HomeMy WebLinkAbout1976 08-12 PCP PLANNING COMMIJISSI(D'N AGENDA
R,II:"G'(.jArk MILETING
Auu�,,-st 121 , 197'
tc Order" 8-0 0 p rp"
Call"
3, of Minutes,, j-,-,tly 22, 1976
Explanation.-
The Planning Commissicra is an advis3:ory bokiy.
One of t1he Com-mlssiorv",s functions is to hold
public hearings. Ixt the matters concerned in
the hearlings., the Gorimission makes
recOl"Im�."MIat tolls to he City Council. The
CR.:; Councii makes all final decisions on
these matte
76045
• TPreliminary Plat Appr,)val to create v,�,o R-2 1� � a
-)t,�; t
5341 Colfwc Av,,--.,nue
Inc. 76034
R---zC-MM,:' PITVE-Irt!, lNest Ave zind rl'orth
1-94 fr,,m 1-1--3 tO I-I (1'(?m ta-bled on 6-10-76)
-us cif Applicat-lcv IN�0, 7604,1 113'03M-ittetj by �VjClacj-�)W
Q 0&at
T 4.
Ordt",larIce Stalle'E-rds Relative to Single Dwellings
Ore';�,IaDce StaZId�-4f-ds Relative to Fba,,;,hing Signs
c, R,7,:Mpv., Zon.ing Adatters Referred by City Go it
d Status of 11a)-ded iteni�;-,
ou rn M-eyytr.,
PLANNING COMMISSIO-IN INFORMATION SHEET
Application No. 76045
Applicant:n1t: Da-%rid Brandvold
Locaiton: 5341 Colfal-C Avenue North
Request: Preliminary Plat
The applicant seeks approval of a preliminary plat creating two R-2 zoned parcels,
each )--,eing approximately 7,597 sq. ft. This is 3 sqo ft. less than the new
ordinance minimum. (7,600 sqo ft. for R-2 Interior lots). The lots exceed the
ordinance minimum as -to delYch and width. The applicant proposes to build a
single family home on each lot.
This is the first proposal under the revised minimum standards and, In our judgment,
complies with the intent of the ordinance.
Approval would be subject to the folloniving:
I . Final plat is subject to revlew by the City Engineer,
2. Final plat is subject to the requirements of Chapter
15 of the City Ordinances.
•
r
t i Ste
d�
pp.
f
Mt.. 19ho
..._�-a ... ..., A X Iry
45 17
PLANNING COMj*M1SS-10Nr nNFORMATTON SHEET
Applicatioll IVJO- 76034
Applicant: E.C.1.P. es Avee,
,Location: Between "old" 'Xerxes and "new" Xen,x nu
nor 0i of 1-94
RG-quest: Rezone from R-3 to 1-1
Iflas item was considered at the June 10 meNeting which was the public hearing,
it was referred to the N.W. Neighborhood Advisory Group for review.
The Group has recommended denial; a copy of their report is attached. Refer to
he 'T ne 10 minLites for additional comments offered at the public hearing.
asic rezoning determiniations iliciude- whether additional 1-1 land is rneeded
B
and desirablet- whether 1-1 represents the highest and best use; and whether
preliminary development concepts indicate the parcel could be properly developed
,,pith 1-1 uses,
• Recommendation to the Council should be by resolution.
•
y � kaS A
t
I inch 200 feet
r t
Cl TIE 3
4 � �
a
tl
Al
121 >t
z PA R «
f
1 .
i,.
-+,i
July 8, 1976
Planning Blair ingCommemss3onSecy. uRN1; ('l��•�ry �,
City of Brooklyn Center
From: Northwest Neighborhood Advisory Group
Subject: Request for Rezoning from R-3 (Townhouse & Garden Apts.)
to I-1 (Indust. Park) per Application No. 76034.
The undersigned, as Secretary for the N. W. Advisory Group, was
instructed to convey the following action taken by our Group on
the above subject referred by the Planning Commission by its
letter from Mr. Blair Tremere, Secy., dated June 18, 1976..
• Members of the Group held a meeting at 8:00 P.M. on July 1, 1976
to consider the above subject. Present were: Olson, Carlson,
Pederson, Uhlenkott and Terzich.
Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of June 10th were
read and discussed.
After due consideration, the Group voted unanimously to recommend
that the Planning Commission deny the regt;est to rezone for the
following major reasons:
1. Rezoning of the parcel would abut an industrial park directly
to an R-1. (Single family) area, which is against all prudent
judgement and should be avoided. Homeowners in the effected
area should be given some means of protection against encroach-
went by an industrial development.
2. Rezoning to I-1 could not be contingent on any specific develop-
ment or plan approved in advance. Once rezoned, the land would
be open to all permitted uses for the I-1 district.
3. No demonstrated need was shown fQr additional industrial zoning.
A large part of the adjacent industrial park is still available
for development.
4. Traffic could be a problem in the area resulting from some
industrial uses if the parcel was to be rezoned.
A number of other points were discussed relating to the subject
matter, but the conclusion was that the Group could not justify
a recommendation to rezone to I-1 at this time.
Northwest Neighborhood Advisory Group
Louis Terzich, Secy.