Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1975 10-30 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 SPECIAL SESSION CITY HALL OCTOBER 30, 1975 Call to Order The Planning Commission met in special session and was called to order at 8:00 p.m. by Chairman Carl Gross. Roll Call Chairman Gross, Commissioners Scott, Engdahl , Horan, Pierce, and Jacobson. Also present was Director of Planning and Inspection Blair Tremere. Consideration of Office Chairman Gross explained the meeting had been called Building Parking Space to review and discuss a staff analysis-and recommenda- Requirements Study tion regarding ordinance parking space. rbquirements for office buildings. The Secretary reviewed the background for the study and the general findings which had been discussed by the Commission at the October 23 meeting. He ampli- fied that review with the description of the various elements of the study, which had been distributed in advance to the Commission members. Extensive discussion ensued regarding the proposed formula. The Secretary explained that at the pre- sent time, office buildings fall under the blanket requirement of "other commercial " which is calcu- lated at the rate of one parking space per 200 square feet gross floor area. He stated that observation, verified by the data in the study, indicated a more specific criteria, utilizing gross floor area, was warranted in the case of office buildings. He explained that a basic finding was a definite trend or relationship in the case of large-scale office buildings, where larger buildings exhibit ,a larger amount of gross floor area per parking stall . In further discussion the Secretary described the basis for the proposed formula which comprehended specific requirements for each of-three ranges of building size: Building Gross Required Parking Spaces I F oar Trea G.F.A. ) G.F.A. 0 - 20,000 sq. ft. 200 20,000 - 220,000 sq. ft. G.F.A. S x +1 0 where x is the gross floor area in thousands over 220,000 G.F.A. 300 He reviewed each of the recommended criteria and described the derivation of the mathematical formula for the intermediate range. He stated it was based on a definition of the slope line which was shown in -1- 10-30-75 the study in Graph 2, which represented the relationship between building size and gross floor area and gross floor area per parking space. Extensive discussion ensued as to the size of the sample which consisted of eight office buildings, four or which were outside the City, and which were treated in an earlier parking space survey by the engineering consultant, Bather, Ringrose, and Wolsfeld for B.C. I.P. Concern was expressed as to the requirements for smaller office build- ings and whether the minimum floor area should be greater than 20,000 square feet. Chairman Gross stated, for example , that he had recently found parking to be unavailable at the Brookdale Tower Office Building on County Road 10. The Secretary stated in that particular situation it had been found the management of the building had restricted the use of parking spaces in the underground garage on a rental basis, although the spaces were included in the minimum parking requirement. He said there was parking avail- able to the public on the garage roof deck on the north side of the building, and Chairman Gross responded that he had not been aware of that parking. The Secretary explained that while there was an apparent difference between a multi-tenant office building and a predominately single-tenant build- ing, the parking study had adjusted the gross floor area of each building to a common basis in order to determine the realistic need in terms of the actual occupancy, and actual parking demand. He noted that in contrast to the Brookdale Towers building, which at least in terms of the open lot area, appeared to maximize its parking capability, the Office Towers on the Earle Brown Farm ex- hibited a substantial amount of unused parking spaces. He stated that given a generally accepted vacancy rate of approximately five per cent, all the buildings were fully occupied at this time. Further discussion ensued regarding availability and quality of public transportation and car pooling activities at the various buildings. The Secretary stated the data had been obtained from the owners or leasing agents as well as from the Metropolitan Transit Commission. He continued that given current trends nationally with respect to availability of fuel and the increasing cost of operating private automobiles, it could be reasonably expected that social and economic pressures would lead to a more intense demand for improved transit service, a higher use of such transit, and an increasing use of other measures such as car pooling. He stated also that the recommendation was not a radical departure from the City' s policy of re- quiring off street parking and thereby assuring through ordinance requirements that adequate parking be provided on the site. He explained the purpose of the study was to refine the exist- ing parking requirement for a particular use, namely office buildings . -2- 10/30/75 He continued that to the extent the minimum park- ing requirements are reduced, the resultant park- ing is not deficient, but rather more realistic and adequate in meeting the minimum requirements. He stated that philosophically, the study was focused on providing an adequate minimum amount of parking rather, t"an a speculative abundance of parking to meet all possible contingencies including convenience and mismanagement of available parking. He elaborated as to the management problems, such as in the case of Brookdale Towers where a portion of the credited minimum parking was being intentionally restricted to those willing to pay a rental fee. He said rather than trying to accommodate such situations by providing an excess in parking, a policy or ordinance requirement could be considered that park- ing spaces intended to be restricted on a rental basis should not be given full credit in determining the minimum requirements. Chairman Gross recognized Mr. Roger Newstrum and Mr. Harold Feurhelm, who represented B.C. I.P. , Inc. , and who offered comments as to their experience with the Office Towers on the Earle Brown Farm. Further discussion ensued and Chairman Gross polled the C0mm4ssioners as to their reactions to the staff analysis and recommendation. Commissioner Pierce said he was in agreement with the report and the recommendations. He stated he would prefer a larger sampling of other office buildings , especially in the 100,000 square foot to 150,000 square foot gross floor area range. He stated the recommended formula appeared to be appropriate, based on the study' s findings for the sample of eight office buildings. Commissioner Horan stated that the concept of the study and recommendation was good in terms of treating a specific type of use and the actual parking demand. He stated he was not satisfied that the findings of the report statistically confirmed the probability that the recommended ratios would be effective. The Secretary responded with a further explanation of the basis for the recommended formulas and Commissioner Horan stated he was not suggesting a larger sampling was needed, but rather that additional statistical analysis con- firming the probability of the findings would be appropriate. He concluded that he needed additional time to digest the report. Commissioner Jacobson stated that she was in agree- ment with the concept and the findings with exception of the requirements for smaller office buildings. She stated that she was not certain of an appropriate starting point, although 20,000 square feet seemed too small. She recognized that there was difficulty in forecasting problems which were management-related rather than need-related, but that it appeared based on experience that deficient parking would be more evident with smaller office buildings than with larger ones. Commissioner Scott agreed, emphasizing her concern with an apNY' "Y priate minimum range. She stated that rop in her opinion, smaller office buildings calculated at the 1:200 square foot ratio should be up to 50,000 square feet, rather than 20,000. She -3- 10/30/75 recognized the basis for the formula, but said that her experience with multi-tenant smaller office buildings confirmed her belief that minimum parking requirements should not be re- duced. Commissioner Engdahl stated he was in agreement with the study and recommendations to the extent that the present one space per 200 square feet formula was adequate as a minimum and that one space per 300 square feet was adequate for build- ings over 200,000 square feet. He stated, however, that as Commissioner Scott and Com- missioner Jacobson, he had reservations about the 20,000 sq. ft. minimum. Chairman Gross agreed with the intent of the study and the concept of the recommendation. He had several concerns, some of which were perhaps be- yond the scope of this specific analysis, but which had ramifications. He stated, for example, that a larger sampling of buildings could further substantiate the established trend and that more precise data as to the significance of mass transit and car pooling would be helpful , although he recognized such data was highly subjective and not easily quantified. He agreed with earlier state- ments that perhaps the range of smaller buildings - should be greater than the minimum 20,000. He stated that he was particularly concerned with the retroactive application of the new formula whereby present office buildings could recalcu- late their parking to accommodate additional office space or perhaps other uses such as medical clinics. The Secretary responded to the concerns regarding assurance or probability of the formula's applica- tion and to the speculation that deficiencies might arise in the case of existing buildings applying the new formula. He stated that if fewer spaces were provided than under the present ordinance standards, it was questionable as to what degree the City should be inordinately con- cerned with the inconvenient location or lack of available stalls for a particular building. He emphasized that the analysis showed the formula would provide adequate parking for office buildings , taking into account specific degrees of occupancy and the amount of floor area per parking space. He stated that the likelihood of mass transit service and alternative means of transportation, such as car pooling, was not only enhanced by pro- viding adequate rather than over-abundant parking, but was also substantiated by current trends towards more efficient use of energy and vehicles. He stated that the report and recommendation had been submitted for purposes of providing a realistic parking standard for a specific type of use, which has not been treated in the ordinance except under a blanket requirement comprehending many commercial uses other than retail . He remarked that other as- pects ,of parking provisions such as minimum parking stall sizes were being analyzed as possible further refinements of the ordinance and that in fact, if provisions were adopted to allow for smaller vehicles, the number of parking stalls on a given -4- 10/30/75 site could be significantly increased, thereby also allowing for expanded uses. He stated that as such data is developed it would be submitted for review. Chairman Gross stated that while the Commission recognized the analysis and recommendation had merit, the City Should be also prepared to re- evaluate the other parking standards and criteria. Adjournment Motion by Commissioner Engdahl seconded by Com- missioner Scott to adjourn the meeting. The motion passed unanimously. The Planning Com- mission meeting adjourned at 11 :30 p.m. Chair n -5- 10-30-75 i 1