The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1973 05-24 PCP PL, COMIATISSIT 0 IT Z�c MWA -iy P Axl?,"il. 3.2, 1973a May 1.0, L973- 3.973 4, -w n, fj xm 1"72 is a 7.t The p:lam,-Ain g cormij-,z;r., on is an advisory Is. of tha Cmmmkiasionls ftactions i�o h .4-- .old p-ubl ic cikearings, :Ln the -mat,,ers concez:,,Ied 1��, theso bearings" 1:-,he Commission ruakes, to the Citzly Vic, C-ity Com-r-1,cil 0.1 final devisions (-),n these V fS u n v i a 6k A Aar pJI-k!at.,I.w% 1,74o. 13 Arpp 15.a a a I.-,t klike -'5521 Brookll-�.-,n P-oulevard Variance CK GR Vi 191 D i Th,-a ap;,-.D I-i cant is seelJ-IIg, n ',-ariae froln Sect-ifon 35-111 -�o :Vzxsn.d�..t comatxuctiovi or'. an addition to a, in the Pt-s dig-".rict. SC-C-tt-ion 35-IJUI. tihat-- noi-monfoana' 'ing use of C-1 a-- t-he -*-inte i,f 1--he aeoption of this bu2--di-nS... exdrz;t5rl,-,; yftzly lx-n pro- vlcled 110. except -ehose rerquired by Iav-,, Ox- Otll---ar Z-espli'-t-i-01-1 are mclee therein". • I t. s the appli-camt 'a conficention that ar hzxdship is Zez, Aized Ln t7na-*,:. tho use provision does not allow for a nee6ed expansion of the halbitable portion of his si.ngle, 1113 IAIT�K(D Z'I-2ICIIXI-,-- Olu issues �,vh,-Lch ne�eC2 to be exemined: use; and, a deter.-Anation contended 'hardship reets with In application le 5 1 s year which mi-ple, J-s not- tnnlilee thzzt- consid --md a t 72000, cle;�-.Onc-e KIVIdley, 'It is gz!lOar in terilm of the a. 1. L-QU:,m t-hz:it tlne Intent of- t1he nonconforming use prov�ioior -IS -,C0 uses t.0, the i:7 mmi-Sting status iaz� -id ef ph:,-o 21 w .-,cncmia life span. In -e- - 0 Plan to t-h ---u- evolva thAe h1i-ghest and best-, -1atid! use 4 t, OJE Thn-�;, to ze.rmS.-;,L ,,�'he F!I*IU*,re.ra','----,IOn and addi-tion to a ` v inrz -L-a an district, rA III L-o-i U t-o vj-ac- -intenaled life of the S123bje--t use. 2 tffo. 72030 (which d 4 'r .y 4 ty Plan calls p i --nned of he area (-'I bota sides of B.'Cook-lyn so3xthe.%-Iy of FI-94, including the subject pz-op,ex�,I. -i-.0 1--he e.M a i3 for gx-antincf ;!z is -"_-O -1-.-TIC-ther the n-pplicant can in :r-act es- F. hF.,- wil-nich has been created �`--ates thr- t, e' CdetCin -1-0 the dwelling CJ 0 a.,- .t.wnfi ly. As to t-h s j.0, t I r. re-cmm)eLl-ded c, -is znl intent €O oz- bw,-J_nes_!:�, given he location p o)E �Ie, evaluatond,' oii i4-s inz-�arits, a recoirmen- cza:mot ';--e E.-ade ill instaace, given U'D Yis, the Provisions o&` the Comprehensive C il pol GS re am!] anld CO-7,1172 iCi -0 voea. • � s+a .3C2f Yf �e tu57 ! ,my flu M .t'4�.' ryiw� .T A.q L�{ � �t= � � •�.1. twEw°._ wx 1 S i�"a� 6 �•� t�`f � � 1164y�1EPyip-muR?6 ti<M'�`tlf �#s'�,7i{�.jf F`f 3 �Y✓`f��' �4 � '"�if�fiaf�csse;3'x.,+Lit%..?'F.:S�.;X,lt�#r�E�d34�,S" "" �' yp � f t14 M 4 A Ir s VA «M�*�,�wa+. .� l��t �� aki r� ,�fir{{ ¢✓� m�e��%°�a�..t��i, y� j��j�f*�.1 k y9 tf> }a��n4 Ef`C2/�F, �T $ f v4SPf Y '1"tYf t♦X.v i§J'�Ay�Y @�B 4 Y F 5 y�gym. PLABT.MIM C1q,,,U4ZSSION .INFOMIATION SHEET Application No. 73010 Applicant: R. A. Zimmermann Location: 3807 Eckberg Drive Request: 'variance from Chapter 15 The item was tabled on may 10th to permit the applicant the opportunity to investigate the feasibility of securing a Registered Land Survey. Due to the time and expense, the contention is still that such a procedure would be unduly restrictive. This has some merit in that the property has bden platted. The train conce 'n is whether tc permit the creation of two substandard (37.5 feet) Lets. The intent is to adapt each of the new lots to the adjacent properties. ANALYSIS AND REGO;k.'ME A11'1 O1gs It is the, recomf.endation, if a variance is deemed appropriate, to require deers restrictions for the new parcels creat.e6 via metes and bounds division. The use of the lofts would be limited to accessory uses by the respective adjacent lot: (i.e. , lots l and 3, Eckberg Addition) . Said documents would be subject to revieca and approval by the City Attorney, S • Ronal , , Eleisher 5649 Fremont Avenue NO. rth Variarce front Chapter 15 BA CKO ROU NJ Ibe item was tabled at the klay 10th weating to permit the applicant to investigate the feasibility o- f a formal sub division, instead of the proposed rpetes and bounds action. The applicant has i_nd"- cated that, because of time factors xelative to a sales agreement on the property, he wishes to secure a reconmendattoy, so the matter may -I.-,e brought before the Council. ae also has indicate-zi that formal sub-division procedures would be cosl�'Ay aind VVC"-'_0_d not be prepared in t_ime for the proposed closing date. ANAL"k-SIS ARD The rerains the same.- the subject property should be plaIL-ted according to norrital subdivision procedures. This wcv,ld be in keeping ,60;h the City policy -whier. strives for concise and simplified descriptions. I't appears the contended hardship - platting being unduly rest.rictive - is solely a result of a time frame established by the applicant and his realtor, There is a possible-, wt ens of cocomplishing tk,,.e subdivision ,which would recognize, Lhe ixiimediacy felt ?by the applicant, TbA6 =go-j.W invQ.kve �=,n �greevjeat th&t he parcel could he dii"idiv-d Lay -Metes; an:'i 'Lc!unds in with the W � f I.-PA,31 plat�vid be sv,�b,_Atted within 90 days,,- and, further, tk,-at an .1 -5- .0 cash escx-cw will be '5110 depu)sited with the OU."y to qu. -ve the of said plat., �t As c)nly oa the basi,3 of this v*rditilin ei;,hat approval of FALMO P-ablic :ears. ;g On kome OCOLIP-Itjxzr+:F FW)M Blair Treme'e, Planning Commission Secretary TO Planning Comm-Ls.sioners, Members of Neighborhood Advisory DATE Way 14 , 1973 The Public hearing on Ho,-�ie occupat. ons arid Special Home occupations is schiedulO, for B-00 may 17 , 19173 irt the Co=iunity Center Social Fla?l. Encloned is the information shec-tt which sets forth the conzi.ission ' s concerris and -lists the issues t,,,) be deliberated at the hearing. Also encloged is the !JI!st-, of citizens who are appointed to the Planning CoTrji,.ission Neighborhood Advxs(,ry Groups . Future oil (- arming ConuAssian matters should be direr°ted to the Adviscry Groups through the Chairman, via this ar. the lia`.son 41-1.C7t:imissioners 'see. iist� CITY Old BROOKrAys CBLaTNR PLANNING COMMISSION • INFORMATION SHEET HOME OCCUPATIONS AND SPECIAL HOME OCCUPATIONS DEFINITION The City Ordinances comprehend certain home occupations as both per- mitted and special uses in the R-1 (single family dwelling) , and R-2 (two family dwelling) zoning districts. Home occupations are recog- nized as a permitted use in the R-3 (townhouse garden apartment) district. A permitted home occupation is defined as: Any gainful occupation or profession carried on within a dwelling unit by the occupant, and not involving any accessory buildings, stock in trade, manufacturing business, repair work, equipment not customarily found in a home or light enough to be carried, or employment of persons not customarily residing on the premises in the performance of such services (for example: dressmaking, professional offices, individual music instruction, and the like) . • The ordinance defines a special home occupation as: A home occupation, approved by special use permission, which involves incidental stock in trade in the performance of the service, or involves equipment not customarily found in a home, nor light weight enough to be carried. It may involve the employment of not more than one person who is a non- resident of the premises (for example: barbershop, beauty parlor, shoe repair service, photography studio, day nursery and the like) . The essential difference between the two classifications is that the special home occupation represents a more intense use. This in- tensity is often reflected in the amount of traffic and activity generated by the use. SPECIAL USE PERMIT REQUIRED primarily for this reason, a special use permit is required in order to conduct a special home occupation. This involves a procedure of filing an application with the City and appearing before a public hearing held by the Planning Commission and City Council. The ordinance provides further that a permit may be granted after v Home Occupations and Special Home Occupations Page 2 demonstration by evidence that a number of criteria or standards are • met. These include assurance that the special use will promote and enhance the general welfare and will not be detrimental to or endanger the community; that the special use will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity nor sub- stantially diminish and impair property values within the neighbor- hood; that the use will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding property for permitted uses; that ad- equate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress, egress, and parking so to minimize traffic congestion; and that in all other respects, the use will conform with the regulations of the district in which it is located. ZONING RESTRICTIONS AND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN It is notable that neither the permitted home occupation or special home occupation category comprehends general commercial business activities. The zoning ordinance permits general commercial uses, including business offices, retail sales, and wholesaling only in the nonresidential, commercial and industrial districts. Only the limited business activities recognized as home occupations or special home occupations are permitted in the residential district. • These provisions of the zoning ordinance are based upon land use Policies adopted in accordance with the community's Comprehensive Plan, which strives for a balance of various land uses by restricting : the location and type of activities to certain geographic locations within the community. Furthermore, the Comprehensive Plan, as well as policies adopted by the City over the years, have emphasized the importance of developing and maintaining the integrity or character of the residential neighborhoods. Permitting general commercial or business activities, more intense than a limited degree of home occupation activity by the residents, represents a major infringement upon the integrity of the residential neighborhood. Furthermore, in consideration of the health, safety, and welfare of the community, certain requirements concerning the physical character- istics and operation of commercial enterprises have been adopted for the nonresidential zoning districts. These would include such things as automatic fire protection, adequate parking provisions, building design, lighting, and landscaping. Thus, to condone general commer- cial uses in a residential district where such requirements are not • provided, would be unlawful as well as degrading to the character of the residential neighborhood. Home Occupations and Special Home Occupations Page 3 SITUATION TODAY • it has come to the City's attention that there are some enterprises operated from residential dwellings which are either special home occupation type uses operating without a special use permit; or, in some cases, are outright general business and retail commercial activities. In an effort to evaluate the effectiveness and timeliness of the ordinance provisions for home occupations and special home occupa- tions, as well as the restrictions governing the location of commercial activities, the City Council has asked the Planning Com- mission to develop a status report and to make any appropriate recom- mendations. To this end, the Commission is hearing testimony from interested parties; is considering requirements in other communities; and is conducting a public hearing whereby the residents of Brooklyn Center will be afforded the opportunity to express their concerns. ISSUES FOR PUBLIC HEARING For purposes of the public hearing, the Commission is seeking a • community response to the following questions. 1. Are the current ordinance provisions for home occupations and special home occupations adequate? Are they timely? 2. Should the current provisions be more restrictive? Should they be relaxed? Should they be eliminated? 3. What are the merits or objections to limited business ventures operated from homes by residents? 4. To what extent are citizens of the community willing to diminish the character of their residential neighborhoods by permitting various commercial type activities in neighboring homes? 5. To what extent are the citizens of the community willing to relax the strict requirements for the commercial districts so that commercial uses might develop indis- criminately throughout the City, including the residential districts? • 6. To what degree is the community willing to alter or eliminate the principles of the Comprehensive Plan? What would the impact of this be upon the character Home Occupations and Special Home Occupations Page 4 and life quality of the community as a whole? CONCLUSION AND CURRENT POLICY It is apparent that the ramifications of this issue are most significant and go beyond the seeming minor decision whether to permit a retail shop or industry in a certain home or a certain neighborhood. Until any change is adopted- in the principles of the Comprehensive Plan, and the requirements of the zoning code, the City Administra- tion intends to fully execute the ordinance provisions and has re- ceived the unanimous endorsement of the City Council in this regard. ' I