Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1978 10-19 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 OCTOBER 19, 1978 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Planning Commission met in study session and was called to order at 8:10 p.m. by Chairman Gilbert Engdahl . ROLL CALL Chairman Engdahl , Commissioners Theis, Jacobson and Hawes. Also present were City Manager Gerald Splinter, Superintendent of Engineering James Noska, Administrative Assistant Mary Harty, Director of Planning and Inspection Ronald Warren and Plann- ing Aide Laurie Thompson. APPROVE MINUTES - October 5, 1978 Motion by Commissioner Hawes seconded by Commissioner Theis to approve the minutes of the October 5, 1978 meeting as submitted. Voting in favor: Chairman Engdahl Commissioners Theis and Hawes. Voting against: none. Not voting: Commissioner Jacobson who stated she was not present at that meeting. The motion passed. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND CRITICAL AREA PLAN REVIEW PROCESS The first item of business was presentation and discussion of the Comprehensive Plan and Critical Area Plan Review Process. Chairman Engdahl explained that all of the City Advisory Commissions and Neighborhood Advisory Groups had been in- vited to participate in this evening's discussion. He asked that each person present introduce themselves and state which Group or Commission they belonged to. The following persons introduced themselves: Sylvia Winkelman, William Price, Chairman Mary Ellen Vetter, Barb Jensen, of the Conservation Commission; Phyllis Plummer, Chairman, Ray Haroldson, and Clifford Williams of the Housing Commission; John Kightlinger and John Angel of the Southwest Neighborhood Advisory Group; Jody Brandvold, Ben Davidson and Louis Sullivan of the Southeast Neighbor- hood Advisory Group; Lowell Whiteis of the West Central Neighborhood Advisory Group;�Steven Boone of- the Northeast Neighborhood Advisory Group; Barbara Egli of the League of Women Voters; George and Betty Olson, citizens; and Council member Celia Scott. --- The Secretary presented a suggested format for review of the Comprehensive Plan and Critical Area Plan. He stated that the City had retained the consulting firm of Bather, Ringrose, Wolsfeld, Jarvis and Gardner, Inc. (BRW) to provide special planning services for the development and preparation -of both plans. He stated that the Commission and Advisory Group members have been provided with a breakdown listing the various major sections of the plan (Inventory, Policy Plan, Physical Plan and Implementation) and their major components. He continued that BRW had presented the Inventory and Analysis of Existing Conditions for both the Comprehensive and Critical Areas Plan. He stated that certain revisions and additions to these sections had been requested by the staff and the Planning Commission and were forthcoming. He stated that a flow chart showing the process and the appropriate dates for presenting the major section had also been provided to the members. 10-19-78 -1- The Secretary continued that it was the City's intention -to •solicit and encourage as much input and feedback as possible from the Advisory Groups and interested citizens, keeping in mind the imposed time restrictions. He explained that the various City Advisory Commissions .would review and comment on the various compo- nents and elements dealing with their area of expertise, and that these elements would be forwarded to them through their Commission Secretary. The Secretary stated it was also suggested that the Neighborhood Advisory Groups review their particular neighborhood and develop a list of concerns or problem areas they feel should be reviewed and addressed in the Comprehensive Plan. These areas of concern could deal with land use, housing, transportation, etc. He stated it was hoped the Groups could meet and that the list could be developed and forwarded to the City staff within the next few weeks in order to be incorporated into the planning process at an early date. The Secretary stated that the Critical Area Plan is to be completed and sutmitted to the Metropolitan Council by January, 1979. He continued that because of this deadline, the review and input for this document would be emphasized in the next few months. He stated that copies of the information received to date, which include the Inventory and Analysis of Existing Conditions and the Goal and Policy Guidelines section, would be provided to members of the Park and Recreation Comis- sion, the Conservation Commission, the Northeast Neighborhood Advisory Group, and the Southeast Neighborhood Group, and they are asked to review and comment on the information. The Secretary continued that a public hearing on the Critical Area Inventory and Policy will be held at the November 16, 1978 Planning Commission meeting. At the December 14, 1978 Planning Commission Meeting, it is anticipated that a public hearing will be held regarding the Critical Area Physical Plan and Implementation Plan. He presented a proposed public hearing for the Comprehensive Plan and its major elements as follows: November or December, 1978 - Inventory and Policies March, 1979 - Land Use, Public Facilities and Housing August, 1979 - Implementation Plan September, 1979 - Complete Document He explained that the schedule was tentative and that there may be opportunities for additional hearings. He commented that throughout the planning process the Planning Commission and the City staff will welcome input and comments from the Advisory Commissions, Neighborhood Advisory Groups, and interested citizens re- garding the Plans, and encourage each of these groups to solicit other input as well . The Secretary concluded by stating that this evening's meeting would also be a general "brainstorming session" with the groups in attendance for other suggestions on how to proceed with the review and public input process for these plans . City Manager Gerald Splinter explained that the Comprehensive Planning process being undertaken by the City was a mandated process . He explained that the State Legislature had passed the State Planning Act which stipulates that all Metro- politan Communities must prepare a Comprehensive Plan, and that this planning process be coordinated by the Metropolitan Council for the purpose of coordinating growth in the Metropolitan Area. - 10-19-78 -2- PATRICIA WEITZEL ARRIVES Patricia Weitzel of t e Housing Commission arrived at 8:25 p.m. The City Manager continued that the deadlines for the planning process were set in law, and that it was the City's responsibility to comply with the deadlines. He further explained the role of the Neighborhood Advisory Groups would be to solicit input from neighbors to provide an assessment of the neighborhood. He stated the Neighborhood Groups could address the question: What would make the neighborhood more liveable? He stated this could include such things as suggestions for the parks, improvement of the housing stock, and locations for traffic stop signs. He pointed out that because neither the Planning Consultant nor the City staff actually lived in and "knew" each neighborhood, the grass roots level participation of the Neighborhood Groups would provide a valuable input into the planning process. ROGER SCHERER ARRIVES Roger Scherer of the Northeast Neighborhood Group arrived at 8:30 p.m. An extensive discussion regarding the planning process ensued. Chairman Engdahl recognized Mr. Steve Boone of the Northeast Neighborhood Advisory Group. Mr. Boone had several questions regarding the location of U. S. 169 in Brooklyn Park and Brooklyn Center. He stated that he had heard that the State Highway Commission was looking at a number of alternative routes for the highway, including Humboldt Avenue and Lyndale Avenue. Superintendent of Engineering James Noska stated that the State was working with a planning consultant to developing an alignment for Highway 169. He explained that the Highway would be the connecting corridor between the Northtown Crosstown and F. A. I. 94. The City Manager explained that once the State Department of Transportation had prepared plans, those plans would have to be approved by the cities involved. He explained that while funds had been allocated for study of the corridor, the new highway was still in a very tentative stage. He continued that it was likely that West River Road would remain in its present alignment in Brooklyn Center. Mr. Boone stated that the problem was a complex one and included the location of the North Crosstown bridge, and the location of the trunk line interceptor across the Mississippi River. He stated he lived in the area and was concerned with the effect that the Highway alignment might have upon his property and the area. Chairman Engdahl suggested that Mr. Boone and the other residents of the area give all the information regarding their preferences for the alignment to the Highway Commission before plans are prepared. Mr. Boone stated he had no real preference as to the location, but that he was concerned with having the matter decided. A discussion ensued relative to the location of the corridor. . Commissioner Theis stated it was his understanding that in Brooklyn Park there was a desire to divert traffic off of West River Road. The City Manager explained that there were several alternate routes under consideration including Humboldt Avenue and the possibility of constructing Xerxes Avenue through the Palmer Lake Basin. He con- tinued that since the Palmer Lake Basin alternative was not desirable, more traffic pressure was placed on Brooklyn Boulevard, Humboldt Avenue and West River Road. He stated that goals and policies contained in the Critical Area Plan encouraged the Highway department to minimize the impact of the Highway in the Critical Area. 10-19-78 -3- Chairman Engdahl recognized Mr. Roger Scherer of the Northeast Neighborhood Group. Mr. Scherer .explained in the original "701 " planning process, carried out in the 1960's, the Xerxes Avenue and Humboldt Avenue routes had been the major routes proposed. He stated the Xerxes proposal had been opposed by Environmentalists, and that because of.the existing commercial uses along Humboldt Avenue, it was not really suitable as the corridor. He continued that Highway No. 169 was the major connector from Anoka to Minneapolis, and he added that `due to the anticipated increased traffic because of new development in Brooklyn Park and Anoka to the north, Highway No. 1.69 should be expanded to a four lane Highway. Mr. Boone proposed that the City Council work with the Metropolitan Council to facilitate the establishment of the Northtown Crosstown Corridor, because Brooklyn Center is subject to the results of that decision, and is currently suffering the consequences of indecision. The City Manager explained that the City Council has passed joint resolutions with other communities involved which has brought the matter to the present poini. where a Consultant is studying the feasibility of the proposed alternative route. Chairman Engdahl recognized Lowell Whiteis of the West Central Neighborhood Advisory Group, who asked whether the Comprehensive Plan would speak to upgrading streets and installing concrete curbs. The City Manager responded that street upgrading and installation of curb and gutter could be included in the capital improvements program which is a part of the total Plan. He explained that the capital improvements program would include such things as physical facilities, park development, and schools. He further explained that the individual school districts were required to present their own capital improvment plan to the Metropolitan Council for review and coordination with the entire planning process. Mr. Whiteis inquired as to how a decision for street improvements would be made. The City Manager responded that the Planning Commission would recommend the Com- prehensive Plan which would include the capital improvement plan, and that the plans would then be approved by the City Council . He continued that once the Comprehensive Plan was implemented, public improvement hearings would be held regarding each individual public improvement project, and that residents affected by the project would be notified. In further discussion the City Manager explained that the Comprehensive Plan is used in the development of the City. He explained that it was a binding document, and that a number of court cases have been won and lost on the basis of a City's Comprehensive Plan. He stated that the Plan has a stabilizing influence on the City's development, and that to change any element of the Plan requires public hearings. He continued that the Comprehensive Guide Plan prepared in the 1960's had been very carefully followed and that the City has developed much in the way that the plan originally proposed. Chairman Engdahl recognized Council member Celia Scott. She suggested that a way to facilitate input would be for each Neighborhood Advisory Group to hold a meeting open to the public at a public place such as City Hall , which would be publicized in the local newspaper to encourage individuals in the neighborhood to come and provide their input. Chairman Engdahl stated he felt that such a public meeting was a good idea and suggested that the Chairman of the Neighborhood Advisory Groups arrange to schedule the meeting before December. 10-19-78 -4- Chairman Engdahl recognized Barbara Egli , of the League of Women Voters. She inquired whether all the Neighborhood Advisory Groups were active. Chairman Engdahl responded that the Neighborhood Groups were called upon for review and comment of each rezoning in the City and occasionally for review of special use permit applications. Ms. Egli stated that her concern was that many people may not be aware of the existence of the Neighborhood Groups, as she had not been, and that because of this, citizens may be excluded from participating in the process. Council member Scott suggested that the Neighborhood Groups could be publicized by an explanatory article in the local newspaper which would include a map of the City showing the six different planning neighborhoods. Chairman Engdahl agreed that this would be a good technique for publicizing the groups, and he reemphasized the importance of public participation at the neigh- borhood level . The City Manager explained that the objective of the Neighborhood Advisory Group meetings with the public would be to collect a list of problems, and not necessarily to analyze the problems or propose solutions. He stated that .the City staff could coordinate the publicity for the meetings and could supply a list of dates when the City Hall public meeting rooms would be available to the respective chairpersons. Chairman Engdahl recognized Louis Sullivan, of the Southeast Neighborhood Group. Mr. Sullivan commented that holding the public meetings at City Hall was a good suggestion in view of the requirements of the open meeting law which must be met. The Secretary briefly explained the open meeting law which requires that "adequate" notice be given of all public meetings. He stated that the City staff would take the responsibility for seeing that such notice was given when the Neighborhood. Groups determined when they would hold their meetings. Chairman Engdahl recognized Clifford Williams of the Housing Commission, who asked whether there were any ongoing programs of the Neighborhood Advisory Groups. Chairman Engdahl responded that the Advisory Groups offered review and comment on specific subjects as requested by the Planning Commission. He explained that during the current Comprehensive Planning process, the Neighborhood Advisory Groups would function to get people in the individual neighborhoods involved in the planning process at the front end, before the plan is completed. Chairman Engdahl recognized Phyllis Plummer of the Housing Commission. She stated she would like to see information regarding existing conditions before deciding needs. Chairman Engdahl explained that the Consultant had completed a survey of the existing housing stock and that this would be made available in the Housing Commission. Commissioner Plummer stated that she would lile the Commission to review the survey before discussing housing needs as it did not seem necessary to duplicate effort. The Secretary explained that the Housing Commission would receive copies of the housing inventory in the near future. He stated that most of the items for review by the individual commissions would be contained in the next section, the Policies section, and that when available, the different areas of that section would be sent to the various Commissions for their response. 10-19-78 -5' The Secretary explained that the difference between the Neighborhood Advisory Croups and the Advisory Commissions was that the Commissions were concerned with City-wide problems, while the .Neighborhood Advisory Groups would be concerned with individual specific problems related to their neighborhoods. He stated that the Commissions could use the lists arising from the Neighborhood Group meetings as information to take into consideration in their own reviews of the Comprehensive Plan. Chairman Engdahl recognized Sylvia Winkelman of the Conservation Commission. She explained that she was interested in the park and ride service provided by the Metropolitan Transit Commission to some areas. She stated she felt this was a good idea and inquired whether it would be possible to have a park and ride location in Brooklyn Center and whether the City would have to set aside land for parking purposes. The City Manager responded that the park and ride project was being studied by the MTC, and that while the study was not complete and new park and ride locations had not been established, information on the status of t�? study could be made available. He commented that Finance Director Paul Holmlund was on the Advisory Committee of the Metropolitan Transit Commission and could sake a presentation on the status if the Commission so desired. 4 ,The .City Manager stated. that it was the responsibility of the City staff and of the Planning Consutlant to see that the questions arising from the Neighborhood reviews and the responses and comments arising from the Commission's review of the planned elements into the final plan document. COMMISSIONER BOOK ARRIVES Commissioner Book arrived at 9:05 p.m. The Secretary stated that copies of the Critical Area Plan Inventory and Policies Elements would be distributed to the Northeast Advisory Group, the Southeast Neighborhood Advisory Group, the Park and Recreation Commission and the Conserv- ation Commission, and anyone else who is interested in reviewing the Plan. He stated that copies would be mailed to those members not present at this evening's meeting. He stated again that the public hearing on those portions of the Critical Area Plan would be held at the Planning Commission meeting on November 16, 1978. He recommended that if the Commission or Group would meet before that time, the Plan should be reviewed. OTHER BUSINESS: Citizens Community Development Advisory Committee The Secretary explained that as a part of Community Development Block Grant Fund- ing Application, a review committee for the various programs proposed under the application is to be established. He stated that while the City of Brooklyn Center had not opted to seek the Community Development Block Grant Funding.; in the past, an application was being prepared. He stated the deadline for the application was August of 1979. He further explained that the City is seeking to find interested citizens to serve on this Committee, and that it was felt that it would be bene- ficial to have a member of each City Advisory Commission on the Community Develop- ment Committee, He inquired if any Planning Commissioner would be interested in serving on this group. He noted that they would probably meet 4 to 6 times during the course of a year. 10-19-78 -6- Commissioner, Hawes stated he had attended the first meeting of the Committee, and that he would volunteer to serve on tie committee. The Secretary responded that Commissioner Hawes ' name would be su mitted to the City Council for consideration. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Commissioner Book seconded by C mmissioner Hawes to adjourn the meeting. The motion passed unanimously. The Planning Commission adjourned at 9:20 p.m. Cha' a n 10-19-78 7 1 i