Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1973 11-08 PCM MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE PLANNING COSWISSION OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THEE COUNTY OF FXNNEPIN AND STATE OF MIND"ESOTA STUDY SESSION CITY HALL NOVEMBER 8, 1973 Call to Order: The Planning Commission met in study session and was called to order at 8:05 P.M. by Chairman Robert Jensen. Roll Call: Chairman Jensen, Commissioners Boguclati, Foreman, Scott, GroSw, and Engdahl. Also present was Director of Planning and Inspection Blair Trcmere. Approve Minutes: Motion by Commissioner Gros seconded by 10-25-73 Commissioner Scott to approve the minutes of the October 25th meeting as submitted. Voting in favor wete: Commissioners Bogucki, Gross, and Scott. Not Voting: Chairman Jensen aad Commissioners Engdahl and Foreman who were not present at that meeting. The Motion. passed. 11-1-73 Motion by commissioner Engdahl seconded by Commissioner Foreman to approve the minutes of the November 1, 1973 meeting as submitted. Voting in favor were: Chairman Jensen, Commissioners Bogucki, Foreman and Engdahl. Not Voting: Commissioners Scott and Gross who were not present at that meeting. The motion passed. Proposed Change of Use The first item of business was considera for Brookdale Towers tion of a proposal for a change in the Office Building use of a portion of the Brookdale Towers (Darrel Farr Development) Office Building, submitted by Darrel A. Farr Development Corp. The item was in- troduced by the Secretary who explained that on July 26, 1971, the City Council granted final approval of site and build- ing plans for the office building (Appli- cation No. 71025) and one of the condi- tions of approval read as follows: That should the general office use change and a new use require addi- tional parking, the plan will be subject to review by the Planning Commission anal/or City Council. • lie explained the developer was now pro- posing to lease some of the space to one or more ophthalmologists or optical doctors and that the ordinance specific- ally provided for a higher parking ratio for medical uses. Chairman_ Jensen then recognized Mr. Roger Redmond who represented the Darrel A. Farr Development Corp. , and who noted a -1- 11/8/73 letter he had submitted to the file specifically requesting permission to lease 5,000 sq. ft. of medical space to five different doctors or, as an alter- native, 3600 sq. ft. to three different doctors. An extensive discussion ensued and Mr. ;1,edmond outlined the reasons for the request, stating that an optical service which had leased ground floor space felt their business could be sub- stantially improved if there were a • number of ophthalmologists located in the building. The Secretary commented that according to ordinance parking provisions for medical uses, and given the amount of existing parking, there would be a de- ficiency of 23 spaces for the 5,000 sq. ft. - 5 doctor proposal and a deficiency of 15 spaces for the 3600 sq. ft. - 3 doctor proposal. Commissioner Engdahl inquired as to whether any -,pace had been set aside for opnthalmolcgistc when the optical ser- vice had mover into the building. Mr. Redmond responded in the negative and further noted that such a commitment was not made when the lease was signed with the optical service. Mr. Redmond further commented that the developer felt the market was not strong in this area for medical uses and that the present intent was to accommodate a good tenant. Mr. Redmond then proceeded to cite statistical data based upon net rentable area and -the developer's conclusions as to the need for parking generated by existing tenants. The secretary stated that Mr. Redmond's data should be con- sidered in the proper perspective, in that the ordinance requirement was based upon gross floor area so to provide a "blanket" parking formula for the entire building. He stated furthermore that the intent of the ordinance requirement was to comprehend parking for customers and visitors as well as the tenants themselves. Mr. Redmond responded that in that can- text, it should be noted a number of present tenants did not utilize the park- ing which would be reserved for employees. :3e explained certain employers such as lawyers, insurance companies, and the developer himself, had a number of people who were in the field more than they were in the office. He stated that based upon his projections, the site could accommodate parking for the building with full tenancy including the proposed medical uses. He noted -2- 11/8/73 that this Assumed a 5% vacancy rate at any given time. Mr. Redmond stated the need for visitor parking spaces was affected by at least three factors: I.- The number of tenants or occupants which were usually out of the office; 2. Tenants and visitors which arrived via public transporta- tion or who walked to the building; 3. Tenants who were absent from the building periodically throughout the day for luncheon engagements and other appoint- ments. Chairman Jensen stated that at first sight, it appeared the basic issue was whether a rationale could be developed for granting a parking variance. He stated tf.-at upon further analysis, how- ever, i� was apparent the standards for a variance could not be met. Chairman Jensen continued, that the basic query tions appeared to be: whether adequate parking can be provided on the site to accommodate the proposed use: and, whether the proposed uses represented a needed service to the community. He stated that answers to these questions were essential if the time and effort were to be taken to establish some approach to providing for the requested uses. Commissioner Bogucki stated that there was an overriding need to provide for total required parking for the site. He stated, however, that if the applicant could thoroughly document a case that showed existing ordinance requirements to be excessive, as they related to the specific proposed use, perhaps the Commission could consider a special approval. The Secretary commented that apparently the planning Commission had originally considered the possibility of a variance or other special use approach, when the developer had indicated at the site and building plan review, that should economic conditions dictate, there might be future considerations of utilizing a portion of the facility for a medical/ dental clinic use. He stated that the developer's original suggestion that a variance might be requested, and the Commission's concern for providing adequate parking, had generated the -3- lY6�f`73'" • condition of approval noted earlier in the meeting. An extensive discussion ensued as to what approach might be taken to resolve the situation generated by the subject request and Chairman Jensen reiterated that he Could not vote in favor of a variance since the standards were not met. Commissioner Engdahl stated that he could not approve a variance action or any other special use action without some assurance that provision would be made to supply required parking in the future when it was needed. He explained that the concept he had in mind was one of permitting the requested use on a limited basis, but only subject to the condition that if the available parking spaces were overburdened in the future, the subject uses could be eliminated. Chairman Jensen suggested that the possibility of a special use approach be discussed wiF_h the City Attorney. He emphasized to Mr. Redmond that thorough, objective documentation would be re- quired to establish the contention that the ordinance parking requirement for medical uses was excessive with respect to the specific proposal. In response to a question by Mr. Redmond, Commissioner Scott stated that the applicant should work solely with the concept of 3600 sq. ft. for a maximum of three doctors. There being no further discussion, Chairman Jensen stated that the matter would be deferred until such time the staff had secured a reading from the City Attorney as to a feasible approach, and until such time the applicant had developed documented evidence supporting the contention that the existing ordinance requirements for medical uses were excessive with respect to the sub- ject request. Recess The meeting recessed at 9:30 P.M. and resumed at 9:50 P.M. Draft Resolution The next item of business was considera- • Recommending Denial tion of a draft resolution recommending of Application No. 73038 denial of Planning Commission Applica- (Koch Marketing) tion No. 73038. A brief discussion ensued. Resolution No. 73-5 Member Gilbert Engdahl introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption. -4- 11/8/73 PLANNING COMNISSION RESOLUTION N04 5 RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING DENIAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION N0, 73038 WHEREAS, Application No. 73038 was submitted by Koch Marketing Company on September 25, 1973, requesting review and approval of special use permission to reopen the former Gulf Oil Service Station, 1912 57th Avenue North; and, WHEREAS, a public hearing was duly scheduled for and held on • November 1, 1973; and, WHEREAS, it was the applicant's proposal to commence a gasoline sales operation on the site as soon as possible, with the intent to eventually demolish the present structure and to redevelop the sub- ject site according to the applicant's own specifications for such an operation; and; WHEREAS, the former operation, now closed for approximately eighteen months, constituted a nonconforming use, in that current ordinance requirements for service stations as to site size and building setbacks were not met; and, WHEREAS, the application was considered with respect to the provisions of Section 35-220 of the Zoning Ordinance, "Standards for Special Use Pei,uits" ; NOW THEREFORE"' BE IT RESOLVED, by the Brooklyn Center Planning Coaimission that: It is the recommendation that the Ciiy Council deny Application No. 73038 submitted by Koch Marketing Company, noting the following: 1. Due to substandard area and building setback, the .fo=r er service station use of the subject site was nonconforming. 2. Approval of the subject request would constitute perpetuation of a nonconforming use, which would not be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Ordinance. 3. The subject site is not deemed appropriate or desirable for a service station because of its size and provision for access. 4. The site could serve other commercial uses permitted in the C-2 district. The motion for the adoption of the foregoing .resolution was duly seconded by member Robert Foreman. And upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: chairman Jeasen, Commissioners Bogucki, Foreman, Scott, Gross, and Engdahl. And the following voted against the same: None. Whereupon said resolution was duly declared passed and adopted. Dated Secretary Chairman Other Business; In other business, the Secretary noted Special Study Meeting that a special study meeting had been scheduled for November 15th for purposes of considering the Council moratorium on -5- 11/8/73 • multi-residential development and the interim study of ordinance provisions. Cancel Field Frip In other business, the propo3ed field trip and tour of the City previously scheduled for November 10th was can- celled until early 1974. Adjournment Motion by Commissioner Foreman seconded by Commissioner Scott to adjourn the meeting. The motion passed unanimously. • The Planning Commission meeting ad- journed at 11:10 P.M. Chairman -6- 11/8/73