Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1974 05-23 PCM MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA SPECIAL SESSION CITY HALL MAY 23, 1974 40 Call to Order: The Planning Commission met in special session and was called to order at 8:10 p.m. by Chair- man pro tem Robert Grosshans . Roll Calls Present were Chairman pro tem Grosshans, Commissioners Foreman, Pierce, Engdahl, and Scott. Also present were Director of Public Works James Merila and Director of Planning and Inspection Blair Tremere. Application No. 74027 Following the Chairman ' s explanation the first (,Swanco, Inc.) item of business was consideration of Planning Commission Application No. 74027 submitted by Swanco, Inc. The item was introduced by the Secretary who explained the applicant sought approval of a proposed plat of an approximate 12 .6 acre R-1 tract generally bounded by 67th, 68th Colfax and Camden Avenues North. He noted the applicant also requested a 5-foot lot width variance for one lot, located at the corner of 68th and Camden Avenues, which would be approxi- mately 85 feet wide at the front yard building setback line. He stated the ordinance requires a 90 foot width for corner lots . The Secretary explained the proposed plat con- sists of three blocks with 37 lots and compre- hends the extension of Aldrich and Bryant Avenues North through the subdivision, as well as the extension of 68th Avenue North, a por- tion of which would be a 30 foot wide half- street dedication pending future platting of the tracts to the north of the site. He stated that Camden and 67th Avenues would also serve the subdivision. The Secretary explained that, relative to the variance request, the five foot deficiency on the one corner lot resulted from the land avail- able subsequent to the layout of the other lots southerly of the corner, all of which were of the minimum width. Chairman pro tern Grosshans recognized Mr. Harold Swanson who represented the applicant and Mr. Carl Anderson owner of a portion of the subject tract. He noted that none of the notified neighboring property owners was present and he waived the reading of the names. The Director of Public Works explained the history of the development of the roadway network -1- 5/23/74 roadway to the City; however, the property owner westerly of Aldrich Avenue, Mr. Gunderson, has consented to conveying the right of way for the northerly 30 feet of 68th Avenue to the City.) 2 . The concept would divert a higher volume of traffic down existing Camden Avenue between 67th and 68th Avenue than would the grid pattern lay-out consistent with the City's master plan for the area. 3. The cul-de-sac at 67th Avenue North would require the emergency vehicles coming from the Bast Side Station at 65th and Dupont Avenues to travel in a circuitous route to reach properties on the cul-de-sac streets and properties northerly of 68th Avenue. The Director of Public Works further stated that grid pattern layout provides for the flexibility of developing on both sides of Bryant Avenue and Aldrich Avenue,while deferring construction of 68th Avenue North between Aldrich Avenue and Camden Avenue until the property north of 68th Avenue is ready to develop or convey the necessary roadway right of way to the City. The Secretary explained a prime planning con- sideration was the fact that 67th Avenue North was planned and constructed as a collector street for the entire area, including the sub- ject tract. He stated that failure to connect to this collector would create an undue burden on other existing streets which were not planned or designed as collector or arterial streets. The Secretary and the Director of Public Works also noted that the staff had determined a hy- brid design of the proposed plat and the alter- nate plat would be possible and generally con- sistent with the planning; such design could comprehend one cul.-de-sac off of Bryant Avenue North for example, with Aldrich running through from 68th to 67th. Chairman pro tem Grosshans asked the applicant for his response to the suggested hybrid con- cept, and Mr. Swanson stated that it was un- acceptable, in that his preferred design would not comprehend any access onto 67th Avenue North except at existing Camden Avenue. • Commissioner Bngdahl stated an important con- sideration was the 68th Avenue half-street, and he commented it was unfortunate the land to the north was not included in the plat. He stated that rather than deferring the construction of 68th Avenue North, the applicant 's alternate would require premature installation just to provide minimum access and that this street -3- 5/23/74 applicant's alternate had an aggregate ex- posure of 797 lineal feet. He continued that, given the depth of the rear yards as proposed in the applicant's alternate cul-de-sac plan, there was substantially more yard living area exposed to 67th than there was in the proposed plat, where the rear yards were primarily oriented "back to back" with • only front or side yard exposure to 67th. He stated that, considering ordinance limitations for screening of yards along streets, it ap- peared that the alternate plat did not fully comprehend the ramifications such a design would have on the use of the properties, and was primarily concerned with eliminating street intersections with a collector street. Commissioner Engdahl reiterated his concerns as to emergency vehicle access to the area and Chairman pro tem Grosshans stated that while he generally preferred a cul-de-sac concept, this was not an area well suited for its implementa- tion. Mr. Swanson commented that this was a concept developed after substantial experience in housing construction and platting in such areas as North Oaks, and Chairman pro tem Grosshans re- sponded that the subject tract was hardly com- parable to that. He asked Mr. Swanson if he was implying quality homes could not be built in this area without a double cul-de-sac design. Mr. Swanson stated that the alternate concept would, in his opinion permit homes of a higher quality, but that he had not meant to infer that only low quality homes could otherwise be built. Further discussion ensued as to the merits of tabling the application to permit the applicant and the staff to consider the proposed alternate as well as other alternate designs and Com- missioner Foreman stated that he felt there was merit to further study in that his prime con- cern was assuring quality homes. The Secretary commented that the applicant had made his position clear: he desired to maximize the use of the land at the R-1 zoning; he was not interested in a hybrid concept of one cul- de-sac and one through street; and, his pre- ference was for no access onto 67th Avenue North whatsoever. He stated the issue before • the Commission was clear: the proposed plat was consistent with City master planning of the area, the future needs of the area for access and traffic, and the compatibility and con- sistency with existing land uses. Commissioner Horan arrived at 9:30 p.m. -5- 5/23/74 Chairman pro tem Grosshans stressed the recommendation should only comprehend the plat contained in the application and no alternates. Vote on Recommendation Chairman pro tem Grosshans then called for a o,f Approval of vote. Voting in favor were: Commissioners Application No. 74027 Foreman, Pierce, Engdahl, and Scott. Not voting: Commissioner Horan because he was not present for the discussion. The motion passed. Recess The meeting recessed at 9:50 p.m. and resumed at 10:00 p.m. Application No. 74028 The next item of business was consideration of. (B.C.I .P . , Inc.) Planning Commission Application No. 74028 sub- mitted by B.C.I .P. , Inc. The item was intro- duced by the Secretary who explained the applicant seeks approval of a preliminary registered land survey of the area northerly and easterly of Summit Drive along Earle Brown Drive which contains the farm structures, the existing office building, the office building under construction, and adjacent vacant parcels.. He stated the survey comprehends eight tracts, including Earle Brown Drive which is being re- aligned, and that the application was sub- mitted in response to the conditions of ap- proval in Application No. 74004. He also explained that there was a related pending matter involving the site layout for the Office Tower II complex and the possible ramifications of an upgrading of FAI-94 and k Trunk Highway 100. He stated this matter was discussed extensively at the April 18, 1974 meeting at which time the Commission considered a proposed agreement between B.C.I.P. , Inc. , and the City which set forth various options relative to providing adequate parking for the sites in this area, specifically Phase I and Phase II of the Office Tower II complex. He stated that it was the consensus at that meeting that a covenant expressing the terms of the agreement should be prepared and submitted for review, with the intent to file the approved: covenant with the titles of the subject parcels assuring the agreement would carry with the properties, regardless of ownership. He stated that depending upon the disposition of the R.L.S . and the proposed covenants, there were possible site amendments for the Office Tower II complex as approved under Application No. 74004. Chairman pro tem Grosshans stated that each of the three interrelated items before the Com- mission should be considered separately and he recognized Mr. Roger Newstrum representing the applicant. -7- 5/23/74 He stated that the cost of holding the land pending some possible future acquisition was astronomical. He stated that the basic con- cerns of B.C.I .P . were ones of adequate com- pensation for the land as well as the ability to meet existing City parking requirements. In that regard the Director of Public Works commented that if the use of the subject . land for parking was not deferred, then the Highway Department would be required to compensate the applicant not only for de- veloped land, but also would most likely be in a position of having to compensate the applicant for the cost of providing required parking. Mr. Newstrum responded, however, that it was untenable that the applicant should sit in a position of suspension of retaining land in a deferred status until some indefinite date when the Highway Department might decide to use it. He explained the parties which held the mortgage on the land would only con- sider releasing all of the parcel and would not be amenable to excepting the two acre portion, since it in effect was a remnant and had very little development value except as it supported the Office Tower parking requirements. Mr. Newstrum stated that the B.C.I .P. position centered on two concerns : first, that proper compensation be realized for the land which might be taken for highway purposes; and secondly, the ability of the developer to meet City parking requirements, whether or not those requirements were down graded in the future as requested by the developer. Mr. Newstrum continued that as a practical matter the land would not be initially de- veloped into parking, but that it would be desirable to exclude the deferral question in the covenant because of a pressing need to get the registered land survey recorded with clear title as soon as possible. A brief review ensued regarding the site and building plans approved for the Office Tower II, Phase I (Application No. 74004) with particular attention directed towards the subject two acres. Chairman pro tem Grosshans inquired whether Item "B" in the draft covenant could be eliminated and attached to • the conditions of approval for the office tower complex, since Phase II was subject to site and building plan review and approval. The Secretary read the section: "The con- struction of parking area required in Phase I -9- 5/23/74