HomeMy WebLinkAbout1976 07-22 PCP p q` p
STUDY MEETING
July 22, 1976
1 . Call 't-o Order:
2. Rol°I (:a.l I
3. Approval of Minutes: Ju_4,,� 1976
4. Chasrrmn's Explanation: 1,1e icmnirg Coiwdssion is are advisory
body , One of the Comission's functions
to hold Public Hearings. In the
matter's concerned 'in these hearings, the
Commission mkes recommendations to the
Cate Council . The City Council makes all
final decisions on these matters.
BOARD ADJUSTMIENlS AND AP'PEALS
5. Dayton Development Co, 76043
Prellminafy R� 1— S. Approtia'i for: easterly portion
o`; Br•ookdale Center.
6. Days--m izevelopimnt Co. 764346
Joint Parking Agreements Pr°elative to Brookdale
. East Perimeter- Area,
7. Vleadr r? Corporation 76044
Preliminary P a•- Approval for Fox Run Addition
at Unity Avenue North, noi� th o3,' 69th Avenue North.
S. Red } `4 Stores, Inc. rj6072
Review proposed amends gent to ow i gi na l sit.- plan
r=elative to rc:mpaclLer erclosure at 9-425 Xerxes Avenue
9. Rev la,,, ror0ng Matters ret•erreo b,,.r Cit;- C'ouncil relative to Application
10. Discussion items:
a -i -nonce Standards Relative Ito S 5 g l e l=anni l y Attached) 1111ei i ;ngs
Via. Ordinance Standards Relative to Flashing Sims
c. :to us of Tablet' 3 term s
d. +eon Eng ,-kpplications
PLANNING CON-MYSSIt'IN
Application No. 76043
. Applicant: Dayton Development Company
Location: Easterly perimeter area of Brookdale Center
Request: Preliminary Registered Land Survey Approval
This item re=at.es to Application No. 76040 (Titus, inc.) which was reccirmended for
approval at the July B, 1976 meeting. One of the conditions of that Application
is that the area be re-subdivided prior to occupancy of the proposed Titus retail
center.
The proposed R.L.S. will consolidate a rennapt parcel (unplatted) and portions of
a larger R. L. S. which includes much of Brookdale site.
We have received a review from the County, and we will be prepared to discuss the
matter in detail .
Approval wfould be subject to the -Following:
a. Final R. L. S. is subject to review by the City Engineer.
b. f=inal R. L. S. is subject to the requirements of Chapter
15 of the City Ordinances.
c. Me RI. L. S. shall be finalized and filed with the County
prior to occupancy of the development comprehended under
;Pp1 xcafion �No. 75040.
i
PLANNING COMMISSION 114FORKATION SHEET
Application No. 76044
Applicant: Meadow Corporation
Location: Unity Avenue North north of 69th Ave. North
Request: Preliminary Plat Approval
This relates to the special use request application No. 76041 which was heard
on July 8, 1976 and tabled. it is for the Fox Run 11 Development.
lie have not received a response from the County, which is expected; or from
Brooklyn Park.
We have not reached a final determination, from the State agencies involved
with enforcE llen' of Environmental IRIegulations, as to whether an Environmental
Impact Assessment or Statement is izndated for this project-.. '
The hearing for this ftem was scheduled several weeks ago, and notice has been
published.
We recoli-xiiend i6his item be tabled, concurrent wit-h Application No. 76041 , since
it is equailY Subject to possible Environmental Assessment requirements.
Application itlo. 66072 (Amendment)
Applicant: Red Owl Stores, Inc.
Location: 5425 Xerxes Avenue North
Request: Approval of design .1 car proposed waste compacter storage facility
The applicant has submitted plans for an accessory structure which would screen
a storage box that is part of a waste compacter system. The structure would be
at the northwest corner of the building near t e existing dumpster enclosure.
The screened area would be 13 ft. aide and .%rould project 22 ft. from the building.
The coiapacter would be inside the building and would be used to compress the
substantial paper board was-e material generated by the "Country' Store" operation.
The store currently uses a small baler, and the bales are being stacked outside
the bu,"Idinig. The amount of material has increased markedly since the bulk sale
.,Country Store" foriiikit was established recent=ly.
There `rave hien oncoing concerns since the store opened about outside storage
and re'euse problems. A concrete block, screen wall was erected in the late 1960's
on the west s-17de to provide screening for soc* of the "temporary" storage of
cases .-,i-nd racks.
Furl r V-ris Ye,-,ir, the applicant erecl-ed screening anclosures around two large
duirt-psters outside the south and northwas• walls. Tile orilginal plans called for
all disposal t-0 be inside.
'dais propcjsed compacter-storage facility is an additional encroachment of the
wasta disposall syst-ern upon the outside. The store reanagemant contends 1-.1he volume
of material is such that inside storage (pending pickup) is not feasible.
The propost--d for screening is redhvood or cedar boards. approximately 8
r.,
ft. hi""I -- slimi'la-'r 1.-0 the dumuster screening.
It 44S non opinion the structure should be riasonry, of coi,.ipatlible design and
aesthet-lcs to the rairt building since:
1) the size (lenath) of the area is substantially larger
than a standar.-I trasil enclosure; 2) the facill-ty involves
production (coi-iipacting) and storage of arterial which
passes aie-chani ca?ly from the store In
io the ou-Itside box;
3; the loca-il-ion is pr oxii atte to the masonry screeriwall on
the •,,'E.st`- side Of the, buildirtri.
1e t,, be pre-Pared to the r,.kitter in detail .
PLANNING COM-USSTION INFORMATION SHEET
i"o W1 i
0
Location. B ookdale Last Perimp-ter Area
Request: Approval of Joint Parking A- greei.%vi-L's
Section 36•-720 provides for joint parking agreerents between properties (and
among properties as in this c,-se) where one property has available eltcess
parking.
The afire`,,lentsisrivolve the Plitt Theater and 1-,,ie proposed Titus retail center.
The theater has a de-.Ficifency which has beell acconwodated via private easement
with the applicant since 1969. The Council recognized that in the theater
approval (Applica-itior, No. 68069) , and pnovided through Resolution No.69-34
that a forbazal joint agreement would lbe necessary when Broorkdale expansion
warranted -it,
Application No. 76040 comprehends the new retail development which also has a
deficiency.
Dayton Development has Jrtnc!, a(ijacent to both si,,?.,es (now used by Oe ".*heater)
which can Provide the needed parking.
11-le will be prepared to review the parking 11& GUts and draft agreements in
detail .
• It is Blost '19nMcant thalt forii,,al legal encum-Orance of the Dayton property is
necessary (a� provided by Sec, 35-720) since both developments credit the
available p,?,rking to thelir -inin, mnuin requirew-nts.
Approval IWOuld, bc- Subject CO the follow-gria:
L The agreements are subject to rev-,,ehr, approval and
1c,gal encumbrance require-meq-ts of Sec. 35-720.
2. The agreement relative to the rota ili development
ceim,prehended by Application No. 76040 shall be finalized
• and filed prior to Issuance of per.-mits (or that development).
PLANNING COMISSIOrJ INFORMATION SHEET
The main discussion item is review of the zoning matters relative to Application
No. 76311 . The Attorney's memoranda should serve as guidelines for the "spot
zoning' questions and we will offer cormient on the other issue regarding the
use of Cal .Land uses as "buffering" interchangeably with higher residential
zones.