Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1977 03-10 PCM MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA REGULAR SESSION MARCH 10, 1977 ' CITY HALL . Call to Order: The Planning Commission met in regular session and was called to order at 7:35 p.m.- by Chairman Cecilia Scott. Roll Call : Chairman Scott, Commissioners Engdahl , Foreman, Pierce and Horan. Also present was Director of Planning and Inspection Blair Tremere. Approval of Minutes Motion by Commissioner Engdahl , seconded by Commis- 2-17-77 sioner Pierce to approve the minutes of the February 17 minutes as submitted. Voting in favor: Chairman Scott, Commissioners Engdahl and Pierce. Not voting: Commissioners Foreman and Horan who explained that they were not present at that meeting. Motion passed. Application No. 76046 Following the Chairman's explanation, the first item (Dayton Development Company) of business was consideration of an amendment to Application No. 76046, submitted by Dayton Development Company. The item was introduced by the Secretary who stated the amendment had been reviewed at the January 27, 1977 meeting and had been tabled to allow the applicant the opportunity to make needed revisions to the parking layout. He explained the item com- prehended the Joint Parking Agreement involving the Brookdale Theater, the proposed Howard Johnson Restaurant, and the Dayton Development Company on land in the east Brookdale perimeter area. He stated the City Council had approved an agreement involving the same land area on July 26, 1976 when a small retail shopping facility had been proposed on the site now proposed for the Howard Johnson Restaurant— The Secretary explained the applicant had made re- visions involving aisle widths, delineation and park- ing space layout which would assure proper traffic flow and access. He stated the parking area contained 195 spaces which accomodated the total 193 spaces which represented the deficiencies of the theater and the proposed restaurant. Chairman Scott recognized Mr. George Bestrom repre- senting the applicant and a brief discussion ensued. Recommend Approval of Motion by Commissioner Foreman, seconded by Commis- Application No. 76046 sioner Horan to recommend approval of the amendment (Dayton Development Company) to Application No. 76046 submitted by Dayton Development Company subject to the following conditions: 1 . The agreements are subject to review and approval by the City Attorney, and to the legal encumbrance requirements of Section 35-720 of the City Ordinances. 2. The agreement relative to the development comprehended by Application No. 77005 shall be finalized and filed as encumbrance prior to issuance of permits for that project. 3. The agreement shall also comprehend accom- modation of the parking space deficiency for the theater use as directed by Council Resolution No. 69-34. _1_ 3 710-77 4. 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 approved site improvements. The motion passed unanimously. The next item of business was consideration of Application Application No. 77005 No. 77005, submitted by Howard Johnson Company. The (Howard Johnson Secretary reviewed the January 27, 1977 consideration of Restaurants) the item which was tabled at that time to permit the applicant the opportunity to make necessary corrections. He stated that the detailed revisions had been made to the site plan and he proceeded to review the completed site and building plans for the proposed 237 seat Ground Round Restaurant. Chairman Scott recognized Mr. Walter Francois who repre- sented the applicant, Mr. George Bestrom who represented Dayton Development Company, and Mr. Bill Sheehy who represented the contractor. An extension discussion ensued concerning landscape materials for the south and east perimeter areas; the curbing detail on the east side of the project; and a proposed grease interceptor indicated in the utility plan detail . It was the concensus of the Commission and the applicant that the south and east perimeter areas should contain sod rather than the indicated pine bark mulch. It was the concensus of the Commission and the applicant that the east perimeter curbing includes not only curbing of the restaurant parking lot, but also the westerly edge of the joint parking area lot. The Secretary commented on the matter of the proposed 1 ,500 gallon concrete grease interceptor indicated on the submitted utility plans. He stated that at this time the City Health Officer and the Director of Public Works recommended the device not be included in the site and building approval , subject to further review and approval by those departments. He stated that the Health Officer in particular, had concerns about future maintenance of the device as well as the need for the device,citing the lack of such installations in com- parable restaurants in this area. Mr. Francois was recognized and stated that the Howard Johnson Engineer- ing Staff had been in contact with the City Health Officer and would continue to review this utility detail with him. He stated there was no objection to excepting that particular device from the site and building plan approval . The Secretary explained that it was brought to the attention of the Commission since its location at the rear of the building was indicated on the site plan. Relative to parking, the Secretary stated the restau- rant had a deficiency of 71 spaces, based upon the seating plan which indicated 237 seats and a proposed maximum shift employment of 15 persons. He stated that the Joint Parking Agreement approved under Application No. 76046 must be filed as an encumbrance on the Dayton Development Company property before permits can be issued for this development. Following further discussion, there was a motion by Recommend Approval of Commissioner Horan seconded by Commissioner Foreman Application No. 77005 to recommend approval of Application No. 77005, (Howard Johnson Company) submitted by the Howard Johnson Company, subject to- the following conditions: 1 . Building plans are subject to approval by the Building Official with respect to applicable codes 3-10-77 -2- 2. Grading, drainage, utility and berming plans are subject to approval by the City Engineer. 3. A Performance Agreement and supporting financial guarantee (in amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be submitted to assure completion for approved site improvements. 4. The parking space deficiency shall be resolved through an approved Joint Parking Agreement, per Section 35-720, with Dayton Development Company who owns the adjacent land designated as parking. The approved agreement shall be filed as an encumbrance upon the Dayton land prior to issuance of permits. 5. Any outside trash disposal facilities and all rooftop mechanical equipment shall be appropriately screened. 6. Approval is exclusive of the grease Interceptor device shown on sheet No. SP-2; it shall be subject to approval of the City with respect to applicable codes and utility policies. 7. The landscape plan contained on Sheet No L-1 is hereby amended by the substitution of sod for the pine bark mulch in the south and east perimeter greenstrip and the proposed curbing on the east side of the project shall include not only the curbing of the restaurant parking lot but also the westerly edge of the joint ' parking area as it abuts the restaurant site. The motion passed unanimously. Application No. 77006 The next item of business was consideration of (Howard Johnson Company) Application No. 77006 submitted by Howard Johnson Company. The item was introduced by the Secretary who stated it also was tabled on January 27, 1977, pending disposition of the previous application. He stated the application proposes live entertainment in the Ground Round Restaruant proposed on the site at Shingle Creek Parkway and County Road 10. He stated that live entertainment in eating establishments is a special use in the C-2 district. Chairman Scott recognized Mr. Francois and a brief discussion ensued. Chairman Scott noted that the required public hearing had been held on January 27 and none .of the noted property owners had been present. Recommend Approval Motion by Commissioner Foreman seconded by Commis- of Application No. 77006 sioner Engdahl to recommend approval of Application No. (Howard Johnson Company) 77006 submitted by Howard Johnson Company subject to the following conditions: 1 . The permit is issued to the operator and is not transferable. 2. The permit is subject to applicable codes, ordinances and regulations and .violation thereof may be grounds for revocation. The motion passed unanimously. . Commissioner Jacobson Arrives Commissioner Jacobson arrived at 8:10 p.m. -3 3-10-77 The next item of business was consideration of Application No. 77001 Application No. 77001 submitted by Mr. Richard (Richard Rockstad) Rockstad, relative to the property at 7000 and 7006 Brooklyn Boulevard (northeast corner of 70th Avenue North) . The item was introduced by the Secretary who presented slides and stated it had been considered at the January 27, 1977 meeting when a public hearing had been held and when the item had been tabled and referred to the Northwest Neighborhood Advisory Group for review and comment. He stated it comprehends the rezoning, from R-5 to C-1 , of two parcels which now contain a nonconforming use single family dwelling. He stated the Neighborhood Group has submitted a written report and recommendation which was to retain the zoning. The Secretary explained that; as with any rezoning proposal , there were a number of essential questions which must be considered, including consistency with the Comprehensive Plan; determination whether the request represents 'tpot zoning," whether the proposed land use represents the highest and best use for the land; and, related to the Comprehensive Plan con- sideration, whether the use is consistent with the best interests of the community. Regarding the Comprehensive Plan provisions, the Secretary stated that the Plan speaks to this area as a Planned Development District in the context that there should be a common zoning for that area between 70th and Noble Avenues North along the east side of Brooklyn Boulevard, and that development and particu- larly zoning of the area should be considered on an area versus individual lot basis. He said the plan speaks to a broad spectrum of possible uses including apartments, public and semi-public buildings, and certain service-office commercial uses such as clinics, professional offices and the like. He explained that the 1968 Comprehensive Zoning designated the area as R-5 (22 to 3 ,story apartments) . The Secretary further commented that, if the Commission determined C-1 Zoning to be appropriate for this area, it was not mandatory that all the properties be rezoned at this time, but rather a resolution to that effect establishing the intent could be made and the present application could be passed upon as being consistent with the resolution. This would recognize that there was not a current demand for development of other properties in the area, but that the C-1 zoning was appropriate. He stated such a resolution of intent would also be of value when the upcoming Comprehensive Plan review focused on this area and a formal determination was made as to the proper zoning criteria. Relative to the "spot. zoning" consideration, 'he stated that if the determination were made to designate this Planned Development Area as C-1 , then the Rockstad application would not necessarily be characterized as "spot zoning." He stated the Commission had by concensus, endorsed the City Attorney's definition of "spot zoning" as "a zoning decision which discriminates in favor of a particular land owner and does not relate to a Com- prehensive Zoning Plan or to accepted planning principles." 3-10-77 -4- He stated that finally the matter of whether the proposed zoning was representative of the highest and best land use for the property and whether it repre- sented the best interests of the community were part of the determination that C-1 would be an appropriate designation for this entire area. An extensive discussion ensued as to the Comprehensive Zoning process and in response to a question by Com- missioner Horan the Secretary explained that it was clearly the City's perogative and responsibility to provide for Comprehensive Planning of the community and subsequently to designate the appropriate zoning districts throughout the City consistent with that plan. He stated that part of the procedure in estab- lishing the Comprehensive Plan priorities and sub- sequent rezonings was- input from the affected property owners. Commissioner Foreman stated he was unable to support the application based due to the stated opposition of the neighboring property owners at the public hearings; the recommendation of the Neighborhood Ad- visory Group to retain the present R-5 zoning; and the fact that the Commission was in the process of reviewing draft guidelines for rezoning proposals which had been requested by the City Council. He stated he could support deferring this application, with the applicant's consent; until the Commission has further opportunity to review the Comprehensive Plan and rezoning guidelines. Chairman Scott stated that while she recognized that - the uses of all the R-5 parcels, except for one, are non-conforming uses, any new zoning should be of the area basis and not of individual parcels. She stated that there-was ample land elsewhere in the City zoned C-1 which was yet to be developed as such, and that any action in this particular area should be con- sistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 'She stated that further review was needed on an area wide basis as a matter of amending the Comprehensive Plan and thus it would be premature to approve the application. She also commented that any recommendation to the Council should be in the form of a resolution. Commissioner Horan stated that Comprehensive Plan concept, that this area should be reviewed from a zoning perspective on an area basis, should be fol- lowed and that rezoning of individual parcels should be avoided. He stated that he could not support a recommendation for approval at this time. Commissioner Pierce agreed. He stated his concern with existing C-1 land in the City which was not developed. Commissioner Jacobson stated that at this time the application represented "spot zoning" and that, until further review of the Comprehensive Plan was completed, she could not support it. Commissioner Engdahl agreed that, regardless of the C- 1 possibilities for the entire area, the application itself represented "spot zoning." He also stated that the recommendation of the Northwest Neighborhood Advisory Group was specific and was based upon concerns of the Comprehensive Plan. Chairman Scott then recognized the applicant, Mr. Richard Rockstad, who stated he was disturbed by the Commission's apparent determination that R-5 zoning was the highest and best land use. He stated he re- called the City had considered this area flexible for either office or apartment uses, and that in fact, had determined on occasion they were compatible. He noted office uses generally had daytime hours, versus the around-the-clock activity of apartment complexes. -5- 3-10-77 He statad that he had-operated a nonconforming real estate office from the dwelling for approximately 8 years and had moved his business elsewhere in the expectation that eventually he would redevelop the . entire property with an office building. He stated that represented a better use of the property than the present dwelling.. Mr. Rockstad suggested that the Commission consider his application as a vehicle for the process of evaluating the entire area. He noted that in his judgment each of the other R-5 parcels containing nonconforming uses was large enough to support small but viable C-1 developments. Chairman Scott also recognized Mrs. Hagen, 7015 Kyle Avenue North, who reiterated her opposition to the request as stated at the public hearing and stated she would prefer to retain the R-5 zoning. Further discussion ensued relative to the Comprehensive Plan and the Secretary stated that the context of the Plan's concern with area development must be placed in a current perspective. He stated that it was un- likely a single developer would be consolidating all the parcels and proposing a unified development. He stated while there was merit in the idea of having a common zoning to assure a compatibility of uses, it would not be mandatory that a single rezoning appli- cation would be submitted for the entire area. He suggested again that a basic issue was whether the Commission agreed the entire area should be designated C-1 and, if so, the present application could be con- sidered a vehicle for supporting an intent to rezone the area. In further discussion, it was the consenus of the Commission that a formal determination of whether C-1 zoning was the best use was premature, and that further analysis of the Comprehensive Plan as well as the draft guidelines for zoning applications should be made. Chairman Scott stated that it appeared there were two alternatives before the Commission with regard to the present application: (1 ) with the applicant's consent, table the matter to allow adequate time to review the Comprehensive Plan and related matters; or, (2) draft a resolution recommending immediate dis- position by the City Council . She then recognized Mr. Rockstad who stated that he had made numerous commitments and had planned an investment of a sub- stantial amount of money in redevloping this property on the assumption that it would be rezoned, and therefore he would prefer that the matter be referred to the City Council as soon as possible. Motion by Commissioner Foreman, seconded by Commis- Direct Preparation of sioner Engdahl , to direct the Secretary to prepare Draft Resolution a resolution recommending denial of Application No. Recommending Denial of 77001 .submitted by Richard Rockstad citing the Application No. 77001 following: (Richard Rockstad) 1 . The "spot zoning" characteristics of the proposal . 2. The opposition of the neighboring property owners as expressed at public hearing and the lack of support of rezoning the area to -C-1 . 3. The recommendation of the Neighborhood Advisory Group to retain the present zoning. 4. The inconsistency with the Comprehensive Plan with respect to treatment of the entire area rather than individual parcels. 3-10-77 -6- 5. The consensus of the Commission that the de- termination of whether the area should be R-5 or C-1 was premature at this time. Motion was passed unanimously. Recess The meeting recessed at 9:15 p.m. and resumed at 9:30 P.m. Application No. 77011 The next item of business was consideration of Appli- (Kenneth Bergstrom) cation No. 77011 submitted by Mr. Kenneth Bergstrom. The item was introduced by the Secretary who presented slides and stated the applicant proposed rezoning, from C-2 to R-1 , of the approximate 8 acre vacant parcel immediately east of the Humboldt Square Shop- ping Center in the southeast quadrant of 69th and Humboldt Avenue North. He stated this land and the Humboldt Square Center property have been planned since at least a 1961 Northeast Neighborhood Study, as the central location of a neighborhood shopping center. He stated this site was so designated because it is in the center of the Northeast Neighborhood and that one of the stated policies of the Comprehensive Plan was "to provide a neighborhood shopping center for each of the six residential neighborhoods, unless the residents are adequately served by community or re- gional shopping centers located nearby." He also stated there have been numerous speculative proposals to develop -all or parts of this property; and most of the speculative proposals have advocated the piecemeal type of development admonished by the Comprehensive Plan which encouraged an integrated type of commercial center. He stated the net result over the years was the Humboldt Square Center which, since its construction approximately four years ago, has yet to realize a full occupancy. The Secretary stated the Commission should consider that a zoning less than C-2 but higher than R-1 might be appropriate for at least portions of this property, such as an R-3 or R-4 designation in the westerly portion to serve as an intermediate land use between the shopping center and the single family homes. The Secretary commented that a stated goal of the Comprehensive Plan was "to make single family. detached housing the predominant character of the Northeast' Neighborhood." He stated a March, 1976 land use in- ventory of the City indicates single family detached dwellings comprise approximately 48.5% of the total number of dwellings in the Northeast Neighborhood. He stated that townhouses and multi-family dwellings together comprised approximately 51 .4% of the total number of dwellings. He said the parcel if rezoned R-1 , could be subdivided into approximately 22 single family dwelling units, thus increasing the number of single family detached homes in the neighborhood by about 1%. Chairman Scott recognized Mr. Murray, who represented the applicant, and stated the applicant felt R-1 represented the best use of the land, and that it was apparent commercial development was not feasible. He stated the applicant had owned the property for several years and had observed numerous attempts to develop the property commercially. -7- 3-10-77 Chairman Scott then announced that a public hearing Public Hearing had been scheduled and that approximately 46 neigh- boring property owners within 350 feet of the property had been notified. She recognized 4 neighboring property owners: residents of 6733, 6813, 6807 and 6825 Emerson Avenue North, who stated they were in favor of the proposed rezoning. Chairman Scott noted that no other property owners were present or desired to be heard. Motion by Commissioner Foreman seconded by Commissioner Close Public Hearing Horan to close the public hearing. Chairman Scott stated it seemed there were three basic issues: t-tether the existing C-2 zoning for purposes of reserving an area for a neighborhood shopping facility was desirable; whether the proposed R-1 zoning in whole or in part was the highest and best use of the property; and if it were determined that R-1 , in whole or in part, was the highest and best use, what type of buffering should be provided against the existing C-2 use. Commissioner Horan inquired as to possible screening devices that could be used for buffering.. The Secret- ary responded that a variety of things -such as berming, fencing or walls, or a combination thereof were pos- sible. He stated that specific buffering devices would be most appropriately considered when and if the property were subdivided for a residential development. Commissioner Foreman inquired as to the price range of the proposed homes in the area. Mr. Murray re- sponded onded stating that the concept was to provide large lots so that homes comparable to those in the vicinity could be built. Following further discussion Chairman Scott explained that it was established Commission policy to refer re- zoning matters to the neighborhood group for review and comment. Motion by Commissioner Foreman, seconded by Commissioner Table Application No. Jacobson to table Application No. 77011 and refer the 77011 and Refer to matter to the Northeast Neighborhood Advisory Group Northeast Neighborhood for review and comment. Motion passed unanimously._ Advisory Group The next item of business was consideration of Appli- Application No. 77007 cation No. 77007 submitted by Mr. Twig Leininger for (Twig Leininger for Midwest Recreational Sales and Service- The item was Midwest Recreational introduced by the Secretary who stated the applicant Sales, Inc.) proposes a recreation center in the Humboldt Square Shopping Center, 69th and Humboldt Avenue North. He explained that recreation centers are comprehended by the ordinance as special uses in the C-2 zoning district. ' The Secretary reviewed letters which had been submitted by the applicant explaining the nature of the operation and the management policies. He also reviewed a field investigation of the applicant's present operation in Hopkins and a report from the Police Department re- garding observations of the Hopkins Police. He also stated that the applicant had submitted a letter from Mr. Clarence Lowe, president of Cal Corporation, which owns the Humboldt Square Shopping Center indicating that a tentative lease agreement, subject to certain conditions, had been reached. The Secretary stated that the basic issue, as with. previous similar applications, was the nature and adequacy of the management, and particularly with respect -to this location, where a previous similar operation had been unsatisfactory. 3-10-77 -8- Chairman Scott recognized Mr. Twig Leininger who stated the center was intended to be a family fun center and while it tended to mainly attract young people, it was also intended to cater to families. He reviewed his employment policy which he explained included a thorough screening of the applicants. He also stated that he owned all of his equipment--the advantage being that- a substantial portion -of the profits could be directed to hiring qualified help. He emphasized the management policies against loiter- ing, no smoking by patrons below the legal age, and the rigid enforcement of curfew hours and other house rules noted in his letters. He stated his hours of operation were noon to midnight, year around, with the exception of Christmas Eve and New Year's Eve, when the establishment would close at 6:00 p.m. Chairman Scott inquired as to provisions for fo.od or drink on the premises. Mr. Leininger stated canned drinks, candy and hot dogs would be available. Relative to beverages, he stated no bev- erages were allowed to leave the premises and return, and none were allowed in the premises from the outside. The applicant also stated he had discussed the oper- ation with Deputy Chief of Police, and he proposed as in Hopkins, to have a working relationship with the police. Chairman Scott inquired as to provision for bicycle parkings. The applicant stated that he would require as a condition of his lease, that a certain portion of the parking stalls in front of the estab- lishment be made availabe for the installation of bicycle racks. Commissioner Engdahl inquired as to the maximum number of people in the premises at any given time and the applicant responded that the number of people varies, but that there are generally peak hours from 7:30 p.m. to 9:30 p.m. , and on Friday evenings. He stated there could be as many as 50 to 75 people, depending on the number of machines and equipment available. He stated there was generally a high turnover and the average number of customers at any given time was 25 to 40 persons. The applicant also stated that part of their normal operating policy was a patrolling of the exterior areas, both to discourage loitering as well as to assure a clean environment by disposing of litter. Commissioner Horan inquired as to music or sound systems which might be installed and the applicant responded that there would be background music as well as a juke-box which could be played by patrons. He stated that the noise level was strictly controlled. Further discussion ensued as to the experience with previous operations and the applicant stated he was aware of the community's concerns and that he had observed poor management in other operations around the Twin Cities, most of which had failed event- ually because of the lack of management. He stated that his -interests were to run a profitable business and to provide a community asset for young people and families, and any activities which were not consistent with those goals would be dealt with swiftly and effectively. -9- 3-10-77 Chairman Scott noted that a public hearing had been Public Hearing scheduled and that property owners within 150 feet had been notified as well as tenants within the Humboldt Square Center. He then recognized Mr. Tony Dorff, operator of a barber shop in the center; Mr. Brad Rothnem, operator of the Pizza Factory tenant space; Mr. Gus Cambanes, operator of the Photography Place tenant space; and Mr. Tim Boyle, 6813 Emerson Avenue North. Each expressed their concerns as to the prob- lems which had been experienced with the previous operation and with their concern generally as to the numbers of young people which would be attracted to such facilities. They stated their concerns that customers and potential customers would be discouraged from shopping in the center because of problems related to the proposed game room. Examples were cited of the problems of the previous operation and concerns _as to the external effect such an operation could have on the entire area. It was commented that despite the attentions of the applicant and the apparent sound management policies, the provision for such a facility in the shopping center could have a detrimental effect becaused of the public's perception of that type of facility. Chairman Scott recognized the applicant who responded that as a businessman, both in the retail trade as well as the recreation center business, he°could understand their concern, and that he had seen the problems to which the tenants referred. He stated that he felt their experience in Hopkins was evidence they cou ld deal with the potential problems and stated they were entitled to the opportunity to establish a comparable operation in Brooklyn Center. He invited the tenants to observe the Hopkins operation and noted that their management policies have resulted in a lack of a need to regularly call the police. He stated that by establishing strict house rules and clear and fair discipline at the outset, he found that the operation was quite successful . Chairman Scott also recognized Mr. Frank Adler, who is a resident on Emerson Avenue behind the shopping center, and who stated he was an employee of the municipal liquor store. He stated that one problem with the previous operation had been that older young- sters acquiring alcoholic beverages for younger persons who consumed the product in and about the recreation center. Motion by Commissioner Foreman seconded by Commissioner Close Public Hearing Horan to close the public hearing. The motion passed unanimously. Chairman Scott stated that the letter and investigative reports in the file as well as the information sub- mitted by the applicant, indicated that the proposed operation seemed to be well founded and that the existing operation in Hopkins seemed to be well managed. During further discussion, the Secretary commented that special uses recognized by the ordinance were in effect, permitted uses subject to special consider- ation and special conditions. He reviewed the ordinance standards for special use permits and stated that unless it was clearly found the proposed use was inconsistent with those standards, the pro posed use should be approved subject to the conditions deemed appropriate for proper control . 3-10-77 -10- Recommend Approval Following further discussion there was a motion of Application No. 77007 by Commissioner Horan, seconded by Commissioner (Twig Leininger) Pierce to recommend approval of Application No. 77007 submitted by Twig Leininger for Midwest Recreational Sales and Service, Inc. , subject to the following conditions: 1 . Special use permit is issued to the applicant as operator, and is non-transferable. 2. The use is subject to all applicable ordinances and. regulations including special licensing requirements and violation thereof shall be grounds for revocation of the permit. . 3. House rules and hours of local curfew regulatior: shall be clearly posted in the establishment and rigorously enforced. 4. Provisions shall be made for bicycle parking racks located in a manner approved by the Planning and Inspection Department. 5. The special use permit shall be subject to review on an annual basis, and a police report as to the nature of the operation and any attendant problems after the first month, second month, and the sixth month of operation shall be submitted for City Council review. 6. The applicant shall assure that the outside areas are maintained free of debris and litter generated by patrons of the center. In further discussion, Commissioner Horan stated the applicant has presented a good track record with the existing operation and had proposed a sound operating philosophy. Commissioner Engdahi agreed stating that the key was effective implementation of the proposed house rules and management policies. Further discussion ensued as to the feasibility of estab- lishing a minimum age of on-site management personnel , other than that proposed by the applicant (19 years) , and it was determined that the success of the operation would be evident not so much from the age of the oper- ators as the effectiveness of the personnel in properly managing the operation. Chairman Scott called for a vote. The motion passed unanimously. Application No. 77010 The next item of busines was consideration of Appli- (Ms. Jean Schmitt) cation No. 77010 submitted by Ms. Jean Schmidt, 6200 Brooklyn Boulevard. The item was introduced by the Secretary, who presented slides and stated the appli- cant proposed a single-operator beauty shop as a special home occupation at her residence. He stated the property is zoned R-1 . He also explained there had been a permit authorized for this premises under Application No. 65045 and that under the conditions of that permit, it had expired in 1971 . Chairman Scott recognized the applicant and a brief discussion ensued. The applicant stated that she did work by appointment only and only took two customers at a time. She stated there was provision on the premises for parking and that her proposed hours of operation would be Monday through Saturday, 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. -11- 3-10-77 Chairman Scott noted that a public hearing had been Public Hearing scheduled and that none of the notified property owners were present. Motion by Commissioner Jacobson, seconded by Com- Close Public Hearing missioner Pierce to close the public hearing. The motion passed 'unanimously. Following further discussion, there was a motion Recommend Approval by Commissioner Pierce, seconded by Commissioner of Application No. Foreman to recommend approval of Application No. 77010 77010 submitted by Ms. Jean Schmitt, 6200 Brooklyn (Ms. Jean Schmitt) Boulevard, subject to the following conditions: 1 . The permit is issued to the applicant as operator and is not transferable. 2. The permit is subject to all applicable codes, ordinances and regulations, and violation thereof shall be grounds for revocation. 3. A copy fo the current State Operator's License shall be kept on file in the city. 4. The hours of operation shall be Monday through Saturday, 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m, Motion passed unanimously. The next item of business was consideration of Application No. 77012 Application No. 77012 submitted by First Wisconsin (First Wisconsin Mortgage Company. The item was introduced by the Mortgage Company) Secretary who stated the proposal comprehends the Shores Townhouse project, north of County Road 10, westerly of June Avenue North. He stated a final plat for this area had been approved on October 15, 1973, for the original owner-developer, Farr Development Corporation (Application No. 73030) , He stated that plat was never filed and that this applicant acquired and proposes to market the units as condominium/townhouses this year. The Secretary reviewed the proposed plat and Chairman Scott recognized Mr. Bill Casper, representing First Wisconsin Mortgage Company. A brief discussion ensued. The Secretary stated the applicant submitted a proposed homeowner association agreement and that a copy had been forwarded to the City Attorney for review and comment. Chairman Scott noted that notice of public hearing Public Hearing had been published in the legal newspaper and that no one was present to speak for or against the application. Following further discussion, there was a motion by Recommend Approval Commissioner Foreman, seconded by Commissioner Application No. 77012 Jacobson to recommend approval of Application No. (First Wisconsin 77012 submitted by First Wisconsin Mortgage Company Mortgage Company) subject to the following conditions: 1 . Final plat is subject to review by the City Engineer. 2. Final plat is subject to the requirements of Chapter 15 of the City Ordinances. 3. The Homeowner's Association Agreement and By-Laws shall be subject to review by the City Attorney. 3-10-77 -12 4. The ownership, management and maintenance of all outside common areas and common facilities, including roadways, utilities, and street lighting, shall be under the jurisdiction of one Homeowner's Association. 5. The Homeowner's Association Agreement and By-Laws shall include: a. Provision for the City to provide maintenance and revitalization of roadways, utilities, and other common use facilities in the event the City Council deems such mainten- ance and revitalization necessary. The cost of such expenses that might be incurred shall be assessed to the property owners; and b. Provision for water and sewer main and fire hydrant maintenance and inspection agreements pursuant to Section 35-410 .(5) of the City Ordinances. The motion passed unanimously. Adjournment Motion by Commissioner Engdahl , seconded by Commis- sioner Jacobson to adjourn the meeting. The motion passed unanimously. The Planning Commission meeting adjourned at 11 :50 p.m. Chairman -13- 3-10-77 1 1