Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1978 02-09 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 FEBRUARY 9, 1978 Call to Order: The Planning Commission met in regular session and was called to order at 8:05 p.m. by Chairman Gilbert Engdahl . Roll Call : Chairman Engdahl , Commissioners Malecki , Jacobson, Pierce, Book, Hawes and Sazama. Also present were City Manager Gerald Splinter, Director of Public Works . James Merila, Director of Planning and Inspection Blair Tremere and Planning Aide Laurie Thompson. Approve Minutes: Motion by Commissioner Jacobson, seconded by Commis- January 26, 1978 sioner Book to approve minutes of January 26, 1978 as submitted. The motion passed unanimously. Application No. 78003 Following the Chairman 's explanation, the first item (Robert Putnam) of business was consideration of Application 78003 submitted by Robert Putnam. The Secretary introduced the application, stating the applicant sought approval of a preliminary plat which would divide a large parcel in the 3900 block of 52nd Avenue North into two single family residential lots. The Secretary showed a transparency of the area and reviewed the history of the parcel . He stated the property had radical elevation differences which would require proper engineering improvements before it could be developed. He continued that part of the parcel is very low and serves as a drainage area for the lots in the sur- rounding neighborhood. He stated that because of these physical characteristics , the property had never been built on and, until recently, had been held by the State since going tax-forfeit. He stated there had been a previous Planning Commission Application in 1959 for permission to build double bungalows on the parcel , which has been denied because of incon- sistency with the surrounding neighborhood. He ex- plained that this application was for a preliminary plat to create two single family residential lots which would exceed the ordinance standards in width and in area. The City Engineer reviewed the drainage situation. He stated that about three acres of land drained into the rear of the property. He continued that it would be possible to bring in storm sewer along 52nd Avenue North from Lakeside Place. In response to questions from Chairman Engdahl and Commissioner Pierce, he stated that storm sewer could be brought in at an elevation which is about the elevation of the walk-out basement of the house located directly west of the property. He added that, considering the lowest elevation of the property, installing storm sewer would not guarantee a solution to the drainage problem. A discussion ensued relative to the drainage altern- atives. The City Engineer stated that an alternative would be to provide an easement for drainage and storage at the rear of the property which would allow the surface water to drain into the property as it does now. -1- 2-9-78 " Commissioner Hawes questioned whether it would be possible to provide a pumping station in the area. The City Engineer responded that it would probably be cost-prohibitive and in addition, would require maintenance. In response to a question by Commissioner Pierce, the City Engineer stated that fill-ing the lot would cause a severe problem to the lot directly west and the lot directly south of the property. Commis- sioner Book questioned whether the property dried out. The City Engineer answered that there was seldom any standing water on the the property.' Chairman Engdahl announced a public hearing had been scheduled and recognized by Mr. Palzer of 3919 - 52nd Avenue North. Mr. Palzer stated his property was directly west of the subject property, and stated he had frequently seen water standing on the property. He added that there was cometimes standing water in the rear of his own lot, but that water had never come within a foot of his walk-out basement. Chairman Engdahl recognized Mr. Curt Peterson of 3906 52nd Avenue North. He inquried as to who would be responsible for the cost of the storm sewer. The City Engineer responded that bringing storm sewer in would cost approximately $16,000.00 and that generally this cost would be assessed to the areas that contribute to the drainage. He continued that this had not been determined at this point, but that it was estimated 8 properties contributed to the drainage. The Secretary stated that Mrs . E. J. McCaffrey, of 3840 Oak Street, who was unable to attend the public hearing, had asked to go on record as being concerned about the drainage probl.ems on the property. Motion by Commissioner Jacobson seconded by Commissioner Close Public Hearing Pierce to close the public hearing. The motion passed Chairm Engdahl recognized the applicant, who stated he did not propose to change any elevations on the property. He stated the ponding area was to remain as it is in the rear of the property. He continued that the neighbor to the west would be the only affected property and that he intended to build at the same elevation as the walk- out basement of the neighboring property. The City Engineer pointed out that it would be necessary to build at an elevation two feet higher than the neighbor's property. He explained that, due to flood insurance program requirements, it was necessary to build one foot above the 100 year flood elevation, which is 856 feet in Brooklyn Center. He stated that this would mean the applicant would have to build 857 feet, whereas the neighbor's walk-out is at 855 feet. An extensive discussion ensued relative to the provision of a drainage easement. Commissioner Book questioned whether there would be a problem with the transfer of the drainage easement when the title will be transferred. The Secretary responded that there would be proper documentation of the easement on the survey and that the easement would be transferred with the property title. Commissioner Pierce asked whether installation of a storm sewer would solve the drainage problem. The City Engineer responded that the storm sewer would be about 31-2 to 2 ft. above the lowest part of the lot, and could not be guaranteed to solve the problem. Commissioner Book questioned the applicant whether he was amenable to providing a drainage easement. The applicant stated that he was willing to provide it in order to help alleviate the drainage problem. The City Engineer stated that it was recommended that a 15 ft. easement be provided along the west property line for future storm sewer in addition to an easement along the rear property line for a ponding area. The applicant pointed out that a 15 ft. easement would reduce the amount of buildable lot frontage. The City Engineer stated that if the neighbor to the west were agreeable, it would be possible to provide a 72 ft. easement on each side of the property line. Recommend Approval of Following further discussion there was a motion by Application No. 78003 Commissioner Hawes seconded by Commissioner Book to (Robert Putnam) recommend approval of Application 78003 submitted by Robert Putnam subject to the following conditions: 1 . Final plat is subject to approval by the City Engineer. 2. , Final plat is subject to the requirements of Chapter 15 of the City Ordinances. 3. A 15 ft. storm sewer easement shall be provided along the west property line, and an easement for the drainage and storage of surface water shall be pro- vided along the rear of both new prop- erties, as determined by the City Engineer. The motion passed unanimously. Application No. 78004 The next item of consideration was Application No. (Mobil Oil Corporation) 78004 submitted by Mobil Oil Corporation. The Secretary introduced the application stating it was for a Special Use Permit to reopen and operate the service station at 5710 Xerxes Avenue North. He reviewed a transparency of the area and pointed out that there was access onto County Road 10 and onto Xerxes Avenue North. He explained it was the intent of the applicant to .change the nautre of the operation in such a manner that the gasoline sales would be fully self-service and the use of the interior service bays would be on a rental basis to the public. He added that a snack vending area was proposed for the existing office space. He reviewed site alterations including reducing the pump islands from 36 ft. to 22 ft. and installing a 22 ft. diameter round canopy light on each island. He continued that the station would be owned and operated by the Mobil Oil Corporation, but would not carry the Mobil brand name. He stated that the station- was built in the late 1960's and, therefore, did not have an underground sprinkler system for the landscaped areas. He stated that it had been the Commission's policy in the past to require the installation of an underground sprinkler system as a condition of the special use permit. In response to a question from Chairman Engdahl , the Secretary stated that the food vending area would be subject to the sanitarian's approval and that pro- vision for a screened trash enclosure could be a condition of approval . Public Hearing Chairman Engdahl announced a public hearing had been scheduled. It was noted none of the notified neigh- boring properties owners were present. Motion -by Commis- sioner Jacobson seconded uy Commissioner Pierce to close public hearing. The motion passed unanimously. .3-_ 2-.9-78 Chairman Engdahl recognized Mr. Alan Larson, repre- senting the applicant, who explained the nature of the operation. He stated the station would be owned and operated by the Mobil Oil Corporation. 11le explained this was preferable to a dealer-lessee arrangement because the corporation could control the operation. Commissioner Jacobson questioned whether parts and supplies would be sold on the premises. The appli- cant responded that they would not, and that the service bays would be rented by the hour. In response to a question by Chairman Engdahl , the applicant stated that the facility would be monitored by the Mobil Oil Corporation. He stated Mobil Oil was a self-insured corporation, and that the station would be operated under the name of "Big-Bi" which is a secondary brand name In response to further questions by the Commissioners, the applicant stated the hours of operation would be from 6:00 a.m. to midnight, that the trash dumpster would be placed in a screened enclosure area, that there would be no preparation of food on the premises, and that packaged snacks would be sold over-the-counter rather than from vending machines. Mr. Larson stated the applicant was willing to install an underground sprinkler system if such systems were required of all other service stations. The Secretary explained that the system was required by Ordinance and that the Planning Commission had required the installation of the system of all service stations applying for a special use permit. In response to a question from Commissioner Pierce, the Secretary stated that the bituminous curbing along the rear of the property line met former ordinance standards and plan approval , and appeared to be well maintained. There was a motion by Commissioner Jacobson seconded by Recommend Approval of Commissioner Book to recommend approval of Application Application No. 78004 No. 78004 submitted by Mobil Oil Corporation subject to (Mobil Oil Corporation) 5 the following conditions: 1 . The permit is issued to the operator of the facility and is nontransferable. 2. The permit is subject to all applicable ordinances, codes, and regulations, including special licensing requirements and violation there shall be deemed grounds for revocation. 3. An underground lawn sprinkler system shall be installed in all landscaped areas, including boulevard greenstrips. 4. Plan approval is exclusive of all plan signery which shall be subject to require- ments of Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances. 5. All outside trash disposal shall be appropri- ately screened from view. The motion passed unanimously. The next item of consideration was Application No. 78006 Application No. 78006 submitted by Richard Kruger. The Secretary stated the (Richard Kruger) applicant sought approval of a site plan for the property located at 6045 Brooklyn Boulevard. He showed a trans- parency of the area, noting that the subject property was zoned C-1 (Service/Office) , that the property to the west is R-1 (Single Family Residential ) and contained a house, and that the property to the south was zoned R-5 (Multiple Family Residential ) and contained an 11 unit apartment building. 2-9-78 -4- The Secretary explained that the property contained a structure which was originally built as a single family dwelling in which the then owner conducted a home occupation beauty shop. In the late 1960's, as part of the Comprehensive Planning and Zoning, the property was rezoned C-1 (Service/Office) and was converted over time to a total use as a beauty shop with no residential activity. He added that the building had been vacant for approximately 2 years. He continued that the City Council had approved a variety of improvements, including paving and land- scaping, as proposed by a former owner in 1968. He stated that those improvements had never been completed. The Secretary stated the applicant proposed using the building as a real estate closing office. He continued that houses cannot be converted to business uses without remodeling the structure to meet appli- cable commercial building and zoning codes. He stated that the applicant's architect has certified that the building is structurally sound, and can meet all code requirements. He added that architect- ural plans showing the necessary modifications had been submitted. He added it had also been determined that the building meets commercial setback standards. Chairman Engdahl inquired whether proper exits were provided in the building. The Secretary responded that the plan showed proper exits and remodeling for handicapped accessibility. Chairman Engdahl inquired whether the second floor could be used for public commercial activity. The Secretary responded in the negative. Chairman Engdahl noted that the square footage of the first floor was approximately 1100 sq. ft. and not large enough to require installation of a fire sprinkler system. The Secretary commented that smoke detectors were indicated on the plans. The .Secretary showed slides of the property and in- dicated that a six foot opaque fence or wall would be required to screen the R-1 property to the rear. He stated this was not shown on the plans. The Secretary also stated there was concern with the proposed traffic flow on the site. He stated there was a 24 ft. , two-way traffic driveway from 65th Avenue and a 12 ft. , one-way driveway from Brooklyn Boulevard. The City Engineer commented that since no parking was proposed along the south property line, the south driveway onto Brooklyn Boulevard was un- necessary, and because of the traffic hazard on Brooklyn Boulevard, it would be safest to close the curb cut. In response to a question from Commissioner Pierce, he stated the driveway was proposed to be in- only. Commissioner Pierce asked whether the bus lane in front of the site could be used as a right turn lane. The City Engineer responded that it could be, but was not needed. He stated the applicant's concern was that if the driveway were closed, the State High- way Department would not permit them a new curb cut onto Brooklyn Boulevard. Commissioner Pierce inquired whether there was irri- gation provided along the south greenstrip. The Secretary stated that it would be required. -5- 2-9-78 Chairman Engdahl recognized Mr. Kruger and Mr. Berwyn, who represented the applicant. Mr. Kruger stated that the character of the building lent itself to the Gallery of Homes operation. In response to a question from Chairman Engdahl regarding the irrigation .in the south greenstrip, Mr. Kruger stated that the area was heavily wooded and was a run-off area from the rest of the site. He commented that the area didn't seem to need irrigation, but that it would be put in if necessary. .,_ Commissioner Pierce inquired as to the number of parking spaces required. The Secretary stated that six were required, and added the applicant indicated 11 parking stalls, including a handicapped space, on the plan. Mr. Kruger added that the use was low volume, and that there would be at the most, 6 to 10 people in the building at any one time. In response to another question from Commissioner Pierce, Mr. Kruger stated that the applicant would stucco the building, bring it up to building code, add a picture window, and extend the existing walkway to the City sidewalk. An extensive discussion ensued relative to the need for the in-only driveway off Brooklyn Boulevard. Mr. Kruger restated the applicant's concern that, if the existing driveway were to be closed, the State Highway Department might not permit a new curb cut. The City Engineer added that several other realty buildings, Bermel-Smaby, at 6500 Brooklyn Boulevard, and Lowry Realty, at 7000 Brooklyn Boulevard, both had their driveways off the side streets rather than off Brooklyn Boulevard. He added that there appears to be area on the site for additional parking spaces if, needed along the west side of the property without utilizing the south driveway. The City Engineer stated if the driveway were to be retained, it should be widened to 16 ft. rather than 12 ft. width, reducing the traffic hazard. He explained the applicant would need to get a permit from the State Highway Department to enlarge the driveway. Following further discussion there was a motion by Recommend Approval of Commissioner Book seconded by Commissioner Jacobson to Application No. 78006 recommend approval of Application No. 73006 subject to (Richard Kruger) the following conditions: 1.. Building plans are subject to review by the Building Official with respect to applicable codes prior to issuance of permits. 2. Grading, drainage and traffic delineation plans are subject to approval by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of permits. 3. 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. A 6 ft. opaque fence shall be provided along the west property line. 5. An underground lawn irrigation system shall be installed throughout the landscaped areas on the site. 6. Driveway opening onto Brooklyn Boulevard shall be increased to 16 ft. in width and proper delineation and/or signery in the rear area shall be added to restrict traffic, as approved by the City Engineer. 2-9-78 -6- Voting in favor: Chairman Engdahl , Commissioners Book, Jacobson, Malecki , Pierce and Hawes. Voting against: none. Not voting: Commissioner Sazama. The motion passed. Recess The Planning Commissioner recessed at 10:00 p.m. and resumed at 10:20 p.m. Application No. 78007 The next item of business was consideration of Appli- (Dr. Richard Check) cation No. 78007 submitted by Dr. Richard Check repre- senting the ownership of the Brookdale Office Build- ing, 5901 Brooklyn Boulevard. The item was introduced by the Secretary who stated the applicant was seeking approval of a joint parking agreement with the Cross of Glory Lutheran Church, 5940 Ewing Avenue North. He stated that the owners of the building proposed to add additional medical uses which resulted in an increased parking need under the City Ordinance formulas. He stated that the building was built for office uses only, and had enough parking on the site for that. The Secretary further explained that, in 1974, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 74-46 approving a joint parking agreement between this office building and the church comprehending the use of adjacent church property to the west of the office building. He stated that area contained approximately 19 parking spaces which enabled the then owner of the office building to accommodate a certain amount of medical use. He stated the present application comprehends 19 addi- tional parking spaces on the paved parking area be- longing to the church to the north of the office building. He stated that there is a total of 38 spaces and consequently, once this agreement would be ap- proved, there would be no need for use of the area to the west of the office building. The Secretary reviewed a site plan and indicated the location of the parking, including the provision for chain "gates" which could be secured during the office building parking hours thereby preventing traffic related to the office building from driving through the large church parking lot into the residential area to the west. He stated that during nonbusiness hours when the church would be using the property, the chains could be unlocked and pulled back thereby open- int up the lot similar to the present configuration. The Secretary explained the site modifications, in- cluding a combination of the two parking lots on the north side of the office building. He explained that there would be no additional curb cuts onto Brooklyn Boulevard, and that there would be some additional parking lot islands installed in the joint parking area to assure good traffic flow. The Secretary also informed the Commission of a con- cern raised by a citizen at the last City Council meeting regarding the use of tax-exempt property by commercial uses. He stated the matter had been re- searched, and it was determined that joint use of parking between commercial taxed use and a noncom- mercial tax-exempt use such as the church was permis- sible, but that the City Assessor had determined the law requires the portion of the tax-exempt property which is used to be assessed for taxes. He explained that the church officials had been informed of this. -7- 2-9-78 The Secretary then reviewed the Ordinance standards in Section 35-720 and explained that, upon approval of the joint parking by the City Council , the properly drawn legal agreement must be filed against the church property as an easement encumbrance, allowing the use of the parking. He stated that this was required by the Ordinance so that the additional parking could be legally credited to the office building use. The Secretary then reviewed slides of the property indicating the present parking and the proposed future parking areas. An extensive discussion ensued and in response to a question by Chairman Engdahl , the Secretary stated that there were other possibilities for achieving additional parking to the office building. He stated, for example, the property immediately to the south of the office building, which is zoned C-1 , and which contains a non- conforming single-family dwelling, could be acquired and converted to parking. He stated that the ownership of the office building could purchase property from the church, including a parcel to the southwest of the office building which was not paved, and seek a rezoning and combination of the land with the office building property. He stated that for a maximization of the use of existing resources, however, the joint parking agreement was more desirable than paving additional land. Commissioner Pierce inquired as to who would be responsible for seeing that the chain "gates" were properly secured, and the Secretary stated it would be the responsibility of both 'the office building ownerhsip and the church to determine who would be in charge. Chairman Engdahl then recognized the applicant, Dr. Richard Check, who stated the building had been purchased by himself and several other physicians who intended to use it for their own practice, and also intended to provide additional tenant areas for medical uses. He stated that a joint parking agreement was considered the most appropriate way to achieve the additional parking, because of the existing paved area, the convenience for patients, and the alleviation of several potential hazard- ous traffic situations for entering and exiting the office building. Dr. Check also stated that he had pursued and was continuing to pursue other options such as the acquisition of land, but this approach seemed to be the most feasible because of the Ordinance provisions and the willingness of the church to participate. Chairman Engdahl also recognized Mr. Bob Rasmussen who represented the church, who stated the church was not interested in generating revenue from the agreement, and explained that the applicant would be responsible for the taxes and the maintenance of the parking area. He stated he felt the use of the existing pavement is a proper utilization of existing resources, and he also stated that the resulting traffic patterns should be an improvement to the community in this area and noted also that through traffic from Brooklyn Boulevard to the residential area to west should diminish. It was also noted that the agreement calls for use of the office building parking by the church during church functions, and Mr. Rasmussen stated that experience with church traffic indicated this should improve their situation. In further discussion, Commissioner Book stated that provisions should be made for handicapped access, and the applicant indicated this was planned not only for access to the building, but also for handicapped parking stalls. 2-9-78 -8- Chairman Engdahl inquired about the existing green- strip and fence on the north side of the office building, and the Secretary.. stated that the plan called for the fence and greenstrip to be eliminated, and that a wider delineator would be provided on the church property. It was suggested that delineator be landscaped, and that aesthetically, it would be comparable to what is there today without the fence. In further discussion, the Secretary stated that when the office building was built, there was a single family home to the north and thus, the opaque screen renting was required along the north side of the office building. He stated that now the area contains only open parking. Chairman Engdahl then recognized Mr. Darrell Catton, 5901 Ewing Avenue North, who stated concerns with the existing 1974 joint parking agreement, especially noting concerns that the neighboring property owners were not aware of that agreement until after it had been approved. He also stated that he had raised the question of tax-exempt property at the City Council open forum, and he inquired as to how the church property could be assessed. The Secretary responded that the City Assessor would determine the exact area used for the parking and could assign it a special parcel number to which the taxes would be assigned. Mr. Catton then inquired whether the original 1974 joint parking agreement would be terminated and Chair- man Engdahl recognized Mr. Rasmussen of the Cross of Glory Lutheran Church who responded that it would be, upon filing of the new agreement. Mr. Catton acknowledged that he had seen the proposed plan and stated that as long as the proposed chain "gates" were in place during the hours of business , there should be no traffic problems through the area. He suggested that the City monitor the situation, however, to assure that there was no through-traffic generated by the office building. Chairman Engdahl then recognized Mr. Everett Carlson, 5905 Ewing Avenue North, who stated that, in his judgment, if the church congregation were polled on this issue, they would probably not approve the joint agreement. He stated that people would have concern about the church's ability to use this close parking area for special functions during the week, such as women's groups and funerals. He stated that the church membership and neighboring property owners should be consulted about the plan. In response to a question by Chairman Engdahl , Mr. Rasmussen stated the church executive board had reviewed the matter thoroughly and felt the joint parking was in the best interests of both property owners and, further, did not feel there would be any major conflict. He stated that the possibilities of conflicting needs for the parking was minimal and in any case, was a matter of convenience since the church had an overabundance of parking available elsewhere on the site. The Secretary stated that if periodic unique situations arose, such as large funeral or during election day, when the church is used as a polling place, there would appear to be no problem in the parking area being opened up for the flow of traffic and more convenient parking. Mr. Rasmussen reiterated his comment that the church officials felt the joint use of the parking facilities, and especially the proposed modifications,would result in a better overall traffic situation in this area for both the office building and the church, thus representing an improvement of the community. -9- 2-9-78 A brief discussion ensued relative to landscaping of the new delineator on the church property, and it was the consensus of the applicant and the Commission that the landscaping of the delineator should consist of wood chip mulch and juniper plantings. Following further discussion, there was a motion by Com- : Recommend Approval of missioner Sazama seconded by Commissioner Pierce to Application No. 78007 recommend approval of Application No. 78007 submitted by (Dr. Richard Check) Dr. Richard Check subject to the following conditions: 1 . The agreement shall be subject to review and approval by the City Attorney as to content and form, and it shall be filed as easement encumbrance to the title to the church property as provided for in Section 35-720. 2. Use of said additional parking shall be authorized upon completion of certain site improvements as indicated on approved site plans and a Performance Agreement and supporting financial guarantee (in an amount to be determined by the City Manger) shall be submitted to assure to completion of those site improvements: 3. The extent to which facilities in said office building are permitted for medical or dental uses shall be limited to the amount of ad- ditional parking which is available through the provision of the approved joint parking agreement. 4. The approval comprehends landscaping of the delineator in the joint parking area, utiliz- ing wood chip mulch and juniper plantings, and the approval comprehends delineation of the parking area as approved by the City Engineer. The motion passed unanimously. The next item of consideration was Application No. . Application No. 78002 78002 submitted by Summit State Bank of Richfield. (Summit State Bank of The Secretary introduced the application for a special Richfield) use permit to locate a remote banking facility, a C-i (Service/Office) use in the I-1 (Industrial Park) at 6100 Summit Drive. He stated the Commission had con- sidered the application and a public hearing had been held at the January 26, 1978 meeting. He continued that the application had been tabled to allow the ap- plicant time to submit additional site plans and to develop a definite proposal for deferment of permanent improvements. The Secretary showed transparencies of the area on the Earle Brown Farm in which the remote banking facility was proposed, in the Earle Brown Farm administration building for a _temporary period. He stated that research had determined there was precedent to allow the deferment of certain permanent improvements for a definite period, or until it becomes necessary to provide them. He briefly reviewed the concerns with the site. He stated a site drainage plan had been provided and had been reviewed by the City Engineer. It was found to be in order and did not include storm sewers, but rather on-site drainage. He continued that proper security lighting was also a site concern. 2-9-78 -10- In reviewing the building improvements, the Secretary stated that it would be necessary to provide a second- ary exit from the second floor and to provide a fire protection system. He stated the Commission had discussed the possibility of approving a fire detect- ion system rather than a fire extinguishing system for the building at its last meeting. He explained that the ordinance requirement for in- stallation for a fire extinguishing system in a building over 2,000 sq. ft. applies only to new construction and is not a retroactive requirement. He also stated that the applicant contends it would be difficult to install a fire extinguishing system in the building, that it would disturb the aesthetics of the building, and has indicated a heat and smoke detection system on the plans. He added that in similar circumstances, where an applicant had shown installation of a fire extinguishing system to be physically infeasible, the Council had approved a smoke and heat detection system connected to the central alarm system for the Twin City Federal building. He reiterated that this was not a variance request, but rather a policy matter. Chairman Engdahl stated that were two major consider- ations, that of deferment of site improvements such as concrete curb and gutter, upgrading the driving and parking areas, and installation of underground lawn sprinkling system, and that of the installation of a fire protection system. Chairman Engdahl recognized Mr. Roger Newstrum who represented the applicant, and who stated that de- ferral of site improvements was requested because of the uncertain duration of the use in the building, and the future development in this area. He in- troduced Dr. Jenkins, a fire protection notification specialist and consultant for the bank. Dr. Jenkins stated he was the inventor of the ionization detector system and explained that in some cases a fire extinghishing system is not feasible for existing buildings. He explained that he had designed a detection system which would provide adequate pro- tection, and central notification. In response to a question from Commissioner Pierce, Mr. Janis Blumentals, architect for the applicant, stated the building was highly fire resistive. Commissioner Pierce questioned the applicant whether a time limit of two years was acceptable. Mr. Ralph Bruins, President of Summit State Bank of Richfield, responded that it was. He continued that the bank would probably be located in the building for three years, but that after two years there would be definite plans for the future location of the building and if need be, the applicant would apply for an extension. Chairman Engdahl commented that the Performance Agreement and supporting financial guarantee would cover the cost of all permanent improvements. Commissioner Book questioned whether the property would be replatted so it was a single identifiable piece of property. The Secretary responded that this was required by ordinance. He continued that the Earle Brown Farm was recorded in the State Register of historically significant sites, but that this placed no legal constraints on the development or use of the property. He stated that the State agency encourages uses such as the proposed use which maintain the character of the historic buildings. -11- 2-9-78 A brief discussion ensued relative to the zoning of the property in the surrounding area. Motion by Commissioner Jacobson seconded by Commissioner Malecki to recommend approval of Application No. 78002 submitted by Summit State Bank of Richfield subject to the following conditions: 1 . The Special Use Permit is issued to the applicant as operator and is nontransferable. 2 The permit is subject to all applicable codes, ordinances and regulations and violation there- of shall be grounds for revocation. 3. The subject property and adjacent parcels will be resubdivided, through platting or registered land survey, as approved by the City Engineer. to assure that the commercial activity including the main building and all accessory uses are .contained entirely within a single lot or tract; and said resubdivision shall be completed within 90 days of the date of the issuance of the special use permit. 4. Installation of required site improvements including concrete curb and gutter around all driving and parkings areas; ordinance standard paving of driving and parking areas; and underground lawn sprinkling system may be deferred for a period of up to two years from date of issuance of the special use permit in consideration of the future develop- ment pending for this area and subject to the following: a. Notwithstanding the above, the City Council may require the installation of permanent improvements at any earlier time if deemed necessary, based upon the observed levels of the intensity of the use and the maintenance of the temporary improve- men-ts described below. b. During the interim period, temporary bitumunious rolled curbing will be installed as approved by the City Engineer and indicated on the approved plans. c. At the end of the two year deferral period, or upon the termination of the subject commercial special use at this location, the need for such improvements will be reviewed by the City, taking into account the use of the property and the developments which may have occurred in the adjacent and immediate area. 5. A Performance Agreement and supporting financial guarantee (in an amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be submitted to assure com- pletion of the required site improvements, both temporary and permanent; and this agreement shall be in force until it is determined the improvements have been satisfactorily completed, or are deemed unnecessary as described above. 6. The building shall be equipped throughout with a smoke and heat detection system as approved by the City, and said system shall be connected to a central alarm system in a manner described in Chapter 5 of the City Ordinances. 2-9=78 -12- 7. The property shall be supplied, prior to occupancy, with available City utilities, and utility plans and drainage plans shall be subject to approval by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of permits. 8. Building plans are subject to approval by the Building Official with respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance of permits. The motion passed unanimously. Other Business In other business, the Planning Commission discussed its meeting schedule in view of the City Council 's meeting schedule. Following the discussion, it was the general consensus of the Commission to allow flexibility in the meeting schedule. Adjournment Motion by Commissioner Book seconded by Commissioner Jacobson to adjourn the meeting. The Planning Commission adjourned at 12:15 a.m. C man -13- 2-9-78 1 1