HomeMy WebLinkAbout1972 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, 1972
The Planning Commission met in study session and was called to
order by Chairman Robert Jensen at 8 o'clock P.M.
Roll Call: Chairman Jensen, Commissioners Grosshans, Foreman,
and Engdahl. Also present was Administrative Assistant Blair Tremere.
The first item of business was Planning Commission Application
No. 72072 submitted by Gerald Stasson. The item was introduced by
the Secretary who stated the applicant seeks approval of a Special
Use Permit to operate a beauty shop in the home located at 4818 -
71st Avenue North. He noted that there has been an approved beauty
shop operation at that location for over eleven years and that the
present owner is in the process of selling the house. He stated the
applicant desires to continue the use and that the beauty shop would
be operated by his wife.
Chairman Jensen then recognized the applicant who explained
that the beauty shop would be operated solely by his wife and that
no outside employees would be hired.
Chairman Jensen also recognized the present owner and special
use permit holder, Mrs. Alda Braasch, who discussed the current
operation. She stated that very little traffic was generated by
the shop because of the spacing of appointments, and that at most,
two cars were parked in the driveway.
Commissioner Bogucki arrived at 8:10 P.M.
Chairman Jensen then read a petition dated September 16, 1972,
submitted by Mrs. W. G. Pehrson of 4612 - 71st Avenue North, request-
ing that the application for the special use permit be denied. He
noted that the petition was signed by residents of five homes in the
neighborhood in addition to the Pehrsons.
Commissioner Scott arrived at 6:12 P.M.
Chairman Jensen then called upon the notified property owners
and recognized Mr. W. G. Pehrson, 4612 - 71st Avenue North. Mr.
Pehrson presented pictures of the subject property, and stated his
objections to the traffic and nuisance allegedly generated by the
current beauty shop operation. In response to a question by Chairman
Jensen, he stated that there was activity after 7 P.M.
Mr. Pehrson further noted that the residents of the neighborhood
were concerned about continued corLuuercial type uses in the neighbor-
hood and sited alleged problems relative to the residence at 4800 -
71st Avenue North (Petsuch Realty) .
Chairman Jensen also recognized Mr. D. G. Magnuson of 4830 - 71st
Avenue North, who submitted a letter to the Commission signed by
himself and the residents at 4836 - 71st Avenue North.
Chairman Jensen noted that the letter opposed the granting of
the special use permit and placed the petition in the file. Mr.
Magnuson stated that he had perceived few problems with the present
beauty shop operation but was concerned with the possible intensity
that could develop with the continued use under a new ownership.
1
1
1
i
-2-
He noted the many children in the neighborhood, particularly
during the school year, and he also stated dissatisfaction with the
business operated in the home at 4800 - 71st Avenue North (Petsuch
Realty) . He stated he was concerned with maintaining the residenti @i
integrity of the street and noted that there were many other areas
in the City that offered business opportunities without sacrificing
existing residential neighborhoods.
Also recognized was Mr. E. L. Burnham, 4819 - 71st Avenue North,
and Mr. Legler of 4813 - 71st Avenue North, who stated their
opposition to the application.
The applicant's wife stated her intent to have only one operator
in the shop and that because she had small children, the shop would
be operated during the day and only two evenings per week.
Chairman Jensen commented that the issue before the Commission
was continuation of the special hone occupation, and that the
questions involved were traffic and the factor of possible creeping
commercialism in the neighborhood. He stated the main criteria
considered by the Commission were the existing and potential external
effects of the home occupation upon the neighborhood, and whether
there were detrimental ramifications. He recognized Mrs. Pehrson
who stated that at the present time, there was a traffic problem
and that the customers of the beauty shop were transcients who did
not have any particular concern for the upkeep of the neighborhood.
Chairman Jensen then reviewed the ordinance definitions per-
taining to home occupations and special home occupations and a
discussion ensued relative to the nature of a Special Use Permit.
Commissioner Gross arrived at 5:35 P.M.
Chairman Jensen inquired whether the neighbors ' concern was
based upon the present opFration or upon the proposed operation.
Mr. Magnuson responded that the past record of the beauty shop was
good in his opinion but that the new application represented
totally new cicrumstances.
Mr. Pehrson stated that the significant opposition of the
neighbors as evidenced by the signatures on the petition submitted
was based upon past experience. He stated that they did not like
to constantly complain and that they recognized the right of the
applicant to submit a petition for a special use permit. He stated
that the neighbors also had rights to voice their opposition to
such a petition.
The Secretary noted that there was no record of formal complaints
relative to the present operation during its 11 year tenure and
thus the City had no prior basis for gauging any opposition to the
special use permit.
Chairman Jensen noted that the Commission worked within the
framework of the ordinance and that the main consideration was of
the actual and potential external effects such permitted use would
have upon the neighborhood. A discussion then ensued relative to
the ordinance standards for the issuance of a special use permit.
Following further discussion, there was a motion by Commissioner
Foreman, to recommend denial of Planning Commission Application No.
72072 submitted by Gerald Stasson, noting the opposition of the
neighbors and their concern that the special use permit represented
a furtherance of commercial uses in the residential neighborhood.
The motion does for lack of a second.
1
1
1
-3-
Commissioner Bogucki stated that the Commission needed to work
within the standards and provisions of the ordinance and he reviewed
the standards. He stated the problem in the specific neighborhood
appears to be not with the subject property, but with the Petsuch
Realty Company. Commissioner Engdahl agreed and sated that possibly
the Petsuch Realty special use permit should be reviewed as a
separate matter.
Following further discussion there was a motion by Commissioner
Grosshans, seconded by Commissioner Engdahl, to recommend approval
of Planning Commission Application No. 72072 submitted by Gerald
Stasson subject to the following conditions:
1. The permit shall be subject to annual review by -
the City commencing with the date of issue;
2. No person outside the household shall be employed
for the operation of the special use;
3. Adequate on-site parking shall be provided;
4. Hours of operation shall be limited to the period
9:30 A.M. to 7:30 P.M.
5. A copy of the beauty shop and beauty operator's
license issued by the State of Minnesota will be
placed on file with the City prior to the issuance
of the permit.
voting in favor were: Chairman Jensen, Commissioners Grosshans,
Bogucki, Scott and Engdahl; voting against: Commissioner
Foreman; not voting: Commissioner Gross, who noted that he had
not been present during much of the deliberation. The motion
passed.
The meeting recessed at 9:15 P.M. and resumed at 9:30 P.M.
The next item of business was Planning Commission Application
No. 72067 submitted by Northbrook Alliance Church. The item was
introduced by the Secretary who stated that the application had
been tabled on September 7th so that it might be considered in
conjunction with Application No. 72055 which had been previously
tabled.
He stated that the applicant was seeking permission to build
a Sunday School addition adjacent to the church located at 6240
Aldrich Avenue North and that churches and educational uses were
special uses in R1 districts:
The Secretary further commented that the present application
as well as the application for site and building plans, had been
deferred pending the response of the Highway Department to the
suggestions submitted by the Highway Improvement Citizen's Advisory
Group.
Chairman Jensen commented relative to the recommendations made
by the Advisory Group to the Highway Department and noted that the
highway Department did not intend to proceed with the 100 foot
setback recommended by the Citizens Group. He stated rather the
Highway Department planned to utilize an earth berming or wooden
wall and that the information relative to the upgrading of I-94 had
been submitted to the Central Office. He stated a response and/or
recommendation was due from the Highway Department within 30 days.
1
1
1
-4-
Chairman Jensen further commented that a church was a rather
unique use in that it differed significantly from a single family
dwelling. He stated that since the Highway Department, at this time,
was not recommending any substantial acquisition of property from
the church, and since the church officials had indicated their
preference to proceed with the construction as proposed, the
petition could be acted upon based on its own merits.
Chairman Jensen then recognized representatives of the
applicant and a discussion ensued relative to the possible ramifi-
cations of the widening of the freeway near the church. Chairman
Jensen noted again that the application was for a special use permit
and that the site and building plan application would be handled
separately.
Following further discussion there was a motion by Commissioner
Engdahl, seconded by Commissioner Foreman, to recommend approval
of Planning Commission Application No. 72067 submitted by North-
brook Alliance Church. The motion passed unanimously.
A discussion then ensued relative to Planning Commission Appli-
cation No. 72055 submitted by Vanman Construction Company for the
Northbrook Alliance Church Sunday School addition. The Secretary
noted that the application was tabled on July 13th to allow the
applicant the opportunity to develop revised landscape and drainage
plans. He stated that final disposition was deferred until further
input regarding the upgrading of I-94 was available.
Chairman Jensen then reiterated the status of the Highway
Department's recommendations and plans and the input of the neigh-
borhood advisory group and he stated that it appeared the application
could be acted upon on its own merits.
Following further discussion, there was a motion by Commissioner
Bogucki to recommend denial of Planning Commission Application
No. 72055 submitted by Vanman Construction Company for Northbrook
Alliance Church, noting that: 1) the submitted plans represented
poor site planning, given the proximity of the major freeway to
the subject property; 2) the applicant does not seem to comprehend
the magnitude of the ramifications of the highway widening project
upon the property; 3) it appears that the proposed addition could
be constructed elsewhere upon the substantial site owned by the
church. The motion died for lack of a second.
Following further discussion, there was a motion by
Commissioner Engdahl, seconded by Commissioner Gross, to recommend
approval of Planning Commission Application No. 72055 submitted by
Vanman Construction Company for Northbrook Alliance Church subject
to the following conditions:
1. Building plans are subject to the approval of the
Building Inspector with respect to applicable
building codes;
2. Drainage and utility plans are subject to the approval
of the City Engineer prior to the issuance of a
building permit;
3. 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 installation
of site improvements as designated on the approved
plans;
1
1
-5-
4. All parking and driving areas shall be paved and curbed
utilizing the B-612 type curbing.
Voting in favor were: Chairman Jensen, Commissioners Grosshans,
Foreman, Scott, Gross and Engdahl. Voting against: Commissioner
Logucki. The motion passed.
The next item of business was planning Commission Application
No. 72064 submitted by Mr. C. A. Olson, Jr. The item was introduced
by the Secretary who stated the applicant was seeking preliminary
registered land survey approval for a parcel located at 6252 Bryant
Avenue ,North. He noted that the application was tabled on August 3r,
pending further input from the Citizen's Advisory Group and the
Highway Department.
He stated that the applicant proposed to combine two existing
parcels for purposes of building a single family dwelling. He
reiterated the status of the Citizen's Advisory Group's recommend
ations to the Highway Department and Chairman Jensen further
discussed the concerns of the Advisory group relative to the
construction of additional single fam3.ly dwellings along the
freeway. The Secretary noted that the Highway Department had
indicated that approximately 20 feet would be taken from the subject
parcel, but that the remaining parcel would still be of buildable
size.
In response to a question by the Secretary, the applicant
stated that the parcels were currently owned by the Northbrook
Alliance Church and that he had negotiated a purchase agreement
with the church.
The Secretary further noted that should the wooden or earth
barrier concept proposed by the Highway Department be unacceptable
to the Advisory Group and the City, given the concerns for proper
setback and noise abatement, it was conceivable that more than the
estimated 20 feet would be required from the parcel; thus, the
potential ramifications were significant relative to the risk of
the owner to proceed with home construction, and to the risk of the
City in condoning poor planning.
Chairman Jensen reviewed the concerns of the Advisory Group
and he stated that, in his opinion, the Commission would be acting
inproperly at this time to make a recommendation without further
data and a final decision relative to the highway widening. He
also noted the planning principle involved relative to the incom-
patibility of residential uses and major freeways.
Commissioner Gross stated that he agreed, and that while the
proximity of the church and the subject property to the freeway was
the same, the nature of the uses was substantially different.
Commissioner Foreman commented that the issue before the Commission
was similar to the one regarding residential development around the
Twin Cities International Airport. He stated that many residents
were allowed to build in the area after the airport use was
established and that, in his opinion, this was representative of
poor planning.
Following further discussion, there was a motion by
Commissioner Foreman, seconded by Commissioner Bogucki, to table
planning Commission Application No. 72064 submutted by C. A. Olson,
Jr. until such time that a final determination is made by the City
and the Highway Department relative to the widening project for
Interstate 94. The motion passed unanimously.
f
,.
-6-
Motion by Commissioner Grosshans, seconded by Commissioner
Gross, to approve the minutes of the August 24, 1972 meeting as
submitted. Voting in favor were: Chairman Jensen, Commissioners
Grosshans, Bogucki, Scott, Gross and Engdahl. Not voting:
Commissioner Foreman, who explained that he was not present at the
August 24th meeting. Motion carried.
Motion by Commissioner Foreman, seconded by Commissioner
Scott, to approve the minutes of the September 7, 1972, meeting
as submitted. Voting in favor were: Commissioners Grosshans,
Bogucki, Foreman, Scott and Engdahl. Not voting: Chairman Jensen
and Commissioner Gross, who stated they were not present at the
September 7th meeting. The motion carried.
The Commission then proceeded to informally review the site
and building plans submitted by Fox Run, Inc (Application No. 72045) .
Extensive discussion ensued and centered around the proposed phasing
of the project, and particularly the split nature of the Phase One.
The Director of Public Works briefly reviewed the proposed
drainage for the site and Commissioner Gross stated his concern
with the soil conditions, noting that perhaps that consideration
was responsible for the rather intricate boundaries of the proposed
three phases. The Secretary explained that the application would
be presented for formal consideration upon adoption of the proposed
ordinance amendment which comprehended planned residential develop-
ment. He stated that the Council, had given the draft ordinance
first reading.
Motion by Commissioner Fngdahl, seconded by Commissioner Foreman,
to adjourn the meeting. Tbo nation passed unanimously. The
Planning Commission meeting u6-iourned at 11:25 P.M.
s rma
1
1
1