Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1974 12-05 PCM MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA REGULAR MEETING CITY HALL December 5 , 1974 all to Order: The Planning Commission met in regular session and was called to order at 8 : 00 p.m. , by Chairman Gross . Roll Call : Chairman Gross, Commissioners Engdahl, Foreman, Scott, Pierce and Horan. Also present were Director of Public Works Names Merila and Director of Planning and Inspection Blair Tremere. Approve Minutes: Motion by Commissioner Scott , seconded by 11-21-74 Commissioner Horan to approve the minutes of the November 21, 1974 , meeting as submitted . Voting in favor were Commissioners Engdahl, Pierce, Scott and Horan. Not voting, Chairman Gross and Commissioner Foreman, who explained they were not present at the November 21, 1974 , meeting. The motion passed . Application No. 74055 Following the Chairman ' s explanation, the first (Mrs. S. Arneson) item of business was consideration of Planning Commission Application No. 74055 , submitted by Mrs . Sudjai Arneson. The item was introduced by the Secretary who explained the applicant was seeking special use permission for the operation of a beauty shop in her home at 6825 Abbott Avenue North . He stated that the application was for a one-chair operation in the basement of the home, and that the premises had been inspected by the Building Official, who determined that no additional exitways were necessary if the operation were located as designated by the applicant . The Secretary stated that concerns included; hours of operation , and paving the existing grave ji.rt driveway which opens onto 69th Avent— North . Chairir,n Gross noted a public hearing was schedh, 17:�d and that none of the notified property owner= vas present. Chairma: Gross recognized the applicant and her husband , and a brief discussion ensued . Mrs . Arneson explained her hours of operation as follows : Sunday & Monday - Closed Tuesday, Wednesday, & Thursday - 9 : 00 a.m. to 4 : 00 p.m. Friday - 9: 00 a .m. to 7 : OOp.m. Saturday - 8 : 00 a .m. to 4 : 00 p.m. Regarding the driveway, Mr . Arneson explained that it was their intent to pave the driveway during the 1975 construction season. A brief discussion ensued as to the best design for the paving so to permit the turn-around capability for vehicles at the residence. Commissioner Foreman stated his concern that vehicles should be able to drive forward onto 69th Avenue North , because of the rather poor visibility at that location . _ _ 12/5/74 The Director of Public Works stated that such a design was possible and suggested that the staff could work with the applicant at such time that the paving is installed. Motion by Commissioner Foreman, seconded by Action Recommending Commissioner Engdahl to recommend approval Approval of Application of Planning Commission Application No. No. 74055 74055 submitted by Mrs. Sudjai Arneson (Mrs . S. Arneson) subject to the following conditions : 1) A copy of the State Beautician' s Certificate shall be placed on file with the City. 2) The use shall be subject to all applicable ordinance requirements and violation thereof shall be grounds for revocation. 3) The driveway shall be paved, according to a design reviewed and approved by the City Engineer, prior to June 1, 1975. 4) Hours of operation shall be: Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday 9: 00 am. - 4: 00 p.m. Friday 9 : 00 a.m. - 7: 00 p.m. Saturday 8 : 00 a.m, - 4: 00 p.m. The next item of business was consideration Application No. 68041, of an amendment to Planning Commission (Douglas Johnston) Application No. 68041 submitted by Douglas (Amendment) Johnston. The item was introduced by the Secretary who stated that the applicant was the new owner of the Chippewa Apartments located at 65th and Camden Avenue North. He noted that the item had been tabled at. the November 7 , 1974 meeting since the applicant had been unable to attend , He stated the request proposed the relocation of the rental office from the manager ' s (free-standing) residence at 65th and Camden Avenues North, to the recreation building located on the west side of the site. He stated the applicant also tentatively proposes to convex # one garage space, attached to the recreation building, as an entrance to the prcF ;1;,ed office. He stated the intent was to centralize the rental office with the supervisory office for the recreation building. Chairman Gross recognized the applicant and an extensive discussion ensued. The Secretary commented the site plan for the 216 unit complex shows 433 parking spaces; thus, using one garage for an entrance way would leave a balance of 432 spaces the amount required. The Director of Public Works and the Secretary commented that there were a number of maintenance-related items which should be accomplished: upgrading and striping of the parking lot; upgrading of the green strips, particularly along Camden Avenue; replace- ment or revitalization of a number of trees on the perimeter of the site, particularly along Bryant Avenue, and the removal of a -2- 12/5/74 number of non-conforming signs and sign supports on the site., Chairman Gross recognized the applicant who commented that a number of trees had died through the lack of upkeep, particularly along Bryant Avenue North., and that he had removed some of them, He stated his intent was to rejuvenate the landscaping on the site as well as to upgrade the parking lot. Mr. Johnston also briefly discussed the concept of relocating the rental office to the recreatio building and stated that it would accomplish full time supervisory capability for the recreation center as well as providing a more centralized rental facility. He stated that the present building now used as quarters for the resident manager as well as the rental office would be used totally as a residence for the resident manager. Further discussion ensued regarding certain non-conforming signery on the site. Commissione Foreman recalled that. the Commission had considered this application when the former owner requested a variance to retain a project sign facing the freeway. He recalled that the City had required that the large project sign be removed, and that the former owner had only removed the sign itself and had left the sign. frame and supports . Mr . Johnston responded that he had removed the frame and acknowledged that the supporting poles remained , but would be removed. The Secretary further commented as to ordinance requirements for permanent identification signery for large multi-residential complexes. He noted that the present language had been clarified as the result of concerns with the subject project . He stated that the free- standing identification signery located at 65th and Brant and 65th and Camden were technically comprehended as permitted non-conforming signs since -he ordinance states, two free-standing ident �. lcation signs are permitted at each major ntrance to the project . A brief discussion ensued and Commissioner Forema. stated that while the signs technically might % c_ non-conforming, they were properly locate6 given the somewhat unique location of the project in relation to main access roads, and., in addition, were aesthetic. Chairman Gross agreed, but inquired as to the status of remaining signery. The Secretary stated that a prime concern was with existing wall signery on the present rental building, which did not meet ordinance stand- ards, as well as the supporting poles for the former project sign facing the freeway. The Secretary commented that the applicant was eligible for a variety of signery for the project, and that upon corrective ,action with respect to the wall signery and the poles, such signery could be installed. The Secretary also commented that the proposed relocation of the rental office had merit, in that the focal point of the project would be within the site, having access through a major -3- 12/5/74 driveway opening off of Camden. Ave.. , which fronted onto C-2 property across the street. Following further discussion, there was a Action Recommending motion by Commissioner Foreman, seconded by Approval of Application Commissioner Scott to recommend approval No. 68041 of the proposed amendment to Planning (Amendment) Commission Application No. 68041 , submitted (Douglas Johnston) by Douglas Johnston, subject to the following conditions: 1) Building remodeling plans are subject to review by the Building Official with respect to applicable codes , 2) The parking lot will be upgraded and restriped according to ordinance standards prior to June 1.5 , 1975 . 3) Landscaping on the site will be rejuvenated prior to June 15 , 1975, with particular attention directed towards establishment of trees originally approved and planted, but. which have since died along the perimeter areas of the site. 4) All wall signery on buildings shall be brought into conformance with the ordinance standards prior to June 15 , 1975, and the sign support on the south end of the project abutting the I-94 freeway, will be removed- The motion passed unanimously. The meeting recessed at 9: 00 p.m , and Recess resumed at 9: 20 p.m. The next item of business was consider- Application No. 74004 ation of an amendment to Planning Commission (Amendment.) Application No. 74004 , submitted by B.C. I . P . (B.CAI .P. ) The item was introduced by the Secretary who stated that the applicant seeks, per- mission to conduct an "athletic club" on the 8th floor of the new Earle Brown Farm Office Tower. He stated that the ':tilding was approved as a special use in the !-- district earlier this year and that the subjct use is comprehended among those listed in the ordinance as a permitted special_ uc� in the 1-1 zone. He stated the handball court, sauna ; exercise room and sanitary facilities were approved under the site and building plan approval , and, they were originally- intended for use by tenants , He stated the area was included in parking cal- culations (non-retail) , Chairman Gross recognized Mr. Dick Sheehy representing the applicant, and a brief discussion ensued , Chairman Gross announced that. a public hearing had been scheduled, and noted that none of the notified property owners was present. Motion by Commissioner Scott, seconded by Commissioner Pierce to close the public hearing. The motion passed unanimously. -4- 12/5/74 Further discussion ensued regarding the occupancy load of the subject area as well as the limitation of actin,=ities in the building , and particularly in this area , to those non-retail in character , In .response to a question by Commissioner Horan, a brief discussion ensued regarding the status of the proposed phase two of the building as well as the status of the parking lot , Action Recommending Following further discussion , there was a Approval of Application motion by Commissioner Scott , seconded by No, 74004 Commissionez Horan to recommend approval of (Amendment) the amendment to Planning Commission Application (B.C. I.P. ) No , 74004 , submitted by B . C. I , P , , subject to the following conditions : 1 The use is subject to all applicable ordinance requirements and violation thereof shall be grounds for revocation n the permit . X The occupancy load of the 8th floor at any given time shall notexceed 200 persons , 3T Retail sales activities are prohibited except for those normally found in office buildings , such as -ending machines and the like, The motion passed unanimously . Application No. 70016 The next item was consideration of proposed (Amendment) site and b�K O ng plan amendments to Planning (DeCoster Realty-Hage Commission Application No . 70016 , submitted Construction) by DeCoster Realty and Hage Construction . The item was introduced by the Secretary who stated that the application involved the former S and H Green Stamp Redemption Center structure, 5810 X- :_xes Ayprue North He presented a h st :orti of the applicat:ion dating from 1970, when ti - original plans were approved , and when ! " City Council authorized action resulting in thf .lac i.not of a restrictive land use covenant on th± aivperty 17mating commercial uses to a gift < ;mp redemption center , parking, and C-1 uses . He continued, noting that the structure o-- ; giry y designed for a single purpose use had K -acated by the S and H Green Stamp Co. approx > ately 18 months age, and that the build r ;; had been vacant since that time, and that acrordinq to the applicant , new prospect- iye tenancies were C-2 rather than C-1 in nature. The Secretary stated that essentially the request consisted of two parts; 1) A proposed amend- ment- to the building plan comprehending the construction of interior parking, which would accomplish a reduction in the available floor area for retail uses as well as providing additional parking spaces , thereby bringing the required number of spaces in line with the promided =paces; 2) a re�.-ision of the building exterior ccmprrehending closing existing pedest- rian and service entrances and installing new entrances to the proposed multiple tenant areas, as well as a genera ]_ upgrading of the site. With tetn-ct to the first consideration, the Secretary.- reviewed the proposed installation of interior parking in the southeast corner of the - 5- 12/5/74 building, including the installat � ­' overhead door. He stated that area would comprehend five useable spaces as well as general access tr_x tenant areas for loading purpose--, HqF- noted that revised exterior parklnq requiredtwo handicap stalls and ramr�, He stated there resulted a total :\' 97 parking stalls which was the n��mber required for the remaining 11 , 700 sq4 �ire feet of retail floor area. He r,.mm-rrtf7--d that upon installation of the inter I -r P�rk - ing, and the subsequent reduct , cn ,-' tfe overall retail area of the build .- rq, appropriate legal measures could initiated, resulting in the litt - nq the restrictive covenart . A brief discussion ensued regard layout of the parking lot and the of the subject site to the neqhh,c- Health Spa site. The Seryptar'� �-f reviewed the status of an exist '. rrl parking agreement and lease bet,wr­n-r' -,7, - applicant and, the Health Spa , nct ' rc, said agreement terminated , n He stated that based on a gene!­, ' ation of gross floor a.y ea o1 + Spa building, an adequate n;iTy-th- spaces were available , it , r= 1 to meet the non-retail park ,. !­', a o E n, He stated that the capab il , tY Spa to provide sufficient park members, was a function ^f ached u` management by the Spa a!-; iA:E, future joint parking agreements-, applicant or other ne7gl-b-riin,'; (9r With respect to the se roc 7 the Secretary rev A-ewed f alterat ions to the bu ILd .included installation ' on the north side of installation. of a ma in er t- side of the building and tY;,e existing entrances on building A brief disucssion ensued ability of three separ-ate north side of the buildlrg , tw were oriented to one tenaint ar to the submitted plan , C-71-fa - r rr, recognized Mr , Douglas DeC­jst� � explained that one of -thy l was intended for an entrance. He explained e 1- for the tenant, area was irtr,d customers, while the east-erIv way on the north side was rr�-ndid smaller tenant area on tbp ea— the building, The Secretary commented that -i tenant area on the sons-h s -de t� - building would have primary the west end and through the parking facility on th.e east noted concern as to has,ing a delivery entrance on the north s :d- 12/5/74 the building and suggested that because of the high density of the required parking spaces along that side, that only twc .—I-rances be p-rovided; located in such a manner so to utilize one of the wider handicap parking stalls and accompanying ramps for access , 71e stated that. it would be structurally feasible to provide loading capability to the north -tenant area through the anterior parking facility . He stated *.hat. by prop iding only two entrances on the n:>t-fr s ,.de of the building lone to each of +he north side tenant, areas) , a substantial amount T,t c^ngest, cn noul.d be avoided , part- i cu i ar- ly n light �If the four-foot walkway along that side of the building and the tightness of the park nq sty 11 s The applicant acknowledged that the proposal had merit and noted that lease agreements with a pr'rl=p^ct l ° e tenant for the north side of the building had n;-)t been finalized . The Secretary sta ted rat ir_ would appear then there was flexib ' ' ir_v 1r, developing an internal corridor wh: �7h u' d pr _ yd , -)ading capabilities for teat tern- arc= tj-: ,ugh the internal parking fact i ; tv . r: b .mot d ­rr _!ssicn ensued and it ors the t-.� , �. r t fat r:he applicant t +,rther r = N to the sta* f the internal layraut of the ni, sdir:1 with respect to orient- ing pr mnrr del ;, acc�.ss to the tenant areas th,ro+. gh the rear of the building: thereby reser nq F s �n the north and west end of the bui ld anal f�;r pedestrian customer traffic. The DYector of pa,bl ; c works and the Secretary re�' ,ewed * hr- Witat rf ti-e parking lot and of the landscap r,g The Secretary noted that dur ng the 1: 8 mr -nt`h = cancy of the building, a s<<bstarr : ' det r .ratrn had occurred and it was rec--mended that- the condition of the parking lot as well as of the sodding and plant- ings bf spgraded t-^ original status . The Dre:.:tt., -�i Public Wnrks discussed the desir- ab, � t -�i r)rc.-, _d = ng r•oncrete delineators in the lo= _ � : n:, ore-, , Ord stated that an inspection of t?, ,Y k ,.n.q " -f- i rd ic:ated the need for path Y , spa , =Pcar ' ng , and striping of the lot. Dur r .� t3 ether d • sr --saran, it was determined that t� pe, . .;rmar,ce bond should be re- estah � d t ^ : �surr- reju% enation of the k, par t , c?t anc?^ landscaping to the originally appr. st=3t us In turther the appl cant commented as to the _tatus PYcsper+- 1 , e tenancies and stated that he h,r,pi�=d b.: i ld ,, ng improvements could Le , ndcrway w -= thin a mnrtl? Commissioner Foreman stated that it was appropriate for the c:ty tr- work with the fawner in taking the necessary stEps tc re°vitalize the prime commercial prcperty . The Secretary commented that the precise taming of occupancy of the bu 4 1d i.na would be a f uinct ion of the City Counc4l ` s cons 'deratt,on as to the status of tee rest- rictive covenant and its ultimate divs,-Jut ion . - r- 12/'5/74 Motion by Commissioner Foreman, seconded Action Recommending by Commissioner Pierce to recommend Approval of Amendfaents approval of the proposed amendment to to Application No. 70016 Planning Commission Application No. 70016 and Related Removal of subject to the following conditions : Existing Restrictive Covenant 1) Building plans are subject to review (DeCoster Realty - Hage by the Building Official with respect Construction) to applicable codes prior to the issuance of permits . 2) Approved alterations of the building exterior shall be compatible aesth- etically with existing finish. 3) A performance agreement and supporting financial guarantee (in an amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be submitted to assure completion of approved site and building improvements to include rejuvenation of the parking lot and the landscaping to the originally approved condition. 4) Upon satisfactory completion of structural amendments, resulting in approved interior parking spaces and subsequent reduction of available retail floor area, appropriate legal procedures shall be initiated to remove the existing restrictive land use covenant as an encumberance upon the property. 5) Site improvements shall include installation of concrete delineators as indicated on revised plans, as approved by the City Engineer. 6) Approved revisions to the building exterior comprehend two entrances on the north side of the building with the precise location to be a function of proper location of handicap parking spaces and ramps, fire lanes and internal layout of the tenant areas, as reviewed by the City. Particular concern is �-oted that primary access for deliveries and unloading shall be at the east end of the building, thereby Cimin- ishing the potential vehicul and pedestrian congestion in the north parking area. The motion passed unanimously. The Secretary noted that the next item of Action Tabling business was Planning Commission Application Consideration of No. 74056 submitted by Arthur Treacher ' s Application No. 7405 Restaurants, but that a representative of (Arthur Treacher ' s) the applicant was not present, although appropriate notice had been sent. Motion by Commissioner Scott, seconded by Commissioner Foreman to table Planning Commission Application No. 74056 until the next regular Planning Commission meeting. The motion passed unanimously. 12/5/74 -8- Other Business : In other business, Chairman Gross reminded the Commissioners that commencing January 9 , 1975 , the regular Planning Commission meeting will be normally on the second Thursday of the month. In other business , a brief discussion ensued as to scheduling of the December study session, and the Secretary was instructed to notify the members of the time and location for that session. Adjournment: Motion by Commissioner Scott, seconded by Commissioner Engdahl to adjourn the meeting. The motion passed unanimously. The Planning Commission adjourned at 11: 25 p.m. aam-(2�mv_ Chairman -9- 12/5/74 1 1 1