Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1977 04-28 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 STUDY SESSION April 28, 1977 CITY HALL Call to Order: The Planning Commission met in study session. and was called to order at 8:05 p.m. by Chairman Cecilia Scott. Roll Call : Chairman Scott, Commissioners Engdahl , Pierce, Kohrt and Foreman. Also present was Director of Planning and Inspection Blair Tremere. Chairman Scott deferred approval of the minutes until later in the meeting. Application No. 77016 Following the Chairman's explanation, the first item (Gabbert & Beck, Inc.) of business was consideration of Application 77016 submitted by Gabbert and Beck, Inc. The item was introduced by the Secretary who stated the applicant was proposing site and building plan approval for the final phase consisting of a freestanding building of Westbrook Mall Center at 5605 Xerxes Avenue North. The Secretary stated the proposed building was ap- proximately 7,500 square feet versus an approximate 5,000 square foot building which had been indicated on original site and building conceptual plans. He stated the original plans had been approved by the City Council on July 22, 1974 (Application No. 74040) and that there have been several amendments, the most recent being on August 18, 1975. The Secretary then reviewed the plans including a slide presentation of the existing development. At- tention was directed to the use of washed gravel in certain parking lot delineators throughout the site as approved by the Planning Commission on November 13, 1975. The Secretary commented that earlier approvals have included the deferral of a certain number of parking spaces (most recently, 115 spaces) in consideration of the following: the applicant's contention that the full complement of ordinance required spaces is not necessary given the type of uses in the center; and the submission and approval of a "proof of parking plan" which shows that the ordinance required parking can be .installed on the land available using a 900 parking stall design rather than the installed diagonal design. The Secretary stated that final calculations of the proposed and existing development showed a need for 571 parking stalls. He stated the applicant provided 437 stalls and thus the revised proposed deferral was 134 spaces. He explained that the revised 900 proof of parking plan indicates 574 spaces can be provided on the land available; and thus there is a total surplus of 3 spaces. Chairman Scott recognized Mr. Warren Beck who repre- sented the applicant and an extensive discussion ensued as to the design of the proposed building with specific concern directed to the location of the proposed entrances. 'Mr. Beck stated that the primary entrances would be on the west elevation towards the parking area. During further discussion it was stated that entrance to the building should be restricted from the east side because an entrance on that side might encourage unauthorized parking on Xerxes Avenue resulting in a traffic hazard. -1- 4-28-77 In -further review Mr. Beck noted the future provision ' for a remote bank teller, since one of the prime tenants of the proposed structure was a financial institution. He described several revisions to the parking lot delineation in that area when the teller station was installed. The Secretary also reviewed various areas around the site which had been originally installed as "tempo- rary" in consideration of then existing power line poles and guy wires. He stated these improvements would be permanentized during the final phase. A brief discussion also ensued as to the berming treat- ment along the east side of the proposed building, and Mr. Beck indicated that the treatment would be consistent with that installed last year easterly of the Hirshfield's paint store and the Dayton's Home Store. Following further discussion there was a motion by Recommend Approval of Commissioner Foreman, seconded by Commissioner Application No. 77016 Pierce to recommend approval of Application No. (Gabbert and Beck) 77016 submitted by Gabbert and Beck, Inc., subject to the following conditions: 1 . Building plans are subject to review by the Building Official with respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance of permits. 2. Grading and drainage, utility and berming plans are subject to review by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of permits. 3. The performance agreement and financial guarantee submitted under Application No. 74040' shall include the completion of site improvements comprehended under this approval . 4. Installation of certain parking stalls as indicated on the approved site and building plans may be deferred until deemed neces- sary by the City Council , provided such deferred areas are developed, landscaped, and maintained in accordance with approved site plans and ordinance requirements. 5. All site improvements previously deferred in consideration of the then existing company pole and line easement shall be installed and/or completed as permanent improvements.. 6. All landscaped areas on the site shall be provided with underground irrigation. 7. All trash disposal facilities and rooftop mechanical equipment shall be appropriately enclosed and screened from view. 8. Site and building plans shall comply with State provisions for the handicapped. 9. Installation of the proposed remote bank teller station shall be subject to review by the Planning and Inspection and Engineering Departments. The motion passed unanimously. 4-28-77 -2- Consideration of Council The next item of business was review of the City Review of Application No. 77001 Council consideration of Application No. 77001 (Richard A. Rockstad) submitted by Richard Rockstad involving a rezoning of the northeast corner of 70th Avenue North and Brooklyn Boulevard. He stated that the Council,on April 25, had remanded this item to the Planning Commission for further consideration in light of Council deliberations on March 28 and April 25. He stated the staff had been directed to prepare for the Council alternatives which could be con- sidered in providing for the redevelopment pro- posed with the recognition that zoning and permit- ted uses should be consistent with the Compre- hensive Plan provisions. He explained the Council had reviewed the alter- natives and had determined that provision for certain service/office uses in the R-5 district as special uses would be an appropriate means. He stated that this was based on the premise that. there was a compatibility of certain service/office uses and R-5 multi-residential uses. He said the Council had refrained from a first reading of this ordinance amendment, however, until such time the Planning Commission had reviewed the matter. An extensive discussion ensued and Commissioner Engdahl stated that it was important to clarify the intent of such a provision so that service/ office type uses did not comprehend conversion of individual apartments in the R-5 district, versus appropriate, special uses for development of R-5 zoned property. Commissioner Horan Arrives Commissioner Horan arrived at 9:20 p.m. Chairman Scott stated that it had been a consensus of the Planning Commission for some time that there was a compatibility of the uses in the R-5 zone and certain service/office uses now compre- hended in the C-1 zone. She stated the main concern had been with respect to actually rezoning land which could, by reclassification, subject certain property to commercial development which would not be appropriate. Commissioner Foreman concurred stating the primary rezoning issue was the matter of "spot zoning." He stated that in his opinion the proposed special use approach was a realistic way of-accomplishing needed redevelopment, and at the same time retain- ing positive control over such development. In further discussion, the Secretary commented that the proposed approach was not unlike that used several years ago in allowing certain retail com- mercial developments in the I-1 (Industrial Park) district by special use permit. Commissioner Horan stated that since the result was provision for different types of uses, a feature of the rezoning procedure, namely, noti- fying residents within 350 feet of the property, should be provided for in these special use permit hearings which now only require notices within 150 feet of the property. He suggested that the draft ordinance before the City Council allowing for the special uses be amended to provide for a radius of 350 feet for notices for special use permits in the R-5 through I-2 zoning districts. -3- 4-28-77 Commissioner Foreman agreed stating that this would enable neighboring property owners to have partic- ipation in reviewing specific special use permit w proposals as they would have in a;rezoning hearing. He stated that the input from the public would be perhaps more effective since most persons who at- tended rezoning hearings are concerned about the specific proposals which, under .rezoning, are legally theoretical since rezonings cannot be con- ditionalized. He stated that under the special use permit provisions, however, a specific land use would be under consideration. Commissioner Kohrt stated concern that the Commis- sion and Council should be assured that there will be positive control and that the City's position is not weakened by foregoing the rezoning procedures. He stated that he could support the proposal as an interim measure subject to more intensive review during the upcoming comprehensive planning and subsequent Zoning Ordinance review and revision. During further discussion, Chairman Scott polled the Commissioners and Commissioner Horan stated that he could support the draft ordinance amend- ment provided the radius for public hearing notice was expanded. He stated there was a need to address the entire issue more specifically when the Compre- hensive Plan is reviewed. Commissioner Kohrt stated his previous concern and Commissioner Foreman re- sponded that he was comfortable with the control which would be retained under the special use provisions since special uses could be condition alized, whereas rezonings cannot. Commissioner Pierce agreed with the technique of effective land use control without rezoning, particularly in a developed community, but he stated that the radius for public hearing notice should be expanded as suggested by Commissioner Horan. Commissioner Foreman agreed and stated he had nothing further to add. Commissioner Engdahl inquired how much vacant C-1 land there was in the community, and the. Secretary reviewed the land inventory map which had been prepared last year. He stated he had reservations that the already designated C-1 land would not be effectively used in lieu of the R-5 properties which would be developed instead. He stated he was concerned about the "spot zoning" connotations of the immediate application and that the effort currently before the Commission and Council seemed to be an accommodation of that specific request. Chairman Scott stated that a realistic appraisal of the City's development and the experience over the past nine years indicated a unified develop- ment as proposed by the Comprehensive Plan and the planned development district was not highly feasible. She stated there was a need to provide for viable redevelopment of the older areas which contain nonconforming uses and which tend to be incompatible with the location and in some cases are dilapidated through lack of maintenance. She stated she was confortable with the control the City would exercise through the special use permit and that she did not view the draft ordi- nance as being a surrogate rezoning since the Comprehensive Plan in fact acknowledged a com- patibility of R-5 and service/office type uses. 4-28-77 -4 Action Recommending Motion by Commissioner Horan, seconded by Comis- Adoption of Draft Ordinance sioner Foreman to recommend to the City Council Amendment (with addition) adoption of the draft ordinance amending Chapter 35 to Chapter 35-220 of the City Ordinances relative to special service/ office uses in the R-5 district, as reviewed by the City Council , provided that the ordinance amendment includes revision of Section 35-220, 1 . (d) stip- ulating that, in the case of R-5, R-6, R-7, C-1 , C-lA, C-2, I-1 and I-2 districts, the radius of notices to neighboring property owners shall be 350 feet; further that the Secretary shall draft such an amendment for inclusion in the minutes. The motion passed unanimously. Review Draft Rezoning The next item of business was consideration of Review Criteria draft criteria for reviewing rezoning applications. The Secretary stated the Commission had reviewed the first draft of the criteria on March 24 and had directed that they be assembled in a checklist format for further review. An extensive discus- sion .ensued and it was determined that the questions should be reworded so that they can be responded to either affirmatively or negatively, and that the cumulative responses will serve as an in- dicator of the viability of a rezoning request. It was the consensus of the Commission that the checklist was intended to provide a uniform scheme for answering the two questions: Is the proposed rezoning consistent with the Compre- hensive Plan? Is the rezoning proposal character- istic of "spot zoning"? Chairman Scott suggested that the first two items (The proposed use has no relation to the Compre- hensive Plan; and, the proposed rezoning benefits the applicant and damages surrounding property.) should be intended as prime indicators of whether the other questions need even be answered, since a negative response to those two items would ind- icate "spot zoning" within the legal definition offered by the City Attorney. Dissolve Ad Hoc Committee In other business, Chairman Scott suggested that on Compatible Uses the Ad Hoc Committee, consisting of Commissioners Pierce and Kohrt, could be dissolved at this time since the City Council had determined a compati- bility between the R-5 zone and certain C-1 service/office uses, and she suggested that the matter of whether C-1 service/office uses were compatible with other zones such as R-4 could be reserved until the Comprehensive Plan is reviewed. Approve Minutes Motion by Commissioner Pierce, seconded by Commis- 4-14-77 sioner Kohrt to approve the minutes of the April 14, 1977 meeting as submitted. Voting in favor: Chairman Scott, Commissioners Pierce, Kohrt and Horan. Not voting: Commissioners Foreman and Engdahl who were not present at that meeting. The motion passed. Adjournment Motion by Commissioner Foreman, seconded by Comis- sioner Engdahl to adjourn the meeting. The motion passed unanimously. The Planning Commission meeting adjourned at 11 :15 p.m. Chairman -5- 4-28-77 1 1