Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1978 12-07 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 DECEMBER 7, 1978 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The PlInning Commission met in regular session and was called to order at 8:05 p.m. by Chairman Gilbert Engdahl . ROLL CALL Cha—' irT man Engdahl , Commissioners Malecki , Jacobson, Hawes and Theis. Also present were Director of Public Works James Merila, Superintendent of Engineering James Noska, Building Official- Will Dahn, Director of Planning and Inspection Ronald Warren and Planning Aide Laurie Thompson. APPLICATION NO. 78065 (Aaron Hoffman) and APPLICATION NO. 78067 (Dr. Gregory Swenson) Following the Chairman's explanation the first item of consideration was Application No. 78065 submitted by Aaron Hoffman for site and building plan of an approximate 8,800 sq. ft. office building on the Cl zoned property at 6417 Brooklyn Boulevard. The Secretary stated that Application No. 78067 submitted by Dr. Gregory Swenson for a special use permit for accessory parking was related to this application and the two could be considered concurrently. COMMISSIONER BOOK ARRIVES Commissioner Book arrive at 8:10 p.m. The Secretary showed a transparency of the area and explained the application. He stated that the property under consideration was concurrently owned by the Brook Park Dental Clinic, 6437 Brooklyn Boulevard, and that Mr. Hoffman was in the process of purchasing the property provided a parking agreement could be worked out whereby a number of parking spaces could be provided for the dental clinic on the site. He continued that the site was a triangularly shaped piece of property and could accom- modate parking for 65 cars. Forty four spaces would be required for the proposed office building and 20 spaces would be required for the accessory off-site parking proposed for the dental clinic. The Secretary stated that the property at 6437 Brooklyn Boulevard abuts an R1 (Single Family Residental ) district at the south property line, and the applicant proposed to plant a four foot high Nankin cherry hedge along the property line to provide the ordinance-related required screening. He explained that the ordinance requires a four foot high opaque fence or wall , or City Council approved substitute where an R1 District abuts a Cl development. The Secretary reviewed the recommended conditions of approval for Application No. 78065, including the requirement that the property proposed for accessory off-site parking for the Brook Park Dental Clinic be legally encumbered for the sole purpose of providing parking for the dental clinic through a deed restriction approved by the City Attorney. The Secretary continued that under Application No. 78067, a special use permit was sought to provide off-site accessory parking for the Brook Park Dental Clinic to be located at 6417 Brooklyn Boulevard. He stated the applicant proposed to have the off-site parking on the previously discussed property. A letter from the appli- cant's architect indicates the dental clinic desires to expand into the unused portion of the lower level of the dental clinic in order to provide a dental lab- oratory as well as administrative and office areas.. The Secretary explained that the expansion requires a need for additional parking based on the ordinance parking formula. 12-7-78 -1- The Secretary explained that the dental clinic proposed to sell the property at 6417 Brooklyn Boulevard for the development of an office building provided an arrangement could be made for accessory parking to meet the needs of the dental clinic. He further explained that the property had been subject of a rezoning from R5 (Multiple Family Residental ) to Cl (Service/Office) under Application No. 75044 which was approved by the City Council in March, 1976. He stated a special use permit had been granted to the applicant in June, 1976 under Application No. 76018 for off- site accessory parking at the property. He stated the parking had not yet been provided and the expansion of the clinic had not yet taken place. The Secretary explained that the major concern with the application was to ensure that a proper agreement be reached which will provide enough parking for the dental clinic when its proposed internal alterations are completed. He stated that Section 35-701 (3) of the City Ordinances addresses off-site accessory parking and he re- viewed the provisions of the Ordinance in relation to the application. He.stated the application met the ordinance conditions in that the dental clinic had been in continuous operation on its site for more than two years; the proposed off-site parking property was zoned Cl , the same as the dental clinic property; there was no other off-site parking in use or proposed for the clinic; the distance from the furthest point of the off-site parking property to the site of the principal use is less than 300 feet; a minimum of 20 parking spaces would be provided on the off-site parking property; pedestrian traffic would not be required to cross the major . thoroughfares and other roadways defined in the ordinance; approval of the permit would require the off-site parking property to be legally encumbered to the sole purpose of providing parking accessory to the principal use; and site improvements were proposed for the off-site parking site. The Secretary also reviewed the recommended conditions of approval for the application, and the Standards for Special Use Permit:.. The Commission reviewed the site and building plans and an extensive discussion ensued relative to the application. The Secretary noted the existing landscaping on the site and recommended that the- proposed Nankin cherry hedge be required to be four feet high at the time of installation. He stated there were some plantings in place at the present time in the area. He. also noted that mechanical equipment was proposed for the roof and that screening of the equipment would be required. The Commission discussed the possibility of providing an easement for - walkway purposes along the Unicorn Apartments property between the off-site parking area and the dental clinic. The Secretary explained that the off-site parking would be used for staff only, and that clients would use the spaces on the site. He added that the applicant would restripe the clinic parking lot in order to provide for a handicapped parking space. In response to a question from Chairman Engdahl , he stated there was a ramp from the parking lot to the building. Commissioner Hawes inquired whether 20 parking spaces were required by the number of employees. The Secretary explained that the ordinance provisions for accessory off-site parking require that a minimum of 20 parking spaces be provided on the off-site parking property. He explained that there are two formulas to determine the amount of park;lig required for a medical use: one which computes spaces required on the basis of the number of doctors in the building and one which uses the total amount of square footage of the building. He stated that the amount of parking required is the greater of those two computations. He explained that the expansion proposed by the Brook Park Dental Clinic would require only 18 additional parking stalls if on-site parking were proposed, but because it is off-site parking, 20 spaces are required. 12-7-78 -2 . Commissioner. Theis inquired as to the walking distance between the parking property and the dental clinic. The Secretary responded that the distance appeared to be less than 800 feet. He stated that the ordinance speaks to. a straight line distance between the properties, rather than a walking distance. The Commission again dis- cussed the problem with the walking distance between the two properties and the possibility that people might cut across the R5 zoned property between the dental clinic and the proposed accessory off-site parking property. Chairman Engdahl recognized Mr. Keith Sjoquist, architect for the dental clinic, who pointed out that the off-site parking would be used exclusively for staff and that the problem was therefore controllable since the doctors would require that the staff use the sidewalk on Brooklyn Boulevard rather than cutting across the adjacent property. He also briefly reviewed the dental clinic remodeling plans. Commissioner Hawes inquired whether the dental clinic site was provided with an underground irrigation system. The Secretary responded that it was and commented that the City Council had recently authorized the release of the performance bond in effect on that property. Chairman Engdahl inquired whether there would be any changes in the exterior of the building. The Secretary responded that an additional entryway would be added on the south side of the building to provide access to the dental laboratory area. He pointed out it would be a staff entrance and not the main public entrance. Chairman Engdahl recognized Dr. Swenson who stated he had nothing to add to the application. In response to a question from Chairman Engdahl , he explained that the dumbwaiter indicated on the plans was to be used for the laboratory. PUBLIC HEARING Chairman EngdaTD announced that a public hearing had been scheduled for the special use permit consideration comprehended under Application No. 78067. No one spoke relating to the application. Motion by Commissioner Jacobson seconded by Commission- er Book to close the public hearing on Application No. 78067. The motion passed unanimously. In further discussion Chairman Engdahl asked the applicant why the clinic proposed to sell the land rather than retaining it. Dr. Swenson responded that it wasn't felt that the property would be used for any future expansion. The Commission further reviewed Application No. 78065. Chairman Engdahl recognized Mr. Aaron Hoffman, the applicant. In response to a question from Commissioner Hawes, the applicant stated that the building was proposed to be a general office building and not a medical building. The Secretary pointed out that the 45 parking stalls indicated on the plan for the office building is one in excess of that required for the building. In response to another question from Commissioner Hawes, the Secret- ary stated that the encumbrance on the off-site parking property would be perpetual and would include driving easements.. The Secretary also recommended that as an additional condition of approval revised landscaping plans be submitted prior to the Council meeting which would show the landscaping as is shown on the site plan. A discussion ensued relative to the proposed Nankin cherry hedge. In response to a question from Commissioner Theis, the Secretary stated that it was his under- standing it would be a dense type of shrubbery and would be a satisfactory screening. Commissioner Hawes inquired whether it would be a satisfactory screen in the winter. Chairman Engdahl recognized Mr. David Nelson, the architect, who explained that Nankin cherries were a thick shrubbery with expanded branches and would provide plenty of screening in the winter as well as in the summer. He also commented that it would be a minimum of four feet high when installed. 12-7-78 -3 Chairman Engdahl inquired as to the wood chip mulch indicated on the plans. Mr. Nelson responded that the wood chip mulch was proposed to be four inches deep around all the plantings and would be in a bed in the sod and was indicated for all the plantings around the parking lot. Commissioner Hawes inquired whether there would be any form of retainer of the wood chips in the sod. Mr. Nelson stated that a metal retainer could be installed around the wood chip area. Chairman Engdahl ' state that he felt a retainer was necessary in order to restrain the wood chips from the parking lot and the sodded areas. Commissioner Book pointed out that a wood chip mulch is a good weed restraint. Commissioner Theis inquired whether there were any hardwood trees required for the site. He noted that the -plan indicated a softwood type of maple. The Secretary stated that the ordinance does not require hardwood trees for commercial properties. In further discussion reqarding the proposed hedge screening, Commissioner Hawes inquired whether it would be possible to condition the approval such that if the hedge proved to be inadequate, an opaque fence would be required. He stated he did not feel it would be a major problem, but he was con- cerned with the single family residential property. Mr. Nelson responded that the applicant would have no objection to installing the fence if the hedge screening proved inadequate to the neighboring property owners. RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO-. 78065 (Aaron Hoffman) Motion by Commissioner Hawes seconded by Commissioner Ma ecki to recommend approval of Application No. 78065 submitted by Aaron Hoffman 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 landscaping plant are subject to review and approval by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of permits. 3. A Performance Agreement and supporting financial guarantee (in an amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be submitted to assure completion of approved site improvements. 4. The building shall be equipped with an automatic extinguishing system to meet NFPA Standard No. 13 and shall be connected to an approved central monitoring system in accordance with Chapter 5 of the City Ordinances. 5. Any outside trash disposal facilities and/or rooftop mechanical equipment shall be appropriately screened from view. 6. All landscaped areas shall be equipped with an underground irrigation system as approved by the City Engineer. Plan approval comprehends a planting of a four foot high Nankin cherry hedge as appropriate screening along the south property line in lieu of a four foot high opaque fence or wall . In the event that the installed hedge does not prove to adequately screen the parking area, the four foot high opaque fence or wall shall be provided. 8. Consistent with the provisions of Section 35-701 , the property proposed for accessory off-site parking for the Brook Park Dental Clinic shall be legally encumbered for the sole purpose of pro- viding parking for the dental clinic through a deed restriction approved by the City Attorney prior to the issuance of permits. 12-7-78 -4- 9. Revised landscaping plans consistent with the proposed site plan including the indicated sidewalk shall be submitted prior to City Council review. The motion passed unanimously. In further discussion regarding Application No. 78067, it was suggested that a fence along the northerly property line of the off-site parking property or the southerly property line of the clinic property could discourage walking through the adjacent residential property. The Secretary pointed out that no fence was required by the ordinance. Commissioner Malecki stated that she felt that the landscaping proposed would discourage any walking through that area . Dr. Swenson explained that he did not think that pedestrian traffic through the adjacent property would be a problem since only staff would be parking on the off-site parking property. Mr. Sjoquist pointed out that in addition to the fact that only staff would be parking on the property, landscaping would discourage any through traffic. He stated that since it doesn't seem to be a problem at this point, requiring a walkway easement would be a hardship for the applicant. He concluded that if there were a problem in the future, some type of further plantings could be provided in that area to discourage walking through. Commissioner Theis stated that he did not feel that shrubbery would be an adequate deterrent to walking through the adjacent property. Commissioner Hawes pointed out that in the conditions of approval , the Commission could stipulate that if there were a problem in the future,a fence could be provided. Chairman Engdahl agreed and stated that he felt approval of the application could be recommended with that restriction. Commissioner Theis commented that he was concerned with the City's recourse if there were problems with this area. Chairman Engdahl pointed out that the application was for a special use permit and that a special use permit was subject to review. RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 78067 (Dr. Gregory Swenson) Following further discussion there was a motion by Commissioner Malecki seconded by Commissioner Theis to recommend approval of Application No. 78067 subject to the following conditions of approval : 1 . The permit is issued to the applicant and is nontransferable. 2. The final plans for remodeling the lower level of the dental clinic , are subject to review and approval by the Building Official with respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance of permits. 3. A Performance Agreement and supporting financial guarantee (in an amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be submitted to assure the completion of sidewalk and other outside improvements. 4. Consistent with provisions of Section 35-701 , the parking property at 6417 Brooklyn Boulevard for accessory off-site parking for the Brook Park Dental Clinic shall be legally encumbered for the sole purpose of providing parking for the dental clinic through a deed restriction approved by the City Attorney. 5. Adequate parking for use by the clinic, as determined by the Building Official , shall be provided at 6417 Brooklyn Boulevard prior to certifying the occupancy of the remodelled lower level of the dental clinic. 12-7-78 -5- 6. In the event that complaints arise caused by pedestrians waiking through the property between the dental clinic and the off-site parking property, a fence shall be required along the northerly property line of the property at 6417 Brooklyn Boulevard. The motion passed unanimously. APPLICATION NO. 78058 (Brooklyn Properties) The next item of consideration was Application No. 78058 submitted by Brooklyn Properties. The Secretary explained that the application was for a rezoning from R1 (Single Family Residential ) to Cl (Service/Office), of an approximate one acre site at 5637 Brooklyn Boulevard. He showed a transparency of the area and stated the site was commonly referred to as the slaughterhouse property and bounded on the east by the Brooklyn Boulevard frontage road; on the north by two single family residential properties (5643 Brooklyn Boulevard and 5642 Northport Drive); on the west by Northport Drive; and on the south by Cl properties including the two sites being temporarily occupied by CEAP (5607 and 5625 Brooklyn Boulevard) and the Library property at 5601 Brooklyn Boulevard. He explained that the west end of the subject site (approximately 28 ft. by 165 ft.) is part of the Library Terrace Addition which contains the Library, but is zoned Rl . The Secretary continued that the applicant proposed to combine this property with the slaughterhouse property for the development of a law office. The applicant had submitted a conceptual draw- ing for a three story 14,850 sq. ft. office building should a rezoning be accomplished. The Secretary explained that when the Library site was rezoned in 1976 under Appli- cation No. 76053, there had been much discussion as to whether or not the slaughter- house property should also be included in the rezoning. The record indicates the Council 's feeling at that time that the property should remain Rl, but that a re- zoning of the property at a future date would be considered if a specific proposal was put forth. The record also indicates that the City Council felt the Planning Commission should study this area along Brooklyn Boulevard between 53rd Avenue North and County Road 10, particularly vacant property, for rezoning during the Compre- hensive Planning review process, The Secretary stated the application was introduced and a public hearing was held on October 5, 1978. The matter was tabled by the Commission and referred to the Southwest Neighborhood Advisory Group for review and comment. He stated the Neighborhood Group met on November 8, 1978 and had submitted minutes of that meeting to the file. He explained that the group recommended rezoning from Rl to Cl , all existing property, starting with and including the Northport Medical Center, 5415 Brooklyn Boulevard, north to and including the old slaughterhouse property, 5637 Brooklyn Boulevard. The Secretary also briefly reviewed the Rezoning Evaluation Policy and Review Guidelines contained in Section 35-208 of the City Ordinances. The Secretary recommended that the Commission loo's at the specific proposal conteFa- platcd by the application, rather than accepting the Southwest Neighborhood Advisory Groups recommendation in its entirety, and consider the rezoning of the property from the North Clinic northerly in light of the Comprehensive Plan review. He ex- plained that while there may be merit in rezoning that property, it would be more appropriate to consider it with the Comprehensive Plan review. 12-7-78 -a- The Secretary continued that there may be merit in rezoning the subject property particularly, in light of the present Comprehensive Plan's acknowledgement of Service/Office and Multiple Family Residential rezonirgs on Brooklyn Boulevard. He also pointed out that the City Council , when rezoning the Library property, indicated that rezoning of the slaughterhouse property could be considered if a specific proposal was put forth. He stated that the proposal met some of the rezoning guide- lines which could be looked at collectively or individually after measuring the pro- posal first against the policy that the zoning must be consistent with the Compre- hensive Plan and does not constitute "spot zoning." "Spot zoning" is defined as a zoning decision which discriminates in favor of a particular landowner, and does not relate to the Comprehensive Plan or to accepted planning principles. The Secretary also stated that with respect to the Rezoning Guidelines, the proposal seemed to some extent, to be consistent with and compatible with surrounding land use classifications. The Library property to the south is zoned Cl , and to some degree it is felt that Service/Office uses are compatible with single family uses with the provision of proper buffering. He continued that the permitted uses in the Cl zoning district could be contemplated for the property and that there had been a zoning classification change in the area (the Library property) since the subject property was zoned. He stated it appeared the property could bear the ordinance development restrictions for the proposed zoning district. He recommended that the Cotmnission take a closer look at the Policy and Review Guidelines before making a final recommendation to the City Council . A discussion ensued. Chairman Engdahl inquired whether the matter had been discussed with the Planning Consultant. The Secretary responded that it had, and that the consultant was conducting a study and preparing recommendations for Brooklyn Boulevard. The Secretary stated that the application could stand on its own merit and that it was important to determine whether or not the property was good residential property. He also commented that the rezoning recommended by the Neighborhood Advisory Group should be considered during the Comprehensive Planning process because of expanded opportunities for public hearings. Commissioner Hawes commented that at the meeting of the Southwest Neighborhood Advisory Group, there had been discussion of the installation of a cul-de-sac on Northport Drive at the property. He stated that the neighbors had expressed concern that such a cul-de-sac would result in more traffic on the Brooklyn Boulevard frontage road, and that the neighbors were not in favor of the installation of the cul-de-sac. Commissioner Jacobson commented that it was her understanding that at the time of the Library rezoning, the neighbors were in favor of the cul-de-sac. Commissioner Hawes explained that if Northport Drive were closed off at that point, that the traffic to the north would funnel down and use 56th or 57th Avenue in order to reach the Brooklyn Boulevard frontage road, and then would continue down the frontage road to the intersection at 55th Avenue. He stated it was this increase in traffic on the frontage road to which the neighbors were opposed. The City Engineer clarified the discussion of the cul-de-sac. -He stated that -it appeared that the neighbors on Northport Drive were in favor of the cul-de-sac because it would protect them from the Cl use, but that those who live south of the property on Brooklyn Boulevard were opposed to the cul-de-sac and feel it would be detrimental to the traffic flow in the area. The Secretary commented that while the conceptual plans showed a curb cut onto Northport Drive, it would be desirable to have the main access to the building be from Brooklyn Boulevard and no access to Northport Drive. The City Engineer commented that the installation of a cul -de- sac would require more study in order to ascertain that its installation would not create more problems. The Secretary also commented that the cul-de-sac would elimi- nate access to Northport Park from Northport Drive to the north, and that there should be no need for access onto Northport Drive from either the slaughterhouse property or the Library property with future development. 12-7-78 -7- Chairman Engdahl commented that he felt the Commission should limit its recommend- ations to the particular proposal of the applicant, and not consider rezoning the entire portion of Brooklyn Boulevard suggested by the Neighborhood Group. In response to questions from Chairman Engdahl and Commissioner Theis, the Secretary stated that a 15 ft. greenstrip and four foot high opaque fence or wall or Council approved substitute was required as a buffer between a Cl development and Rl prop- erties. He also stated that the property .fronted on Brooklyn Boulevard, which is a major thoroughfare, and a 50 ft. front setback would be required. Chairman Engdahl stated that the public hearing had been held at the October 5, 1978 meeting, but inquired whether anyone present in the audience had any new information or questions to add. He recognized Mr. George Olson, 5459 Brooklyn Boulevard, who explained that the recommendation to change the zoning of the property from the Northport Clinic northerly was primarily an attempt to draw attention to the problems of the property owners in that area. He stated that the neighbors realized that such a rezoning must be carefully reviewed. He stated that he had no object- ions to the rezoning to Cl of the slaughterhouse property, but that he would like his own property to also be considered for rezoning. Chairman Engdahl recognized Mr. David Jensen, 5501 Brooklyn Boulevard, who stated he agreed with the Southwest Neighborhood Advisory Group and commented that the die had been cast for commercial zoning in the area when the Library site was rezoned. He also stated that he did not object to the rezoning of. the slaughterhouse property as long as the entire area was considered for rezoning. Chairman Engdahl recognized Mrs. Modeen, 5545 Brooklyn Boulevard. She pointed out that the property along Brooklyn Boulevard was not suited for residential uses, and emphasized that there was an existing traffic problem in the area, and that increase commercial activity would increase the traffic problem. Chairman Engdahl commented that there were ordinance requirements and restrictions as to density and parking, ` and that each proposal would be considered individually. He also explained that at this time the Commission was not considering a site and building plan approval, but it was only considering the rezoning proposal . Further discussion ensued relative to the application. Commissioner Theis stated that, in his opinion, the application met the review guidelines, and that he felt the area would benefit if the Comprehensive Plan were revised to permit the Cl zoning. He commented that he felt it was a reasonable solution to the problems of the area. Commissioner Book noted that the rezoning policy requires that the zoning be con- sistent with the Comprehensive Plan, and asked whether the application met this criteria. Commissioner Jacobson responded that approval of the rezoning would require an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan. Chairman Engdahl stated that he felt the area between 55th and 55th Avenues was un- desirable as residential property and that this meant it was generally unsuited for uses permitted in the zoning district, which was one of the Guidelines. Commissioner Book stated he felt the issue was one of where the logical place to draw the line is. He pointed out that people generally do not want to abut com- mercial property, and that the applicant's property was not isolated from other single family residential property as were the properties along Brooklyn Boulevard between 55th Avenue and Northport Drive. Commissioner Jacobson stated that since the Planning Consultant was preparing the study regarding Brooklyn Boulevard, she felt that perhaps the Commission should wait until it receives the results of that study before making a recommendation on this application. 12-7-78 -8- Commissioner Malecki inquired as to the opinions of the neighbors immediately adjacent to the properties. Commissioner Hawes stated that the property owners immediately north of the slaughterhouse property had not been present at the Neighborhood Group meeting. RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 78058 (Brooklyn Properties) Following further discussion there was a motion by Commissioner Theis seconded by Commissioner Hawes to recommend approval of Application No. 78058 submitted by Brooklyn Properties to rezone the property located at 5637 Brooklyn Boulevard from R1 (Single Family Residential ) to Cl (Service/Office) in view of the following: the Comprehensive Plan acknowledges Service/Office and Multiple Residential Rezoning on Brooklyn Boulevard; the proposed zoning is consistent with and compatible with the surrounding land use classifications in that the property immediately to the -south is zoned Cl , and single family residential property is compatible with Cl development which is properly buffered; all the permitted uses in the proposed zoning dibtrict can be contemplated for development of the subject property; there have been zoning classification changes in the area since the subject property was zoned (the Library site); the subject property can bear the ordinance development restrictions for the proposed zoning districts; the property is generally unsuited for uses permitted in the R1 zoning district; the proposal demonstrates merit beyond the interest of the owners of the individual parcel in that consideration of rezoning of the entire are along Brooklyn Boulevard from Northport Clinic northerly to the subject property is warranted. Voting in favor: Chairman Engdahl , Commissioners Malecki , Hawes and Theis. Voting against: Commissioners Book and Jacobson. Not voting: none. The motion passed. RECESS The Planning Commission recessed at 9:50 p.m. and resumed at 10:20 p.m. APPLICATION NO. 78061 (Robert Fors/Andrew Gunn Development Com an ) The next item of consideration was Application No. 78061 submitted by Robert Fors/ Andrew Gunn Development Company. The Secretary stated the application was for a special use permit and site and building plan approval of a proposed 6,000 sq. ft. building to be used as day care facility/Montessori School on the R5 zoned property at 6501 Brooklyn Boulevard. The Secretary reviewed a transparency of the area and stated that the applicant felt the proposed building could be converted at a future date to a Service/Office type use if the day care facility did not prove successful . He stated the special use permit is required with the application because a Cl use was being contemplated in an R5 zoning district. He also explained that a determination would have to be made that the proposed day care use represents a proposal similar in nature to other Cl uses, and that it is compatible with the criteria for determining compat- ibility of a Cl use in the R5 zoning district. He reviewed the criteria. The Secretary continued that the application had been considered and a public hearing was held by the Planning Commission on October 5, 1978. He stated that at that time, the Commission indicated their feeling that the proposed day care use represents a proposal similar in nature and compatible to other Cl uses. He continued that the item was tabled to allow the applicant time to prepare complete plans and to meet with the neighborhood regarding neighborhood concerns. 12-7-78 -9- The Secretary stated that completed plans had been received which included the various required revisions. He explained that the inclusion of a traffic bump in the driveway to slow traffic down was recommended because of the children which would be present on the property. He stated that it had also been recommended that a chain be installed across the curb cut proposed for 65th Avenue as an attempt to g p ublic hearin . traffic which was a concern raised during the ` discourage cut through He continued that it was not felt that the proposed use of the property would have an adverse impact on available public facilities nor would it have any of an adverse impact on the immediate neighborhood or community than would the development of the parcel under its present R5 zoning. He reviewed the recommended conditions of approval . The Secretary noted that he had received a call from Mrs. Friedl , 4012 - 65th Avenue North,who stated she did not object to the proposed day care facility, but felt that a gate or chain should be installed at the 65th Avenue driveway in order to prevent drive-through traffic. The Secretary reviewed the site plan and the proof of parking plan. He stated that more information was necessary regarding the grades and elevations of the property before City Council review. He also stated that the plans should indicate a chain gate on the 65th Avenue curb cut. In a discussion regarding the traffic in the area, Commissioner Book inquired as to the possibility of a signal light being installed at the intersection of 65th Avenue and Brooklyn Boulevard. The City Engineer responded that the signal at that-inter- section was on the priority list and could possibly be installed within a ,period of two years. The Secretary commented that the speed bump in the driveway and the gate across the curb cut were recommended as deterrents to drive-through traffic which could increas traffic problems in the area. He added that the applicant had agreed to those pro- visions in the interests of good neighborhood relations. A brief discussion ensued relative to the chain gate provision. The City Engineer noted that the Brooklyn Methodist Church was a good example of the use of a chain gate. He stated that the Church had installed a chain gate at its parking lot at Brooklyn Boulevard and Noble Avenue North and that it had been successfully used to prevent drive-through traffic. He also commented that the chain gate installed on the Cross of Glory Church property was relatively lightweight, and that when a heavier chain was installed, it could probably be effective. In response to questions from Commissioner Jacobson and Chairman Engdahl , the Secretary stated that fencing was proposed primarily for the perimeter of the play area and that it was intended for the children's safety, not as screening. In re- sponse to a question from Commissioner Book, the Secretary stated that the appli- cant proposed to use the existing trees on the rear of the lot to screen the parking from the neighboring adjacent R1 properties. Chairman Engdahl recognized Mr. Fors who represented the applicant and presented the Commission with recent photographs taken of the site which showed the existing land- scaping. The Secretary noted that the site was already dense with trees and plant- ings and that there were no real landscaping changes proposed. He noted that the landscaping plan should be revised to show a better delineation of the type and number of trees existing on the site. 12-7-78 -10- The Secretary briefly reviewed some of the concerns the Commission had raised at the last meeting which included the notion that the subject property was key to a package development of the entire R5 zoned area. He added that because of covenants existing on the single family properties in the Northgate subdivision, it might not be feasible for commercial or multiple family residential development to take place on these properties. He stated the Commission should determine whether or not it would be desirable to refuse this application and wait for a package development of the area. He also commented that the Commission had asked the applicant to look into acquiring the property immediately adjacent to the south of the subject property. Mr. Fors stated that he had met with the owners of the R1 zoned property adjacent to his property and that the owners had preferred the existing trees as screening to an opaque fence. He added that if the trees proved to be an inadequate screening, then the fence could be installed. He also stated that there would be no problem with installing the chain gate to prevent the drive-through traffic and to provide signs indicating that the curb cut was a private driveway, both on Brooklyn Boulevard and on 65th Avenue North. In response to a question from Commissioner Jacobson, Mr. Fors stated that the hours of operation of the school would be from 8:00 a.m. to 3:30 p.m., and would comprehend two shifts. He explained that the day care center would be open from 7:00 a.m. to approximately 6:00 p.m. Chairman Engdahl stated that the public hearing had been held at the October 5, 1978 meeting, but inquired whether there was anyone in the audience who had any comments to make regarding the application. He recognized Mr. Richard Sturgis, 4013 - 65th Avenue North, who stated he was not opposed to the school itself, but. was concerned with additional traffic on 65th Avenue at its intersection with Brooklyn Bouelvard. He also commented that he would prefer the school development to an apartment de- velopment and felt the development would be an improvement to the property. . Commissioner Theis stated that he recalled the concerns at the public hearing were with the S curve at 65th Avenue and motorists cutting the corner, and the speed with which motorists drove in the area. He inquired whether the staff had any recommendations for these problems. The Secretary responded that installation of curb and gutter on 65th Avenue North would alleviate the problem of cars cutting the corner. The City Engineer explained that in order to provide a spee limit of less than 30 miles an hour, the authorization of the Commissioner of the Department of Transportation was necessary. He also explained that 65th Avenue is collector street, and there was traffic on this street because it leads into and o t of a large residential area. In response to another question from Commission r Theis, the City Engineer stated that 65th Avenue was_ not on the Municipal State Aid System, but that the City was considering placing it on the system. He Added in that event, the street would be widened and upgraded and curb and gutter would be installed at that time. He pointed out that curb and gutter can be installed at any time with the petition of property owners in the area. In response to a question from Commissioner Theis, the Secretary stated that a day care facility was not a listed permitted use in the Cl zoning district, ut that the Commission had determined at the October 5, 1978 meeting that such a use was similar in nature to the permitted Cl uses. The Secretary also pointed ut that replatting of the property was required in order to simplify an existing metes and bounds description which described the property as extending to the cent r line of Brooklyn Boulevard, and to straigten out the property line which would r sult in a trade-off of property between the owner of the property at 4012 - 65th A enue and the applicant. 12-7-78 -11- .Commissioner Theis asked the applicant whether any attempt had been made to acquire the parcel to the south. Mr. Fors responded that he had contactea the property owners and- that the owners were satisfied with the development of the group home on the property (the Welcome Community Home) and were not interested in selling the property. . RECOMMEND APPROVAL Of APPLICATION NO. 78061 (Robert Fors/Andrew Gunn Development Co. Following further discussion there was a motion by Commissioner Jacobson seconded by Commissioner Book to recommend approval of Application No. 78061 submitted by Robert Fors/Andrew Gunn Development Company 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 and utility plans are subject to review and approval by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of permits 3. A Performance Agreement and supporting financial guarantee (in an amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be submitted to assure completion of approved site improvements. 4. The building shall be equipped with an automatic fire extinguishing system to meet NFPA Standard No. 13 and shall be connected to an approved central monitoring system in accordance with Chapter 5 of the City Ordinances. - 5. Any outside trash dispo.sal facilities and/or rooftop mechanical equipment shall be appropriately screened from view. b. All land-scaped areas shall be equipped with an underground irrigation system as approved by the City Engirear. 7. Plan approval comprehends using existing trees and plantings to provide the ordinance required screening between this property and the R1 property to the north of the site in lieu of a four foot high opaque fence or wall . If this screening proves inadequate, install- ation of the four foot high opaque fence or wall shall be required. 8. The property is subject to replatting prior to the issuance of the building permits. 9. The special use permit is issued to the applicant and is nontransferable. 10. The proposed day care use must be appropriately licensed by the State of Minnesota and a current copy of any required licenses shall be kept on file with the City. 11 . Plan approval comprehends the deferral of seven parking spaces based upon the Proof of Parking plan showing that the required parking can be provided on the site. 12. Plan shall be reviewed and approved by the State Building Codes Division. prior to the issuance of permits. 13. A revised landscaping plan showing the number and type of existing trees on the site and including a chain gate at the 65th Avenue curb cut shall be submitted prior to City Council review. 12-7-78 -12- Voting in favor: Chairman Engdahl , Commissioners Malecki, Jacobson, Book and Theis. Voting against: Commissioner Hawes. Not voting: -none. The motion passed. OTHER BUSINESS: CRITICAL AREA PLAN PUBLIC HEARING In other business the Secretary recommended that the public hearing on t e Critical Area Plan be deferred from December 14 to December 21, 1978. He stated that this would allow those concerned with the plan to review it prior to the hearing. He also commented that if everything was in order and the response to the plan was favorable, the Commission would be able to approve the plan on the 21st and forward their approval to the City Council for its first meeting in January. It was the consensus of the Commission that the public hearing be deferred to December 21, 1978. RESTAURANT USE IN CI ZONE/R.L. JOHNSON REZONING REQUEST In other business the Secretary reviewed a memorandum regarding restaura t uses in the C1 zoning district. He stated that the City had received a recommendation from the Planning, Consultant,: BRW,_:Inc.,. regarding_.a matter._which_had be En referred to the Planning Commission from the City Council involving the possibility of permiting a restaurant use on the property located in the 7200 Block of Brooklyn Boilevard. He stated that the property was currently zoned R3 (Townhouse and Garden partments) and was bounded on the north by the municipal boundary; and the east by Brooklyn Boulevard; on the south by Shingle Creek and Creek Villa Townhouses; and n the west by'"The Ponds" planned residential development. He continued that Mr. R. L. Johnson had earlier this year submitted a rezoning request (Application -No. 780"2) to zone the property C2 (Commerce) and had indicated a desire to develop the property with an office building on the south portion. and a restaurant on the north portion. The rezoning request, following public hearings by the Planning Commission, review and comment from the Northwest Neighborhood Advisory Group, and review by the City Council was denied. He continued that the Planning Commission was requested by the City Council to review a proposed split zoning of the property (Cl to the south and C2 to the north) on the basis that a Cl use of the southerly portion would be compatible to existing zoning in Brooklyn Center while a C2 use on the northerly portion would be compatible to adjacent land uses in Brooklyn Park, and that the split zoning would provide a buffer between the R3 property in Brooklyn Center and the Commercial properties in Brooklyn Park. It was also requested that the Commission 1 ok at the feasibility of rezoning to Cl , a potentially landlocked piece of property which is part of "The Ponds" development, that lies easterly of Shingle Creek. The Secretary continued that the Planning Consultant had recommended as a solution to the problem and as a means to permit the development of an office use and a restaurant use on the property, the rezoning of the parcel to Cl , which w3uld be compatible with the Comprehensive Plan, and an amendment to the Zoning Or finance to permit restaurants which seat a minimum of 130 persons in the Cl zone. The recommendation went on to note that restaurants along Brooklyn Boulevard dould not appreciably interfere with the roadway's ability to handle traffic demands. The consultant felt that with one properly designed curb cut to service the too uses, the impact on the traffic flow of Brooklyn Boulevard would be no greater than that of an office development. They also recommended that there be no additional C2 zoning on a parcel by parcel basis on Brooklyn Boulevard, and indicated tat gener- ally a 130 seat restaurant seemed to be a valid number of seats to distinguish between family restaurants and convenience. food restaurants. I2-7-78 -13- , The Secretary explained that after much review of the consequences of such an amend- ment, it was not felt that this type of amendment would not be in the best interests of the City. He stated that first of all , there may be a problem with using the number of seats as a qualifier for permitting a restaurant in the Cl zone. He noted that this might only serve to encourage larger convenience food type restaurants. He added that another major concern would be with respect to other Cl zoned property along Brooklyn Boulevard. He stated there were a number of Cl locations on Brooklyr, Boulevard where a restaurant would not be •compatible with surrounding uses, and than an example of this would be the Library property. He added that there are a number of other Cl zoned properties where it is felt that a restaurant would not be appro- priate. He explained that the City Would be hardpressed to deny restaurant uses on those properties if the Zoning Ordinance were amended in such a manner. The Secretary continued that it was felt the original action to deny the C2 use of any portion of the property was the best overall decision and that it was recom- mended that this decision stand. He explained that if the Commission feels that it is in the best interests of the City to have a restaurant or other C2 use on a portion of the property in question , then it was recommended that a split zoning occur, noting that the property is unique because of the location of Shingle Creek and acknowledging a C2 zoning on the northerly portion of. the property as being an extension of and compatible with the commercial zoning to the north in Brooklyn Park. He recommended that the Commission acknowledge that there is no rationale to rezone any other Brooklyn Boulevard property to C2; that this action is merely a minor ex- tension of an already existing zoning in another community which will not cause a major traffic impact on Brooklyn Boulevard; and that the C2 use can be adequately buffered from the less dense uses to the south by a rezoning of the remainder of the property to Cl which is compatible with the City's Comprehensive Plan— The Secretary also noted that if such a split zoning were undertaken, a determination would have to be made regarding the best location for drawing the zoning line, and the applicant would be encouraged to contact "The Ponds" about the possibility of rezoning that landlocked property to Cl as well.The Secretary stated Mr. R. L. Johnson had received a copy of the memorandum. A discussion ensued regarding the possibility of rezoning the property. Chairman Engdahl stated it was his opinion the parcel was unique and that he could see a rationale for rezoning. Commissioner Book agreed that the property was unique, and also agreed with the recommendation that the consultant's proposed amendment not be adopted. The Secretary pointed out that the Commission's major concern with the rezoning had been with establishing a precedent for C2 rezoning on Brooklyn Boulevard, but that in recognizing the uniqueness of the parcel , especially with consideration of the commercial property in Brooklyn Park, the Commission could acknowledge that no precedent was set with the rezoning. Commissioner Hawes stated he was in favor of the split C1/C2 zoning of the property in that he felt the Cl use would be an adequate buffer to the R3 properties located to t"e South. He inquired of the applicant whether there had been any change in the Development proposal . Mr. Johnson stated that because of the time element, Sambo 's Restaurant was no longer interested in the property but that there were other parties interested in developing it with a restaurant. He added that interest in the office site had increased and that with the possible acquisition of the two acres to the west, it might be possible to develop it with a Big B 's Pizza Restaurant, his own company. Ae added that he was negotiating for the parcel to the west contingent upon the rezoning. 12-7-75 -; Commissioner Theis stated that the parcel is unique in Brooklyn Center doe to its proximity to• the Brooklyn Park commercial district. He inquired as to tie meaning of "split zoning." The Secretary explained that as the property under consideration was currently one parcel and the Commission had referred to the possibil ty of zoning a portion of it Cl and a portion C2 as "split zoning." He pointed out tat the property would be required to be replatted and that once this was accomp ished there would be a separate legal description and only one zoning classification per parcel . In further discussion regarding the development proposal , Commissioner H wes inquired whether the applicant still intended to encumber the adjacent property ii Brooklyn Park to provide for parking. The applicant responded in the affirmative Commis- sioner Book commented that the proposed rezoning would appear to be consistent with the Rezoning Review Guidelines. In response to a question from Commissi ner Theis, the Secretary stated that the Council had requested the Planning Commiss on to re- view the matter and make a recommendation. He explained that if the Plalining Com- mission recommended that a Cl zoning for the southerly part of the property and a C2 zoning for the northerly part of the property be considered, and the Council concurred with the recommendation, then the applicant would submit a new rezoning application. In a unanimous decision, the Commission recommended that a rezoning of t e property located in the 7200 Block of Brooklyn Boulevard to comprehend a Cl zonin on the southerly portion of the property and a C2 zoning on the northerly porti n of the property be considered noting that this property is unique because of th location of Shingle Creek and acknowledging that a C2 zoning on the northerly por ion of the property as being an extension of, and compatible with the commercial zo ing to the north in Brooklyn Park. The Commission also acknowledged that there is lo rationale to rezone any other Brooklyn Boulevard property to C2; that this action is merely a minor extension of an already existing zoning in another community which will not cause a major traffic impact on Brooklyn Boulevard; and that the C2 use an be adequately buffered from the less dense uses to the south by a rezoning if the remainder of the property to Cl which is compatible with the City's Comprehensive Plan. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Commissioner Jacobson seconded by Commissioner Malecki to adjo rn the meeting. The motion passed unanimously. The Planning Commission adjourned at 11 :30 p.m. r � C irman 12-7-78 -15-