HomeMy WebLinkAbout1973 08-02 PCM MINUTES OF THE PROCE13DINGS OF THE
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF
HENNEPIN AND STATE OF MINNESOTA
REGULAR MEETING
CITY HALL
AUGUST 21 1973
• Call to Order: The Planning Commission met in regular
session and was called to order at 8:05 P.M.
by Chairman Robert Jensen.
Roll Call Chairman Jensen, Commissioners Bogucki,
Scott, Gross, and Engdahl. Also present
were Director of Planning and Inspection
Blair Tremere and Director of Public Works
James Merila.
Approve Minutes Motion by Commissioner Bogucki seconded by
July 19, 1973 Commissioner Engdahl to approve the minutes
of the July 19, 1973 meeting as submitted.
Voting in favor were: Chairman Jensen,
Commissioners Bogucki and Engdahl. Not
voting: Commissioners Gross and Scott who
stated they were not present at the July 19th
meeting. The motion passed.
Application No. 73021 The first item of business was consideration
(Orville Willa) of Planning conwission Application No. 7302",
submitted by Orville Wilda. The item was
introduced by the Secretary who explained
the matter had been tabled at the July 19th
meeting to permit the applicant the oppor-
tunity to revise the proposed plat and to
permit notification of neighboring property
owners of the proposed variance.
He stated the applicant was seeking pre-
liminary plat approval for a parcel located
at 6732 Lyndale Avenue North and that the
newly created lot complied with minimum
dimensions outlined in Chapter 15. He com-
mented that the setback from the existing
house to the new lot line was 22 feet, and
thus, the variance would acknowledge an 18
foot deficiency.
Chairman Jensen then recognized the appli-
cant and a brief discussion ensued regarding
the need for the variance. The Secretary
stated that there appeared to be merit for
the variance, given the following factors:
the size of the existing lot; the desira-
bility, from a planning perspective, of
platting a new lot at the east end of the
property; the consistency with the policy
of conforming with the minimum standards of
the Subdivision Ordinance; and, the size of
the old lot which will permit the location
of any future house so to conform with the
40 foot minimum rear yard setback.
-1- 8/2/73
� t
Chairman Jensen then asked if any of the
notified property owners were present, and
Mr. Fred Nelson, 6726 Lyndale Avenue North,
commented as to the ramifications of the
subject action upon possible future similar
requests regarding his parcel. A brief dis-
oussion ensued and the Secretary stated that
since all of the lots in this area were not
being platted at one time, each individual
parcel and proposed preliminary plat would
• have to be evaluated on its own merits and
suggested that Mr. Nelson contact the City
staff regarding the details of his situation.
The Secretary noted that there was an old
storage shed on the new lot, and stated that
the structure should be removed prior to
construction on that site. Mr. Wilda re-
sponded that he was in the process of having
that structure removed and also stated the
steel storage shed behind his existing house
would also be relocated, so not to interfere
with the new lot line.
Action Recommending Following further discussion, there was a
Approval of application motion by Commissioner Bogucki seconded by
No. 73021 Commissioner Gross to recommend approval of
(Orville Wilda) Planning Commission Application No. 73021
submitted by Orville Wilda requesting a rear
yard setback variance and a preliminary plat,
subject to the following conditions:
1. Final plat is subject to approval by
f4he City Engineer prior to Council
approval:
2. Final plat is subject to the require-
ments of Chapter 15 of the City
Ordinances.
The motion passed unanimously.
Application No. 73023 The next item of business was Planning Com-
(Ladder of Learning) mission Application No. 73023 submitted by
Mrs. Betty Smith and others. The item was
introduced by the Secretary who stated the
applicant was seeking a special use permit
to operate a day care center in the Beach
Apartments at 4201-4207 Lakeside Avenue. He
stated the name of the proposed facility was
the "Ladder of Learning Day Care Center" .
He noted staff concerns included the maximum
capacity of the facility, the hours of
operation, and provision for adequate safety
and fire protection provisions. In that re-
gard he stated the Building Inspector had re-
searched the State Building Code and State
Fire Code requirements and had noted the
following: 1) for a facility located in a
structure such as this, not more than 20
children would be allowed in a day care
center, and such facility must be on the
first floor lever; 2) travel distance to a
building exit in this particular structure
-2- 8/2/73
shall not be more than 150 feet; 3) appro-
priate exit lights will be required over
all exits and in the path of travel; 4) if
handicapped children at involved, no less
than one ramped exit shall be provided; 5)
electrical outlets within childrens reach
shall be protected with insert covers; 6)
approved fire extinguishers shall be pro-
vided in hallways -and kitchens and else-
where as required by the Fire Marshall; 7)
an approved fire blanket shall be kept near
the kitchen area; 8) not less than one fire
drill shall be held each month.
The Secretary stated it was as yet undeter-
mined whether the use of two apartments
would constitute two separate facilities or
one, in determining the maximum number of
children permitted. He stated the applicant
was unsure at this time whether more than
one apartment would be used. in that regard
he stated the assumption was made that the
application comprehended only the use of
one apartment and consequently the 20 child
limitation would be applicable.
An extensive discussion ensued regarding
effective fire escape routes, with particu-
lar attention being paid to the fact that
the balconies of the apartments extended
over the driveway approach to the under-
ground parking facility. There was concern
as to whether the sliding glass doors to
the balconies would serve as appropriate
emergency exits for children. The Secretary
commented that code requirements for apart-
ments and fire exits deemed windows as exits
Commissioner Bogucki responded, however,
there was some question as to how effective
windows could serve as emergency exits for
children.
Chairman Jensen then recognized the applican
who explained it was the intent to use one`
unit at this time, depending on the demand,
and she further commented that certain State
welfare requirements held that there must be
one qualified person per 10 children present
at all times.
She further stated that in addition to beinC
certified teachers, the supervisory personpe
must also be qualified as to emergency ,
escape and exiting procedures.
• Chairman Jensen inquired as to what area of
the City the facility would serve. The
applicant responded the intent was to draw
from the Twin Lake area, and specifically
the apartment complex. She stated there was
an indication already that 13 children
could be enrolled in such a facility.
In response to a question by Commissioner
Gross the applicant stated the intended
hours were from 6:30 A.M. to 6:00 P.M. ,
-3- 8/2/73
Monday through Friday, and provision would
be made for a g7walified personnel to be
present at all times.
Further discussion ensued relative to safety
provisions and the Secretary recommended
that as a condition of approval thorough
inspection and approval by the Building
Inspector, the local Fire Marshall, and any
appropriate state agencies be made prior to
• the issuance of the permit.
Commissioner Gross inquired whether the
owner of the building was willing to make
any modifications so to provide for effec-
tive safety and fire protection measures.
Mrs. Burrell, representing the owner, re-
sponded that if reasonable modifications
were required, the owner would be amenable
to them.
Chairman Jensen stated that he felt document-
ed evidence from state agencies and the local
Fire Marshall particularly, should be on
file prior to final disposition of the
application.
In other discussion, Commissioner Scott in-
quired as to provisions for playground
equipment and open space. The applicant
responded that adequate open space and
recreational facilities were available on
the site and that at the recommendation of
the State Welfare Department Inspector, the
public playground area at the beach would
not be used.
In response to a question by Commissioner
Gross, the applicant stated that she was
requesting that the •cic eic range in the
kitchen area be disconnected, and that meals
would consist of bag lunches with snacks.
She noted hot lunches were not required.
She also commented that the state had
specific minimum requirements as to furnish-
ing the facility and that such documentation
could be provided to the City.
In response to a question by Chairman Jensen,
the applicant stated the facility would be
licensed annually and should be inspected
periodically by the State Welfare Department.
She also commented that children would only
be taken under contract and noted the variouE-
state requirements for medical and liability
• insurance.
Chairman Jensen stated he felt the best pro-
cedure would be to table the application
until the study meeting, to permit the appli-
cant the opportunity to work with the staff
in having the facility inspected, and docu-
menting said inspections and requirements
for the file.
-4- 8/2/73
Action to Table Following a brief discussion there was a
Application No. 73023 motion by Commissioner Gross seconded by
(Ladder of Learning) Commissioner Scott to table planning Com-
mission Application No. 73023 submitted by
Mrs. Betty Smith et al. , until the August
16, 1973 meeting to permit the applicant the
opportunity to work with the staff in accom-
plishing the following:
1. Document for the file, compliance
. with various state and local
regulations;
2. Document for the file, a statement
from the owner approving the pro-
posed facility, and willingness to
make provisions so to provide
effective safety measures.
3. Establish whether the use of two
apartments would constitute one
facility with regard to the maximum
number of children in a day care
facility in such a structure.
The motion passed unanimously.
Application No. 73024 The next item of business was consideration
(Brook ParI4 Realty) of Planning Commission Application No. 73024
submitted by Brook Park Realty. The item
was introduced by the Secretary who explain-
ed that the application was in response to
a condition of approval of Application No.
73011 submitted by Ronald Fleisher (app4
by the City Council on May 21, 1973) .
He stated the application was for prelim-
inary plat approval of a parcel -located at
5649 Fremont Avenue North, and that the re-
quirement was that the subject lot would be
formally subdivided within ninety days of
the Council action approving a temporary
metes and bounds subdivision.
He stated the preliminary plat indicates the
lots as approved. He noted the new lot was
71 feet wide and that the deficiency of 4
feet was noted and approved by the earlier
action.
Chairman Jensen recognized Mrs. Evelyn
Schmidt who represented the applicant and a
brief disucssion ensued.
The Secretary noted that the former owners
of the property, Mr. and Mrs. Ronald Fleisher:
had been required to post a $300.00 cash
escrow to guarantee the accomplishment of the
preliminary plat. He stated that upon
approval of the final plat, the money would
be returned to them.
Action Recommending Following further disucssion there was a
.approval of Application motion by Commissioner Bogucki seconded by
No. 73024 Commissioner Engdahl to recommend approval
(Brook Park Realty) of Planning Commission Application No. 73024
-5- 8/2/73
submitted by Brook hark Realty subject to
the following conditions;
1. The final plat is subject to review
by the City Engineer prior to Council
approval,
2. The final plat is subject to the re-
quirements of the Subdivision
Ordinance.
• The motion passed unanimously.
Application No. 72068 The next item of business was consideration
(Anoka-Hennepin of Planning Commission Application No.
School District) 72068 submitted by the Anoka-Hennepin
independent School District. The item was
introduced by the Secretary who stated the
application consisted of annual review and
renewal of a special use permit for a
temporary classroom structure approved by
the City Council on August 28, 1972 for
a one year period.
He commented that the applicant had deter-
mined last year that based upon the school
census, an additional classroom space would
be required for approximately 30 students
at the Evergreen Park Elementary School,
7020 Dupont Avenue North. He stated the
temporary structure was located north of the
school and that the school district had
determined the structi,ire would be needed
for at least one more year.
Chairman Jensen inquired whether any of thp .
neighboring property owners were present
and he recognized Mr. Richard Higgins, 7037
Dupont Avenue North, who stated his concern
with the alleged "temporary" nature of the
building. He commented that he and other
property owners were concerned that the
building not become a permanent addition to
the site and stated some concern as to
whether the building was on a sound founda-
tion.
Chairman Jensen commented that he appreciates
Mr. Higgins cv-ncern, noting the ordinance
provision that schools were special uses,
and that the Council had specified an annual
review of the permit. He then recognized
Mr. Salmela, who represented the Anoka-
Hennepin School Board, and who commented
that it was not the intent of the Board to
make the structure a permanent addition to
the Evergreen School site. He commented
that a bond issue for providing more perman-
ent structures had been voted down last year,
but that the Board had decided to submit the
bond proposal to the voters again this fall.
In response to a question by Chairman
Jensen, Mr. Salmela stated that the enroll-
ment in the district had increased, but that'
-6- 8/2/73
the enrollment at Evergreen School was
approximately the same. He noted, however,
that there was a distinct possibility some
students would be brought in by bus to the
Evergreen School.
Commissioner Gross noted some concern as to
the temporary nature of the structure and
noted that when the permit was originally
issued, the school district had indicated
the structure probably would not be required
for more than three years.
An extensive discussion ensued and Mr.
Salmela stated that he could forsee that the
building might be needed for an additional
year. Chairman Jensen responded that renew-
al of the permit would be for twelve months,
and would be reviewed again next year.
Action Recommending Following further discussion there was a
Approval of Special motion by Commissioner Scott seconded by
Use Permit P.enewal Commissioner Gross to recommend approval of
(Application No. 72068, the renewal of the special use permit for
Anoka-Hennepin the Anoka-Hennepin School District, as con-
School District) tained in Planning Commission Application
No. 72068 for one year. The motion passed
unanimously.
Recess The meeting recessed at 9:40 P.M. and resum-
ed at 10:05 P.M.
other Business: In other business, the Secretary stated that
Council Moratorium the City Council at its July 23rd meeting ha�cl
on Multi-Residential, established a 120 day moratorium on all
Development multi-residential development not approved
by the City Council. He stated that during
the moratorium, a study was to be conducted
regarding the following ordinance provisions
for R3 through R7 districts: 1) recreation
area; 2) light, air and view; 3) open green
space; 4) parking and storage facilities.
He stated the Council had directed that the
Planning Commission serve as the coordinat-
ing body for the various policy determina-
tions which may be required, following an in
depth investigation by the Department of
Planning and Inspection. He stated that it
had been suggested some consideration be
given to a defined organizational structure
such as the establishment of ad hoc com-
mittees and the use of the neighborhood
groups.
He further noted the moratorium period cur-
rently in affect would terminate on approx-
imately November 19, 1973, coinciding with
the date for a regular City Council meeting.
Chairman Jensen then recognized Mayor Cohen
who commented as to the intent of the mora-
torium and noted various factors which
generated its adoption. The Secretary and
-7- 8/2/73
the Mayor reviewed a map indicating the re-
maining multi-residential parcels in the
City which had yet to be developed as such,
and an extensive discussion ensued.
Mayor Cohen stated the basic concern was
providing for quality of life and noted
this conviction was based upon his ex-
perience on the Metropolitan Housing
Committee. He recommended that the Com-
mission initiate their participation in the
study by meeting with the City Attorney,
and he emphasized the use of existing staff
resources versus contracting with a
planning consultant.
Chairman Jensen stated that it was necessary
to undertake this study in terms of the
provisions of the Comprehensive Plan, the
present needs of the City and its residents,
and existing ordinance requirements.
Commissioner Bogucki responded that it was
important for the Planning Commission to
proceed with the philosophy of doing what
was deemed right for the community. He
stated that he personally would recommend
a consultant be contacted to provide infor-
mation and response to preliminary recom-
mendations by the Commission.
in further discussion, Chairman Jensen
stated he would propose the use of the
neighborhood groups and a structuring of
the study by the established neighborhoods.
He commented two basic questions which
definitely needed to be answered were
whether changes were required in the
ordinance, and whether any rezoning actions
were necessary.
Fa.:.th Academy In other business, the Secretary stated
special use Matter that an application had been received from
the Faith Academy Christian Elementary
School, relative to a proposed special use
permit and he noted that due to the timing
of the application, and the next regularly
scheduled Planning Commission meeting in
September, the applicant had requested to
be heard at the August 16th study meeting.
It was the consensus of the Commission to
hear the petition of the Faith Academy
Christian Elementary School at the August
16th meeting.
Nonconforming In other business, the Secretary stated that
Residential uses on May 24, 1973, the Commission considered
in R3-R5 Distracts an application submitted by Mr. Mike Harrer,
6521 Brooklyn Bouletard requesting variance
approval from Section 35-111 (nonconforming
uses) to permit construction of an addition
to his single family dwelling located in an
R5 district. He commented the application
was tabled at that time to permit evalua-
tion and consideration of the nonconforming
-8- 8/2/73
use ordinance provisions, particularly as
they relate to nonconforming single family
uses within residential districts zoned
other than R1 or R2.
The Secretary noted that research had been
done regarding this matter and it was
recommended that if the Commission deter-
mined that an ordinance change should be
made, Paragraph (3) of Section 35-111 could
_ be amended to read as follows:
A nonconforming use of a building exist-
ing at the time of the adoption of this
ordinance may be extended throughout the
building, provided no structural altera-
tions except those required by ordinance,
law, or other regulation are made therein
Excepted from the structural alteration
limitation"axe single family dwellings
located in residential districts other
than R1 or R2, provided -any structural
alterations or additions shall conform
with the requirements of the R1 district.
The Secretary noted there had been dis
cussion at the May 24th meeting, that Mr.
Harrer's application for a variance could
serve as a vehicle to carry any proposed
ordinance change through to the Council.
He stated that if it were determined by the
Commission that an ordinance change were
merited, the following action was recoumik-nc3-
ed: the application could be placed on the
August 16th study meeting agenda and a
recommendation for denial of the application
would be made in conjunction with a . recmr—
mendation that the ordinance be amended to
provide for the above described exception.
He stated that on the other hand, if it
were determined by the Commission that no
ordinance change was required, Mr. Harrer's
application for a variance could be again
considered at the study meeting, and an
evaluation could be made on its merits.
It was the consensus of the Commission that
the application submitted by Mr. Harrer and
tabled at the May 24th meeting be placed on
the August 16th agenda.
Comments on Walkway In other business, the Director of Public
Construction Program Works inquired of the Commission, whether
any feedback had been received relative to
the on going walkway construction program.
A brief discussion ensued and the Director
of Public Works explained that there had
been some objection to sidewalk installa-
tion by groups of citizens in various parts
of the City. He stated that there had been
a meeting recently held with one such group.
He noted the basis for his question was that
extensive use had been made of the neighbor-
hood study groups at the time the basic
sidewalk network program was proposed.
-9- 8/2/73
Chairman Jensen stated that extensive de-
liberation had gone into the establishment
of the Sidewalk Network Program, and that
it was important to keep in mind the in-
tegral nature of the sidewalk network. He
commented that this overall philosophy
should be followed so that the integrity
of the network is not disrupted by random
gaps.
Adjournment: Motion by Commissioner Engdahl seconded by
Commissioner Gross to adjourn the meeting.
The motion passed unanimously. The
Planning Commission meeting adjourned at
11:40 P.M.
Chairman
-10- 8/2/73