Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1973 04-05 PCM MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THEE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND STATE OF MINNESOTA REGULAR MEETING APRIL 5, 1973 CITY HALL 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, Grosshans, and Gross. Also present was Administrative Assistant Blair Tremere. Approval of Minutes Following the Chairman's explanation, 3-15-73 there was a motion by Commissioner Gross secondrd by Commissioner Scott to approve the minutes of the March 15, 1973 meet- ing as submitted. Motion passed un- animously. Commissioner Engdahl arrived at 8:07 P.M. Resolution 73-1 Member Gross introduced the following revolution and moved its adoption: PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION N0. 73-1 RESOLUTION DENYING PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION N0. 73002 SUBMITTED BY MR. MRMN GORDON9 ._ WHEREAS, on March 15, 1973, the Planning Commission considered an application submitted by Mr. Marvin Gordon requesting a special use permit to construct attached single family dwellings on the property located south of FI-94 rind north of 66th Avenue North from Noble Avenue to approximately 400 feet easterly of Lee Avenue North, and, WHEREAS, a public hearing was held at that time relative to the special use permit request; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission met informally with the appli- cant on March 1st and January 18th, 1973 for purposes of preliminary review of the request to develop the subject property with dwellings of a design other than detached single family homes; and, WHEREAS, it was the consensus of the of the neighboring property ou ners and other residents present, that the proposed project would not Le representative of the best land use for the subject property, and, '00AS, special use permission was sought to construct attached single family dwellings, similar in design to townhouse garden apart- ments, on the parcel zoned R-1 at an R-1 density; and, -1- 4-5-73 k7HEREAS, to deem such dwellings as R-1 would be not only un- orthodox brat would result in dwellings which could be converted to rental properties if the intended sale of each dwelling as a single family home proved unfeasible; and, WHONMAS, to permit such development upon a remnant parcel zoned R-1 would serve to establish an undesirable precedent for other similar parcels throughout the City; and WHEREAS, the proposed development is not considered in the best • interest of the neighborhood or the community due to the proximity of the freeway as a major noise generator: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Brooklyn Center to recommend to the City Council that Planning Commission Application No. 73002 submitted by Marvin Gordon be denied: Date Chairman Secretary The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Bogucki and upon vote being taken thereon ::one following voted in favor thereof; Jensen, Scott, Grosshans, Gross, and Engdahl, and the following voted against the same; none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. Application No. 73004 The next item of business was Planning (Boone Construction) Commission Application No. 73004 sub- mitted by Steven L. Boone Construction Co. The item was introduced by the Secretary who explained the applicant was requesting rezoning approval for two lots in the 7200 block of Lyndale Avenue North, which abut the easterly side of the highway and the corner lot at the northeast quadrant of the inter- section of 72nd Avenue and Lyndale Avenue North. He stated that the appli- cant was further requesting a site and building plan approval for 5 townhouse units to be located on the subject property. He stated that the Combined dimension of the two lots was 150 feet by 206 feet. He stated that the neighboring proper- ties both to the north and across the street were zoned R-4. He also stated that the development which has occurred there has been primarily R-4 plexes and 1h to 2 story apartments) with the exception of the 11 townhouse units currently under construction by Swanco Developing Company. Chairman Jensen recognized and asked Mr. Steven Boone why rezoning to R-4 was being proposed. Mr. Boone responded that he felt the area was better suited -2- 4-5 .73 to multi-family development than single family homes. He stated that it appear- ed that R-1 single family homes were difficult to sell and he also noted that the R-4 zoning would be in keeping with the zoning of other parcels in the area. He commented that he had originally re- quested rezoning to R-3, but that the City had recommended that if any re- zoning were to take place, it should be in an R-4 context. • Extensive discussion then ensued as to the proposed development comprising 5 townhouse units and Mr. Boone discussed the various advantages of townhouse ownership versus single family dwelling ownership. Commissioner Foreman arrived at 8;20 P.M. Mr. Bo�3ucki commented that it was not clear to him why R-3 or R-4 development would be desirable in the area, if R-1 development were considered undesirable. The applicant responded that the differ- ence was a matter of freedom from main- tenance chores, and the value of homes in terms of the quality of construction and design. In that regard, Chairman Jensen inquired what the applicant's experience had been with townhouse development, and he also inquired whether the applicant consider- ed a 5 unit townhouse development to be viable. The applicant responded that he had indication from prospective town- house buyers that high quality townhouse units in a small development setting would be highly desirable. He stated further that the proposed price range vas $45,000.GO and up per unit. H:: stated that this would offer quality hones to those willing to pay a premiun price for the advantages of townhouse ownership in a small home-like atmos- phere. Chairman Jensen responded that the Com- mission had spent considerable time de- liberating as to the desirable minimum size of townhouse developments. re then inquired whether the applicant had given thought to possible widening of Trunk • Highway 169. The applicant stated that he had contacted the Highway Hepartnen•4 and had been informed that there were no plans for widening Trunk Highway 169 in the for-seeable future. The Secretary reiterated the concern for future widening of the highway and the likely taking of land on the east side. He stated that while there might not be established future plans for widening: that situation could change with a sub- -3- 4-5-73 stantial increase in traffic or a change in existing policies as to the use of Trunk Highway 169. The applicant then proceeded to briefly review and explain the proposed site and building plans and a brief dis- cussion ensued. Public Hearing on Chairman Jensen then called upon the Application No. 73004 notified neighboring property owners Rezoning Request and he recognized Mr. Foslien, 7215 Dallas Road, who stated he had no par-.. ticular objection to the rezoning re- quest. He stated he was concerned that there be appropriate screening or berm- ing in the rear of the property and he stated that he would prefer not to see apartments developed on the site. He commented that he was aware of other homes built by the applicant and to h knowledge they were of high quality. Chairman Jensen noted that there were.: other notified property owners present. Close Public Hearing There was a motion by Commissioner Gros:: seconded by Commissioner Grosshans to close the public hearing. Further discussion ensued relative to the ongoing Northwest Corridor Study an•I the possible implications for the use of Trunk highway 169. Chairman Jensen then explained to the applicant the Commission's policy to table rezoning requests and to refer them to the appropriate neighborhood study group for further input. He stated that there were several question that should be resolved: the merits of the zoning request; feasibility of the proposed townhouse development; and the matter of the relatively small size of the proposed development. :�,c;tion to Table Following further discussion, there was Application No. 73004 a motion by Commissioner Bogucki secor0- (Boone Construction) ed by Commissioner Foreman to table and to refer to Study Planning Commission Application No. 73004 Group submitted by Steven L. Boone Construct ' : ,,-. Company and to refer the rezoning re- quest to the appropriate neighborhood study group. The motion passed unani- mously. Application No. 73005 The next item of business was Planning (Marvin Nelson) Commission Application No. 73005 sub- mitted by Mr. Marvin Nelson. The item c:as introduced by the Secretary who ex- plained the applicant was seeking site and building plan approval for a pro- posed 510400 square foot recreational facility, comprised of 40 bowling lanes, a 102 seat main, dining room, a 52 seat -4- 4-5-73 bowlers bar, a 28 seat smaller bar, and a 40 seat snack facility. T'Ze Secretary stated the proposed structure would be located on the site of the present Lynbrook Bowl at the northwest quadrant of the intersection of I-94 and Trunk Highway 169. The Secretary then commented that the • approval of the application would be totally contingent upon adoption of an ordinance amending Section 35-704 2(e) of the City Ordinances, reducing the parking requirement for bowling alleys from 7 spaces per each alley to 5 spaces per alley requirement. Chairman Jensen then recognized Mr. Gingold, Mr. Pink, and Mr. Katz, architects for the applicant. An eX.- tensive presentation of renderings and the proposed site and building plans, then ensued. The Director of Public Works arrived during the presentation. Chairman Jensen inquired as to the tim- ing of the demolition of the present facility. Mr. Gingold responded that the development would be phased, in that the new structure would be built to the rear of the existing facility, and the present 24 lane business would continue its operation. He stated that upon completion, the new facility, which would initially contain 24 lanes, the restaurant, and the proposed bars, would be open for business and the existing facility would be closed. He said cer- tain equipment would then be transferred from the old building, and the remaining 24 new lanes would be installed. Upon completion of that transfer, the old building would then be completely de- molished and covered over, with the space converted to parking for the ex- panded Lynbrook Bowl. Mr. Gingold explained in some detail, that sufficient parking would be avail- able for the existing 24 lane facility during construction of the new building, and would be available for the new 24 • lane facility (including restaurant and bars) during the period of transfer anA demolition of the old building. An extensive discussion then ensued as ::o the phasing of the project and the provision for adequate parking. The Director of Public Works noted that. elevation and drainage plans would be -5- 4-5-73 subiect to review and he cosarae nted ltiat certain details needed to be resolved, and that these .natters could be worked out with the architect. Regarding Vhe lan-3scape plan, he reco-im ended that the berms indicated on the parkilig perimetz�, be longer than indicated. An extensive discussion ensued regarding the contingency regarding necessary re- duction of the ordinance parking require- ment from 7 spaces per alley to 5 spaces. Chairman Jensen and Mr. Nelson discussed the actual experience of the existing bowling facility and Mr. Nelson noted the data collected and submitted to the City, which indicated that 5 spaces psc lane would be adequate. The Secretary commented that staff re- search had included a survey of eight metropolitan eon.•uunities as 14-:o ordinance requirements for bowling facilities. He stated that five of' the eight com- munities required 5 parking spaces for each bawling large and that one required 8 spaces p,.r lane. Iie stated the other two used a different basis for deter- mining the parking recraireament. He ex- plaiaed that each community surveyed provided that any additional ancillary facility such as restaurants or bars would generate the need for additional par?ring according to established ordi- nance requirPm.ent: for those uses. Mr. N-alson also conunoii ed the.'_ gi4en newer technology in bowling lane design such as fast ball returns and computer- iLerd scoring, the cranrQover time durs ir.q league bowling for example, was s�uh- stantially reduced. He also noted that many bowlers tended to pool their rides to the bowling facility. Commissioner bogucki inquired as to the type cf eating facilities which were proposed and the applicant respon6ed the restaurant was intended to offer a family type menu and he noted the other: snack facilities available elsewhere in the building. In response to a question by Commission- er Bogucki, Mr. Nelson also commented • that he had submitted an application of intent for securing a liquor license, and that the progress of the proposed construction would weigh heavily on whether a license was obtained. Consensus Developed Regarding the contingency as to raini.mum Regarding Par-king parking requirements, Chairman Jensen RegU i cement Contingency polled the Con uissioners and determined that it was the preliminary consensus of the Commission that a 5 spaces per -6- 4-5-73 r ' lane requirement seemed reasonable, and would be reviewed by the Commission in more detail. Action to Recommend Following further discussion there was Approval of application a motion by Commissioner Grosshans No. 73005 seconded by Commissioner Gross to recommend approval of planning Commis- sion Application No. 73005 submitted by Mr. Marvin Nelson subject to the follow- . ing conditions; 1. Building plans are subject to the approval of the building official.. with respect to applicable build- ing codes prior to the issuance of building permits; 2. Drainage, grading, and utility plans are subject to approval by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of building permits; 3. A performance agreement and financial guarantee (in an amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be submitted to the City to guarantee the instal- lation of site improvements as shown on all plans approved by the City; 4. Approval is completely contingent upon the adoption of an ordinance amending Section 35-704, reducing the required minimum parking spaces for bowling alleys from 7 spaces per alley to 5 spaces per alley; 5. Details as to the size and type of the proposed landscaping, in- cluding proposed berms on the per- imeter of parking area will be re- solved with the Planning and Engineering Departments. The motion passed unanimously. Recess The meeting recessed at 9:55 and resumed at 10:10 P.M. Apr-lli.ezqv nn No. 73006 The next item of business was Planning Commission Application No. 73006 sub- mitted by Mr. Gene Anderson. The Secretary introduced the item and' ex- plained the applicant was seeking a variance from Section 35-400 of the ordinances, to permit construction of a single family dwelling on a substandard lot located at 5323 Irving Avenue North. The Secretary also explained that on October 25, 1965, the then Village Council approved a similar variance re- quest for the subject parcel and a -7- 4-5-73 neighboring parcel. It was noted that, the Council stated it was not obligating itself to grant additional variances. ,_,. He stated that Application (No. 6507'%1,, had been submitted by a Mr. Richae-1 Cameron and that the present applicant, ,; was seeking a reaffirmation of the approval for the one parcel. • .,"xblic Bearing Chairman Jensen then called upon neigh on Application boring property owners which had been No. 73006 notified of the public hearing. He recognized Mr. D. G. Cole of 5329 I3'vifw; Avenue North, and Mr. Nygaard of 531 ,; Irving Avenue North, who stated their objection that construction on j ect parcel would make for a very t development in the area, which was al- ready crowded. Mr. Cole noted the numerous-substandard lots in the area which had been developed. Chairman Jensen stated that according to the plat of the area, both Mr. Cold?�,_w� home and Mr. Nygaard's home were on 54 } foot wide substandard lots. He in- quired as to why they objected, in tt the proposed development would be sip:-.:=: lar to their homes and that it appeared the situation would not be overerowdeoff ' although it would be tighter than at the present time. Mr. Cole responded that he and Mr. Nygaard currently utilized the vacant parcel for parking and other purpose:,. and that development of the subject parcel would restrict their activities. Chairman Jensen then recognized the applicant who stated that he would be willing to forgo any proposed develop- ment if the neighboring owners were i,v­ terested in purchasing the property. During further discussion, Chairman Jensen inquired whether the subject parcel met with the ordinance provision, allowing development of substandard lob: whose dimensions and area were at least'' 70,b of current ordinance requirements. , The Secretary responded that the area of the subject parcel was less than 70% of current ordinance requirements, as • were many of the other substandard lots in the Humboldt Addition. Acts to Recommend Following further discussion, there was- . fyval of a motion by Commissioner Foreman 'ication No. 73006 seconded by Commissioner Endahl to he Anderson) recommend approval of Planning Commis-j. sion Application No. 73006, noting the prior approval contained in P.pplicatioa,l,: No. 65072, the precedent for such action~ in this area, and the evidence sub- mitted by the applicant that the parcel -8- 4-5-73 could be developed with a single family home meeting other ordinance require- ments; and, further, subject to the stipulation that such approval only grants permission to construct a single family dwelling on the lot and doers not imply or include any other variances. The motion passed unanimously. Application No. 73007 The next item of business was Planning Commission Application No. 73007 sub- mitted by Titus Construction, Inc. The item was introduced by the Secretary who explained the applicant was seeking site and building plan approval for a 4,268 square foot commercial building to be located on the property northerly of the Goodyear Tire Center on Xerxes Avenue. He stated the proposed struc- ture was intended to house an office for the Household Finance Corp. , as well as retail space for a Lafeyette Electronics Store. The Secretary explained that whereas the applicant had originally indicated the desire to install a basement storage for the electronics firm, it had since been requested that the basement construc- tion be considered optional, due to the possibility that it would not be needed. The Secretary explained that the signi- ficance of this option was related to the exterior design of the building, in that if a basement were included, a stairwell and lavatory facility for the electronics store would be required on the easterly end of the building; and, by the same token, if a basement were not installed, this extension of the main building would not be built. A brief discussion ensued as to the potential use of a basement area for retail activity and the consequent ram- ifications upon parking requirements. The applicant stated it was not the intent of the developer or the tenant to utilize the possible lower level for retail activity. Application i.on No. 73007 Following further discussion there was (Titus a motion by Commissioner Gross seconded by Commissioner Scott to recommend ap- proval of Planning Commission Applica- tion No. 73007 submitted by Titus Con- struction Inc. , subject to the follow- ing conditions; 1. Building plans are subject to the approval of the building official with respect to applicable build- ing codes prior to the issuance of permits; -9- 4-5-73 2. Utility and drainage plans in- cluding berming specifications a_,a subject to the approval of the City Engineer prior to the isEuance of the buila ng permit; 3. A performance bond and a finan- cial guarantee (in an amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be submitted to • the City to guarantee the in- stallation of the site improve- ments as designated on the ap- proved plans; 4. If a basement area is installed, it shall not be utilized for re- tail sales activity. The motion passed unanimously. Fula vre Meeting The next item of business was consid- Sai�edu:u -� eration of a future meeting schedule and it was the consensus of the Com- mission to schedule upcoming meetings as follows: April 12th (study) , May 10th (regulate) , May 17th and May 24th (study) , and June 7th (regular) . Discussion of Proposed Further discussion ensued regarding the Ordinance Amendment possible amendment of the zoning regarding Bowl;_ng Alley ordinance to comprehend a reduction of Paikiing Requirements the required minimum parking spaces for bowling alleys. Chairman Jensen stated that while a preliminary consensus had been offered to the applicant indicat- ing that such an amendment would be feasible, further thought should be given to the proposal and a draft ordinance amendment should be available for Commission review. Consensus to Direct It was the consensus of the Commission Preparation of !)raf-t to direct the staff to prepare a draft: ordinance Amendment ordinance amendment comprehending the reduction of the required minimum park- ing spaces for bowling facilities from 7 spaces per lane to 5, and to submit the draft at the next meeting for dis- position. Discussion of Home Extensive discussion then ensued re- Occupation Ordinance garding the need to generate input rel- P-ovisions and the ative to home occupation and special • Reorganizal-.-ion of home occupation ordinance provisions Leigh":aoxrhood Study and policies for purposes of discussing Groups the issue with the City Council at a joint meeting. Chairman Jensen noted the consensus of the Commission on March 15th, that con- sideration should be given to schedul- ing a public hearing relative to the home occupation issue. In that regard, -10- 4-5-73 extensive discussion ensued regarding another agenda item proposing the re- vitalization of neighborhood study groups for each of the six neighborhoods as designated by the Comprehensive Plan., Chairman Jensen stated that these groups could be reorganized and called upon for input relative to the home occupa- tion issue in conjunction with public • hearing. Assig,3 Commission He then designated each of the Commis- Representatives to sioners to determine the status of each Study Groups of the designated neighborhood groups with the intent of reorganizing each group as follows: West Central, Grosshans: Northwest, Bogucki: Central, Gross: Northeast, Foreman: Southwest, Scott: and Southeast, Engdahl. Chairman Jensen asked that a report be submitted as to the status of each group at the next meeting, when a deter- mination could be made as to the need for new members and group leaders. Cor:sensus to In further discussion it was the con- Schedule public sensas of the Commission to schedule a Hearing on May 17, 1973 public hearing on the matter of home regarding Home Occupctions occupations for May 17, 1973, and to direct the Secretary to appropriately publicize the hearing. Report of Ad Hoc In other business, Commissioner Gross Co,-4mitt,ee on Freeway presented the report of the ad hoc Development District committee appointed to study and evalu- ate the proposed creation of a freeway development district. He stated the conclusion of the committee that a free- way development district would be best accomplished as a special use in the I-1 district, comprehending those commercial uses as described in Subsections 1. (b) , 1 (d) through 1 (j) , 3 (c) , 3 (d) , and 3 (g) through 3 (j) , of Section 35-322, subject to the requirements of the I-1 district. Action to Accept Following a brief discussion there was Ad Hoc Committee a motion by Commissioner Foreman second- Report ed by Commissioner Boguvki to accept anal endorse the ad hoc committee's report relative to the provision for a freeway development district. The motion • passed unanimously. Chairman Jensen stated that the Com- mittee's report would thus serve as in- put during the joint discussion with the City Council. -11- 4-5-73 Act.-Ion on Consideration Regarding an agenda item reflecting of I.,ossible Car Wash Councilman Britts ' request that the Standards Commission consider possible standards for car wash operations in service stations, Chairman Jensen noted pre- vious Commission deliberations on the matter, and stated formal action should be taken to indicate the Commission's position. Following a brief discussion there was a motion by Commissioner Foreman seconded by Commissioner Gross to note that the Commission had taken under ad- visement Councilman Britts' suggestion that evaluation be made as to the feas- ibility of additional standards for can wash operations by service stations, and to set forth the Commission's con- clusion that the current ordinance .re- quirements regarding service stations and car washer operations are deemed both adequate and effective. The motion passed unanimously. Adjournment Motion by Commissioner Engdahl seconded by Commission::_r Foreman to adjourn the meeting. The motion passed unanimously. The Planning Commission meeting ad- journed at 11:45 P.M. Chairman -12- 4-5-73