HomeMy WebLinkAbout1979 04-12 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
April 12, 1979
CITY HALL
CALL TO ORDER
The Planning Commission met in regular session and was called to order by Chairman
Hal Pierce at 8:06 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Chairman Pierce, Commissioners Hawes, Lucht and Erickson. Also present were
Director of Planning and Inspection Ronald Warren, Superintendent of Eng .ineering
James Noska and Planning Assistant Gary Shallcross. The Secretary noted that
Commissioners Malecki , Theis and Manson had each called him and informed him that
they would be unable to attend.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES - March 29, 1979
Motion by Commissioner Lucht seconded by Commissioner Hawes to approve the minutes
as submitted. Voting in favor: Chairman Pierce, Commissioners Hawes and Lucht. '
Not voting: Commissioner Erickson. Voting against: none. The motion passed.
APPLICATION NO. 79018 (Arthur Kvamme)
Following the Chairman 's explanation, the first item to be considered was a request
submitted by Arthur Kvamme rezoning certain property from R1 (Single Family Resi-
dential ) to R3 (Townhouse/Garden Apartments) . The Secretary explained that the
applicant wished to rezone an approximate 3.5 acre tract located within the 5500
block between Camden Avenue North and Bryant Avenue North. He described the
aroaerty in question as being bounded un Lhe nur-Lh by 5o l.;l Avei-we
south by 55th Avenue North, on the east by single family residential nomes racing
Camden Avenue and on the west by single family residential homes facing Bryant
Avenue. In addition to what is presently the Madsen Floral property, the property
owned by Mrs. Olga Madsen at 5500 Aldrich Ave,iue North and rear portions of lots
_ at 803 and 809 - 56th Avenue North and 806 and 800 55th Avenue North were in-
cluded in the rezoning request. The Secretary stated that the applicant intended
to construct seven quadra homes of 4 units each totaling 28 units if the rezoning
were approved. He also cited the arguments made by the applicant in a letter of
application. These included: the fact that the area is in need of a condominium
complex for many of the older residents in the area; that public utilities to
service the area are already available; that the joint effort of combining the
properties in the rezoning eliminates potentially landlocked property and makes
practical use of the land; that traffic to the area will be decreased; that the
development will increase the City's tax base; and that the City would rid
itself of a nonconforming use (Madsen Floral ) .
The Secretary reviewed briefly the history of the parcel . A portion of the
property, he explained, was made eligible for apartment development in 1960 by a
special use permit. However, no plans were ever approved for apartments and in
1968, with the adoption of the Comprehensive Plan, the land reverted to the R1
zoning classification. In 1970, the Secretary went on, the applicant proposed
a rezoning to R4, but this proposal was denied by the City Council following
Planning Commission review and public hearings. The Council determined at that
time, he noted, that the proposal was inconsistent with the Comprehensive Guide
Plan and would constitute spot zoning if approved.
4-12-79 -1-
The Secretary pointed out that the Comprehensive -Plan in its recommendation for
the Southeast Neighborhood recommends permitting up to 12 story apartment build-
ings at no more than 1`2 units per acre within the older portion of the neighbor-
hood, but only at the intersection of collector or arterial streets. Regarding
townhouse development, he said, the Comprehensive Plan designates a tract of
land at the southeast corner of Highway 100 and Interstate 94 for future develop-
ment of this type.
The Secretary further pointed out that development of the land in question under
its existing RI zoning would be possible by dedication of land for a cul-de-sac
50 ft. wide with a variance from the requirements of Chapter -15 of the City
Ordinances. Otherwise, he said, a variance from Chapter 35 would be required
to permit lots of less than 110 ft. in depth if the property were developed
with an extension of Aldrich Avenue North as a public street between 56th and 55th
Avenues. Either type of variance, he noted, might be permitted since a literal
reading of the ordinance requirement would deny the owners the reasonable use of
their land. The applicant, however, argues that such a development alternative
would be economically unfeasible. The Secretary summed up his review of the
application by urging the Commission to carefully consider the applicant's con-
tention that there is a need in this area for additional R3- zoned property, and
also, that the existing zoning should be shown to be a clearly inferior alter-
native to the proposed R3 zoning from a public, rather than merely a private,
standpoint.
After a brief discussion of possible variance requests, Chairman Pierce asked
the applicant to speak on behalf of his proposal . Mr. Kvamme explained that he
is the son-in-law of Olga Madsen whose husband established the Madsen Floral
operation on the site in 1918. He explained that there were four other property
owners besides the Madsen family involved with the rezoning request. He stated
that the rear portions of these lots were contemplated in the rezoning and that
ail tour OT these property owners Tavorea the rezoning.
Mr. Kvamme went into the background of the site, discussing previous rezoning
proposals, and explaining the economics of the floral wholesale business. He
stated that at this point in the company's growth, an expansion of the retail
business would be profitable and that this expansion would either have to be on
the site or at another site..
Mr. Kvamme discussed the alternative of developing the property for single family
residential purposes by placing a street through the present Madsen Floral
property from 55th to 56th Avenues North. He argued that this alternative would
be far too expensive. Instead, he maintained, an R3 development would have
beneficial effects on the neighborhood: 11 it would increase property values
in the area by doing away with the floral mousiness 2) there would be less
traffic and 3) it would meet the need for condominium living for the older
residents in the area.
As Mr. Kvamme slowed a conceptual plan of the site without a through street,
Commissioner Hawes inquired whether a sprinkler system would be required on
the site. The Secretary responded that the Zoning Ordinance does not mandate
underground irrigation systems in R3 developments. Mr. Kvamme explained to Com-
missioner Hawes that there would be a boiler house on the site retained from the
present operation which could utilize either oil or gas, making use of the. most
economical fuel during price fluctuations. Commissioner Hawes asked how many
bedrooms the units would have. Mr. Kvamme responded that in most units there
would be two bedrooms upstairs with it being possible to add a third on the
lower level . He pointed out that a number of townhouse designs had been con-
sidered and also noted the availability of trees on the site for landscaping
purposes
4-12-79 -2- .
In response to a question from Chairman Pierce the Secretary replied that 28
units, as the applicant had proposed, is the maximum number allowed on the site
based on density requirements. Commissioner Hawes asked what the formula for
traffic generation per household was. The Superintendent of Engineering re-
sponded that a commonly used figure is six trips per unit per day. The Secret-
ary, as a point of clarification, noted that none of, the parcels of land proposed
in the rezoning are, in fact, landlocked, and that other proposed developments .
could make use of these properties equally well . He also pointed out that under
the City's Zoning. Ordinance, Madsen Floral is a nonconforming use and would not
be allowed to expand whether or not the business necessities dictated such an
expansion.
PUBLIC HEARING
Chairman Pierce then opened the meeting for a public hearing. Mary Simmons, of
5530 Camden Avenue North, argued that the proposed use of the property is not
compatible with single family uses abutting the site and disagreed that the new
development would raise property values. The Secretary commented that the R3
zoning district allows Townhouse and Garden Apartments. He stated that an
apartment complex is not allowed under the R3 zoning and that a condominium de-
velopment would have to be owner-occupied although a townhouse complex may or
may not be owner-occupied. He added that Brooklyn Center does not have a legal
vehicle for condominiumizing rental dwellings in other than the R3 zoning
district. Mr. Kvamme assured the Commission that his concept envisioned owner-
occupied dwellings. Beyond that, however, he could not guarantee that the units
would be lived in by the owners.
Commissioner Hawes inquired as to who is responsible for maintaining the roadways.
The Secretary answered a legally established Homeowners Association would be re-
sponsible for the maintenance of common areas including private roadways if such
a project were developed as indicated. He added that if other R3 developments
were realized that involved rental units, they would be subject to rental dwell-
ina licensing.
David Larson, of 5537 Camden Avenue North, complained about the possible size of
the buildings to be erected. He stated that the size of the buildings would be
roughly the size of a basketball court in area, two to three stories high. Seven
such structures in the middle of the block, he argued, would crowd the neighbor-
hood. Chairman Pierce inquired whether there was any setback requirement related
to height. The Secretary responded that there was no such requirement in the
R3 zone, but said that he had talked with the applicant concerning roadways and
setbacks. He added that the conceptual plan submitted is merely tentative, not
final , and site and building. plan approval would have to be given if the rezoning
were accomplished. Mr. Kvamme pointed out that none of the units would be any
closer than 70 to 80 feet from single family houses, and that this is a much
greater setback than exists between the homes in the area. Mrs. Saf, of 5531
Camden Avenue North asked if there were any height restrictions on townhouses.
The Building Official responded that nc height restrictions pertained to town-
houses, but that depending on the design proposed, these could be in keeping
with the variable height of houses in the Southeast Neighborhood. The Secretary
explained that each unit must have a ground level entrance.
Ann Jarvimaki,of 5625 Aldrich Avenue North, stated that she did not want Aldrich
Avenue to become a through street and said she considered the proposal a good
idea.
Bruce Hendrickson, of 5612 Aldrich Avenue North, expressed concern over the
possible traffic generated by the site. The Superintendent of Engineering re-
sponded that most residential streets carry 700 to 800 cars per day and that the
additional 80 or so trips for 55th and 56th Avenues would be offset by the re-
moval of Madsen Floral from the site.
4-12-79 -3-
Dave.Lewis, of 5600 Bryant Avenue North, questioned the Commission as to the
number of units allowed in R3 as opposed to R1 zoning. The Secretary stated
that 28 units would be allowed the R3 zoning, while 11 or 12 could be accommodated
with R1 zoning. Ed Trombley of 56th and Aldrich stated he could not foresee any
real overcrowding.
Mr. Kvamme pointed out that with Madsen Floral leaving and the freeway coming in,
traffic on 55th Avenue would actually diminish. Mary Simmons countered, however,
that since the site would be served by nonthrough private roads, more traffic
would be forced onto Camden and Bryant Avenues North. Jim Shetler, of 809 -
56th Avenue North, disagreed with the fears of overcrowding, stating that in
his opinion, the added traffic would not be overwhelming.
Commissioner Hawes pointed out to the applicant the inconsistency of proposing
three bedroom un°its in the townhouse development and using as a selling feature,
their serviceability to older residents. Mr. Kvamme countered that bedrooms are
a resale feature and that younger people may eventually move into the townhouses
as they may move into the neighbrohood in general . Commissioner Erickson asked
the applicant whether he had any empirical evidence for his claim that traffic
would be reduced. Mr. Kvamme admitted that he did not. Commissioner Erickson
went on to ask how many employees presently worked at Madsen Floral . Mr. Kvamme
replied in the neighborhood of five to ten.
Mrs. Jarvimaki argued in favor of the site. She stated that it would be fine for
the neighborhood to have more younger couples since this would probably •bring in
more children and help the school district to survive which has been experiencing .
a period of declining enrollment. What is more, she added, new development would
increase the tax base for public services and therefore reduce taxes for other ,
residents. Mr. Dingley, of 5621 Camden Avenue North, argued that single family
would be the onlv compatible use in the neighborhood. Finally, Mr. Kvamme summed
r. k..4.e. �nv. n�nwm...c_n..+�c. •fnr +_h.a_ n- ,al by askina the Commission if it wouia not be -.ur
-
better to have the properties zoned R3 than to have what is on the site at
present. a
Commissioner Hawes asked whether the Comprehensive Plan had anything to say on
this matter. The Secretary responded that the plan encourages multiple family
dwellings of no more than 12 stories in height at the corners of collector and
arterial streets. As far as townhouse development, he said, the plan designates
the southeast corner of the Highway 100 and Interstate 94 interchange as a
suitable site for this type of development. This site, as of yet, remains
undeveloped.
CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING
Motion by Commissioner Lucht seconded by Commissioner Erickson to close the public
hearing on Application No. 79013. Voting in favor: Chairman Pierce, Commission-
ers Hawes, Lucht and Erickson. Voting against: none. The motion passed.
ACTION TABLING OF APPLICATION NO. 79018 (Arthuu Kvamme)
Chairman Pierce stated that a rezoning requests are referred to the respective
Neighborhood Advisory Group before final recommendation by the Planning Commis-
sion. Motion by Commissioner Hawes seconded by Commissioner Erickson to table
Application No. 79018 submitted by Arthur Kvamme until review by the Southeast
Neighborhood Group. Voting in favor: Chairman Pierce, Commissioners Hawes, -
Lucht and Erickson. Voting against: none. The motion passed.
RECESS
The Planning Commission. recessed at- 9:37 p.m. and resumed at 10:02 p.m.
4-12-79 -4
APPLICATION NO. 79019 (Brauer and Associates)
The 'Secretary introduced the next item of consideration, preliminary plat ap-
proval for an approximate 30 acre site located at the northeast quadrant of
County Road 10 and Shingle Creek Parkway. The Secretary explained that the
parcel proposed for subdivision would be divided into three blocks. Block 1
which is presently undeveloped and zoned C2 would contain four lots, ranging
in size from 2.5 acres to 4.9 acres, with a half acre Outlot. Block 2 is cur-
rently occupied by Brookdale Ford and Block 3 would be a strip of land lying
westerly of Shingle Creek Parkway on the east side of Shingle Creek zoned for
City Open Space. Access to the lots in Block 1 , he went on, would be accomp-
lished by constructing a roadway in the center of the site which would terminate
in a cul-de-sac roughly 750 feet long. He noted that curb cuts are proposed for
right turn in and out for Lots 1 and 4 which abut Shingle Creek Parkway. He
pointed out that the access points for these two curb cuts would be close to the
common property line with Northwestern Bell and Brookdale Ford so that common
use could be made. The Secretary mentioned that the proposed plat indicates that
the west half of Penn Avenue North be vacated and returned to the Charlson and
Brookdale Ford properties since it no longer serves any purpose.
The Secretary visually reviewed the plans submitted by the applicant and stated
that a median cut in Shingle Creek Parkway would only be located adjacent to
the proposed cul-de-sac. Commissioner Hawes noted the difficulty presented by
the plat for Brookdale Ford. It would, he said, eliminate the median cut ser-
vicing their property. The Superintendent of Engineering agreed stating that
the median cut just north of County Road 10 was to be eliminated because of its
proximity to a major intersection and would be closed once the interchange on
the freeway and Shingle Creek Parkway was completed. In response to Chairman
Pierce, the Superintendent of Engineering stated that the separation require-
ments for.median cuts were generally one block or 600 feet apart. The Secretary
remarked that evaluating the plat seemed difficult without an accompanying de-
velopment proposal .
A discussion then ensued concerning the possibility of linking up the roadway
to service the site with Earle Brown Drive. The Superintendent of Engineering
showed the Commission other conceptual plans for roadways submitted by the appli-
cant previously. From a traffic engineering standpoint, he said, it is difficult
to judge the merit of the proposal without knowning what uses would have access
off the roadway.
In response to Chairman Pierce, Mr. Brauer, representing the applicant, explained
that other property owners in the area were not cooperating in planning a roadway
to service the site and other sites. The demands of these property owners would
have required the applicant to dedicate 25% of his land for public right-of-way
purposes he stated. As a result, the only way to economically subdivide the
property is to put a cul-de-sac in and break up the large tract into smaller,
more saleable parcels.
Commissioner Hawes pointed out that the approval of the Brookdale Ford site
contemplated the purchase of Outlot A of the present plat in order to provide an
entrance point to the north. He added that perhaps they would proceed with pur-
chasing Outlot A if they knew they would lose their present median cut.
In response to' a question from Chairman Pierce, Mr. Brauer explained that the
larger lots had to be on the west side of the site because the larger users
wanted frontage on Shingle Creek Parkway. Commissioner Hawes remarked that
restaurants at the east end of the cul-de-sac would bring a lot of traffic into
a dangerous situation. The Commission then discussed a previous alternative plan
which would have placed a roadway on the north side of the site serving North-
western Bell , Perkins, American Family Insurance and the Cinema Theater, in
4-12--79 -5-
addition to. the Charlson property. Chairman Pierce suggested that the through
street plan was so superior that City staff should use its resources to facilitate
its implementation.
The Secretary questioned whether Brookdale Ford was aware of the proposed plat.
Although the applicant assured him that they had been notified, the Secretary
indicated he was sure Brookdale Ford would not favor such a proposal. Commiss-
ioner Hawes asked Mr. Brauer whether he had considered a cul-de-sac servicing
Brookdale Ford directly. The applicant replied that he had considered a plan
putting the roadway all the way through from southwest to the northeast corner.
In response to a question from Chairman Pierce, the Superintendent of Engineering
stated that the City would not install any street until development of the site
was imminent. Chairman Pierce asked what the City would have to do in order to
make the link with Earle Brown Drive. The Superintendent of Engineering re-
sponded that the City could start with negotiation. However, if condemnation
of land were necessary, the City Council would have to make a finding that
such condemnation would, in fact, be in the best interests of the City before
condemnation proceedings could begin. Commissioner Erickson asked what kind of
time constraint existed for development of the property. Mr. Brauer answered
that a single buyer could probably not be found and that smaller buyers did not
seem to be in a hurry. Commissioner Hawes remarked that if the median cut just
north of County Road 10 were closed, Brookdale Ford might wish to negotiate for
access from the proposed cul-de-sac. This lead to another discussion of past
development proposals. The Superintendent of Engineering stated that the median _
cut serving Brookdale at present would be eliminated when the Shingle Creek
Parkway Interchange with Intersta±q 94 was completed.
At this point, Mr. Tom Barry, attorney for Mr. Charlson, explained that his client
is anxious for. development of the property. He pressed the Planning Commission
fnr thnir +hminhtc nn tha matter (nmmiccinnPr NawPC advised that hp felt that
further discussions with Brookdale Ford regarding the proposed plat were in order.
Chairman Pierce stated that other alternatives appeared far better than the one
presented. He recommended that staff negotiate with surrounding property owners
to allow a better road plan linking the property with Earle Brown Drive to be
developed. In response to the applicant's attorney, the Secretary said that
the next consideration of the matter could be in 30 days. - Chairman Pierce added
that the matter might be handled more urgently if a concrete proposal for a
building were submitted along with the plat. Mr. Brauer countered that there
were some interested buyers, but that property lines could no' be drawn without
knowing where median cuts would be placed. The Secretary stated that the Plan-
ning Commission still had a considerable amount of time within the provisions
of the Zoning Ordinance to review the proposed plat before making a recommendation.
PUBLIC HEARING
7M,rman Pierce then opened the meeting for a public hearing. "Doting that no one
was present.to. comment on the proposed plat, he .called fora motion to close the
public hearing.
CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING
Motion by Commissioner Lucht seconded by Commissioner Erickson to close the
public hearing. Voting in favor: Chairman Pierce, Commissioners Hawes, Lucht
and Erickson. Voting against: none. The motion passed.
TABLE APPLICATION NO. 79019 (Brauer and Associates)
Motion by Commissioner Hawes seconded by Commissioner Lucht to table further
consideration of. Applicatian No. 79019 until the May 10, 1979 meeting with
direction to the staff to work with affected property owners to determine if a
better plan for the area could be realized. Voting in favor: Chairman Pierce,
Commissioners Lucht and Erickson. Voting against: none. The motion passed.
4-12-79 -6-
DISCUSSION ITEMS
The Secretary informed the Commission that he had received a letter from Mr. Al
Beisner requesting withdrawal of Application No. 79007 which involved a rezoning
of property located just east of Xerxes Avenue North and south of Interstate 94.
MOTION TO ACKNOWLEDGE LETTER FROM MR. AL BE"ISNER
Motion by Commissioner Lucht seconded by Commissioner Erickson to acknowledge
the withdrawal of Application No. 79007 submitted by Brooklyn Center Industrial
Park involving rezoning of land from.Rl to R2. Voting in favor: Chairman Pierce,
Commissioners Hawes, Lucht, and Erickson. The motion passed.
The Secretary also told the Commission that a report from the City Manager on
the Howe Fertilizer matter would be submitted to the Commission as soon as
possible.
The Secretary briefly reviewed for the Commission other items pending Planning
Commission review in the near future.
ADJOURNMENT
Motion by Commissioner Erickson seconded by Commissioner Hawes to adjourn the
meeting of the Planning Commission. Voting in favor: Chairman Pierce, Commiss-
ioners Hawes, Lucht and Erickson. Voting against: none. The Planning Commission
adjourned at 11 :36 p.m.
LACL
C airman
4-12-79 -7-