Planning Commission and the City Council. RECESS The Planning Commission recessed at 9:21 p.m. and resumed at 9:38 p.m. APPLICATION NO. 85028 (Gregory L'Allier) Following the recess, the Secretary then introduced the next item of business, a request for special use permit approval to conduct a chiropractic office home occupation in the residence at 6336 Lee Avenue North. The Secretary reviewed the contents of the staff report (see Planning Commission Information Sheet for Application No. 85028 attached). The Secretary also briefly reminded the Commission of the application of Dr. Lescault, located at approximately Brooklyn Boulevard and 62nd Avenue North. He noted that that application was similar and that a home occupation such as a doctor's office which generates considerable traffic had to be considered a special use permit under the definition in the Zoning Ordinance. Commissioner Bernards asked what was the floor area of the house. Mr. L'Allier stated that it was approximately 1,100 sq. ft. In response to another question from Commissioner Bernards regarding therapy and equipment used, Mr. L'Allier stated that the therapy would be standard chiropractic therapies and that ultra sound would be used. Commissioner Bernards asked whether TV disturbance would result from the use of the equipment. Mr. L'Allier responded in the negative. Commissioner Bernards also asked whether the business was subject to any health codes. The Secretary responded that there were no local health codes regulating the business, but that Mr. L'Allier would probably have to be licensed by the State. PUBLIC HEARING (Application No. 85028) Chairman Pro tem Manson then opened the meeting for a public hearing and asked whether anyone present wished to speak regarding the application. Mr. Corcoran of 6324 Lee Avenue North stated that the street was essentially a quiet dead end residential street and that the proposed business would generate an unacceptable amount of traffic. Chairman Pro tem Manson pointed out that there would be a condition of approval that all parking be off-street. Mr. Corcoran stated that he did not think such a condition could be enforced. Mr. Corcoran also asked whether proper bathroom facilities would be available and also expressed concern that any person related to the applicant could be an employee. Chairman Pro tem Manson explained that a relative who was a resident could work in the home occupation, but that no nonresidents would be permitted under this approval. Mr. Marlow Pederson of 6330 Lee Avenue North then approached the Commission and stated that he had lived in Brooklyn Center since 1952 and in his present house since 1957. He stated that he likes his home because of the convenience of shopping, schools and the good planning of Brooklyn Center. He stated that the only traffic on the street is local traffic and that he did not want more traffic. He then reviewed with the Commission the standards pertaining to special uses from the Zoning Ordinance. Regarding public health and comfort, he stated that the proposed home occupation caused him stress. Regarding property values, he asked how much they would have to be diminished for this standard not to be met. He stated that he felt the chiropratic business would reduce his property values. Regarding impeding normal and orderly development of the surrounding land, he stated that the business would impede such because the neighborhood is a single-family area. Regarding traffic, he stated that the business should simply locate on Brooklyn Boulevard where traffic is expected. Mr. Pederson stated that he did not think that a home occupation such as this was intended by the City forefathers. 9-26-85 -6- Mrs. Pederson of 6330 Lee Avenue North pointed out that there was no place to widen the existing driveway on the property. She stated that it is right under their window at this time. She also complained that there would be a lot more traffic as a result of the home occupation and expressed concern regarding her grandchildren that visit their home. There followed a brief discussion regarding the question of expanding the driveway. The Planner discussed the layout of the lot and noted that, if the driveway had to be expanded to the north, this would be more difficult because of a rise in the grade, a planter area and sidewalk. He stated, however, that a driveway widening was definitely needed because the existing driveway is definitely too narrow to accommodate two cars parked side-by-side. In response to a question from Chairman Pro tem Manson, Mr. L'Allier stated that he may have up to four cars in an hour. He stated that he did not expect more than two cars at a time. He stated that two cars could park side-by-side if they parked up by the garage. He also explained that his business at home would be on a limited basis. He explained that he assists at a practice in West Saint Paul, but that friends and acquaintances in Brooklyn Center do not wish to go all the way to West Saint Paul to employ his services. He stated that he would move the practice out of the home in about two years when it gets going. Chairman Pro tem Manson stated that she expected patients to park in front of the house since this would be the quickest way to get in the front door. She stated that unless the driveway is widened, cars will likely end up parking on street. She asked the applicant whether he would widen the driveway. Mr. L'Allier answered that he would have to look at the cost of widening the driveway as a condition of doing business and decide what to do. CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING (Application No. 85028) Chairman Pro tem Manson asked whether anyone present wished to add anything more regarding the application. Hearing none, she called for a motion to close the public hearing. Motion by Commissioner Sandstrom seconded by Commissioner Nelson to close the public hearing. The motion passed unanimously. Commissioner Sandstrom stated that the home occupation would not effect the value of the property, based on his experience in real estate. He pointed out that the conditions would restrict the business in such a way that it would not have an impact on the residential neighborhood. There were, at that point, unsolicited comments from the Pedersons that they had received opinions from three real estate agents that their property values would decline as a result of the business. Commissioner Malecki asked why the practice had to be located in Brooklyn Center. Mr. L'Allier answered that he knew people in Brooklyn Center who would not come all the way to West Saint Paul for treatment, but who would come to him for treatment at his home. Commissioner Ma.lecki asked how Mr. LIAllier would advertise the business and whether he would have a sign. Mr. L'Allier stated that he would not limit the business to friends and relatives, but that it would nevertheless be a limited practice. He stated that he would have a sign on the house simply to let people know that they had come to the right place, not really to draw additional business. Mr. L'Allier stated that he was willing to limit the duration of his home occupation to two years. 9-26-85 -7- Commissioner Malecki stated that parking is an issue with home occupations. She stated that Mr. L'Allier should let his patients know that no parking would be allowed on street. There followed a discussion regarding widening of the driveway. Chairman Pro tem Manson expressed concerns regarding the hours of operation and the part-time nature of the practice. Mr. L'Allier stated that he practiced in West Saint Paul on Monday, Wednesday and Friday afternoons, but that he wanted flexibility in the hours so that he could treat people in cases of emergency. Commissioner Sandstrom stated that the hours of such businesses have not been restricted much in the past. Chairman Pro tem Manson asked Mr. L'Allier how he would handle patients who were waiting for treatment if no one would be home to let the patients in. Mr. L'Allier stated that he would have a buzzer in his house to let him know when a patient is there. He stated that he could leave one patient in order to let another in and have them fill out forms. Commissioner Malecki stated that Fir. L'Allier seemed to be expanding beyond what was proposed in the letter by treating people after 5:00 p.m. There followed further discussion regarding hours. The Planner pointed out that the hours of operation are not rigidly enforced, but are an indication of whether a home occupation is incidental and secondary to the residential use of the property. He stated that no one from the City would be at the front door checking to see whether anyone who came to the house after 5:00 p.m. was a patient, but that if there was regular coming and going after 5:00 p.m. this might become grounds for revocation of the special use permit. ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 85028 (Gregory L'Allier) Motion by Commissioner Sandstrom seconded by Commissioner Nelson to recommend approval of Application No. 85028, subject to the following conditions: 1. The special use permit is issued to the applicant as operator and is nontransferable. 2. The special use 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. -5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday on an appointment only basis. 4. All parking associated with the home occupation shall be off- street on improved space provided by the applicant. 5• Special use permit approval acknowledges use of the living room and one room approximately 11' x 10' for the home occupation. No expansion to other rooms for the purpose of diagnosis or treatment is acknowledged. No nonresident employee is acknowledged by this approval. 6. The premises shall be inspected by a City Building Inspector prior to the issuance of the special use permit. Any alterations. to the home recommended by the Building Inspector shall be completed prior to issuance of the special use permit. 7. The applicant shall widen the driveway to at least 17' 4" in width toward the house prior to the issuance of the special use permit in order to accommodate at least two patient vehicles in the driveway at one time. 9-26-85 -8- 8. Permit approval is exclusive of all signery which is subject to the provisions of Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances. Voting in favor: Commissioners Ma.lecki, Sandstrom, Nelson and Bernards. Voting against: Chairman Pro tem Manson. The motion passed. APPLICATION NO. 85029 AND 85030 (Lombard Properties, Inc.) The Secretary then introduced the next item of business, a request for site and building plan and special use permit approval to construct a two phase-office development south of Freeway Boulevard and north of I-94 in the I-1 zone, east of Earle Brown Bowl. The Secretary also introduced a request for preliminary R.L.S. approval to resubdivide into five tracts the three tracts of land south of Freeway Boulevard between Earle Brown Bowl and the Holiday Inn and the vacated highway right-of-way where the old Humboldt interchange used to be. The Secretary reviewed the contents of the staff reports for these two applications (see Planning Commission Information Sheets for Application Nos. 85029 and 85030 attached). The Secretary added that the staff recommended widening the driveway leading from Freeway Boulevard to the office sites within Tract B to allow two lanes out and one lane in divided by a median. The Secretary also noted that the applicant has been asked to provide calculations on sewer flow to be generated by the office development. Regarding the impact of the office development on traffic in the Freeway Boulevard area between Shingle Creek Parkway and Humboldt Avenue North, the Secretary noted that Short-Elliott-Hendrickson had done a brief analysis of the impact of the proposed development and that the level of service at both of those two intersections would still be acceptable with the office development. In response to a question from Commissioner Malecki regarding trees on the site, the Secretary stated that the proposed landscape plan provides a single specie of trees down the entire entrance drive and that the recommendation of the staff is to vary these trees somewhat so that a die-out of one species would not leave the entire area bare. The Director of Public Works also recommended to the Planning Commission a condition that access to Tract A be eliminated to the entrance drive within Tract B of the proposed R.L.S. and not be allowed from Freeway Boulevard. He stated that any access on Freeway Boulevard would create difficulties in the area between James Avenue and the proposed entrance drive. Chairman Pro tem Manson asked the applicant whether he had anything to add. Mr. Al Beisner of Lombard Properties, Inc. asked whether the 10' setback for parking recommended for Tract A would be from the entrance drive or from the property line. The Secretary answered that it would be from the property line. There followed a lengthy discussion regarding the widening of the entrance drive to allow for two lanes of traffic outbound and the need to widen Tract B and to establish a greenstrip on Tract A adjacent to Tract B. The Planner explained the dimensions of the layout as it might exist if a driveway widening were drawn up. The Director of Public Works strongly recommended that 15' of green area total be provided on either side of the entrance drive since that would provide adequate snow storage space. PUBLIC HEARING (Application Nos. 85029 and 85030) Chairman Pro tem Manson then opened the meeting for a public hearing and asked whether anyone present wished to speak regarding either the registered land survey or the special use permit. Hearing none, she called for a motion to close the public hearing. Motion by Commissioner Nelson seconded by Commissioner Sandstrom to close the public hearing. The motion passed unanimously. 9-26-85 -9- ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 85029 (Lombard Properties, Inc.) Motion by Commissioner Sandstrom seconded by Commissioner Nelson to recommend approval of Application No. 85029, 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 landscaped areas to facilitate site maintenance. 7. Plan approval is exclusive of all signery which is subject to Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances. 8. B612 curb and gutter shall be provided around all parking and driving areas. 9. Storm sewer outlets into I-94 right-of way are subject to permit by MN/DOT prior to the issuance of building permits. 10. The new R.L.S. for the property shall receive final approval and be filed at the County prior to the issuance of building permits. 11. The special use permit is subject to all applicable codes, ordinances and regulations and any violation shall be grounds for revocation. 12. Approval acknowledges general office occupancy only. No medical or dental tenants are comprehended because of the number of parking and proof-of-parking spaces provided on the plan. 13. Sewer calculations shall be submitted to the Engineering Department prior to City Council consideration of the plans to determine that the proposed use is within existing sewer capacities. 14. The plans shall be modified prior to consideration by the City Council to provide additional space for two exit lanes in the driveway connecting Freeway Boulevard with the office site. 9-26-85 -10- Voting in favor: Chairman Pro tem Manson, Commissioners Malecki, Sandstrom, Nelson and Bernards. Voting against: none. The motion passed. ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 85030 (Lombard Properties, Inc.) Motion by Commissioner Nelson seconded by Commissioner Sandstrom to recommend approval of Application No. 85030, subject to the following conditions: 1. The final R.L.S. is subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. 2. The final R.L.S. is subject to the provisions of the Chapter 15 of the City Ordinances. 3. An easement agreement covering Tract A and stipulating a minimum 10' parking setback and 25' building setback shall be executed and filed with the R.L.S. at the County. 4. Vacation of Irving Avenue North right-of-way over Tract D, R.L.S. 12482 shall be subject to an agreement stipulating peak sewer flow and payment of utility hookup charges as drafted by the Director of Public Works. Said agreement to be executed prior to final R.L.S. approval. 5• Tract B of the proposed R.L.S. shall be widened to accommodate an entrance drive within Tract B with one entrance lane and two exit lanes as recommended by the Director of Public Works. Tract B shall also be wide enough so that a total of 15' of greenspace shall exist between the entrance drive and adjacent parking lots. 6. Access to Tract A of the proposed R.L.S. shall be limited to the entrance drive within Tract B of the proposed R.L.S. No access shall be permitted from Freeway Boulevard directly to Tract A. Voting in favor: Chairman Pro tem Manson, Commissioners Malecki, Sandstrom, Nelson and Bernards. Voting against: none. The motion passed. APPLICATION NO. 85031 (Federal Lumber) The Secretary then introduced the last item of business, an appeal from a determination by staff that an office building cannot be permitted at the Federal Lumber site at 4810 North Lilac Drive on the grounds that office uses are not permitted in the I-2 zoning district. The Secretary reviewed the contents of the staff report (see Planning Commission Information Sheet for Application No. 85031 attached). The Secretary also noted that the Soo Line tracks in the area of the Federal Lumber site lend themselves to heavy industrial uses with outside storage. Chairman Pro tem Manson asked the appellant whether he had anything to add. Mr. Bernard Herman, an architect representing Federal Lumber, then addressed the Commission. He explained the recent evolution of the use of the Federal Lumber property. He stated that there was excess space in the storage yard because the truss operation had been abandoned. He stated that a market analysis had been done that showed a demand for office space along the Highway 100 corridor. He doubted that a rezoning of the property was appropriate. He stated that the question is what is the most appropriate vehicle for allowing office uses in this area adjacent to Highway 100. He then showed the Commission a plan for an office building on the west side of the site facing Highway 100. He noted landscaped areas around the 9-26-85 -11- office portion of the site and that there would be no windows on the north or south sides of the building. He estimated the cost of the building at approximately $850,000.00. Mr. Herman went on to discuss the changing character of the area in the neighborhood of the France Avenue/Highway 100 intersection. He stated that there is little I-2 zoned land abutting Highway 100 compared with other zoning districts along this corridor. He stated that the nature of this particular neighborhood was more like an industrial park zone than a heavy industrial zoning district. Regarding the Soo Line tracks, Mr. Herman noted that they are being used less frequently as time goes on. He stated that there was a unique situation surrounding this particular property that made office use logical. Commissioner Sandstrom noted that if the property were zoned I-1, Federal Lumber would become a nonconforming use. He asked what would happen then. Mr. Herman stated that Federal Lumber did not want an I-1 zoning. That, he explained, is why an appeal was pursued rather than a rezoning. He discussed the market demand for office in the area and encouraged the Commission to allow office uses by special use in the I-2 zoning district. The Planner asked Mr. Herman what he felt the implications of an office use on the Federal Lumber property would be for the industrial area just north of the Soo Line at 50th and France Avenues North. Mr. Herman stated that he did not want to comment about that property because he was not familiar enough with it. He stated, however, that if the area is rundown, it may be an indication that the property is inappropriately zoned. Chairman Pro tem Manson briefly mentioned the possibility of allowing office uses in the I-2 zoning district as part of a planned unit development which might be allowed under a new PUD ordinance under consideration. The Secretary agreed. He stated that offices are presently allowed by special use permit in the I-1 zoning district, but not in the I-2 zoning district and that this was a major difference between these two districts. The Secretary also expressed concern regarding the Joslyn Pole Yards property and the possibilities for a large development in that area. He stated that there was a need for study of this entire area of the City which was ripe for either redevelopment or new development. Commissioner Sandstrom stated that the Federal Lumber site had benefited from the improvements to other properties in the area and that a different environment has now been created which may support office use. The Secretary asked for direction from the Planning Commission and which option it preferred. Commissioner Malecki recommended that the City consider office use as a special use in the I-2 zone and that storage be screened. Commissioner Nelson stated that he wanted to look at other I-2 areas in the City. The Secretary pointed out on an overhead transparency the entire I-2 district within the City, that it is basically along the Soo Line tracks. The Planner suggested that there were essentially two questions that the Planning Commission should answer. One was whether office use was good in this particular location and the second would be what mechanism to adopt to allow offices if they were deemed to be appropriate. MOTION DIRECTING STAFF TO PREPARE AN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT escus nFollowing�er rs ,nhere was a motion by Commissioner Bernards seconded by Commissioner Nelson to direct staff to prepare an ordinance amendment to allow office uses by special use permit in the I-2 zoning district. Voting in favor: Chairman Pro tem Manson, Commissioners Malecki, Sandstrom, Nelson and Bernards. Voting against: none. The motion passed. 9-26-85 -12- ACTION TABLING APPLICATION NO. 85031 (Federal Lumber) Motion by Commissioner Falecki seconded by Commissioner Nelson to table Application No. 85031 until staff have prepared ordinance language to allow office uses by special use permit in the I-2 zoning district. Voting in favor: Chairman Pro tern Manson, Commissioners Malecki, Sandstrom, Nelson, and Bernards. Voting against: none. The motion passed. Chairman Pro tem Manson then informed the Commission that she would be resigning after the October 10, 1985 Planning Commission meeting. She stated that the reason for her resignation was that she would be taking a class on Thursday evenings over the next two years and that this would simply not allow her to participate in the Planning Commission as a member. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Commissioner Sandstrom seconded by Commissioner Nelson to adjourn the meeting of the Planning Commission. The motion passed unanimously. The Planning Commission adjourned at 12:28 a.m. O�v airman 9-26-85 -13- 1 1