The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1977 03-24 PCP PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA STUDY SESSION • March 24, 1977 1 . Call to Order: 8:00 p.m. 2. Roll Call : 3. Approval of Minutes: 3-10-77 4. Chairman's Explanation: The Planning Commission is an- advisory body. One of the Commission's functions is to hold public hearings. In the matters concerned in these hearings, the Commission makes recommendations to the City Council . The City Council makes all final decisions on these matters. 5. Draft Resolution Regarding Disposition of Application No. 77001 submitted by Richard Rockstad. 6. Rezoning Request Evaluation Policy. • 7. Zoning District Compatibility Policy. 8. Review of Mississippi River Critical Area Act Provisions. 9. Pending Items. 10. Other Business: 11 . Adjournment: +s r • • Planning Information Sheet Application No. 77001 Applicant: Richard Rockstad Location: Northeast corner, 70th Avenue Forth at Brooklyn Boulevard. Request: Rezoning The attached draft resolution recommending denial was directed at the March 10, 1977 meeting. The applicant has since carried a petition among the property owners/residents within 350 feet of the property. It was submitted to the file this week along with the attached letter. The applicant's efforts deals with one aspect of the Commission's concerns- ' neighborhood opinion. The other issues are not treated. G � DRAFT PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 77-1 • RESOLUTION REGARDING RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION OF APPLICATION NO. 77001 SUBMITTED -BY MR. RICHARD. ROCKSTAD WHEREAS, Application No. 77001 submitted by Richard Rockstad proposes rezoning, from R-5 (Multi-Residential ) to C-1 (Service/Office Commercial ), of property at the northeast corner of 70th Avenue North and Brooklyn Boulevard addressed as 7000 and 7006 Brooklyn Boulevard; and WHEREAS, the Commission held a duly called public hearing on January 27, 1977 when testimony both for and against the request was taken; and WHEREAS, the item was referred to the Northwest Neighborhood Advisory Group which, in a letter dated March 2, 1977, recommended that the R-5 zoning should be retained for reasons cited therein; and WHEREAS, the Commission on March 10, 1977 considered the matter, including additional testimony both for and against and the Advisory Group report; and WHEREAS, the Commission reviewed the request in terms of the Comprehensive Plan criteria for the area, and in terms of the intent of the area zoning; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Advisory Commission of • the City of Brooklyn Center to recommend to the City Council that Application No.- 77001 submitted by Richard Rockstad be denied in consideration of the following: - 1 . The request is characteristic of "spot zoning," i .e. , zoning which discriminates in favor of a particular landowner and is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan or with accepted planning principles. 2. Testimony was offered by neighboring property owners who had been notified of the hearing and who expressed the desire to retain the present zoning, rather than establishing commercial use in the area. 3. The Northwest Neighborhood Advisory Group submitted=:a :written recommendation that the residential character of the'a�rea .should be maintained, and that the R-5 zoning of the subject property should be retained. 4. The proposal is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan which defines the area, on the east side of Brooklyn Boulevard from the subject property to Noble Avenue North, as a planned development district which should reflect a common zoning and, preferably, a common development. 5. The Commission has not had the opportunity to thoroughly review the Comprehensive Plan and zoning for this area, • and the Commission holds that rezoning the subject property alone at this time would be premature because of the precedent upon the balance of the area. The applicant has stated his preference for immediate disposition of the petition, rather than for deferring it until the Compre- hensive Plan for the area can be analyzed and possibly modified. Date Chairman The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: • t � The Honorable Mayor of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 2 ��`�'�o uncil Member Planning Commission h NEAR 1977 (:P Re: Application #77001 ; Rezoning; at RECEIVED r 7000 .& 7006 Brooklyn Boulevard BROOKLYN CENTER, will � o 19 qv , Ladies and Gentlemen: Having had the opportunity of serving as a Council Member and serving three years on a Planning Commission in one of our neighboring cities, is the reason I am writing this letter. At the Planning; Commission meeting of March 10th, 1977, a statement was made that it appeared the neighborhood was not in favor of our zoning proposal. With this thought in mind I drafted a petetion, which my staff and I personally followed up on. Through my experience I have concluded that whenever a Rezoning Request or a Oification to Zoning takes place within a city, and the public is made aware of these changes the majority of the time, the only people that appear before the Council or Planning Commission are those that feel they may oppose such changes. The people who do not appear generally consist of individuals that either do not object to said _zoning changes or have formed no opinion whatsoever. The Planning Commission mailed 32 letters to property owners whom they determined most affected by our proposal. A cross reference between the mailing and our petetion indicates clearly that I contacted these same people on an individual basis, with the exception of The Minnesota Highway Department and Osseo School District, Mr. Dennis Baumeister of 7014 Brooklyn Boulevard and Mrs. Hagen of 7015 Kyle Avenue North were also not contacted. Mr. James Backer of 7018 Brooklyn Boulevard was in favor of our proposal but due to a close friendship with Mr. Baumeister, declined to sign. Mrs. Velma Nitz of 69112 Major Avenue North was not against our proposal, however has never kmed a petetiori in her life and declined to do so now. The residents of 6 939 Lee Avenue and 6927 Brooklyn Boulevard .ierc not available for contact. We found no objections whatsoever. `t • y 1 ' "Yr ► , x� 'a h ' l V a I feel that the results of my petetion clearly indicate that the majority of the people involved are indeed in favor of, or have no objection to, the proposed zoning, issue Sincerely Yours ! 4 Richard A. Rockstad r a Planning Commission Information Sheet Item 6. Attached is a condensation of two memos from the City Attorney regarding rezoning requests and criteria which may be used for evaluation based upon case law. The purpose of the review is to determine whether a policy can be developed which could be used for screening rezoning requests. Item 7. Discussion of the compatibility of various uses in different zones has been before the Commission for some time, pending review of the Comprehensive Plan. Item 8. We will be prepared to review the material sent last month_ which describes the State law and regulations relative to the Mississippi River Critical Area Corridor. 1