Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1971 07-15 PCM Minutes of the Proceedings of the Planning Commission of the City of Brooklyn Center in the County of Hennepin and State of Minnesota July 15, 1971 The Planning Commission met in study session and was called to order by Chairman Robert Jensen at 8:07 P.M. Roll Call: Chairman Robert Jensen, Commissioners Henry Bogucki, Karl Schuller, Paul Ditter, Robert Grosshans, Robert Foreman and Cecelia Scott. Following the Chairman's explanation, the first item of business was Application No. 71022 submitted by Merlin West. Chairman Jensen reviewed the application and noted that the Planning Commission action of July 1, 1971, was to table the application until July 15, 1971, to give the applicant time to determine if there were other feasible alternatives of fence construction that would allow him privacy and security for the pool area while at the same time eliminating the sight obstruction that would occur for vehicles attempting to back out of the driveway to the north of the proposed fence. Chairman Jensen then recognized Mr. Merlin West who indicated that it was his intent to build a six foot high cyclone fence and to utilize opaque metal strips the firt four feet in height and leave the top two feet open so that adequate vision would be provided for vehicles backing out of the driveway to the north. Following further discussion, a motion was made by Commissioner Schuller and seconded by Commissioner Bogucki to recommend to the City Council approval of Planning Commission Application No. 71022 providing the top two feet of the proposed fence is left open so as not to obstruct the vision of the drivers of vehicles attempting to back out of the driveway to the north. It was further ascertained that if such provision is made, the intent of the ordinance to maintain a four foot fence height would be sustained. Motion carried unanimously. The next item of business was Planning Commission Appli- cation No. 71025 submitted by Viewcon, Inc. The item was introduced by Mr. Loucks who indicated that the applicant is requesting site and building plan approval for a six story, 55,000 square foot office building to be located on 3.6 acre tract of land bounded on the north and west by Northway Drive, on the south by County Road 10, and on the east by Shingle Creek. It was indicated that the ground floor level of the facility will consist of vehicular parking and employee amenity areas with levels two through six consisting of 52,000 square feet of floor area to be utilized for general office use. It was noted that the site plan meets the requirements of the Zoning ordinance relating to parking spaces when the formula for general office use is applied. Mr. Loucks commented further that the property is zoned C2 which encompasses a number of uses such as retail sales or medical-dental clinic which requires additional parking under the requirements of the ordinance and it was suggested that since such a situation exists, and the fact that the proposed plan utilizes all available land area for parking under the general office requirement, that the Commission 1 1 1 -2- should probably consider additional review of the plan should the nature and character of the uses charge at a future date. Chairman Jensen then recognized mr. Chuck VanEeckhout representing Viewcon, Inc. , who briefly reviewed the plan and indicated that it is their intent to utilize the facility for general office use, however, should economic conditions dictate otherwise, there may be future consiueration of utilizing a portion of the facility for a medical--dental clinic use. . Discussion ensued among the Commission members at which time it was noted by Chairman Jensen that the City Engineer had recom- mended that in-place concrete curbing be constructed to delineate driving and parking isles and asked M:.. Van Eeckhout if he had any comments regarding that subject matter. Mr. VanEeckhout responded that he does not agree with in-place isle delineators because they create maintenance problems related to snow plowing during the winter months, but would comply with the recommendation if the Commission deems it necessary. Commissioner Ditter then asked Mr. VanEeckhout what provisions could be made in regard to parking if the use of the property should change and if they had considered adding a parking ramp to the site at a future date to satisfy such requirements if the need arises. Mr. VanEeckhout responded that they had not considered any particular alteznative to parking but a ramp would be within the realm of possibility, however, he was more inclined to think that at this point, they would probably ask for a variance. Following further discussion, a motion was made by Commissioner Ditter and seconded by Commissioner Foreman to recommend to the City Council approval of Planning Commission Application No. 71025 subject to the following conditions: 1. That all driving isles be delineated with in-place concrete curbing; 2. That the building be sprinklered with an automatic internal sprinkling system; 3. That all areas designated as green space shall have an underground sprinkler system; 4. That all final building specifications shall be drawn under supervision of; and signed by a registered structural engineer; 5. That should the general office use change and a new use rewire additional parking, the plan will be subject to review by the Planning Commission and/or City Council; b. utility, drainage and elevation plans are subject to the approval of the City Engineer prior to the issuance of a building permit; 7. Building plans are subject to the approval of the Building Inspector with respect to applicable building codes; J -3- 8. A performance agreement and pF�r_formance bond (in an amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be submitted to the City to guarantee site improvements as designated on the plans submitted. The motion carried unanimously. The next item of business was Flanning Commission Application No. 71021 submitted by William HolirCherg. Commissioner Bogucki introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 71-2 RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING DENIAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION NO. 71021 WHEREAS, on July 1, 1971, the Planning Commission reviewed a petition submitted by William Holmberg requesting a 15 foot lot width variance and a 2,275 square foot lot area variance for a property zoned R2 located at 5302 Girard Avenue North; and WHEREAS, it is the intent of the applicant to construct a duplex on the property in question; and WHEREAS, it is recognized by the Commission that the intent of R2 zoning in the Southeast Neighborhood is to provide low density multi-family living units on parcels of adequate size to support such densities; and WHEREAS, it is ascertained that the property in question is substandard in nature a�.d consequently does not satisfy the standards and criteria set forth by the Zoning Ordinance for duplex development; and WHEREAS, it is ascertained that a goal of the Comprehensive Plan for the Southeast Neighborhood is to provide low density multi-family living units in specified areas; and WHEREAS, it is promulgated by the Comprehensive Plan that duplexes should be permitted where lot sizes are more suitable for duplex then single family housing; and WHEREAS, it is further ascertained that it is not the intent of the Comprehensive Plan to develop substandard parcels of land for duplex dwellings, but rather to encourage the combining of such parcels to provide sufficient land areas for such development: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER to recommend to the City Council denial of Planning Commission Application No. 71021 because it is inconsistent with the goals of the comprehensive Plan, incon- sistent with the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance, and would serve as a detriment to the health, safety and welfare of property owners in the immediate vicinity of the proposed development. The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Commissioner Cecelia Scott, and upon a vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Chairman Jensen, Commissioners Bogucki, Schuller, Ditter, Grosshans, Foreman and Scott; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. 'i I III -4- The next item of business was d4.c.1 a °lion of the West Central Neighborhood Report:. Commissioner Grosshars c,. ,r-mor_ted that he had not received a report from the West Centru_. Ise 4.,.pI-#crh(,-od Committee but would be pursuing the matter during the en,,iuing week and hoped to have it available to the CorL-ni.ssion by '-.:,e meeting of August 5, 1971. The next item of business was a sign subcommittee report. Commissioner Schuller cominrented that the Committee is studying the matter and would be bring _ng forth a report to the Commission on August 5, 1971. The next item of business was discussion of a proposal to extend Camden Avenue from 70th to 73rd Avenue North east of Evergreen Park. Mr. I,ouets indicated that the City Council, upon review of the site plan submitted by Thomas Construction for an additional 240 units of multiple devel-pment adjacent to Evergreen Park, had some questions in regard to the extension of Camden Avenue roadway and had remanded the matte-r to the Planning Commission and the Park and Recreation Cor.°saission for a recommendation. Mr. Merila then reviewed the existing roadway network in the area and a number of alternatives that had been suggested during the Council discussion of the matter. Following a ratr�r ler.g-thy discussion, Chairman Jensen polled the members of the Cor.imission on disposition of the matter. Commissioner Grosshans, Jensen, Ditter., Scott, Foreman and Schuller concurred teat* additional access should be provided to the park, however, tr:Au access should not be provided in the form of through streets. it was suggested that perhaps a number of cul-de-sacs could be utilized to accomplish this end. Commissioner Eogucki commented that he felt the park had already had proper access and would be opposed to extension of any additional streets with the exception of 70th Avenue North. Following further discussion, it was the consensus of the Commission to further review the matter on August 5, 1971. Motion was made by Commissioner Bogucki and seconded by Commissioner Schuller to adjourn the meeting. The Planning Commission adjourned at 11:17 P.M. Chaff 1 � i 1 'I