Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1986 09-25 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 25, 1986, CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Planning Commission met in study session and was called to order by Chairman Pro tem Mike Nelson at 7:30 p.m. ROLL CALL Chairman Pro tem Mike Nelson, Commissioners Molly Malecki, Carl Sandstrom, Wallace Bernards and Anne Wallerstedt. Also present were Director of Planning and Inspections Ronald Warren and Planner Gary Shallcross. Chairman Lucht and Commissioner Ainas had informed the Planning and Inspection Department that they would be unable to attend and were excused. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - September 11 , 1986. Motion by Commissioner Sandstrom seconded by Commissioner Malecki to approve the minutes of the September 11 , 1986 Planning Commission meeting as submitted. Voting in favor: Chairman Pro tem Nelson, Commissioners Malecki, Sandstrom, Bernards and Wallerstedt. Voting against: none. The motion passed. APPLICATION NO. 86037 (City of Brooklyn Center HRA) Following the Chairman's explanation, the Secretary introduced the first item of business, a request for preliminary plat approval to resubdivide into a lot and an outlot the land south of the Earle Brown (Brooklyn) Farm to be developed as the Earle Brown Commons residential complex. The Secretary reviewed the contents of the staff report (see Planning Commission Information Sheet for Application No. 86037, attached). The Secretary explained to the Commission that the City Council serves as the Housing and Redevelopment for the City and that the application is actually made on their behalf. The Secretary also explained that the outlot for the second phase of the residential development would be unbuildable until it was replatted. He explained that this replatting would have to take place prior to construction of the second phase. Commissioner Bernards asked whether the land involved in the plat was purchased with the Earle Brown Farm. The Secretary answered that part of the land had been included in the Earle Brown Farm site, but that a majority of it was located on a parcel that had been owned by Texas International Airlines. Commissioner Bernards asked whether the property was part of the tax increment financing district. The Secretary responded in the affirmative. He stated that when the tax increment bonds are paid off the land would go back onto the tax rolls and would not be tax exempt. Commissioner Sandstrom asked when the property would go back on the tax rolls. The Planner stated that the law permits a tax increment district for up to 25 years, but that the City has committed to complete the tax increment district within 10 to 15 years. Commissioner Sandstrom stated that the subsidy was an advantage for the developer. The Secretary pointed out that the property would pay the same amount in taxes, but that the taxes would be dedicated to the redevelopment and to some extent to a reduction in the price of the land. PUBLIC HEARING (Application No. 86037) Chairman Pro tem Nelson then opened the meeting for a public hearing and asked 9-25-86 -1- 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. ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 86037 (City of Brooklyn Center) Motion by Commissioner Sandstrom seconded by Commissioner Malecki to recommend approval of Application No. 86037, subject to the following conditions: 1. The final plat is subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. 2. The final plat is subject to the provisions of Chapter 15 of the City Ordinances. 3• The developer shall execute an easement for storm sewer and the detention pond and said easement shall be indicated on the final plat prior to final plat approval. 4. The developer shall execute an easement for sanitary sewer and water and said easement shall be indicated on the final plat prior to final plat approval. Voting in favor: Chairman Pro tem Nelson, Commissioners- Malecki, Sandstrom, Bernards and Wallerstedt. Voting against: none. APPLICATION NO. 86038 (Gabbert and Beck) The Secretary introduced the next item of business, a request for site plan approval to construct a new access onto Brooklyn Boulevard and install a merge lane and parking lot modifications at the Westbrook Mall, 5717 Xerxes Avenue North. The Secretary reviewed the contents of the staff report (see Planning Commission Information Sheet for Application No. 86038 attached). The Secretary also noted that there would be no median opening in Brooklyn Boulevard to serve the proposed access. He also added that Hennepin County which now maintains Brooklyn Boulevard supports the new access arrangement over the existing situation. Commissioner Bernards asked who would pay for the sidewalk relocation. The Secretary stated that it was his understanding the applicant would pay for that relocation. Commissioner Bernards also expressed concern regarding sight lines for cars wishing to exit the site relative to cars traveling northbound in the merge lane. Commissioner Sandstrom recommended that a condition be added to preserve sight lines at the proposed access in accordance with the sight triangle standards for public streets. Commissioner Wallerstedt asked what would happen to the access between the Westbrook Mall parking lot and the parking lot for the Brookdale Ten Office Building. Mr. Warren Beck stated that it would be unaffected by the proposed access improvement. Commissioner Malecki stated that the City's policy is generally to reduce the number of accesses and turning movements onto Brooklyn Boulevard. She stated that the proposed access does not seem to be an equal trade given the arrangement that exists at present. She stated that it would add more traffic movements onto Brooklyn 9-25-86 -2- Boulevard. The Secretary acknowledged that there would be more traffic movements onto Brooklyn Boulevard than at present, but added that the same could happen if a driveway were opened up between the Westbrook Mall lot and the First Brookdale Bank. He stated that the proposed access location is better than the location of the access presently serving the bank (which will be closed). Commissioners Sandstrom and Bernards then discussed the concern of additional turning movements onto Brooklyn Boulevard. The Secretary pointed out that the Westbrook Mall has claimed there have been access problems for many years. He stated that there is visibility of Westbrook Mall from Brooklyn Boulevard, but no access. Chairman Pro tem Nelson asked why it was appropriate to force cars to turn left or right so soon after entering the lot rather than giving them a space to drive in to the lot and then to disperse. The Secretary stated that the objective of such a barrier close to an entrance is to disperse traffic as it enters the lot and move it toward parking spaces rather than right in front of the shopping center. Commissioner Bernards commented that the barrier would force traffic to slow down as it enters the lot. Commissioner Malecki asked whether there would be adequate room for cars which are merging right to exit into the shopping center relative to cars merging left from 56th into northbound Brooklyn Boulevard. The Secretary stated that with the proposed access improvements there would be an entire lane to do this merging rather than the shorter merging lanes that exist at present. The Planner stated that it depended on the number of movements involved as to whether there would be a significant number of conflicts between these merging movements. He added that there would probably not be a great number of such movements and conflicts in this case. Commissioner Malecki acknowledged that such conflicts do exist in other locations, but asked whether the City had to create them. Commissioner Sandstrom compared the proposed access to the office building on the north side of County Road 10 and east of Brooklyn Boulevard. He pointed out that the City requires people using that office building to go around to Northway Drive and enter the site from the east. The Secretary stated that there are far more turning movements from-County Road 10 from Brooklyn Boulevard than from 56th Avenue North onto Brooklyn Boulevard. He added that there is not a full merge lane in that location. He, therefore, concluded that far more conflicts would result in that location than in the instance of Westbrook Mall. Chairman Pro tem Nelson asked the applicant whether he had anything to add. Mr. Warren Beck stated that he had complaints from tenants and customers on how to get into Westbrook Mall since its construction in 1976. He stated that he had expected a period of adjustment until customers learned the access routes to the center. He added, however, that after 10 years it is still a problem for the tenants and customers. He stated that an access onto Brooklyn Boulevard was important to make the shopping center work. Mr. Beck then introduced Mr. Howard Preston of Bennett, Ringrose and Wolsfeld (BRW) to discuss questions of traffic engineering. Mr. Preston addressed concerns raised in the Planning Commission's discussion. He stated that a merge lane can accommodate 1800 vehicles crossing in both directions in an hour's time. He stated that the peak hour traffic into the access on Brooklyn Boulevard would be only 32 . cars. Mr. Preston also pointed out that the taper of the existing merge lanes onto and off of Brooklyn Boulevard is short and that the installation of a full merge lane between Brooklyn Boulevard and County Road 10 would improve the merging movement of 9-25-86 -3- cars both onto and off of Brooklyn Boulevard. Commissioner Sandstrom asked whether trucks could make the movement off of Brooklyn Boulevard into the access to the Westbrook Mall shopping center. Mr. Preston stated that pickup or a straight truck could make the movement, but not a semi trailer truck. He added that there are other routes into the site that a semi can take and that this side of the center is not a loading dock area. Mr. Preston also explained that the T intersection as cars enter the site off Brooklyn Boulevard functions well because it contains potential for fewer traffic conflicts, therefore, he added, cars can move through such an intersection more easily. ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 86038 (Gabbert and Beck) Motion by Commissioner Sandstrom seconded by Commissioner Wallerstedt to recommend approval of Application No. 86038, subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall execute a performance agreement with a supporting financial guarantee (in an amount to be determined by the City Manager) to assure completion of improvements, both in the parking lot and in the public right-of-way, prior to the issuance of the driveway permit by the County. 2. The applicant shall execute an easement for sidewalk purposes within a portion of the greenstrip adjacent to Brooklyn Boulevard prior to issuance of the driveway permit by the County. 3. The applicant shall submit a written acknowledgement from First Brookdale Bank agreeing to the proposed driveway relocation prior to issuance of the driveway permit. 4. The applicant and First Brookdale Bank shall execute a cross access agreement for the use of the access drive prior to issuance of the driveway permit. • 5• Plan approval acknowledges a driveway opening of 321. on the basis of the recommendation of the Director of Public Works. 6. Plan approval acknowledges a proof-of-parking plan for 562 spaces on the site (submitted by BRW and dated 9-11-86) as fulfillment of ordinance parking requirments. 7. Traffic control signs shall be installed on the site adjacent to the proposed access in accordance with recommendations of the Director of Public Works and such signery shall be indicated on the approved site plan. 8. The plan shall be revised to indicate sight lines at the access onto Brooklyn Boulevard in accordance with Section 35-560 of the Zoning Ordinance prior to consideration by the City Council. Voting in favor: Chairman Pro tem Nelson, Commissioners Sandstrom,Bernards and Wallerstedt. Voting against: Commissioner Malecki. The motion passed. Commissioner Malecki explained that she opposed the application because she was not convinced that the potential problems with turning movements onto Brooklyn Boulevard had been solved and felt that there were other solutions to the problem of access to the Westbrook Mall shopping center. 9-25-86 -4- The Secretary left the meeting at 8:33 p.m. DISCUSSION ITEM a. Retail Parking Formula The Planner then reviewed with the Commission additional statistical and graphic information on the impact of a change in the retail parking formula to either 5 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. of gross floor area or 5.5 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. He stated that the decision between 5 spaces per 1,000 and 5.5 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. was not a black and white decision. He pointed out that the lower formula would allow for more development on retail properties, including the possibility of satellite developments. He informed the Commisison that one of the concerns expressed at the City Council level was whether the new formula would induce new development which would in turn lead to the elimination of extra-wide greenstrips provided by proof-of-parking areas. The Planner also pointed out that a requirement of 5.5 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. of gross floor area would provide a greater comfort margin than the lesser formula, but would still do away with the heavy parking requirement on smaller buildings. In a brief discussion, Commissioner Bernards indicated that it might be just as well to error on the side of caution and go with the higher requirement of 5.5 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. Commissioner Sandstrom expressed concern that the City be competitive with other communities so that development which could locate here does not go to other communities because of our parking requirement. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Commissioner Sandstrom seconded by Commissioner Bernards to adjourn the meeting of the Planning Commission. The motion passed unanimously. The Planning Commission adjourned at 9:06_ p.m. C rman 9-25-86 -5- 1 1