Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1986 03-13 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 13, 1986 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Planning Commission met in regular session and was called to order by Chairman Pro tem Mike Nelson at 7:32 p.m. ROLL CALL Chairman Pro tem Mike Nelson, Commissioners Molly Malecki, Carl Sandstrom, Lowell Ainas and Ann Wallerstedt. Also present were Director of Planning and Inspection Ronald Warren, City Engineer Bo Spurrier, and Planner Gary Shallcross. Chairman Pro tem Nelson stated that Chairman Lucht and Commissioner Bernards were unable to attend and were excused. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - February 27, 1986 Motion by Commissioner Sandstrom seconded by Commissioner Ainas to approve the minutes of the February 27, 1986 Planning Commission meeting as submitted. Voting in favor: Chairman Pro tem Nelson, Commissioners Malecki, Sandstrom and Ainas. Voting against: none. Not voting: Commissioner Wallerstedt. The motion passed. APPLICATION NO. 86008 (Lombard Properties, Inc.) Following the Chairman's explanation, airman Pro tem Nelson noted that the applicant for the first business item was not present and took up the next item of business. The Secretary introduced Application No. 86008, a request for site and building plan approval to construct a 70,100 sq. ft. retail shopping center at the corner of Earle Brown Drive and Summit .Drive behind Target. The Secretary reviewed the contents of the staff report (See Planning Commission Information Sheet for Application No. 86008) . The Secretary also referred to the report of the Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commission regarding this project and asked the City Engineer to explain the recommendations of the Watershed Commission. The City Engineer reviewed the conditions of the Watershed Commission's action on the development proposal. He noted that the conditions have to do with the design of the skimming device, with erosion control during construction, and providing easements for the ponding areas on the site. Commissioner Malecki expressed concern regarding a lack of trees in the parking lot area. The Secretary explained that the islands are all quite small and could not support trees. Commissioner Sandstrom asked where the snow would be stored if the islands are so small. The Secretary stated that it would mostly be stored in the perimeter green areas. APPLICATION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 86008 (Lombard Properties, Inc. tion by Commissioner Sandstrom seconded by Commissioner Ainas to recommend approval of Application No. 86008, 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. 3-13-86 -1- 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. 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. g. An as-built utility survey of the property shall be submitted to the Engineering Department prior to release of the performance guarantee. 10. The grading, drainage and utility plan and the design of the storm water skimmer shall be subject to review, approval and any conditions imposed by the Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commission prior to the issuance of permits. 11 . Fire hydrant locations shall be subject to review and approval by the Fire Marshal prior to the issuance of permits. 12. Plan approval acknowledges proof-of-parking for 85 additional parking stalls. The applicant shall acknowledge in writing that he shall install said stalls upon a determination of the need for such stalls by the City. Said acknowledgement shall be filed with the title to the property as a deed restriction. Voting in favor: Chairman Pro tem Nelson, Commissioners Malecki, Sandstrom, Ainas and Wallerstedt. Voting against: none. The motion passed. APPLICATION NO. 86012 (Ryan Construction Company) The Secretary then introduced the next item of business, a request for site and building plan and special use permit approval to construct a 111,755 sq. ft. office building at the northeast corner of Summit Drive and Earle Brown Drive (west leg) . The Secretary reviewed the contents of the staff report (see Planning Commission Information for Application No. 86012 attached) . The Secretary also mentioned the fact that the grading, drainage and utility plan for the entire area surrounding this office development had been reviewed by the Shingle Creek Watershed Management 3-13-86 -2- Commission earlier that day and was acted on. He referred the Commission's attention to the report of the Watershed Commission regarding the plan for this area. The Secretary also referred to the three dimensional models of the proposed office buildings in the Ryan complex. He stated that the size of the second office building would be determined in the future depending on traffic generation. The City Engineer then reviewed the conditions attached to the approval of the Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commission report. He noted that they again had to do with the design of the storm water skimmer, erosion control, easements for water detention areas, and establishing the size of the water detention area needed. Commissioner Sandstrom expressed concern regarding the possibility of people falling into the pond, especially youngsters. He also pointed out that swimming pools have to be fenced and wondered why this pond would not have to be. The City Engineer pointed out that the pond would fill slowly and that it would be graded to a gradual slope (4 to 1) so that there would be no great danger of someone falling into a pond and being unable to climb out. He stated that the pond would hold water the year round and compared it to the City's pond behind the Community Center which is not fenced. The City Engineer also pointed out that the pond serves aesthetic as well as functional purposes and that it would be inappropriate to surround it with a barrier that would detract from the aesthetics. The Secretary compared the proposed pond to other ponds in the City which do not have fences. He noted that residential swimming pools have a sharp dropoff from which a young child cannot climb out. He stated that this pond would have a gradual slope. Chairman Pro tern Nelson then asked the applicant whether he had anything to add. Mr. Jim Zahn, representing Ryan Construction Company, then introduced Mr. Wayne Bishop, the project architect. Mr. Bishop briefly explained the choice of the materials and the massing of the building. He stated that the design was very much intended to be sensitive to the Earle Brown Farm complex to the east. He stated that the building would step up and away from the Farm complex and that the glass exterior would reflect the farm buildings back to an observer looking at the office buildings. He also stated that the pond and surrounding green area would enhance the rural atmosphere surrounding the Farm complex. He pointed out, finally, that the color of the buildings would complement the farm buildings and that the red stripe would be the same color as the farm buildings. PUBLIC HEARING (Application No. 86012) Chairman Pro tem Nelson then opened the meeting for a public hearing and asked whether anyone present wished to speak regarding the application. Hearing no one, he called for a motion to close the public hearing. CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING Motion by Commissioner Sandstrom seconded by Commissioner Malecki to close the public hearing. The motion passed unanimously. Commissioner Sandstrom asked how the office development would relate to the senior citizen center. The Secretary showed a transparency of the plat for the entire area surrounding the Earle Brown Farm, noting the location of the Ryan office buildings and the planned residential development to the south, as well as the Farm itself. ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 86012 (Ryan Construction Company) Motion by Commissio ner Ainas seconded by Commissioner Sandstrom to recommend approval of Application No. 86012, subject to the following conditions: 3-13-86 -3- I . 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 guarantee and supporting financial guarantee (in an amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be submitted prior to the issuance of permits. 4. Any outside trash disposal 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. An as-built survey of the property shall be submitted to the Engineering Department prior to the release of the performance guarantee. 10. The grading, drainage and utility plan, including the design of the storm water skimmer, shall be subject to review, and approval and any conditions imposed by the the Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commission prior to the issuance of permits. 11 . Special use permit approval is deemed consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and with Sections 35-220 and 35-330 of the Zoning Ordinance and further is subject to all applicable codes, ordinances and regulations. 12. Plan approval acknowledges proof-of-parking for 33 additional parking stalls. The applicant shall acknowledge in writing that he shall install said stalls upon a determination of the need for such stalls by the City. Said acknowledgement shall be filed with the title to the property as a deed restriction. Voting in favor: Chairman Pro tem Nelson, Commissioners Malecki, Sandstrom, Ainas and Wallerstedt. Voting against: none. The motion passed. RECESS The Planning Commission recessed at 8:34 p.m. and resumed at 9:04 p.m. 3-13-86 -4- APPLICATION NO. 86010 (City of Brooklyn Center HRA) ollowing the recess, the Secretary introduced an application initiated by the City to rezone from I-1 to R7 the vacant parcel of land immediately south of the Earle Brown Farm site. The Secretary reviewed the contents of the staff report (see Planning Commission Information Sheet for Application No. 86010 attached) . The Secretary also pointed out that the surrounding property in the area is still to be I-1 . He stated that buffer strips are required where I-1 developments abut R7 developments. He added, however, that the requirement for meeting those buffer requirements would be placed on the R7 development because it is coming in later than the I-1 developments. The Secretary recalled for the Commission some of the discussion regarding the proposed housing development on the area south of the Earle Brown Farm. He stated that the area had not been considered good for family housing, but that the Planning Commission had felt that elderly housing would be appropriate in this location. Commissioner Ainas pointed out that the Earle Brown Farm Committee which has studied the reuse of the farm buildings, has pretty much assumed elderly housing to the south almost from the beginning of their discussions. Commissioner Sandstrom stated that he felt it was logical to change the Comprehensive Plan to accommodate elderly housing in this area. He stated that he felt it was a good development proposal with shopping available in surrounding areas. The Secretary also pointed out the attention paid to pedestrians in the planning of the streetscape in this area as well. Chairman Pro tem Nelson then asked whether Mr. Al Beisner had anything to add. Mr. Beisner, representing Earle Brown Commons, the residential developer of the site, approached the Commission with drawings of the site and building elevations. Mr. Beisner then reviewed a number of points of the conceptual plans with the Planning Commission. He noted the concern regarding sight lines to the Farm complex from Summit Drive. He also pointed out a proof of parking plan showing that the requirement of two stalls per unit could be met on the property. He stated that the desire was for a covered walkway between the Earle Brown office building which would be part of the complex and the hippodrome. He stated that this would allow elderly residents to take advantage of services in the hippodrome without having to brave the elements. He stated that the Earle Brown Commons project would be a full service senior housing project with a number of the services available in the farm buildings. Mr. Beisner then showed the Planning Commission the building elevations of a tentative plan for the building. He stated that he was attempting to match the brick of the Earle Brown office building, but that if this were impossible he would have to go to some completely different color that would complement, but also contrast, the office building brick. He stated that the project, including the senior center, could provide transportation for seniors in the area to come to the development. He discussed with the Commission the possible uses for the hippodrome and the horse barn as senior-related services. He also discussed with the Commission the option of buying units within the building. Commissioner Sandstrom left the table at 9:29 p.m. and returned at 9:43 p.m. PUBLIC HEARING (Application No. 86010) Chairman Pro tem Nelson then opened the meeting for a public hearing and asked whether anyone present wished to speak regarding the application. No one spoke. The Secretary suggested that the Commission leave the public hearing open until the 3-13-86 -5- next consideration of the rezoning. He stated that the rezoning decisions should be based on the guidelines and standards in the Zoning Ordinance. He suggested that the application be tabled with direction to prepare a Comprehensive Plan amendment if the Planning Commission is inclined to approve the rezoning. ACTION TABLING APPLICATION NO. 86010 (City of Brooklyn Center HRA) Motion by Commissioner Ainas seconded by Commissioner Sandstrom to table Application No. 86010 with direction to staff to prepare a resolution recommending the rezoning and a Comprehensive Plan amendment to allow residential uses in the area adjacent to the Earle Brown Farm. Voting in favor: Chairman Pro tem Nelson, Commissioners Malecki, Sandstrom, Ainas and Wallerstedt. Voting against: none. The motion passed. Commissioner Sandstrom stated that the Planning Commission should go on record as favoring the development. The Secretary and Mr. Beisner then discussed the timing and procedure for submitting the development plans for the residential project. DISCUSSION ITEMS a. Builders Square The Secretary then reviewed with the Planning Commission the reuse of the K Mart building on 63rd and Brooklyn Boulevard by a Builders Square store. He noted that they would be adding a lumber staging area to the east side of the building near the garden center and that the staff had insisted that the addition be masonry consistent with the building and not a metal shed. He also stated that there would bean extension of the screen wall of the truck dock behind the building. He pointed out that the Builders Square is a permitted use in that building and asked the Planning Commission whether they felt a formal application was needed or whether it could simply be approved through a normal building permit. Commissioner Ainas asked whether there would be any outside storage. The Secretary stated that there would be none. He pointed out that outside storage is allowed in the C2 zoning district, but that it must be screened. He stated that the building would still have a garden center. Commissioner Ainas stated he saw no need for a formal application. ACTION ACKNOWLEDGING BUILDERS SQUARE AS A PERMITTED USE Motion by Commissioner Ainas seconded by Commissioner Malecki to recognize Builders Square as a permitted use in the old K Mart building at 3600 63rd Avenue North and waving the requirement for a site and building plan approval of the proposed lumber staging area to the east of the building. The motion passed unanimously. APPLICATION NO. 86004 (Paul Worwa) The Secretary then briefly introduced Application No. 86004, an appeal from a determination by staff that not more than five children, including those of the resident family, may be serviced by a family day care operation in the R3 zoning district. He referred the Commission's attention to a draft ordinance amendment which would not count the resident children in the R1, R2 and R3 zoning districts toward the ordinance maximums. He recommended that the Commission deny the appeal and act on the ordinance amendment. ACTION DENYING APPLICATION NO. 86004 (Paul Worwa) Motion by Commissioner Sandstrom seconded by Commissioner Malecki to deny Application No. 86004 and recommending adoption of a draft ordinance amendment to Section 35-405 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow up to five children to be serviced in a family day care operation in the R2 and R3 zoning districts. Voting in favor: Chairman Pro tem Nelson, Commissioners M,alecki, Sandstrom, Ainas and Wallerstedt. Voting against: none. The motion passed. 3-13-86 -6- I DISCUSSION ITEMS CONTINUED b. Retail Parking Formula The Planner then distributed to the Commission a survey of suburban municipalities with their parking requirements for retail shopping centers. There followed a lengthy discussion as to the rationale behind changing the parking formula. Commissioner Sandstrom made the point that Brooklyn Center should be competitive with other communities in trying to attract business development in the City. Commissioners Nelson and Wallerstedt wished to know what the impact of a formula change would be on existing developments in the City. They asked whether it would have a favorable influence on redevelopment possibilities and or whether it would spur smaller out buildings in retail parking lots. The Planner acknowledged both of these possibilities and added that it might also allow for somewhat more intense use of existing structures, for instance with some additional restaurant space. He also suggested that more area could be devoted to landscaping within parking lots and on retail sites generally. He discussed with the Commission with St. Paul Book and Stationery building which reserves space within the building for proof of parking. He stated that this was a ludicrous arrangement and that it should be changed. He also stated that his own experience as a resident of Brooklyn Center was that the shopping centers and retail establishments, other than Brookdale, were never full, even during the Christmas shopping season. The Secretary urged the Commission to keep gross floor area as the unit of measure in determining parking space requirements. He advised against using leaseable area since this can change with internal building modifications. Mr. Steve Mosborg of Lombard Properties added that, based on his own experience in Colorado and elsewhere and from his reading of the study of the Urban Land Institute, he did feel that the Brooklyn Center ordinance was overly burdensome at the low end of the scale. c. Landscape Requirements The Planner then distributed to the Commission a draft of a landscape point system where various sites would be required to provide a minimum number of landscape points per acre based on so many points per planting type. The Planner explained that the point system offered was somewhat arbitrary at this time and had not been tested extensively against existing projects. He did point out that the two site plans approved by the Planning Commission that evening did meet the standards set up in this point system. He also pointed out that it was important for the relative point differential between planting types to mirror the relative price differential between planting types so that there would not be an economic incentive to fulfill landscape requirements with only one type of planting. Commissioner Ainas agreed that there should be landscape standards with minimum numbers of plantings required. He suggested that less weight be given for potted plants since these can be provided in great numbers and they are only out and flourishing at a limited time of the year. The Planner pointed out that landscape standards would give the City some systematic basis for accepting or rejecting a proposed landscape plan. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Commissioner Sandstrom seconded by Commissioner Wallerstedt to adjourn the meeting of the Planning Commission. The motion passed unanimously. The Planning Commission adjourned at 10:46 p.m. i rV� ai man 3-13-36 -7- 1 1