Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1971 09-21 PCM Minutes of the Proceedings of the Planning Commission of the City of Brooklyn Center in the County of Hennepin and State of Minnesota September 21, 1971 The meeting was called to order by Chairman Pro-tem Robert Grosshans at 8:07 P.M. Roll Call: Chairman Pro-tem Robert Grosshans, Commissioners Karl Schuller, Robert Foreman, and Cecelia Scott. Staff members present were: Tom Loucks. Following the Chairman's explanation, the first item of business was Planning Commission Application No. 71037 submitted by Donald Arm. The item was introduced by Mr. Loucks who commented that the applicant is requesting a variance from Section 15-104 of the Platting Ordinance to allow a property division by metes and bounds description. It was noted that it is the intent of the applicant to add 12 feet from Lot 12, Block 1, Ryden's 3rd Addition, to Lot 13, Block 1, Ryden's 3rd Addition, to allow construction of a future garage. Discussion ensued among the Commission members at which time it was noted that variances of a similar nature had been granted in the past because the requested property divisions were relatively simple in nature. Chairman Jensen arrived at 8:15 P.M. Following further brief discussion, a motion was madebV Commissioner Foreman and seconded by Commissioner Schuller to recommend approval of Application No. 71037 because the requested property division constitutes a simple metes and bounds description and therefore meets the requirement for granting such a variance. Those voting in favor thereof: Chairman pro-tern Robert Grosshans, Commissioners Schuller, Scott and Foreman. Chairman Jensen not voting. The motion carried. Chairman Pro-tern Grosshans turned the gavel over to Chairman Robert Jensen at 8:20 P.M. The next item of business was Planning Commission Application No. 71034 submitted by Dayton Development Company requesting site and building plan approval. The item was introduced by Mr. Loucks who commented that the applicant is requesting site and building plan approval for an eight pump gasoline service station to be located south of Dayton's Garden Store, east of the Brookdale perimeter road, and west of the ABC Theater parking lot. It was further commented that the proposed use would consist of the sale of gasoline and petroleum products with no car servicing. Following a brief discussion, a motion was made by Commissioner Foreman and seconded by Commissioner Scott to recommend approval of Planning Commission Application No. 71034 subject to the following conditions: 1 1 -2- 1. That all areas depicted as green strip be provided with underground sprinkler system; 2. Due to unstable soil conditions on the site, no building permits be issued until driving and parking area construction methods are approved by the City Engineer; 3. Utility, drainage and elevation plans are subject to the approval of the City Engineer prior to the issuance of a building permit; 4. Building plans are subject to the approval of the Building Inspector with respect to applicable building codes; S. A performance agreement and performance bond (in an amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be submitted to the City to guarantee the site improvements as designated on the plans submitted. The motion carried unanimously. The next item of business was Planning Commission Application No. 71035 submitted by Dayton Development Company. The item was introduced by Mr. Loucks who indicated the applicant is requesting a variance from Section 35-414.1. of the Zoning Ordinance which requires that a service station must front on a street designated as a thoroughfare and that the proposed site location for the service station is on a perimeter road in the interior of the Brookdale Center complex and does not meet this requirement. Discussion ensued at which time Chairman Jensen noted that it appeared that perhaps there are unusual circumstances related to the petition and are not generally applicable to other properties in the same zoning classification. He further commented that it appeared that the Zoning Ordinance does not comprehend the potential of locating service station in the interior of complexes such as Brookdale Center. Following further brief discussion, a motion was made by Commissioner Foreman and seconded by Commissioner Grosshans to recommend approval of Planning Commission Application No. 71035 because the location of the service station is unique to the property in question and is a situation that is not generally common to other properties within the same zoning classification. The motion carried unanimously. The next item of business was Planning Commission Application No. 71036 submitted by Dayton Development Company. The item was introduced by Mr. Loucks who indicated that Dayton Development Company is requesting a Special Use Permit for an automobile service station co'Asistent with the requirements of Section 35-414 of the City Zoning Ordinance. Following a brief discussion, a motion was made by Commissioner Schuller and seconded by Commissioner Scott to recommend approval of Planning Commission Application No. 71036. The motion carried unanimously. 1 1 -3= The next item of business was discussion of the Sign Ordinance. Chairman Jensen commented that the Planning Commission had under- taken a review of the Sign Ordinance during the past year to deter- mine if there are any inequities unknowingly built in to the docu- ment at the time its adoption was recommendedto the City Council. He further commented that it appeared appropriate to conduct a review since there had been sufficient operational experience to determine if there are needed changes to the ordinance. Discussion ensued at which time Commissioner Grosshans commented that the recent K Mart application in which the applicant desires to put a sign on a mansard panel points to what may be a deficiency in the ordinance. He then commented that, in his opinion,- the aggregate panel on the front facia of the building is more closely related to an architectural treatment than a sign backdrop, however, the ordinance definition does not differentiate between an architectural treatment to the building and a structure designed for the sole purpose of supporting a sign and therefore the sign which is proposed to be located on the panel is not allowed by the ordinance. Chairman Jensen commented that other matters of concern to the Commission has been the size of signs for commercial establist- ments located adjacent to freeways and expressways. Commissioner Schuller commented that the Sign Ordinance Study Sub-committee appointed by the Commission has been studying the matter over the past few months and recommended no changes related to sign square footage, but did recommend that there should be a clarification as to what constitutes a roof or wall sign if a wall sign is extended beyond the roof line. Commissioner Schuller left the table at 9:50 P.M. Further discussion then ensued related to the intent and purpose of the Sign Ordinance, the advisibility of changing the ordinance to accommodate signs with unique design characteristics, and the need for larger signs associated with freeway and expressway oriented uses. Following further brief discussion, it was the consensus of the Commission to reconsider the matter at the next scheduled meeting. A motion was made by Commissioner Scott and seconded by Commissioner Foreman to adjourn. The motion carried unanimously. The planning Commission adjourned at 10:45 P.M. iChairman 1 1 1 1