HomeMy WebLinkAbout1967 PCM Minutes of the Proceedings of
the Planning Commission in the City
of Brooklyn Center in the County of
Hennepin and State of Minnesota
January 5, 1967
The Planning Commission met in regular session and was
called to order by Chairman Robert Jensen at 7 :40 P.M.
Roll Call: Chairman Robert Jensen, Vice Chairman Robert
Grosshans, Commissioners Vernon Ausen, Adrian Dorenfeld,
Helmer Engstrom and Henry Bogucki were present. Commissioner
Paul Ditter arrived during the meeting as noted below.
The first application to be considered was Application
No. 66091 submitted by Firestone Rubber Company. The appli-
cation requested approval of the site plan for the proposed
Firestone Retail Store and Service Center at 5445 Xerxes Avenue
North (S.W. corner of the intersection of Xerxes and 55th
Avenues) .
Mr. Jon Abbott of Dayton Development Company and Mssrs.
Anderson, Gillespie, and Nordell of Firestone were present to
discuss the site plan with the Commission. The Commissioners
noted that the drawing with a revision date of January 3, 1967,
had been submitted to the City for review only shortly before
the meeting, and apparently had some dimensional errors in
regard to required parking spaces, and that the Commission
would be unable to put its stamp of approval on the drawings
submitted, but due to the urgent need of Firestone to have
its plans approved, perhaps could pass the plans to the
Council with a recommendation.
Following discussion of the plans as submitted, the
following action was taken. Motion by Bogucki, seconded by
Grosshans, to recommend to the City Council that the site plan
for the Firestone Retail Store/Service Center as it is presently
before the Commission is, in principle, an adequate plan, and
should be approved by the Council if:
1) the plan is revised before the Council' s final
approval action to provide the number of correctly
dimensioned parking spaces on the site plan as
would be required applying the standards applied
to this type of use previously - that is, three
spaces for each service bay, one of which may be in
each bay; and the standards for "other retail
stores or centers" for the retail sales portion
of the proposed building;
and further, that:
2) a performance agreement and performance bond be
submitted in an amount determined by the City
Engineer to guarantee site improvements on the
property;
3) no freestanding sign approval be granted at this
time.
Voting in favor of the motion were Jensen, Ausen, Grosshans,
Engstrom, Dorenfeld and Bogucki. Not voting was Ditter, who
arrived during the discussion. Motion carried.
1
1
1
-2-
The next application to be considered was No. 66061 submitted
by Mehl Banta. This application, a request for a special use
permit for a car wash selling automotive fuel and approval of
the plans for the car wash was approved in August of 1966, but
Mr. Banta has now asked that the special use permission granted
at that time be amended to allow him to erect a freestanding sign
on the car wash property at 5500 Osseo Road. Mr. Banta exhibited
a drawing to the Commission of the sign he proposes to install
on the property. He explained that the sign would be just under
20 feet in height, would be an interior illuminated, non-
flashing and non-rotating sign. Motion by Engstrom, seconded
by Dorenfeld to recommend to the City Council that a further
condition be applied to the special use permission granted by
the Council on August 15, 1966, to allow a freestanding sign to
be installed on the southwest corner of the property and to be
of the type described on the drawing submitted with this appli-
cation, and further provided that the sign be no greater in
height than 20 feet above curb grade at the curbline nearest the
sign+s location. Motion carried unanimously.
The next application to be considered was No. 66072 sub-
mitted by Red Owl Stores, Inc. This application had previously
been before the Commission and Council for approval of the site
plan of the proposed Red Owl Food Store at 5425 Xerxes Avenue
in October of 1966. The building plans for the Red Owl Store
now having been prepared, are presented also as a part of
Application No. 66072.
Following examination of the plans submitted and discussion
of them with Mr. Howard Pieper, representative of Red Owl, the
following action was taken. Motion by Ausen, seconded by
Ditter, to recommend to the City Council that the building
plans submitted in conjunction with Application No. 66072 be
approved as submitted with the following conditions:
1) that a performance agreement and performance bond
be submitted to guarantee the site improvements
to be installed in an amount determined by the
City Engineer;
2) That no approval of freestanding signing is being
considered at this time.
Motion carried unanimously.
The remainder of the meeting was spent in discussion and
final revision of the January 1, 1967, draft of the suggested
Sign Ordinance. Following the recording of these alterations,
Commissioner Ausen moved and Commissioner Grosshans seconded that
the draft, as revised, be titled the January 5, 1967, draft of
the suggested sign ordinance and be transmitted to the City
Council with the Planning Commission' s recommendation that it be
reviewed and adopted as the Sign Ordinance for the City of
Brooklyn Center. Motion carried unanimously.
Motion by Ditter, seconded by Dorenfeld, that the meeting
be adjourned. The motion carried unanimously. The meeting
adjourned at 11:00 P.M.
hairman
1
1
1
235
Minutes of the Proceedings of
the Planning Commission in the City
of Brooklyn Center in the County of
Hennepin and State of Minnesota
January 26, 1967
The Planning Commission met in special session and was
called to order by Chairman Robert Jensen at 7:45 P.M.
Roll Call: Chairman Robert Jensen, Commissioners Paul
Ditter, Henry Bogucki, Vernon Ausen, and Helmer Engstrom were
present. Commissioner Adrian Dorenfeld arrived later in the
meeting, at 8:30 P.M.
The evening was spent in discussion of the changing nature
of commercial activity, especially the "drive-in" type of
operation and service stations. Brought into this discussion
was the subject of possible guest speakers who are expert in
the various areas of marketing, as well as those with insight
into the trend of future development. As the Commission was in
agreement that a study of this type would be of value, Chairman
Jensen appointed Mssrs. Bogucki and Ditter as a committee to
arrange a meeting at which various persons familiar with
commercial development trends could be present to discuss them
with the Commission.
Motion by Dorenfeld, seconded by Bogucki, to reaffirm the
Commission' s previous elections of Robert Jensen as Chairman on
September 2, 1965, and Robert Grosshans as Vice-Chairman on
January 20, 1966, and continue both in those same offices; the
reason for this reaffirmation being their recent reappointments
to the Commission. Voting in favor of the motion were Dorenfeld,
Engstrom, Ausen, Bogucki, and Ditter. Not voting was Jensen.
Motion carried.
Motion by Dorenfeld, seconded by Engstrom, that the meeting
be adjourned. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned
at 10:30 P.M.
Chairm
236
IY
i
f
237
Minutes of the Proceedings of the
Planning Commission in the City of
Brooklyn Center in the County of
Hennepin and State of Minnesota
February 2, 1967
The Planning Commission met in regular session and was
called to order by Chairman Robert Jensen at 7:35 P.M.
Roll Call: Chairman Robert Jensen, Vice Chairman Robert
Grosshans, Commissioners Paul Ditter, Henry Bogucki, Vernon
Ausen, Helmer Engstrom and Adrian Dorenfeld were present.
Motion by Bogucki, seconded by Dorenfeld, to approve the
Minutes of the meetings of November 3rd and 10th, December
1st, and January 5th and 26th, as recorded. Motion carried
unanimously.
The first application to be considered was #67001 submitted
by Bermel-Smaby Realty Inc. The application requested rezoning
from R1 to RB of the property at 6500 Osseo Road (Tracts B
and C, Brooklane Addition) . Following the public hearing on
the matter and the soliciting of comments from the applicant
and interested parties in attendance, the Commission dis,pussed
the concept of the "planned development area" as it was con-
ceived by the Planning Consultant and the Planning Commission
in preparing the City' s comprehensive plan. The Commission
noted that in the comprehensive plan this location had been
proposed as planned development area, but included property
to the north of the property in this application. The Commission
encouraged the applicant to investigate the possibility of
including this additional property with their present two
parcels as a total planned development.
Following this discussion, the applicant requested that
he be allowed to withdraw his application to allow him time
to examine the possibility of combining his property with that
to his north. Motion by Dorenfeld, seconded by Bogucki, to
recommend to the City Council that a withdrawal of application
#67001 as requested by the applicant be allowed. Motion carried
unanimously.
Application #67002 was next to be considered. Submitted
by Zejdlik and Harmala Architects, the application requested
special use permission to construct five duplex dwellings on
Lots 1 through 5, Block 1, and one three-family dwelling on
Lots 3 and 4, Block 2, Northtown Plaza First Addition, said
property located in the vicinity of Noble Avenue between 68th
and 69th Avenues North.
Following a lengthy public hearing on the matter, Member
Bogucki moved and Member Grosshans seconded that the public
hearing be closed. Motion carried unanimously.
Following further discussion by the Commission on the
application, the following action was taken. Motion by Bogucki,
seconded by Ditter, to recommend to the City Council that the
application for special use permission to build five duplex
dwellings and one three-family dwelling as requested in Appli-
cation #67002 be approved. Voting in favor of the motion were
Ditter, Bogucki, Grosshans, Jensen, and Engstrom. Not voting
were Ausen and Dorenfeld. Motion carried.
238
,
,
.. ,�, a.. -, ... ♦ ♦ �)t , y
v
� a
_
,t
:
+ �' .t
.. , s
y� •,i ).,. , #_ r • .. a .. .. ..
♦ 'x k.., is� r r..'•..i .. .' S .. ~
239
-2-
The next application to be considered was Application
#67003 submitted by Red Owl Stores`, Inc. The application
requested a variance to permit erection of a freestanding sign
on the property at 5425 Xerxes Avenue North. Following
discussion of the proposed sign with Mr. Mastny, Architect
for Red Owl, the Commission indicated that the proposed sign
was much in excess of what had been considered by the Commission
as an appropriate sign in the sign ordinance proposed for adoption
by the Commission. In response to this, Mr. Mastny asked that
the Commission not take action to approve or deny the appli-
cation, but rather to table the application to allow Red Owl
Stores to develop further justification for the sign, and to
present this to the Commission at a later date.
Motion by Bogucki, seconded by Dorenfeld, to table Appli-
cation #67003 at the request of the applicant. Motion carried
unanimously.
Application #67004 submitted by LeRoy Sign Company was
the last item to be considered. The application requested a
variance to permit the erection of two freestanding signs on
the property at 5601 Xerxes Avenue North (Tract A, R.L.S. #1162) .
A representative of the applicant explained the proposal to
erect a freestanding sign on both the north and south sides
of the building on the property. The Commission discussed the
proposed signs with the applicant and examined the proposal in
light of the draft sign ordinance which the Commission had
developed and recommended to the Council for adoption. Following
this consideration, the following action was taken.
Motion by Dorenfeld, seconded by Ditter, to recommend to
the City Council that two freestanding signs be approved on
the property at 5601 Xerxes Avenue North with the following
conditions;
1) That only two freestanding signs be permitted
on the property;
2) That one of the signs may extend 24 feet above
ground level and shall not exceed 250 square feet
in sign area, while the second sign may not exceed
20 feet in height and 64 square feet in sign area.
Motion carried unanimously.
Mssrs. Bogucki and Ditter reported to the Commission on
their attempt to find guest speakers and research material con-
cerning parking requirements as was directed by the Commission
on January 26, 1967. They reported that they had been unable
to find anyone expert in the parking field other than certain
businessmen who might be competent in certain areas of parking
needs. As for written material, certain periodicals would be
examined for such information.
The Secretary to the Commission reported that he had been
in contact with the Extension Service of the University of
Minnesota, and there was an opportunity for the City to have
the Extension Service conduct a program discussing metropolitan-
wide planning. T7be Commission expressed interest in such a
program and directed the secretary to proceed with setting the
date for it.
1 240
jr
iL
i
t,
( t -
. J
:
r
.. # •:a ;,., � ..,•i.. .. _.. ..:
r .
r
F ..I'• •i..r -. .'.fY .l'._ .f'F��P r�.P..•P
,
't yr i .. •
y _
1
941
-3-
Motion by Dorenfeld, seconded by Bogucki, that the
meeting be adjourned. Motion carried unanimously. The
meeting adjourned at 11:35 P.M.
Chairman
i
��
. .
k ..
�'1 'r° ,.. . � . .��. o . ....�iL.� .. .4„ .t r��.is t a1... .'� .... ��; r
I
I
....,, ....... .. ,.....M,
243
Minutes of the Proceedings of
the Planning Commission in the City
of Brooklyn Center in the County of
Hennepin and State of Minnesota
February 23, 1967
The Planning Commission met in special session and
was called to order by Chairman Robert Jensen at 7:45 P.M.
Roll Call: Chairman Robert Jensen, Vice Chairman
Robert Grosshans, Commissioners Paul Ditter, Henry Bogucki,
Vernon Ausen and Helmer Engstrom were present.
Mr. Howard Pieper of Red Owl Stores Inc. , appeared
before the Commission to discuss Red Owl' s request (contained
in Application #67003) that a variance be granted to allow
a freestanding sign for their property at 5425 Xerxes
Avenue North. Another representative had appeared at the
hearing on the matter held February 2nd, and had at that
time requested that the matter be deferred to allow Mr,
Pieper to be present.
Following a good deal of discussion of the freestanding
sign, the Commission decided that a field trip would be in
order to view the site in question. Saturday, March 18th,
was set as the date of this field trip, with the discussion
of the sign to be taken up again at the March 30th special
meeting.
Motion by Ditter, seconded by Bogucki, that the meeting
be adjourned. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting
adjourned at 10:40 P.M.
Cha'r an
244
. . ........
r
r n
1.. w.I {.'.♦ ...A
.. Y
.. �.. .. ... a .! ... ..
1
24'5
Minutes of the Proceedings of
the Planning Commission in the
City of Brooklyn Center in the County
offHHenne�, in and State of Minn2sota
March 2, 1967
The Planning Commission met in regular session and
was called to order by Chairman Robert Jensen at 7:35 P.M.
Roll Calls Chairman Robert Jensen, Vice Chairman Robert
Grosshans, Commissioners Helmer Engstrom, Vernon Ausen and
Paul Ditter were present. Commissioners Bogucki and
Dorenfeld arrived later in the evening as noted.
Motion by Ausen, seconded by Ditter, to approve the
minutes of the regular meeting of February 2, 1967, as
submitted. Motion carried unanimously.
The first application to be considered was No. 66057
submitted by Macey Sign Company. The application requested
a variance to permit alteration of the existing freestanding
sign at Lynn Brook Shopping Center, 6215 Osseo Road, from
the dimensions previously allowed by variance on November
S, 1965. The instant application had been tabled by the
Commission in July of 1966, as the applicant was revising
the sign proposal, and had only recently been reactivated by
him.
Mr. John Holter of Macey Sign Company and Mr. Charles
Novak of Kroger Food Stores were present to discuss the
sign with the Commission. These gentlemen explained to
the Commission that although the existing sign identified
the Lynn Brook Center, there still existed a problem of
identification for the individual establishments, due to
the fact that the Shopping Center was not of a size which
would remove the necessity for individual identification.
Following a lengthy discussion of the application,
Member Vernon Ausen introduced the following resolution and
moved its adoption:
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 67-1
WHEREAS, in November of 1965, the Village Council,
acting in accordance with the recommendation of the Planning
Commission, approved a variance to permit the erection of
a freestanding sign adjacent to the Osseo Road (Highway #152)
right-of-way 40 feet south of the entrance to the Lynn Brook
Shopping Center; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission and Council have
found that hardship does in fact exist in relation to
freestanding signerry, in that the present zoning ordinance
does not take into account the common and necessary type
of business activity; and
WHEREAS, the applicant, acting for the owner and tenants
of the properties within. the Lynn Brook Shopping Center in
the intervening period, have determined that rearrangement
and addition to that previously approved and erected free-
standing sign would be desirable, and have submitted an
246
9gyJ yxsaaeosn baz rioMr—o erfJ Jrru000s oJrd SABJ Jon aeob
brts ,ydiviJos aaeniaud 10
aJnsnsJ bas x9nwo srfJ zo3c : 7s Jrt , s.Cggs srfJ ,2AaSI3HW
ni zeJnoD pniggorf2 Aooz8 +. ,y I erfJ ttirfJiw a9iJa9goxq srfJ 3o
Jn�>„�spns sxr;9x Jsdi bon iln- {3b ovsd bo.iisq painovzoial orf t
-99il beJoe79 bns bsvoagr,, y.iauoivsYq Jsrfl of no.iJibbs bns
ns baJJimdua sysrf bad jdsulaob sd bluow npia .pnibas:ta
b -o.:t e,ia`-_.1 ' b rMcf
i
9gyJ ssaa�aoen bns Horn- o erfJ Jnu000ii o.Jni ok;j Jon asob
brt. ,yJiviJos ea9nieud 30
j r::JrY. nsJ bnr> usawo `JrxrDilggs orf-i .2A,I.FC:liW
rxi 7CjJn97 pniq gnrf2 gooa6 ,,yd 9rfJ airf:tiw =o.k.faogoaq grfJ ao
ri t�9^:s�sn.� rox J.rrfJ b9rim s sb 9varf .boixsq pni n9vioJai errJ
9911 50JO919 bns b9voigq.:- 'yIGuoiv9xcf JzdJ of noljibbs bas
cis f)eJJimdua evsrf bad ed fafuow npia ,pnib,af"Ja
I
,qy:J y°xsaaooen brrs rxonr_ -,o oild Jrwoaos oJn.i o�€-;J Jon a-Do b
b ;Y�it=iora3nicrrcd to
LR;res. Lnr� :rgawo 4rIJ ao r,,-- :..,Jrxs_pllggs otfJ ,PAaqatfw
M.€: xr Jrz o �,rr:i jc c �° 2 a[c + y 9rf t ir.fJ �w a9.►: x gc�•s,. --1 1ct
JnJm9paniusoa Jnd-I ovfrf .boi-ioq pnirtsvx9Jrri grid-
c);it bsJo97s brig ;bsvoagq.,.< Y yJ,-,voivs7q J ftl of no!Jibb6 bas
ns ,bpJ.timdua evnif brr'd ec: nPile .;pnlbrr4>_ta
267
-2-
application (#66057) requesting a variance to accomplish
such rearrangement and addition; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, for a number of years,
has studied the problem of signery within Brooklyn Center,
and has developed and recommended to the City Council a
proposed sign ordinance, which, among other things, contains
the following provisions:
SECTION 3-1104 DETAILED SIGN REQUIREMENTS FOR SIGNS
REQUIRING A PERMIT.
A. Commercial (C2 and C3 Zones)
1. Individual detached establishments or enter-
prises, except drive-in establishments and
motels, may have the following signs:
b. One freestanding identification sign on
each collector or arterial street the
establishment abuts if the building is
set back at least 50 feet from the street
on which the sign is located, except when
the establishment is part of an integrated
development (in that case, Section 3 below
applies) . The gross surface area of the
sign shall not exceed two per cent of the
gross first floor building area or 250
square feet, whichever is smaller, and it
shall not extend more than 20 feet above
street grade, provided, however, that the
following maximum sign areas shall apply:
Maximum sign area Maximum height of sign
using the 2% rule in relation to sign area
90 square feet 16 feet
130 square feet 17 feet
170 square feet 18 feet
210 square feet 19 feet
250 square feet 20 feet
3. Integrated commercial developments may have
one freestanding identification sign on each
collector or arterial street the development
abuts. Each sign shall not exceed one per
cent of the gross first floor building area
in the development or 250 square feet,
whichever is smaller, and shall not extend
more than 32 feet above ground level.
Regarding signing of a non-freestanding
type, sections l,a, l,c, and l,d, above
shall be applicable to individual
establishments within an integrated develop-
ment. ; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission had intended that the
permission for larger freestanding signs for integrated
commercial developments should be used for identification of
the entire integrated development only, and not for
individual uses within the integrated development; and
268
1
1
249
-3-
WffiUMAS, the applicant has proposed a sign which
would provide identification for individual establishments
within the Lynn Brook "integrated development" which sign
would not exceed the area or height which would be permitted
for an individual detached establishment, the area of said
sign being approximately 125 square feet, and the overall
height between 18 and 20 feet.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDS
TO THE CITY COUNCIL THAT approval be granted to a freestanding
sign not exceeding 250 square feet in area and 20 feet in
height above the centerline grade of Osseo Road adjacent
to this site (centerline grade of 861.00 feet above sea
level) , and further provided that there shall be no sign
message on the sign structure below 7 feet above centerline
grade of Osseo Road and that illumination for this sign shall
not interfere with the safe use of the adjacent roadway.
The resolution was duly seconded by Commissioner Robert
Grosshans and upon a vote being taken all voted in favor,
whereupon said resolution was adopted.
(Mssrs. Dorenfeld and Bogucki arrived at this point.)
The next application to be considered was that of
Lecon Properties, which requested a rezoning of property
west of Osseo Read and north of future 68th Avenue North
from its present R1 and Bl zoning to B3 (General Business) .
Mr. Stanley Wessin of Lecon Properties was present to
explain the rezoning request and also present were repre-
sentatives of Iten Chevrolet who expressed no disagreement
with the proposed rezoning. {
Member Vernon Ausen introduced the following resolution
1
and moved its adoption:
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTIQN NO, 67-2
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, on February 17, 1366,
adopted a Comprehensive Plan which it recommended to the
Council for adoption as the City' s Official Plan, and on
March 31, 1966, recommended a zoning ordinance and map to
the Council providing for a comprehensive rezoning of the
Village in accordance with the comprehensive plan previously
recommended; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, in developing the
Comprehensive Plan had recommended that the property south
of 69th Avenue and West of Osseo Road be put to commercial
uses, which planning concept was further recommended in the
commercial zoning proposed for this area on the comprehensive
zoning map; and
WHEREAS, in said zoning map, the proposed zoning districts
were set out according to the existing property lines and in
the absence of any proposed street network through these
vacant areas; and
2�d
i
�I
I
-4- 247,
WHEREAS, the applicant, in conjunction with the City
Engineering Staff has devised a road network for the area
and will shortly be submitting a preliminary plat of the
property, a preliminary drawing of which is now in evidence
before the Commission; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds that the proposed
B3 zoning for the property abutting Osseo Road and 68th
Avenue North is a proper zoning which is in accord with the
Comprehensive Plan.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDS
TO THE CITY COUNCIL THAT THE property which will be contained
within Lot 1 of Block 1, of future Northtown Plaza
2nd Addition (as per preliminary drawing dated February
28, 1967, on file) should be changed from its present
Rl and Bl zoning classification to B3 (General Business) .
The resolution was duly seconded by Commissioner Helmer
Engstrom and upon a vote being taken all voted in favor,
whereupon said resolution was duly passed and adopted.
The next application to be considered was Application
No. 67005 submitted by Bruce Hasselberg acting as an agent
for Shell Oil' Company.
The application requested rezoning from the present
R1 and RB zoning to B2 and a special use permit for a
service station on the property so zoned, the property
involved being that at the southwest corner of France
Avenue and Highway No. 100 (Tract A, R,LS. #1082 and
Parcel 2910 of Section 10) .
Both Mr. Hasselberg and Mr. Chazin, one of the owners
of the property involved, were present to discuss the appli-
cation. Following a lengthy hearing on the matter including
the gathering of comments from the applicants and interested
parties in attendance, the following action was taken.
Motion by Bogucki, seconded by Dorenfel.d, to close the
public hearing on Application No. 67005. Motion carried
unanimously.
Further discussion ensued by the Commission on the
application, culminating in the following action.
Motion by Ditter, seconded by Dorenfeld, to recommend
to the City Council that the' rezoning to B2 (Regional Business)
as requested in Application No. 67005 be denied for the
following reasons:
1. The requested zoning is not in agreement with the
comprehensive land use planning contained in
the Comprehensive Plan for Brooklyn Center;
2. The present zoning of RB for one of the parcels
in question and the proposed zoning to R5, both
of which are preimarily multiple dwelling zones,
are adequate for the property;
248
i
r
251
-5-
3. The proposed zoning is incompatible with the
residential elements in the existing neighborhood.
Further, that the special use permission requested for a
service station on the property also be denied, in that the
present zoning is inadequate for a service station use.
Motion carried unanimously.
The next application to be considered was No. 67006
submitted by Home Federal Savings and Loan Association. The
application requested approval of site and building plans
of a commercial building; a variance from Section 35-330 to
permit erection of a freestanding sign; and a variance to
permit a lesser building setback than is required by the
zoning Ordinance. The request for a variance to erect a
freestanding sign to be deferred until designs for the
sign have been prepared by the applicant.
Mr. Edward Baker, Architect for Home Federal, and
Mr. Blake Scattergood of Home Federal were present to discuss
the application with the Commission.
Following examination of the plan submitted and the
gathering of comments from those present, the following
action was taken.
Motion by Bogucki, seconded by Grosshans, to recommend
to the City Council that the site and building plans submitted
be approved, and that a variance be granted to allow a
setback of approximately 30 feet from the southeast property
line of the subject tract, due to the fact that a hardship
exists in utilizing the property due to its shape, caused
in part by the purchase by the County Highway Department of
excess right-of-way, recognizing that if the normal
acquisition of right-of-way had taken place in this area, the
setback proposed would be in excess of that normally required
along a major thoroughfare. Motion carried unanimously.
The next application to be considered was No. 67007
submitted by Wesley Reavely, the operator of the Standard
Oil Station at 6044 Osseo Road. The application requested
special use permission for the rental and storage of camping
trailers on the station property at 6044 Osseo Road.
Chairman Jensen read a letter submitted by Mr. Boyer
Palmer, the owner of the apartment property adjacent to the
Standard Oil Station who voiced objection to any activity
on the service station property which would tend to detract
from the appearance of his property.
Following a discussion of the application and the
gathering of comments, the following action was taken.
Motion by Engstrom, seconded by Grosshans, to recommend
to the City Council that approval be granted for the rental
of camping trailers only with the following restrictions:
1. That there be a maximum of six trailers on the
service station property;
1
1
1
253
2. That the trailers on the property be placed out
of the traffic flow areas on the station site;
3. That the special use permission would be in effect
for a period of one year from the date of Council
approval, to allow for review at that time to
determine whether the use shall be permitted to
continue;
4. That no signing for this additional use is being
considered or permitted at this time.
Motion carried unanimously.
Application No. 67008 was next to be considered. Sub-
mitted by Dayton Development Company, it requested a variance
from Section 35-330 to permit the erection of a freestanding
sign on the Goodyear retail store property at 5501 Xerxes
Avenue North. Mr. Martinson of Dayton Development Company
was present to discuss the application with the Commission.
Following discussion of the application, Mr. Ditter moved,
and Mr. Dorenfeld seconded., to table action on Application
No. 67008 until the study, meeting of the Commission on
March 30, 1967. Motion carried unanimously.
Application No. 67009 was the last item to be considered.
Submitted by Shopper's City, Inc. , it requested special use
permission to erect and operate a "garden store" operation
on the Shoppers' City parking lot between April: 1, 1967,
and July 15, 1967, with further permission to remove the
garden store building to the north side of the Shoppers'
City property.
Mr. Roth of Shoppers' City was present to explain that the
proposed garden store building would be built according to the
City's building code so that it vould be capable of with_standing
theizoves from the front of the Shoppers' City building,
3600 - 63rd Avenue North, to the rear (north) side of the
property.
Motion by Dorenfeld, seconded by Ausen, to recommend to
the City Council that the special use permission requested
in #67009 be granted and that the garden store operation be
permitted from April 1, 1967 to July 15, 1967, with the
garden store structure to be removed from the sales site to
a site adjacent to the north property line of the Shoppers'
City property by August 1, 1967. Motion carried unanimously.
The Commission discussed its proposed field trip which
was previously scheduled to be held on Saturday, March 18,
1967, and changed the date of the field trip to March 11, 1967,
at 9:30 A.M.
Motion by Dorenfeld, seconded by Ditter, that the meeting
be adjourned. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting
adjourned at 11:50 p.M.
WQIU�
Chas an
254
Minutes of the Proceedings of
the Planning Commission in the
City of Brooklyn Center in the County
of Hennepin and State of Minnesota
March 30, 1967
The Planning Commission met in special session and was
called to order by Chairman Robert Jensen at 8:00 P.M.
Roll Call: Chairman Robert Jensen, Vice Chairman Robert
Grosshans, Commissioners Vernon Ausen and Helmer Engstrom were
present.
The first application to be considered was No. 67010 sub-
'' mitted by Sears Roebuck and Company, 1297 Brookdale Center.
The application requested special use permission to allow a
retail sales operation (garden store and sporting goods) from
April 1, 1967 to July 1, 1967, involving outside storage
within a 68 by 71 foot fenced area on the west side of the
Sears store.
Following discussion of the request with the representative
of Sears, Mr. Edward Schlicting, the following action was
taken. Motion by Engstrom, seconded by Grosshans, to
recommend to the City Council that the special use permit
for outdoor sales and display within the fenced area to the
west of the Sears store be permitted from April 1, 1967 to
July 1, 1967. Motion carried unanimously.
The next application to be considered was No. 67008
submitted by Dayton Development Company. The application
requested a variance from Section 35-330 to permit erection
of a freestanding sign on the Goodyear retail store property
at 5501 Xerxes Avenue North. This request had been discussed
previously at the March 2nd meeting, and following further
discussion, the following action was taken.
Commissioner Vernon Ausen introduced the following
resolution and moved its adoption:
Planning Commission Resolution Nov 67-3
RESOLUTION APPROVING APPLICATION
NO. 67008 SUBMITTED BY DAYTON
DEVELOPMENT COMPANY
WHEREAS, Dayton Development Company has submitted Appli-
cation No. 67008 requesting a variance from Section 35-330
of the City' s ordinances to permit erection of a freestanding
sign on the Goodyear retail store/automotive service center
property at 5501 Xerxes Avenue North; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has found in the past that
hardship does in fact exist in relation to freestanding signery
on commercial properties, due to the fact that the present
zoning ordinance does not take into account this common and
necessary type of business activity (freestanding signing) ; and
1
1
1
FT B
-2-
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, recognizing this
deficiency in the present zoning ordinance, have studied the
problem during the past several years, both during and after
the community' s 11701" comprehensive planning study, and as a
result of this study has developed and recommended to the .City
Council a proposed sign ordinance which the Commission feels
is a proper and reasonable approach to the matter of signing,
including freestanding signing; and
WHEREAS, the Commission has continued to be presented
with various requests for freestanding signery in this period
before the Council has had an opportunity to adopt an effective
and reasonable Sign Ordinance, and in the absence of such an
ordinance, has endeavored to avoid being arbitrary by applying
the standards set out in the Commission's proposed Sign Ordinance;
° and
c�
A-C
WHEREAS, the following standards of the Commission' s pro-
posed Sign Ordinance are especially pertinent to the instant
application:
8. Freestanding signs located within 25 feet of the
street right-of-way line of a corner use site shall
have a minimum vertical clearance of 12 feet above
the centerline grade of the street.
9. The supporting column(s) of a freestanding sign
shall not materially impede vision between a height
of two and one half (2' ) and seven and one half (7�)
feet above the centerline grade of the street, except
when set back ten (10) or more feet from the street
right-of-way line.
1. Individual detached establishments or enterprises,
except drive-in establishments and motels, may have
the following signs:
a. Wall signs on each wall equal to the number of
public entrances plus one, provided the total
area of these signs does not exceed the following
percentage of the area of the wall supporting
the signs:
10% of the first 15 feet in vertical height;
plus 5% of the second 15 feet in height; plus
A% of the area above 30 feet in height.
Wall signs for identification may project 24
inches above the roof level, provided that the
sign does not extend more than thirty-two feet
above ground level.
b. One freestanding identification sign on each
collector or arterial street the establishment
abuts if the building is set back at least 50
feet from the street on which the sign is
located, except when the establishment is part
of an integrated development (in that case,
Section 3 below applies) . The gross surface area
of the sign shall not exceed two per cent of the
gross first floor building area or 250 square
feet, whichever is smaller, and it shall not
extend more than 20 feet above street grade,
provided, however, that the following maximum
sign areas shall apply:
1
1
1
-3-
Maximum sign area Maximum height of sign
using the 2% rule in relation to sign area
90 square feet 16 feet
130 square feet 17 feet
170 square feet 18 feet
210 square feet 19 feet
250 square feet 20 feet and;
WHEREAS, using the above-stated standards, this property
would be permitted a freestanding sign 18 feet in height, and
170 square feet in area; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds that a hardship
does in fact exist in the application of the present zoning
regulations relating to signs to this property.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby recommended to the City
Council that a freestanding sign be permitted on the property
at 5501 Xerxes Avenue North, in accordance with the following
conditions and restrictions:
a) the sign shall not exceed 170 square feet
in area, 18 feet in total height above the
centerline grade of the street adjacent to
the sign, and shall provide minimum vertical
clearance as outlined in points 8. and 9. above;
b) since the standards of the Commission' s
ordinance recommendation are being used
in determining the freestanding sign to be
permitted, the wall signs to be installed
on this building shall also adhere to the
standards set out above for such wall signs.
The resolution was duly seconded by Commission Helmer
Engstrom and upon a vote 'being taken, all voted in favor,
whereupon said resolution was adopted.
Mr. H. S. Wessin of Lecon Properties appeared to represent
the next application, No. 67011, requesting approval of the
preliminary plat of "Northtown Plaza 2nd Addition" . The area
proposed for platting lies south and west of the intersection
of 69th Avenue North and Osseo Road.
Following discussion of the proposed plat, the following
action was taken. Motion by Grosshans, seconded by Ausen, to
recommend to the City Council that the preliminary plat of
Northtown Plaza 2nd Addition be approved. Motion carried
unanimously.
The last application to be considered was No. 67003
submitted by Red Owl Stores, Inc. , requesting a variance from
Section 35-330 to permit erection of a freestanding sign on
the property at 5425 Xerxes Avenue North. The application had
previously been discussed at the February 2nd and 23rd meetings,
and following further discussion, the following action was
taken.
1
1
1
-4-
Commissioner Helmer Engstrom introduced the following
resolution and moved its adoption:
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 67-4
RESOLUTION APPROVING APPLICATION
NO. 67008 113UBMITTED BY RED OWL
STORES, INC.
WHEREAS, Red Owl Stores Inc. has submitted Application
No. 67008 requesting a variance from Section 35-330 of the City' s
ordinances to permit erection of a freestanding sign on their
property at 5425 Xerxes Avenue North; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has found in the past
that hardship does in fact exist in relation to freestanding
signery on commercial properties, due to the fact that the
present zoning ordinance does not take into account this
common and necessary type of business activity (freestanding
signing) ; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, recognizing this d i"
ciency in the present zoning ordinance, have studied the prob]Le%
during the past several years, both during and after the
community's "701" comprehensive planning study, and as a
result of this study has developed and recommended to the
City Council a proposed sign ordinance which the Commission
feels is a proper and reasonable approach to the matter of
signing, including freestanding signing; and
WHEREAS, the Commission has continued to be presented with
variance requests for freestanding signery in this period
before the Council has had an opportunity to adopt an effective
and reasonable Sign Ordinance, and in the absence of such an
ordinance, has endeavored to avoid being arbitrary by applying
the standards set out in the Commission' s proposed Sign
Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, the following standards of the Commission' s pro-
posed Sign Ordinance are Especially pertinent to the instant
application:
1. Individual detached establishments or enterprises,
except drive-in establishments and motels, may have
the following signs:
b. One freestanding identification sign on each
collector or arterial street the establishment
abuts if the building is set back at least 50 feet
from the street on which the sign is located,
i
i
i
I
�!
I
�� y
4` / ...
k � �. ,�� '. '. ..
,.j
,. y
. . '1�4f+
I �t F �..
.1.' .. °.
.� �.
� Y x
t"a
. 1��'ir(
..
'.i
��
Mu'['
6
r
°, r
�.1
� .t.
..err,
-5-
except when the establishment is part of an
integrated development (in that case, Section 3
below applies) . The gross surface area of the
sign shall not exceed two per cent of the gross
first floor building area or 250 square feet,
whichever is smaller, and it shall not extend more
than 20 feet above street grade, provided, however,
that the following maximum sign areas shall apply:
Maximum sign area Maximum height of sign
using the 2% rule in relation to sign areas
90 square feet 16 feet
130 square feet 17 feet
170 square feet 18 feet
210 square feet 19 feet
250 square feet 20 feet
and;
WHEREAS, the Commission, in accordance with the above-
stated standards considers the Red Owl retail operation to be
an "individual detached establishment or enterprise" for the
purposes of this variance request; and
WHEREAS, using the above-stated standards, this property
would be permitted a freestanding sign 20 feet in height, and
250 square feet in area; and
WHEREAS, although the applicant has endeavored to make a
case for allowing him to 'have a sign greater in size than the
Commission would ordinarily consider through application of the
above standards by arguing that his sign should be made visible
from Highway #100 to the southwest, the Commission finds that
such an argument does not demand unusual treatment of this
sign request; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds that a hardship
does in fact exist in the application of the present zoning
regulations relating to signs to this property.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby recommended to the City
Council that a freestanding sign be permitted on the property
at 5425 Xerxes Avenue North, in accordance with the following
conditions and restrictions:
a) the sign shall not exceed 250 square feet in area and
20 feet in height, such height being measured from
the finished floor grade of the Red Owl building
to the uppermost point of the owl' s head on the
sign, thereby excluding the sign' s structural
elements above the owl' s head.
The resolution was duly seconded by Commisssioner Robert
Grosshans and upon a vote being taken, all voted in favor,
whereupon said resolution was adopted.
The Commission discussed the petition which had been deliverer
to it relating to the possibility of a YMCA facility being
located in the Northwest Service Area. The Commissioners voiced
approval of this concept and indicated their approval by signing
the petition requesting the Second Century Planning Committee
to consider the Northwest Service Area as its location.
Motion by Engstrom, seconded by Ausen, that the meeting
be adjourned. The meeting adjourned at 9• P.M.
Chai
� r.
_ °`;i.-
�Tt
t
..�.
k,
• �"
a
ir+r',
''�
�y
9��!
t
`�Ci
s.� __�
6
Minutes of the Proceedings of
the Planning Commission in the
City of Brooklyn Center in the County
of Hennepin and State of Minnesota
April 6, 1967
The Planning Commission met in regular session and was
called to order by Vice Chairman Robert Grosshans at 7:45 P.M.
Roll Call: Vice Chairman Robert Grosshans, Commissioners
Adrian Dorenfeld, Vernon Ausen, Henry Bogucki and Paul Ditter
were present.
Motion by Bogucki, seconded by Ditter, to approve the
minutes of the meetings of February 23rd and March 2nd, 1967.
Motion carried unanimously.,
The first application to be considered was 0 2
PP No. 67 1
submitted by the Center Development Company. The application
requested approval of the site plan of an apartment develop-
ment, and a variance from 35-401 to permit a greater number
of dwelling units on the property than is permitted by
zoning regulations. In addition to these two requests, the
applicant orally requested that approval also be granted to
the building plans of the structures to be built on the
apartment development site. The property involved in the appli-
cation is Tract B of R.L.S. #1186, lying north of County Road
10 between Xerxes Avenue North and Shingle Creek.
Mr. Chazin, and his Architect, Stanley Fishman, presented
plans of the apartment project and explained them to the
Commission and the audience. Following this presentation, a
discussion ensued between the Commission and the applicant,
and comments from the audience were solicited.
Following the hearing on the matter, the following
action was taken. Motion by Bogucki, seconded by Dorenfeld,
that the following is the Planning Commission' s recommendation
with regard to Application No. 670121
A. That the variance on density being requested in
this application be denied in that it does not
meet the standards for variance as set out in the
City' s Zoning Ordinance;
B. That the site and building plans submitted be
approved, with the following stipulations, conditions,
and alterations:
1) That the overall density of the apartment
project does not exceed the standards set
out in the Zoning Ordinance, which, given
the site plan submitted (dated March 9, 1967),
requires the deletion of 36 dwelling units;
2) That all open off-street parking areas
having more than 6 parking spaces shall be
effectively screened from any adjacent
residential lots by a densely planted hedge
: p
1
1
1
-t-
at least 4 feet high or by a solid wall
or solid fence at least 4 feet high. Such
hedge, wall, or fence shall in no case
exceed 6 feet in height. The screening shall
not be within 15 feet of a street. ;
3) That a performance agreement and performance
bond (the amount to be determined by the
City Manager) be submitted to the City to
guarantee the site improvements set out
in the plans ;submitted, or required by
Ordinance;
4) That the parking and driving areas as set
s; out on the site plan dated March 9, 1967,
shall be revised to conform to the City' s
�« dimensional standards for parking and
driving areas.
5) That the building plans be approved subject
to the approval of the Building Inspector' s
approval with relation to the applicable
building codes.
6) No building permits are to be issued until
satisfactory utilities plans have been approved
by the City Engineer.
Motion carried unanimously.
The second application to be considered was Application
No. 67013 submitted by Brooklyn Center Industrial Park, Inc.
The application requested approval of the preliminary plat
of "Brooklyn Plaza Addition" . The property within the proposed
plat lies within the northwest quadrant of the intersection
of 65th and Humboldt Avenues North. Mr. James Lushine of
B.C.I.P. Inc. was present to describe the plat to the
Commission.
Following the hearing on the matter, and discussion of
the plat with the applicant, the following action was taken.
Motion by Dorenfeld, seconded by Ditter, to recommend to
the City Council that the preliminary plat of "Brooklyn
Plaza Addition" be approved as submitted, with the recognition
that the zoning lines will be adjusted during the comprehensive
rezoning to make the property within this plat entirely R5
zoning rather than the present R5 - 12 combination. Motion
carried unanimously.
The next application to be considered was No. 67014
submitted by Dale Embretson. The application requested
approval of site and building plans for an apartment develop-
ment on the northeast and southeast corners of the inter-
section of 67th and Humboldt Avenues North. (Lots 3 and 4,
Block 1, Lots 1 and 2, Block 3, Hi Crest Square Addition)
Following discussion of the plans submitted with the
applicant, the following action was taken. Motion by Ditter,
1
1
1
-3-
seconded by Bogucki, to recommend to the City Council that
the site and building plans submitted in conjunction with
Application No. 67014 be approved with the following conditions:
1. That the building setback on Humboldt Avenue
be no less than 50 feet;
2. That the building plans submitted are subject
to the Building Inspector' s approval as to the
applicable building codes;
3. That the performance agreement and performance
bond (in an amount to be determined by the
City Manager) be submitted to the City to
guarantee the site improvements set out in
the plans submitted, or required by ordinance.
Motion carried unanimously.
Mr. and Mrs. Elmer Langren appeared with reference to
the next application, No. 67015. Mr. Langren, the operator
of the Spur Station at 6830 Osseo Road, requested through
the application that special use permission to store and
rent trailers on the premises of the service station be
granted. He noted that he had been made aware of the
previous special use permit issued to the previous operator
of the station, but that that permission had been limited
to a maximum of three trailers.
Following discussion of the application, the following
action was taken by the Commission. Motion by Bogucki,
seconded by Ditter, to recommend to the City Council that
special use permission be granted for the storage and
rental of trailers on the premises of the service station
at 6830 Osseo Road with the following conditions:
1. That a maximum of 15 trailers at any one
time be permitted;
2. That .the length of such permission is for
a period of two years from this date;
3. That a maximum of three trailers be on display
in the front portion of the service station
property.
Motion carried unanimously.
The last application to be considered was No. 67016
submitted by Mr. Jerry Harrington, requesting approval of
site and building plans for an apartment development in the
southeast quadrant of the intersection of 65th and Camden
Avenues North. The Commission discussed with the applicant
the disparity between the type of development Mr. Harrington
proposed and the type of development which the Commission
and Council had approved in concept in the Comprehensive
Plan. The Commission noted that the development might, in fact,
be detrimental to the development of the area near 65th
1
1
1
-4-
and Lyndale Avenues North. The applicant discussed the
points raised with the Commission but asked that action
be taken on the site and building plans submitted.
Motion by Bogucki, seconded by Dorenfeld, to recommend
to the City Council that the site and building plans
submitted in conjunction with Application No. 67016 be
approved as submitted with the following conditions:
1. That the building plans be subject to the
approval of the Building Inspector with regard
to the applicable building codes;
.,�. 2. That a performance agreement and performance
�1 bond (in an amount to be determined by the City
Manager) be submitted to the City to guarantee
the site improvements set out in the plans
submitted, or required by ordinance.
Voting in favor of the motion were Ditter, Dorenfeld, and
Bogucki; voting against were Ausen and Grosshans. Motion
carried.
Mr. Ausen noted with reference to his negative vote
that he believes the needs of the City are paramount to the
needs of the individual developer and that the proposed
apartment development would hinder the development of the
65th and Lyndale area. Mr. Bogucki noted that he would
have made the motion to deny the application if he thought
it could have been done legally.
Motion by Dorenfeld, seconded by Bogucki, that the meeting
be adjourned. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting
adjourned at 11:45 P.M.
Chai
'Y �$ � _�F
StEi
Minutes of the Proceedings of the
Planning Commission in the
City of Brooklyn Center in the County
of Hennepin and State of Minnesota_
April 27, 1967
The Planning Commission met in special session and was
called to order by Chairman Robert Jensen at 7:35 P.Mo
Roll Call: Chairman Robert Jensen, Vice-Chairman
Robert Grosshans, Commissioners Paul Ditter, Henry Bogucki,
Vernon Ausen, and Helmer Engstrom were present.
The majority of the evening was spent in discussion of
'-
the possible development of a community walkway P lan, one
of the goals of the Comprehensive Plan, and the possible
implementation of such a plan if one were to be developed.
Mr. VanEeckhout, the City Engineer, explained the probable
cost of such a program, and some of the problems which might
be encountered in installing a system of walkways. Following
this discussion, Mr. Jensen appointed Mssrs. Bogucki and
Ditter as a subcommittee to meet with the Engineer and
develop a tentative plan for the Commission to study at
a future study meeting.
Mr. Jensen read a letter to the Commission which he
had received from the "Friends of the Brooklyn Center Library" ,
Mrs. James A. MacKinnon, Secretary. The letter requested
any historical information the Commission might have
relating to Brooklyn Center, and also a brief history of
the Commission itself. Mr. Jensen directed the Secretary
of the Commission to respond to these requests.
As there were no further items to be discussed, Mr.
Bogucki moved, and Mr. Engstrom seconded, that the meeting
be adjourned. Motion carried unanimously.
Chairm
1
1
1
Minutes of the Proceedings
of the Planning Commission in
the City of Brooklyn Center in
the County of Hennepin and State of Minnesota
May 4, 1967
The Planning Commission met in regular session and was
called to order by Chairman Robert Jensen at 7:40 P.M.
Roll Call: Chairman Robert Jensen, Commissioners Adrian
Dorenfeld, Helmer Engstrom and Henry Bogucki were present.
Commissioners Grosshans and Ditter arrived during the meeting
as noted.
Motion by Bogucki, seconded by Dorenfeld, to approve the
minutes of the regular meeting of April 6, 1967, and the
special meetings of March 30, and April 27, 1967. Motion
carried unanimously.
The first application to be considered was a request by
Mr. Robert Anderson (No. 67017) for a variance from Section
35-401 to permit construction of an attached garage less than
the required five feet from the west property line of the
property at 3207 - 63rd Avenue North (Lot 10, Block 2, Garden
City 2nd Addition) . Mr. Anderson was present and discussed his
request with the Commission. Mr. Jensen read a letter from
the neighbor adjoining this property to the west at 3213 - 63rd
Avenue north, Mr. and Mrs. Therriault, which stated no objection
to a variance to the side yard setback requirements.
Following further discussion on the matter by the Commission,
the following action was ta?ten. Motion by Bogucki, seconded by
Engstrom, that it is the finding of the Planning Commission
that the standards for variance have been met by Application
No. 67017, and it is hereby recommended to the City Council
that a variance from Section 35-401 be permitted to allow
construction of an attached garage on the existing home at
3207 - 63rd Avenue North, provided that the attached garage is
no greater than 20 feet in width. Motion carried unanimously.
The next application to be considered was No. 67018
submitted by James Lushine for Brooklyn Center Industrial
Park, Inc. The application requested approval of the preliminary
plat of "Brooklyn Plaza 1st Addition" , which plat consists of
the former Earle Brown Farm. Mr. Lushine was present and
discussed the proposed plat with the Commission, following
which Mr. Poss and Mr. Van Eeckhout of the City Staff commented
on the adequacy of the plat. It was noted that a request had
been submitted to the City for vacation of James Avenue North
between 65th and 69th Avenues North, but no action had yet
been taken on the request.
Motion by Engstrom, seconded by Dorenfeld, to recommend to
the City Council that approval be granted to the preliminary
plat of "Brooklyn Plaza 1st Addition" with the stipulation that
James Avenue as presently dedicated for public street purposes
between 65th and 69th Avenues North be shown on the plat unless
a vacation of James Avenue North takes place prior to the
recording of the final plat; if this is the case, it is
1
1
1
ti
-2-
suggested that James Avenue extend southward from 69th Avenue
North to the south property line of the Berean Church property.
Motion carried unanimously.
The next application to be considered was No. 67023 sub-
mitted by Mobil Oil Corporation. The application requested
a special use permit and approval to permit construction of a
service station at the southeast corner of the intersection of
County Road 10 and Xerxes Avenue North (Tract A. R.L.S. #1151) .
trtsrrs. Kneuffel and Severson, representatives of Mobil Oil,
were present to discuss the application with the Commission.
These gentlemen reviewed with the Commission the previous history
of this property, including the Commission' s and Council' s
previous approval of plans and special use permit for the
station in 1965, culminating in the acquisition of a building
permit which was never used due to problems in gaining access
to County Road No. 10.
Following this discussion, the following action was
taken. Motion by Dorenfeld, seconded by Engstrom, to recommend
to the City Council that, as the standards for the issuance
of special use permits have been met by this application,
approval be granted to the special use permit to build and
operate a service station at the southeast corner of the
intersection of County Road No. 10 and Xerxes Avenue North
in accordance with the site and building plans submitted.
Further, that the approval of the special use permit and plans
being conditioned upon the following:
1) In the event that the rear driveway from the
Brookdale parking lot should become a through-
way, the City Council may require the driveway
to be closed;
2) That a freestanding sign not exceeding 16 feet
in height is approved as located on the site
plan submitted;
3) That the approval of the building plans is
contingent upon final approval of the Building
Inspector as to applicable building codes.
Voting in favor of the motion were Dorenfeld, Engstrom, Jensen,
and Bogucki. Not voting was Mr. Grosshans who had arrived during
the discussion of the application. Motion carried.
Application No. 67019 submitted by Bermel-Smaby Realty,
Inc. , was next heard. The application contained a request for
rezoning from R1 (single family residential) to RB (residential-
business) for the property at 6500 Osseo Road (Tracts B and C,
Brooklane Addition) . Mr. Bermel and Mr. Sandstrom of Bermel-
Smaby were present and explained what had transpired since
the withdrawal of their original application for rezoning (67001)
in relation to the possibility of combining their property with
properties to the north or working in conjunction with property
owners to the north. They noted that they had had no success
in that direction.
Following an extensive hearing on the matter including
comments from those notified of the hearing, the following
1
1
1
(i
-3-
action was taken. Motion by Bogucki, seconded by Engstrom, to
recommend to the City Council that approval be granted to the
rezoning of Tracts B and C, Brooklane Addition, to RB with the
understanding that such zoning shall be applied to the pro-
perty following the removal of the present house on the property
and submission of site and building plans for a new office
building to be constructed on the property. Further, that
following the Comprehensive Rezoning of the City, the RB zoning
of this property shall become "C1-Office Zoning" .
Voting in favor of the motion were Bogucki, Jensen, Engstrom,
and rrosshans. Not voting was Mr. Ditter who had arrived
during the discussion of the application. Motion carried.
Mr. Larson of Brookdale Ford was present to represent the
next application, No. 67020, submitted by Dayton Development
Company. The application requested approval of the site and
building plans of a commercial building to be constructed on
the property at 2500 County Road 10 (Lot 1, Block 1, Brookdale
First Addition) , such building to be used as an auto sale®
office.
Following discussion of the plans submitted, Engstrom
moved and Grosshans seconded to recommend to the City Council
that the site and building plans submitted in conjunction
with Application No. 67020 be approved. Motion carried
unanimously.
The final application to be considered was No. 67022
submitted by Arkay Construction Company. The application
consisted of a request for approval of the site and building
plans for an addition to a commercial building (Northbrook
Clinic) , located at 5840 North Lilac Drive. Following
examination of the site and building plans submitted, Bogucki
moved and Ditter seconded to recommend to the City Council
that the site and building plans be approved, with the
stipulation that screening around the parking area to the
east of the Clinic be installed in accordance with the require-
ments of the zoning ordinance. Motion carried unanimously.
Chairman Jensen asked Mr. Dorenfeld to serve with Mr.
Ditter and Mr. Bogucki on the sidewalk subcommittee that had
been appointed at the meeting of April 27th, to which Mr.
Dorenfeld agreed.
Motion by Ditter, seconded by Dorenfeld, that the meeting
be adjourned. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting
adjourned at 10:00 P.M.
rm
h a i
82
1
1
Minutes of the Proceedings of
the Planning Commission in the
City of Brooklyn Center in the County
of Hennepin and State of Minnesota
May 18, 1967
The Planning Commission met in special session and was
called to order by Chairman Robert Jensen at 7:35 P.M.
Roll Call: Chairman Robert Jensen, Commissioners Adrian
Dorenfeld, Helmer Engstrom, Vernon Ausen, Henry Bogucki and
Paul Ditter were present. Mr. Grosshans arrived later in the
meeting as noted.
The first application to be considered was No. 67025
submitted by James Wiensch of Wiensch Construction Company. The
application requested approval of the preliminary plat of "Wiensch
Addition" , and approval of site and building plans of a townhouse
development to be built on property within Wiensch Addition.
The property involved in the application is generally bounded
by the following: Camden Avenue (extended) on the east; 65th
Avenue on the south; the east property lines of the property
on the east side of Bryant Avenue on the west; and 67th (extended)
on the north.
Mr. Wiensch and his architect, Mr. Miller, were present to
discuss the proposed subdivision and plans with the Commission.
Following an examination and discussion of the proposed plat
and plans, the following actions were taken.
Motion by Bogucki, seconded by Engstrom, to recommend to
the City Council that the preliminary plat of "Wiensch Addition"
be approved as submitted. Motion carried unanimously.
Motion by Bogucki, seconded by Engstrom, to recommend to
the City Council that the site and building plans for a townhouse
development to be built on future Lot 1, Block 1, Wiensch
Addition, be approved, with the following stipulations and
conditions:
1. That opaque screening be provided along the west
property line of the townhouse project except at
the stub street of 66th Avenue North; such opaque
screening to be in accordance with the standards
of Section 35-710 as to the type and size of the
screening devices;
2. That the 92 units shown on the plans are permissible
in relation to the density standards of the Zoning
Ordinance for the 11,37 acres in the property, but
if there is question as to whether or not a variance
is necessary due to the "rounding off" of 11.365
acres to 11.37 acres, the Council may indicate that
one of the townhouse units be deleted=
3. That the interior curbing along parking and driving
areas be of concrete construction;
4. Approval of the building plans submitted is contingent
upon final approval of the building inspector as to
applicable building codes;
1
1
1
r-2-
5. No building permits are to be issued until
satisfactory utilities plans have been approved
by the City Engineer;
6. That a performance agreement and performance bond
(the amount to be determined by the City Manager)
be submitted to the City to guarantee the site
improvements set out in the plans submitted, or
required by ordinance, the bond and agreement to
be for a period of 30 months from the date of
the issuance of the building permit;
7. The final plat of "Wiensch Addition" is to be
recorded prior to issuance of building permits for
the project.
voting in favor of the motion were Dorenfeld, Engstrom, Ausen,
Jensen, Bogucki, and Ditter. Not voting was Grosshans who had
arrived during the discussion of the application. Motion carried.
Application No. 67024 submitted by Roland L. Erickson was
next considered. The application requested approval of the
preliminary plat of property generally bounded by the following:
Lyndale Avenue (T.H. #169) on the east; 69th Avenue on the
south; Aldrich Avenue on the west; and 71st Avenue on the north.
Following discussion of the proposed plat, the following
action was taken. Motion by Dorenfeld, seconded by Ditter, to
recommend to the City Council that the preliminary plat submitted
by Roland L. Erickson in conjunction with Application No. 67024
be approved with the addition of a 36 foot wide street and utilities
easement along the east side of Blocks 1 and 2, where they abut
Trunk Highway No. 169. Motion carried unanimously.
The last items to be considered were Applications No. 67026
and 67027, requesting, respectfully, approval of the preliminary
plat of "Twin Lake North Addition" and rezoning from R1 (single
family residential) to R3 (townhouse) and R5 (walk-up - 2� story) .
Both applications involved the property generally bounded by the
following; 60th Avenue (extended) ; the west lot lines of the
properties on the west side of June Avenue; 58th Avenue (County
Road No. 10) ; and the west City limits. Mr. Darrel Farr, the
developer of a proposed townhouse and apartment project on the
property, and his architects, Msrrs. Hysel and Baldwin, were
present to present the applications to the Commission.
Following a lengthy hearing during which comments were
solicited from the applicant and those persons notified of the
hearing, the following actions were taken.
Motion by Bogucki, seconded by Dorenfeld, to close the
public hearings on Applications 67026 and 67027. Motion carried
unanimously.
Motion by Dorenfeld, seconded by Ditter, to table appli-
cation No. 67026 and 67027, and take them under advisement for
discussion at the Commission's study meeting, with the proviso
that notification of the Commission' s recommendation on the
OL
1
1
1
-3-
applications and the date of the Council' s hearing of the
matter be mailed to the persons notified of tonights hearing.
Motion carried unanimously.
Motion by Bogucki, seconded by Grosshans, that the meeting
be adjourned. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned
at 11:30 P.M.
7
Chai
1
1
1
Minutes of the Proceedings of the
Planning Commission in the
City of Brooklyn Center in the County
of Hennepin and State of Minnesota _
May 25, 1967
The Planning Commission met in special session and
was called to order by Chairman Robert Jensen at 7:40 P.M.
Roll Call: Chairman Robert Jensen, Vice Chairman
Robert Grosshans, Commissioners Vernon Ausen, Henry Bogucki,
Helmer Engstrom, Adrian Dorenfeld, and Paul Ditter were
present.
Chairman Jensen opened the meeting to consideration of
Applications 67026 and 67027 which had been tabled at the
Commission' s May 18th meeting, following the holding of
public hearings on the Applications. Application 67026
requested approval of the preliminary plat of "Twin Lake
North Addition" , and Application 67027 requested rezoning
of the property within the subdivision from R1 (single
family residential) to R3 (townhouse) and R5 (walk-up
apartments) . The property involved in these applications
is generally bounded by the following: 60th Avenue (extended) ;
the west lot lines of the properties on the west side of
June Avenue; 58th Avenue (County Road No. 10) ; and the west
City Limits.
The Commission discussed the information received on
the May 18th meeting relating to these applications, and
examined the requests in light of this information and in
relation to the Comprehensive Plan and planning principles.
Following lengthy discussion of the requests, the following
actions were taken.
Motion by Bogucki, seconded by Ausen, to recommend to
the City Council that approval be granted to the preliminary
plat of "Twin Lake North Addition" as submitted by Darrel
Farr in Application No. 67026. Motion carried unanimously.
Motion by Bogucki, seconded by Ausen, to recommend to
the City Council that approval be granted to Application
No. 67027 submitted by Darrel Farr, rezoning the property
contained within the proposed "Twin Lake North Addition"
from Rl (single family residential) as follows:
a) Outlot 1 to be R3 (Townhouse) ;
b) Outlot 2 to be R5 (Walk-up Apartments) .
Motion carried unanimously..
Mr. Van Eeckhout discussed a possible sidewalk instal-
lation program with the Commission.
Chairman Jensen received a letter of protest to the Farr
applications acted upon previously in the evening from Mrs.
Braun of 5825 June Avenue for placement in the files. The
Commission discussed its actions on the applications with
Mrs. Braun.
Motion by Engstrom, seconded by Dorenfeld, that the
meeting be adjourned. Motion carried unanimously. The
meeting adjourned at 10.30 P.M.
(;U (0
Chaff a
t �'
L {�
101
Minutes of the Proceedings of
the Planning Commission in
the City of Brooklyn Center in the
County of Hennepin and State of Minnesota
June 1, 1967
The Planning Commission met in regular session and was
called to order by vice Chairman Robert Grosshans at 7:35 P.M.
Roll Call: vice Chairman Robert Grosshans, Commissioners
Henry Bogucki, Vernon Ausen, Helmer Engstrom, and Adrian Doren-
feld were present. Mr. Ditter arrived during the meeting as noted.
The first application to be considered was No. 67028 submitted
by Inter City Builders (for Thomas Kotten) requesting a variance
from Section 35-401 to permit construction of an attached garage
less than the required five feet from the west side property line
at 1306 - 72nd Avenue North. Mr. Thomas Kotten, owner of the
property, was present, and explained to the Commission that he
wishes to build a 22 foot wide garage which would be four feet
from the side lot line at its front, and five feet at its rear.
Following discussion of the application, the following action
was taken. Motion by Bogucki, seconded by Dorenfeld, that it is
the finding of the Planning Commission that a hardship would in
fact result if the setback requirement of the zoning ordinance were
strictly applied in this instance, as the side lot lines of the
property in question diverge from south to north, rather than
being parallel. It is therefore recommended to the City Council
that a variance from Section 35-401 be granted, and a four foot
setback be permitted along the west property line for the
construction of an attached garage on the home at 1306 - 72nd
Avenue North. voting in favor of the motion were Bogucki,
Grosshans, Engstrom, and Dorenfeld. Not voting was Ditter, who
had arrived during the discussion of the application, and Mr.
Ausen. Motion carried.
The next application to be considered was No. 67029 submitted
by William J. Heidelberger, which application requested special
use permission to construct a duplex dwelling at 5350 - 5354
Dupont Avenue North.
Following discussion of the application between Mr. Heidel-
berger and the Commission, the following action was taken. Motion
by Ditter, seconded by Engstrom, to recommend to the City Council
that special use permission be granted for the construction of a
duplex dwelling on the property at 5350 - 5354 Dupont Avenue North,
in that the request meets the standards for special use permits
set out in the zoning ordinance, and also in light of the fact
that the proposed zoning for the area is an "R2" classification
which would allow duplex dwellings as permitted uses. Motion
carried unanimously.
Motion by Bogucki, seconded by Dorenfeld, to approve the
minutes of the regular meeting of May 4, 1967, and the special
meetings of May 18th and 25th, 1967. Motion carried unanimously.
Following further discussion of miscellaneous matters of
interest to the Commission, member Dorenfeld moved and Ditter
seconded that the meeting be adjourned. The motion carried
unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 9:30 P.M.
Chairman
m �.�}
Minutes of the Proceedings of
the Planning Commission in the
City of Brooklyn Center in the County
of Hennepin and State of Minnesota
June 22, 1967
The Planning Commission met in special session and was
called to order by Vice Chairman Robert Grosshans at 7:45 P.M.
Roll Call : Vice Chairman Robert Grosshans, Commissioners
Vernon Ausen, Paul Ditter and Henry Bogucki were present.
The first application to be considered was No. 67030 sub-
mitted by Harry F. DeZiel of United Land, Inc. , requesting
rezoning of the property at 6236 Osseo Road (Parcel 5050, Plat
89100) , from its present R1 Single Family Residential classifi-
cation to B2 Regional Business zoning.
Mr. DeZiel and a Mr. Ivan Lundstrom of James Refrigeration
Company were present to discuss with the Commission the
requested rezoning. They related to the Commission that the
P.D.Q. Food Store Chain was interested in locating one of its
retail stores on this property and that the James Refrigeration
Company was the supplier of the equipment within these stores,
hence their interest in the rezoning request.
The Chair called for comments from those notified of the
hearing and received both oral comments from those persons
present and written comments from those persons not in attendance.
Further discussion on the application ensued, culminating in
the following action.
Motion by Bogucki, seconded by Ditter, to recommend to the
City Council that the rezoning of the property at 6236 Osseo
Road (Parcel 5050, Plat 89100) from Rl Single Family Residential
to B2 Regional Business be denied, and for the following reasons,.
1. The commercial retail uses which would be permitted
by the requested B2 zoning classification would not
be in keeping with the planning goals of the City
for the Osseo Road, as stated in the City's
Comprehensive Plan, which goals were developed to
safeguard the health, safety, and welfare of the
community.
2. The singular development of this or any other
similarly sized parcel is considered by the
Commission to be a piecemeal manner of redevelop-
ment and would, in many instances, preclude the
accomplishment of the City's avowed development
goals for the Osseo Road.
Motion carried uanimously.
Grosshans
Mr. noted for those present that this application
would appear on the City Council's agenda of July 24, 1967,
as the applicant had stated that he would be unable to be in
attendance at an earlier meeting.
1
1
1
145
-2-
The next application to be considered was No. 67031 sub-
mitted by Richard Cameron. The application requested two
variances from the requirements of the zoning ordinance, the
first being from Section 35-601, to permit the use of a
platted lot less than 70% of the size normally required by the
ordinance; secondly, a variance was requested from Section 35-401
to permit the construction of a house on the property with a
lesser side yard setback than is required by the zoning ordinance.
The Commission discussed the variance request with Mr. Cameron,
and as there were no persons present who had been notified of
the hearing, the reading of the list of property owners was
dispensed with by the Chair.
Motion by Ditter, seconded by Bogucki, to recommend to the
City Council that the necessary variances be granted to Mr.
Richard Cameron for the property at 5444 Humboldt Avenue North
(Lot 26, Block 2, Fairhaven Park Addition) as contained in
Application No. 67031, to utilize the property for the construction
of a single family home, the variances being required to permit
the usage of the lot of a size less than 70% of the size required
by the present ordinance and a variance to permit a sideyard
setback along the north property line to be 5 feet rather than
the 10 feet normally required, the reason for granting these
variances being that the imposition of the strict requirements
of the zoning ordinance upon the usage of this lot for single
family dwelling purposes would in fact be an undue hardship on
the ownez of the property. Motion carried unanimously.
The last application to be considered was No. 67032 sub-
mitted by Sipe Bros. Inc. The application requested approval
of the site and building plans of alterations and additions
to the existing Texaco Service Station at 6810 Osseo Road.
Mr. William Sipe of Sipe Bros. Inc. and Mssrs. Walter Sargent
and Russell Maloney of Texaco were present to discuss the
plans with the Commission.
A lengthy discussion of the proposed changes ensued
between the Commission and the applicants. Following this
discussion the following action was taken. Motion by Ausen,
seconded by Bogucki, to approve the site and buildings plans
as submitted with Application No. 67032 ( with changes as noted)
for the alterations and additions to the Texaco Service Station
at 6810 Osseo Road, with no approval to be granted to freestanding
signery on the property, and further, with the understanding
that the existing freestanding sign which overhangs the public
right-of-way will be removed. Motion carried unanimously.
Motion by Ausen, seconded by Ditter, that the meeting be
adjourned. Motion carried uanimously. The meeting adjourned
at 10;55 P.M.
r) o
hairm
1
1
1
a
Minutes of the Proceedings of
the Planning Commission in the
City of Brooklyn Center in the County
of Hennepin and State of Minnesota
July 6, 1967
The Planning Commission met in regular session and was called
to order by Chairman Robert Jensen at 7:35 P.M.
Roll Call• Chairman Robert Jensen, Vice Chairman Robert
Grosshans, Commissioners Henry Bogucki, Helmer Engstrom, and Paul
Ditter were present. Also present were Director of Public Works Charles
Van Eeckhout, and Richard Cihoski, Secretary to the Commission.
The first item to be discussed was Application No. 67034, submitted
by Edward and Lois Bergerson. The application requested a variance from
Section 35-315 to permit the erection of signs on the premises of an R-B
Zoned property in excess of the size permitted, the property in question
being at 7006 Osseo Road. Mr. and Mrs. Bergerson and Mr. Richard
Rocksted (of Lowry Realty) were present to discuss the application with
the Commission. Mr. Rocksted noted that he was in the process of
purchasing the property for use as a real estate office, the property presently
consisting of a b me with an attached garage, which garage would be removed
at a later date. He noted also that at some later date he would be interested
in a free standing sign for the property, which also was not permitted by the
existing sign regulations, but which would be permitted in the future by the
proposed sign ordinance. For the present, however, he noted that he was
interested in having two wall signs on the building, and that he had designed
the signs with the idea in mind of complying with the requirements presently
set out in the proposed sig4 ordinance; that of the sign area being no more
than 10 per cent of the wall area of the wall on which it is attached.
Mr. Jensen noted to the applicants that although the present zoning;
R-B, would permit the office use to which they were planning to put the
property, the future zoning proposed by the Commission to the Council was for
R-5 multiple selling. Mr. Bergerson noted that the property had been
purchased with full knowledge of the existing zoning, and it's potential uses,
and at the time of purchase it was their intention to utilize it for the uses
permitted within the zone. Mr. Jensen noted that the existing sign regulations
for this zone were extremely restrictive, and this had been acknowledged by
the Commission in recommending a larger type of signing for office uses.
Since the proposed zoning would not include the presently permitted use
however, he suggested that if a variance were to be granted to a greater size
signing, perhaps it should have time limitation so that it could be reviewed
In the future in line with the future zoning, when adopted. Mr. Ditter noted
that the applicants did have the proper zoning for the office uses, and that
the Commission had indeed recognized the restrictiveness of the existing sign
regulations in proposing more liberal signing in the proposed sign ordinance.
Motion by Grosshans, seconded by Engstrom to recommend to the City
Council that the variance requested in Application No. 67034, to permit the
erection of two wall signs, neither sign being greater in area-than 10 per cent
of the area of the wall on which it is placed be approved for the property at
7006 Osseo Road, in that undue hardship would in fact result if the existing
sign regulations were strictly applied to this commercial office use. Motion
carried unanimously.
The next application to be considered was Application No. 67035
submitted by Norman Chazin of Homedale Builders. The application requested
approval of the site and building plans of a proposed apartment development
on the property in the northwest quadrant of the intersection of 65th and
230
1
z
- 2 .
Humboldt Avenues North. During discussion of the proposed project with the
applicant's representative, architect Stanley Fishman, Mr. Fishman indicated
to the Commission that he would like to have the Commission's preliminary
approval of the preliminary plans being submitted, with further refined site
plans (including landscaping plans) and detailed building plans to be
submitted in the near future. Following a lengthy discussion of the proposed
project between the Commission and Mr. Fishman, the following action was
taken.
Motion be Henry Bogucki, seconded by Paul Ditter to recommend
to the City Council that the site plans dubmitted (with minor dimensional
corrections) be approved, in principle, as submitted, with finalized site
and building plans to be submitted at a future date, at which time a
performance agreement and a performance bond would be set for the protect.
Motion carried unanimously.
The Commission next considered Application No. 67036 submitted
by Iten Chevrolet, requesting approval of the site and building plans of additions
and alterations to the commercial establishment at 6701 Osseo Road. Mr. Joe
Iten and architect Dick Shane were present to discuss the plans with the
Commission.
Motion by Ditter, seconded by Engstrom, to recommend to the City
Council that the site and building plans submitted be approved, with the
following stipulations;
1. That approval of the building plans submitted is contingent
upon final approval of the building inspector as to applicable
building codes;
2. That a performance agreement and performance bond (the amount
to be determined by the City Manager) be submitted to the City
to guarantee the site improvements set out in the plans
submitted.
Further, that it is the understanding of the Commission that the additional land
being acquired and becoming a part of the Iten Chevrolet site shall be
incorporated into the Iten site by appropriate subdivision as soon as is
practicable. Motion carried unanimously.
Motion by Paul Ditter and seconded by Henry Bogucki to approve the
minutes of the meetings of June 1 and June 22, 1967. Motion carried
unanimously.
Motion by Elmer Engstrom and seconded by Henry Bogucki that the
meeting be adjourned. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned
at 10;25 P.M.
Chairm
1
1
1
205 7
Minutes of the Proceedings of
the Planning Commission in the
City of Brooklyn Center in the County
of Hennepin and State of Minnesota
August 3, 1967
The Planning Commission met in regular session and was called to
order by Chairman Robert Jensen at 7:32 P. M.
Roll Call: Chairman Robert Jensen, Vice-Chairman Robert Grosshan,
Commissioners Henry Bogucki, Vernon Ausen and Paul Differ were present.
Mr. Engstrom arrived later in the meeting, at 8:40 P. M. , as noted below.
Also present were Director Of Public Works Charles Van Eeckhout, and Richard
Cihoski, Secretary to the Commission.
The first application to be considered was Application No. 67033,
submitted by Mrs. Vergil Schafbuch and Mr. L. H. Haug. The application
requested rezoning of the properties at 7015 and 7019 Osseo Road (Parcels 2800
and 3000 Aud. Sub. #57) from the present R-1 (Single Family Residence) and
R-B (Residence-Business) zoning to an R-5 (Multiple Family Residence)
classification for the entire property. Mrs. Schafbuch and her real estate
agent, Mr. Oleston were present to discuss the proposed rezoning with the
Commission. Chairman Jensen reviewed the history of the comprehensive
planning and rezoning study the Commission had made with regard to the
properties in the vicinity of 70th and Osseo Road. He noted that the existing
zoning on these and adjacent properties was split between two zones, R-B and
R-1, and that this type of situation had been recognized by the Commission as
undesirable, and that zoning should follow the lot lines. Hence the Commission'.
previous recommendation that this property be zoned for C-1 office uses. He
commented further, however, that the Commission had always considered the
C-1 office uses and R-5 multiple dwelling uses to be approximately equal in
intensity of land use. Following Mr. Jensen's comments, other members of the
Commission made similar comments, with the general consensus being that the
Commission would prefer to see a "package" development of the two properties
involved in this application as well as vacant properties to the North which
apparently are under the ownership of Mr. Dorn. Commenting with the regard
the suggestion of combining into a package development, both Mrs. Schafbuch
and her agent, Mr. Oleston, agreed that this would be a better type of
development, and that they would like to withdraw the application for re-
submittal at a later date, following further discussion with Mr. Dorn. Several
other persons notified of the hearing made comments with regard to the requested
rezoning.
Motion by Bogucki and seconded by Ditter to permit the withdrawal of
Application No. 67033 at the request of the applicant for possible re-submittal
at a later date. Motion carried unanimously.
The next application to be considered was Application No. 67037
submitted by Brooklyn Center Industrial Park Inc. The Application requested
rezoning for the property of 6501 Humboldt Avenue North, from its present R-5
(Multiple Residence) classification to 11-2 (Regional Business), Mr. Lushine,
of B.C.I.P. , and three other gentlemen associated with him were present to
discuss the matter of rezoning contained in this application and also a request
for a special use permit for a service station on the property as contained in
Application No. 67038. Mr. Lushine recalled his previous request for rezoning
and a special use permit, for a service station on this property during 1966.
(Mr. Engstrom arrived at this point in the discussion) He noted that the
conditions related to this property had changed substantially since the time of
his previous request, in that the former Brown Farm Area had been incorporated
into a subdivision, a part of which was the property in the northwest quadrant
of Humboldt and 65th, divided into two parcels of which one was a corner lot
- 2 2,63
(the subject of this application) and the other was a multiple dwelling site.
With regard to the multiple dwelling site, he stated that Mr. Norman Chazin of
Homedale Builders had purchased the property and intended to proceed with
development of the land for multiple dwelling purposes, thereby eliminating
one of the concerns previously voiced by the Commission and Council, that
commercial zoning could possibly drift northward along Humboldt Avenue if
the corner of 65th and Humboldt was zoned commercially. The Commission then
commented on the requested rezoning, and asked for further clarification of
several points by the applicants.Following this discussion., the following action
was taken.
Motion by Grosshans and seconded by Bogucki to table Application
No. 67037 until the Commission's meeting of August 10th, to provide the City
Attorney an opportunity to prepare a resolution approving the requested
rezoning to a B-2 (General Business) classification. Further, that the hearing
on the matter of the special use as requested in Application No. 67038 shall
also be deferred until the meeting of August 10, 1967. Motion carried
unanimously.
Application No. 67041 submitted by Twila Donley was next heard. A
variance request, the application sought permission to erect a freestanding
sign on the property at 6045 Osseo Road, presently zoned R-B and being used
as a beauty shop. Both Mr. and Mrs. Donley were present to explain their
request to the Commission. They explained that identification for the property
was very necessary to the success of their business and referred to a drawlAg
of the sign which they would erect if given permission by the Commission and
Council. Following further discussion of the sign and its relation to both the
existing sign regulations and the proposed sign ordinance, the following action
was taken.
Motion by Ditter and seconded by Grosshans to recommend to the City
Council that approval be granted to a freestanding sign on the property at
6045 Osseo Road provided that it meet the following conditions and stipulations:
1. That the area of the sign be no greater than 36 square feet;
2. That the sign be set back from the Osseo Road right-of-way
line a minimum of 10 feet;
3. That the overall height of the sign be no greater than 8 feet;
4. That the sign be kept away from 61st Avenue by placing the
sign in line with the north side of the building on the property;
5. That the sign be non-flashing;
the reason for the granting of this variance being that the existing zoning
regulations do not provide for this commonly accepted type of signery, and
therefore, the imposition of these regulations with regard to this property would
be an undue hardship on the property owner. Motion carried unanimous.
The last Application to be considered was No. 67039 submitted by
Lawrence Sign Co. on behalf of Northern States Power. The application
requested permission to erect a freestanding sign on the B-3 zoned property
at 4501 68th Avenue North, the location of Northern States Power's North Service
Center. The applicant, Lawrence Sign Co, , was not present, but Mr. Jerry
Lohmar of Northern States Power requested that the Commission take action on
the sign request. Following the discussion of the sign as proposed ,on
drawings submitted to the Commission by the applicant, the following action
was taken.
Motion by Engstrom and seconded by Bogucki to recommend to the City
Council that approval be granted to a freestanding sign on the property at
264
_ 3 _ 265
4501 68th Avenue North, with the following conditions and stipulations:
1. That the sign be installed at the position indicated on the
plans submitted;
2. that the sign be non-flashing;
3. that the sign not exceed 16 feet in height-;
4. that the area of the sign not exceed 36 square feet in area;
the reason for the granting of this variance being that the existing zoning
regulations do not provide for this commonly accepted type of signery, and
therefore, the imposition of these regulations with regard to this property would
be an undue hardship on the property owner. Voting in favor of the motion were:
Ditter, Bogucki, Jensen, Ausen, and Engstrom; not voting was Grosshans.
Motion carried,
Motion by Grosshans and seconded by Ditter that the meeting be
adjourned. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 9:57 P. M.
Chairman Jensen reconvened the meeting at 10:25 P.M. with all present
as noted previously.
Mr. Jensen read a letter from the State Planning Agency for the State
of Minnesota requesting that the Commission allow a representative of the
State Planning Agency to attend one of the meetings of the Commission to
discuss the Commission's activity since the "701" Study of 1963-1965. The
letter noted that the meeting with the Commission would be a part of a "follow
up" survey program by the State to determine the effect of Federal Planning Aid.
Following discussion with the members of the Commission, the Chairman set
August 31, 1967 as the evening on which the Commission would meet with the
representative of the State Planning Agency, and directed the Secretary to
inform the State Agency of the time and date of that meeting.
Mr. Bogucki then brought up the subject of the possibility of the
Commission entering into a study of Drive-In establishments, including a
review of their changing types of merchandising, size of sites, effect of these
uses on residential uses, including multiple dwelling uses, their ancilliaiy. USHo
such as used car sales, trailer rentals, ice and milk sales, and so on, with a
possibility of a moratorium being established on construction of new Drive-ins
and service stations within the City until the Study could be completed.
Following discussion of this suggestion, the consensus of the Commission was
that Mr. Bogucki should contact the City Attorney to determinewhat, if any,
legal power the City has in relation to the establishment of moratorium on the
construction of new Drive-In establishments.
Motion by Engstrom and seconded by Ausen that the meeting be
adjourned. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 10:45 P. M.
Cha n
266
Minutes of the Proceedings of
the Planning Commission in the
City of Brooklyn Center in the
County of Hennepin and State of Minnesota
August 10, 1967
The Planning Commission met in special session and was
called to order by Chairman Robert Jensen at 7:40 P.M.
Roll Call: Chairman Robert Jensen, Vice-Chairman Robert
Grosshans, Commissioners Henry Bogucki, Paul Ditter and
Helmer Engstrom were present. Also present was Charles
Van Eeckhout, Director of Public works, who acted as
secretary for this meeting.
The first application to be considered was Application
No. 67040 submitted by Robert Keller for the Keller Invest-
ment Company. The application requested rezoning from R-1
(single family residence) to R-5 (multiple residence) for
the property bounded by 65th Avenue, Camden Avenue, 64th
Avenue (extended) , and Bryant Avenue North. The application
also requested approval of site and building plans for the
property.
Mr. Dolan, the engineer for the developer, made a pre-
sentation to the Commission and audience. He stipulated
that no traffic would enter onto Bryant Avenue from the
development, and that he further would provide a minimum
of 100 feet of green area between the closest building and
his westerly property line. Mr. Jensen opened the public
hearing and the residents were called upon by him for their
comments.
After receiving comments from those in attendance, a
motion was made by Henry Bogucki, seconded by Helmer Engstrom,
to close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously.
Mr. Bogucki then expounded at length, quoting the
Comprehensive Plan which envisioned the development of the
entire area to the south of new 66th Avenue and west of
Camden Avenue as being used for walk-up apartment type develop-
ment with the exception of a strip of land along Bryant
Avenue to be put to single family or duplex use as a buffer.
However, the wide green area, as proposed by the developer,
should provide an adequate and compatible buffer area to
protect the single family residents from the undesirable effects
of this higher use.
Mr. Jensen then elaborated on Mr. Bogucki's remarks and
felt that the use of this property for R-5 classification
was proper and reasonable, but that every effort must be
made to adequately protect the residents from any detrimental
effect this might have on their property.
A motion was made by Mr. Bogucki, seconded by Mr.
Grosshans, to rezone the present R-1 single family residence
area as above described to R-5 multiple residence. Motion
carried unanimously. Mr. Jensen informed the people that
this application would be presented to the City Council at
8:00 P.M. on August 14th.
'"% i7
-2-
The second application, No.67037, was next considered.
The application, submitted by Twin City Inter-change Park,
was tabled at the August 3rd meeting to allow time for
preparation of a draft resolution recommending the approval
of the request for rezoning from R-5 (multiple residence)
to B-2 (regional business) , for the property located at
6501 Humboldt Avenue North (Lot 2, Block 1, Twin City
Interchange Park Addition) . The draft resolution was reviewed
by the Planning Commission, and after a short discussion,
during which slight modifications were made, Mr. Grosshans
introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
Planning Commission Resolution No. 67-5
RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL
OF APPLICATION NO. 67037 SUBMITTED
BY JAMES LUSHINE FOR BROOKLYN CENTER
INDUSTRIAL PARK INC.
WHEREAS, Mr. James Lushine, a principal in Brooklyn
Center Industrial Park, Inc. , has submitted Application No.
67037 requesting rezoning of the property at 6501 Humboldt
Avenue North (Lot 2, Block 1, Twin Cities Interchange Park
Addition) from its present R-5 Multiple Residence zoning
classification to B-2 Regional Business; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the request
for rezoning at a public hearing held, pursuant to published
and mailed notice, on August 3rd and 10th, 1967, considering
all factors relating to the requested rezoning, especially
with relation to its effect on overall planning for the City,
with which the Planning Commission is charged; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did adopt in 1966 a
Comprehensive Plan relating to the future use of land within
the City of Brooklyn Center, which Plan included the
recommendation that the property included within this Appli-
cation be put to multiple residence use; and
WHEREAS, during the development of the Comprehensive
Plan, the former "Earle Brown Farm" , an area of open agri-
cultural use of which the subject parcel is a part, was
envisaged as a future "Industrial Park" development by the
City, even though the actual development of it to such usage
seemed quite distant and tentative, and, due to this uncer-
tainty, the traditional concept of a Comprehensive Plan as
a general statement of policy has been accentuated in the
"Industrial Park" area, due to uncertainty as to what
specific types of development are most logical and feasible
for the area; and
WHEREAS, since the adoption of the Comprehensive Plan,
the "Farm" has come to be owned by land developers who are
proceeding to develop the area into an industrial-commercial-
residential complex, much in accord with the City's original
conception of its development, but naturally, with some
deviation based on more appropriate use of land in certain
specific instances;
i.`,d�., `.9J+q,
/,i J
I
z 'A
-3-
NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission makes the
following findings:
1) The recent platting of the Industrial Park has
provided a roadway width of 100 feet on 65th Avenue
to the west of Humboldt Avenue lying immediately
to the south of this site. It is expected that
this roadway would become one of the major entrances
into the Industrial Park area, resulting in a
great deal of traffic, including truck traffic
making turns, stopping, acceleration and deceleration
movements at this intersection, which activity
would be detrimental to any multiple residential
uses which could be established on this property
in accord with the R-5 zoning now in effect.
2) The proposed zoning to B-2 Regional Commerce is
in actuality an extension of intensive zoning to the
south and west, even though the actual zoning class-
ification to the south and west is for industrial
rather than for commercial purposes.
3) The applicant has indicated that the future use
of this property would be as an automotive service
station, provided that necessary permission was
granted by the City. It is felt that there is a
need for commercial activity of this type in this
immediate area, given the existence of the high
school immediately across Humboldt Avenue, the future
existence of multiple residences to the north, and
the future development of industrial activity to
the west, all of which, it would seem, would have
a need for this type of facility.
4) The rezoning to a commercial classification in our
judgement will not have a detrimental effect on
existing homes to the southeast across Humboldt
Avenue or soon-to-be constructed residential uses
to the north, the homes being removed from this
site by a substantial distance, and the future
apartment development in fact being screened from
future 65th Avenue by this commercial site.
Thus, based on these findings, the Planning Commission
of the City of Brooklyn Center hereby recommends to the
City Council that the rezoning to B-2 Regional Business
as requested in Application #67037 for Lot 2, Block 1,
Twin Cities Interchange Park Addition, be granted.
The Resolution was duly seconded by Mr. Ditter, and upon
a vote being taken, all voted in favor, whereupon said
Resolution was adopted.
The next application, No. 67038, to be considered was
that of Twin Cities Interchange Park for a special use
permit, including plan approval for an automotive service
station on the property at 6501 Humboldt Avenue North
(Lot 2, Block 1, Twin Cities Interchange Park Addition) .
This application was tabled at the meeting of August 3rd.
The applicant made a presentation showing a colonial
type building and a revised site plan which allowed adequate
room to install a right turn lane on Humboldt Avenue for
traffic coming from the north, entering the industrial area
to the west of Humboldt Avenue. This plan was then reviewed
��.4�.'
-4-
by the Commission, and after considerable discussion, a
motion was made by Mr. Bogucki, seconded by Mr. Grosshans,
to recommend to the City Council that the special use
permission, including site plan approval, be granted,
subject to the following conditions:
1) That a bond in the amount to be determined by
the City Manager be posted for the site improvements;
2) That a driveway arrangement be worked out that
complies with our ordinances and has the approval
of the City Engineer;
3) That the City retain, by written agreement, the
right to close or modify the southerly driveway
off Humboldt Avenue at its discretion without
reason or without compensation to the affected
property;
4) That the signing be in accordance with the proposed
sign ordinance;
5) That a 17 foot easement be granted for roadway and
sidewalk purposes along the east side of the
property; and
6) That the dirveways be installed so as to be compat-
ible with future street and sidewalk construction.
The motion carried unanimously. The applicant was informed
that the application would be presented to the City Council
on Monday, August 14th, at 8:15 P.M.
The next item discussed was a report of the Sidewalk
Sub-committee. Mr. Bogucki reported that after considerable
study and discussion, he felt that the sidewalk program had
been delayed too long and he felt strong, immediate action
was needed, and suggested that a resolution be presented to
the Council by the Planning Commission members in person.
The Planning Commission felt that this was a good idea, and
the following resolution was then introduced by Mr. Engstrom:
Planning Commission Resolution No. 67-6
RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING IMMEDIATE
INITIATION OF A SIDEWALK CONSTRUCTION
PROGRAM
WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan for Community Develop-
ment recommends that sidewalks and walkways be provided for
strategic areas within the City, and further recommends the
initiation of a location, maintenance and financing study;
and
WHEREAS, a comprehensive sidewalk system is needed by
the City for reasons of pedestrian safety, recreational
benefit, pedestrian convenience and aesthetic considerations;
and
WHEREAS, the initiation of the construction of the
sidewalk system has been delayed too long.
1
1
1
-5-
BE IT RESOLVED to recommend to the City Council of the
City of Brooklyn Center to irrevocably commit themselves
immediately to the initiation of a sidewalk construction
program and direct the staff to prepare a complete report
of a proposed program to include a comprehensive sidewalk
system.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City-wide benefit of
the program be realized and that the funds to finance this
program be derived on a City-wide basis.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED to schedule the program so as
to fund and construct a token portion during the 1968
construction season, and a full portion during the 1969
construction season.
Motion by Mt. Ditter and seconded by Henry Bogucki
that the meeting be adjourned. Motion carried unanimously.
The meeting adjourned at 11:35 P.M.
Chai
411
Minutes of the Proceedings of the
Planning Commission in the City of
Brooklyn Center in the County of
Hennepin and State of Minnesota
August 31, 1967
The Planning Commission met in special session and was
called to order by Chairman Robert Jensen at 7:30 P.M.
Roll Call: Chairman Robert Jensen, Vice Chairman Robert
Grosshans, Commissioners Paul Ditter, Henry Bogucki, Vernon
Ausen and Helmer Engstrom were present.
The only item of regular business to be considered this
evening by the Commission, Application No. 67043. submitted by
Robert Brennan, was the first item of business. Mr. Brennan
was present to represent the application, which requested a
C'I variance from Section 35-310 of the City zoning ordinance to
M allow the construction of an accessory building in excess of
the 660 square foot maximum permitted, on his property at .
3718 Woodbine Lane. He explained to the Commission that his
desire to have a roofed-over patio alongside his 22' x 24'
garage had necessitated the variance request.
Following discussion of the request between Mr. Brennan
and the Commission, the Commission discussed their previous
actions and recommendations with reference to primary and
accessory buildings, noting that on October 27, 1966, a
variance had been granted to Mr. Walter Skinner, in conjunction
with Application No. 66068, following general agreement to the
idea that future regulations of accessory buildings should
prohibit the erection of any accessory building greater than
75% of the area of the primary building on the property.
Subsequent to this discussion, the following action was taken.
Motion by Ausen, seconded by Grosshans, to recommend to
the City Council that a variance be granted to Robert Brennan
to permit erection of a 22' x 24' garage and an attached 10' x 22'
patio area, both under a single roof, on the property at
3718 Woodbine Lane, which structure would exceed the maximum
660 square feet of area as set out in Section 35-310 of the
City' s Zoning Ordinance. The Commission finds, with relation
to this application that the Zoning Ordinance does not recognize
a popular and acceptable type of residential construction - the
garage/patio combination, and that an undue hardship would in
fact exist if the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance were
to be strictly applied. Motion carried unanimously.
At this point in the meeting, Mr. Richard Schieffer,
newly appointed City Attorney, appeared at the meeting and
was introduced to the members of the Commission.
Mr. Bogucki discussed with the Commission his interview
earlier in the day with Mrs. Gustafson, reporter- for. the
Brooklyn Center Press, with relation to the Commission' s
interest in supporting a program of pedestrian walkways
throughout the City, noting that the article based on the
interview would appear in the Brooklyn Center Press on
September 7, 1967.
-1-
I
fig=
Mr. Robert Eidem, Community Planner with the State
Planning Agency, arrived to discuss with the Commission the
effectiveness of the "701" Federal planning program and the
activities of the Commission since the completion of the
program in August of 1965. He stated that the results of
his discussion with the Commission would be embodied in a
report to the Federal Government as a "follow-up" to the
"701" program adminstered by the State of Minnesota. The
remainder of the meeting was spent in discussion with Mr.
Eiden.
Motion by Engstrom, seconded by Ausen, that the meeting
be adjourned. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting
adjourned at 10:25 P.M.
cell,
M Chairm
L
�<�.
�I
�i
63
Minutes of the Proceedings of the -
Planning Commission in the City of
Brooklyn Center in the County of
Hennepin and State of Minnesota
September 7, 1967
The Planning Commission met in regular session and was
called to order by Vice-Chairman Robert Grosshans at 7:35 P.M.
Roll Call: Vice-Chairman Robert Grosshans, Commissioners
Adrian Dorenfeld, Helmer Engstrom, Vernon Ausen, Henry Bogucki
4 and Paul Ditter were present.
Motion by Bogucki, seconded by Ditter, to approve the
minutes of the regular meeting of August 3, 1967, and the
special meetings of August 10 and 31, 1967. Voting in favor
were Bogucki, Ditter, Grosshans, Ausen and Engstrom. Not
voting was Dorenfeld. Motion carried.
�++ The first application to be considered was No. 67044
submitted by Dwight Sundeen and Walter Kukich, requesting a
rezoning from Rl (Single Family Residence) to B2 (Regional
L Business) of the property at 6451 Osseo Road. Both gentlemen
U were present to discuss their application with the Commission.
They explained that the purpose for which they would use the
property if it were to be rezoned B2 would be for a United
Rent-all facility which they are now operating in the City
of Robbinsdale. The Commission reviewed the request in relation
to the Comprehensive Plan, and Mr. Bogucki read to the
Commission and the applicants the Development Goals for the
Osseo Road as contained in the Comprehensive Plan.
Following further discussion of the request for rezoning
as it related to the Comprehensive Plan, and the gathering of
comments from those present who had been notified of the
hearing, Mr. Bogucki moved and Mr. Ditter seconded that the
public hearing be closed on Application #67044. Motion carried
unanimously.
Mr. Bogucki noted that the goals as stated in the Compre-
hensive Plan completed in the summer of 1965 are still current,
and that the rezoning as requested in Application #67044 would,
in fact, be a spot zoning not in keeping with the Comprehensive
Plan. He noted further, however, that he was personally
aware of some movement toward a coordination of residential
properties north of 65th to the freeway which would probably
lead to a rezoning request in thenear future for a larger
number of properties in the area.
Motion. by Bogucki, seconded by Dorenfeld, to recommend to
the City Council that the rezoning from R1 to B2 as requested
in Application #67044 for the property at 6451 Osseo Road be
denied in that:
1) the rezoning of this property would be a
spot zoning to a commercial classification
not presently in existence for some
distance from this property;
2) that this rezoning to a commercial retail
classification would not be in keeping with
64
27.
-2-
the Goals as stated for the Osseo Road
in the Comprehensive Plan, and that there
is no reason to change these stated Goals.
Motion carried unanimously.
The next application to be considered was #67045 sub-
mitted by B & G Realty for Big Boy Restaurants. Mssrs.
Kilberg, Benjamin Marcus, Earl Tetting and Bill Wiggins were
present to discuss the application with the Commission. The
application included a request for approval of site and
building plans for a Big Boy Restarurant at 5440 Osseo Road,
and a variance from Section 35-330 of the City Ordinances to
permit the erection of a freestanding sign on this same
property.
Mr. Kilberg explained to the Commission that the Big
Boy Restaurant chain had not previously entered Minnesota,
being primarily an eastern chain with its westernmost outlets
M in the north part of the countr�rin Wisconsin. The location
adjacent to the Brookdale complex has been chosen as the
initial establishment of the Big Boy cnain in Minnesota
in a series of Big Boy Restaurants to be built in the State.
As the site and building plans were found to be in accordance
with the City Ordinances, discussion turned toward the free-
standing signery being requested by the applicants.
Mr. Kilberg and Mr. Marcus, the owner of the "Marc's
Big Boy" Restaurants proceeded to explain the need for
freestanding signery for their establishment, noting that
they had been under the impression that the standard being used
by the City was 250 square feet in area and 25 feet in height,
causing them to request a sign of approximately 12 by 22 feet.
The Commission explained to the applicants that a good deal
of work had been done by the Commission on a proposed sign
ordinance, and that it had been referred to the Council, who
had made subsequent changes with which the Commission was not
necessarily conversant. A good deal of discussion ensued
relating to the philosophy behind signery; that is, identi-
fication verses advertising, following which Mr. Dorenfeld moved
and Mr. Bogucki seconded that the variance being requested in
Application #67045 be tabled to allow the applicants to re-study
their sign request in relation to information which the Staff
would supply relating to changes in the proposed sign ordinance.
Motion carried unanimously.
Motion by Ausen, seconded by Engstrom, to recommend to
the City Council that approval be granted to the site and
building plans submitted by B & G Realty for the Big Boy
Restaurant at 5440 Osseo Road, with the following exceptions
and stipulations:
1) no roof sign is to be permitted;
2) minor dimensional changes shall be made
in the parking and driving areas to
conform to the City's dimensional
standards;
3) the building plans are subject to the
Building Inspector's approval as to
applicable building codes;
Lk
1
-3.-
4) the applicant shall submit a performance
agreement and bond guaranteeing the
installation of the site improvements as
delineated on the plans being approved.
Motion carried unanimously.
The Chairman called a recess at 9:35 and the meeting
resumed at 9:50.
Application #67046 submitted by Walter Smith was next
heard. The application requested a variance from Section
35-401 to permit construction of an addition to an existing
attached garage to be closer to the side property line than
permitted by ordinance on theproperty at 3013 - 67th Avenue
North.
Mr. Smith explained to the Commission that he had pur-
chased his house in July and was desirous of expanding the
present single garage into a two stall structure, which
addition (to make the garage 19 feet in width from the present
14) would cause the garage to be 2 feet from the side lot line.
A lengthy discussion began among the members of the Commission
relating to the question of "hardship" based on the theory
of a two stall garage being a "necessity" in suburban life
as suggested by Mr. Bogucki. Mr. Ausen proceededto question
whether the Commission's philosophy in the past with regard
to the granting of variances to the sideyard setback requirements
for garages and houses was really to the advantage of the City,
for, if in fact the setback was unreasonable in so many cases,
perhaps the ordinance itself should be changed. if, however,
the setback requirements were not unreasonable, but only
inconvenient to persons who wish to build certain types of
structures which were prohibited by an ordinance intended
to provide a guarantee against encroachment, perhaps the
issuance of variances should be curtailed.
Motion by Bogucki, seconded by Dorenfeld, to recommend to
the City Council that approval be granted to the variance
requested in Application No. 67046 by Mr. Walter Smith to
permit construction of an addition to his attached garage to
be 2 feet from his side property line, in that a two stall
garage is a necessity in suburban areas, and that the
refusal of a variance to the five foot setback requirement
would preclude the applicant's being able to construct a two
stall garage, thereby inducing an undue hardship. Voting in
favor of the motion were Bogucki and Dorenfeld; voting against
were Engstrom, Ausen, Grosshans, and Ditter. The motion
failed for lack of majority.
Mr. Ausen requested of the staff that information be
gathered from other communities in the suburban area to
determine what their ordinance regulations were with relation
to setbacks and what their experiences with relation to
granting of setback variances was, in the hope that this
might provide some insight as to the Commission's future
action with regard to possible changes in the ordinance or
changes in the policy of granting variances to side yard
setback requirements.
U6
� �
C'�
C'�
CJZ
r�
6
-4-
Motion by Ausen, seconded by Engstrom, to recommend to
the City Council that the variance from Section 35-401 to
permit Walter J. Smith to construct an addition to his
attached garage to be two feet from his side property line
be denied, in that the application does not meet the standards
for variance as set out in the Zoning Ordinance. Voting in
favor of the motion were Ausen, Ditter, Grosshans, and
Engstrom. Voting against were Dorenfeld and Bogucki. Motion
carried.
The Commission then considered Application #67047 sub-
mitted by Beim Construction Company, requesting approval of
site and building plans of an industrial building, and a
variance from the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance to
permit a 5 foot sideyard setback for the proposed building rather
than the 10 feet require. Mr. Black, representative of Beim
Construction Company, was present to discuss the plans and
the requested variance with the Commission. Upon calling the
Itl names of those notified of the hearing, Mr. Dallas Holm,
Ov owner of the property to the east, stated that he was opposed
V
to the granting of a variance for any reason other than for
a definite hardship to the owner of a piece of property. He
noted that he considered the zoning regulations to be reasonable
in this instance, and that the Commission should use the power $F
to alter zoning requirements judiciously. Following further
examination of the plans, and discussion of the requested
variance, the following action was taken.
Motion by Bogucki, seconded by Ausen, to recommend to the
City Council that the site and building plans for the
construction of an industrial building on the property at
3500 - 48th Avenue North be approved with a 10 foot setback
required along the east property line, as no hardship or
other mitigating circumstances exist which would cause the
existing regulations to be varied as requested in Application
#67047. Motion carried unanimously.
Mr. Joseph Clark appeared to represent Application
#67048, requesting a variance from Section 35-401 to permit
construction of an addition to an existing attached garage
to be closer to the side property line on the property at
6043 Ewing Avenue North, than the five feet permitted by
ordinance. Mr. Clark explained that the addition which he
proposed to make to the existing garage would necessitate a
variance to slightly less than 4 feet from the property line,
in the vicinity of three and one half feet. He noted further
that although the garage could be built to conform to the
five foot setback requirement, the extra width would be
extremely desirable to permit the installation of a 16 foot
wide garage door with approximately one foot on each side
of the door. He noted further that there was a stairway to
the side door of his house which took up a portion of the width
of the existing garage, so that the present 13.5 foot wide
garage was not entirely usable for vehicle storage.
Motion by Bogucki, seconded by Dorenfeld, to recommend
to the City Council that approval be granted to the variance
requested in Application #67048 to permit a setback to an
attached garage to be three and one half feet from the south
�I
I
I
i
i
�I
I�
n
-5-
side property line of the property at 6043 Ewing Avenue North,
in that a two stall garage is in fact a necessity in suburban
areas and that the refusal of a variance to the five foot
setback requirement would preclude the applicant' s being
able to construct a two stall garage, thereby inducing an
undue hardship. Voting in favor of the motion were Bogucki
and Dorenfeld; voting against were Ausen, Engstrom, Grosshans,
and Ditter. The motion failed for lack of majority.
Motion by Ausen, seconded by Engstrom, to recommend to
the City Council that Application #67048, requesting a variance
to permit construction of an addition to an attached garage
on the property at 6043 Ewing Avenue North to be 3Z feet from
the south side property line, be denied, in that the appli-
cation does not meet the standards for variance as set out
in the Zoning Ordinance. Voting in favor of the motion
were Ditter, Grosshans, Ausen, and Engstrom; voting against
were Bogucki and Dorenfeld. Motion carried.
M
The last application to be considered was #67049 sub-
tf� mitted by Mr. and Mrs. Fred Strong, requesting a variance
�•.7 from Section 35-310 to permit construction of an addition to
an existing garage which would cause the total square footage
V
of accessory buildings on the property to exceed the 660
square feet permitted. Mr. and Mrs. Strong were present to
discuss the application with the Commission,explaining that they
had planned to remove two of the buildings following the
alterations of the garage so that the total square footage of
the garage would be 600 square feet, and the total area of
all accessory buildings r - the property would 808 square feet.
Following such discussion, Ul,e following action was taken.
Motion by Ditter, seconded by Bogucki, to recommend to the
City Council that approval be granted to the variance request
contained in Application #67049 for the property at 516 - 62nd
Avenue North to permit alterations and additional construction
to the existing garage to be made to bring the total area of
the garage to 600 square feet, due to the unique circumstances
of the great number of buildings on the property, but with the
following conditions:
1) a performance bond shall be submitted to
the City guaranteeing the removal of the
concrete block structure presently on the
property containing 148 square feet; and
the removal of the dog house containing 27
square feet also on the property at present•,
2) the altered garage structure shall be
constructed in conformance with the building
codes of the City.
Motion carried unanimously.
Motion by Ausen, seconded by Ditter, that the meeting be
adjourned. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned
at 12:10 A.M.
Chai an
26
f
�I
77
Minutes of the Proceedings of
the Planning Commission in the City
of Brooklyn Center in the County of
Hennepin and State of Minnesota
September 21, 1967
The Planning Commission met in special session and was
called to order by Vice-Chairman Robert Grosshans at 7:38 P.M.
Roll Call: Vice-Chairman Robert Grosshans, Commissioners
Helmer Engstrom, Vernon Ausen and Henry Bogucki were present.
Also present were Charles Van Eeckhout and Richard Cihoski.
The first item of business to be considered was Appli-
cation #67050 submitted by Davies Water Equipment Company,
requesting a variance from Section 35-402 to permit
construction of an industrial building with less than the
required setback of 100 feet for the property at 4110
Lakebreeze Avenue North (Parcel 1800, Plat 89010) .
Lv
Mr. Al Davies was resent to discuss the C� p request with
the Commission, explaining that when he had originally
approached the City with respect to constructing his office
and warehousing facility on the property, he had not been
aware of the extra setback required when industrial property
was across the street from residential property. Since he
had found this to be the case, however, he had attempted
to re-design his industrial use to conform to the requirement
and had found that the requirement of setting his building
100 feet from the street right-of-way on the west side of the
property would work an extreme hardship on him in using the
remainder of the property, 100 feet being approximately 1/3
of the width of the total property. Further, he asked
whether the requirement of a 100 foot setback adjacent to
residential properties would apply. to an R-B (Residential-
Business) classification since the zone would allow
for business uses as well as residential uses.
Discussion of the application by the Commission ensued,
including examination of the zoning ordinance requirements
of Section 35-402 and also the requirements of Section 35-420
in relation to the applicability of the setback requirement
to a proposed fence that would be constructed around a
storage yard for the industrial use. Mr. Boyd, a resident
who had been notified of the hearing, asked several questions
of the Commission related to the proposed industrial use.
Following the questioning of the applicant and the
gathering of comments from the audience, Bogucki moved and
Engstrom seconded that the public hearing on Application
#67050 be closed. Motion carried unanimously.
Motion by Bogucki, seconded by Engstrom, to recommend
to the City Council that the variance from Section 35-402
requiring a setback of 100 feet for industrial buildings
when such industrial property faces residential property,
as requested in Application #67050, be denied in that it does
not meet the standards for variance as set out in the Zoning
Ordinance, and further, that there is no compelling reason
to alter the setback requirement of the existing Ordinance.
Motion carried unanimously.
+ �
1
1
1
-2-
Application #67051 submitted by Robert Siede was next
considered. The application requested a variance from
Section 35-402 to permit construction of a detached garage
21 feet from the side property line of a corner lot rather
than the 25 feet required by Ordinance, on the property at
6138 Dupont Avenue North. Mr. Siede was present to discuss
the application with the Commission and answered questions
relating to his application.
Motion by Bogucki, seconded by Engstrom, to recommend
to the City Council that a variance from Section 35-402 be
granted to Robert Siede as requested in Application #67051
to permit construction of a detached garage on his property
at 6138 Dupont Avenue to be 21 feet from the north side
property line, in that the previous action by the City in
1959 granting a variance to Mr. Siede's neighbor on the
property at 6139 Colfax Avenue North to construct his
Ngarage 21 feet from the property line would constitute
an inequity in the application of the Zoning Ordinance if
the requirements were not varied for Mr. Seide's proposed
construction. Motion carried unanimously.
Z
The final application to be considered was No. 55104
(second revision) submitted by Thomas Geldert and Herbert
Appelquist requesting approval of an amendment to the site
plan previously approved by the Council, to permit the
construction of garages on the apartment properties
contained within the Xerxes Court apartment development,
at 5207 and 5209 Xerxes Avenue North (Lots 2 and 3, R. R.
McChesney and Sons 2nd Addition) . Mrs. Geldert and Mr.
Appelquist explained that they wished to construct up to 12
garage stalls on each of their apartment properties for
the tenants of their buildings.
Motion by Bogucki, seconded by Ausen, to recommend
to the City Council that approval be granted to the amended
site plans of the Xerxes Court Apartments to include up to
12 stall garage on each of the properties at 5207 and
5209 Xerxes Avenue North, as requested in Application
65a04 (2nd revision) , with the proposed buildings adhering
to the setback and construction requirements of the City's
ordinances. Motion carried unanimously.
Motion by Ausen, seconded by Engstrom, that the meeting
be adjourned. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting
adjourned at 10:00 P.M.
Ch Iman
612
r�J
Minutes of the Proceedings of
the Planning Commission in the City
of Brooklyn Center in the County of
Hennepin and State of Minnesota
October 5, 1967
The Planning Commission met in regular session and was
called to order by Chairman Robert Jensen at 7:45 P.M.
Roll Call: Chairman Robert Jensen, Vice-Chairman Robert
Grosshans, Commissioners Helmer Engstrom, Adrian Dorenfeld,
Henry Bogucki and Paul Ditter were present. Commissioner
Ausen arrived later in the meeting as noted below. Also
present was Richard Cihoski, Secretary to the Commission.
Motion by Bogucki, seconded by Dorenfeld, to approve
the minutes of the regular meeting of September 7, 1967, and
the special meeting of September 21, 1967, as submitted.
Motion carried unanimously.
The first item of business to be considered was Appli-
cation No. 66087 (revised) submitted by Lecon Properties
and Iten Chevrolet, requesting rezoning of certain properties
to the southwest of the intersection of 69th Avenue and
Osseo Road to the B3 (General Business) zoning classification.
Mr. Jensen reviewed for the Commission the past history
of the application, noting that the applicant had recently
asked the Council to remand the application to the Commission
for consideration of rezoning properties in addition to those
contained in the original application for rezoning. The
Commission then reviewed the requested rezoning of these
properties, contained in Northtown Plaza 2nd Addition, in
relation to the City's Comprehensive Plan.
Motion by Ditter, seconded by Grosshans, to recommend to
the City Council that Lot 1 of Block 1, and Lots 1, 2, 3, and
4 of Block 2, Northtown Plaza 2nd Addition, be rezoned to
the B3 (General Business) classification, as such rezoning is
in accord with the development goals of the Comprehensive
Plan. Motion carried unanimously.
(Mr. Ausen arrived at this point in the meeting, at
7:55 P.M.)
The next item of business to be considered was Appli-
cation No. 67053 submitted by Ronald Grams, requesting a
variance from Section 35-401 to permit construction of a detached
garage three feet from the south side property line of his
property at 7206 Newton , Avenue, rather than the five feet
required by Ordinance.
Motion by Grosshans, seconded by Engstrom, to recommend
to the City Council that Application No. 67053 be approved,
and a variance granted from Section 35-401 to permit
construction of a detached garage three feet from the south
side property line of the property at 7206 Newton Avenue North,
rather than the five feet required by Ordinance, with a letter
to be submitted from the abutting neighbor stating no
objection to this variance. Motion carried unanimously,
with Mr. Ausen abstaining from voting.
Mr. Jensen informed the Commission that Application No.
67054 submitted by Darrel Farr and Application No. 67055 sub-
mitted by Robert Keller would not be heard this evening.
-2-
The next application to be considered was No. 67032
submitted by Sipe Bros. Inc. , requesting revision of the
approval of the site and building plans previously granted by
the Commission and Council to permit retention of the free-
standing sign on the station property at 6810 Osseo Road.
Messrs, Walter Sargent and William Sipe were present to
discuss the request with the Commission. The Commission
members noted that during the previous site plan approvals,
a stipulation was made that the presently existing freestanding
sign overhanging the highway right-of-way was to be removed,
and that the applicant had agreed to this. Mr. Sipe noted
that at that time of the approvals, he had been of the opinion
that it would be impossible to install a freestanding sign
so that it did not overhang the right-of-way; since that
time, however, a sign had been devised which would be able
to be installed in the present concrete base for the existing
freestanding sign's concrete base without overhanging the
right-of-way and this was their intention. Mr. Ausen
noted that although the sign which had been affixed during
the re-construction of this station on the canopy was
permitted under the present zoning regulations, the intent
of the Commission was that roof type signs would not be
permitted under the new sign ordinance, and that if the
applicant wished to have a freestanding sign he should
not gain the benfit of both the existing and proposed sign
ordinance, but should have either a freestanding sign or a
canopy sign.
Motion by Ausen, seconded by Grosshans, to recommend
to the City Council that an amendment to the previous plan
approval for the alterations being made to the Texaco
Service Station at 6810 Osseo Road be amended to provide
that the (approx. 35 square foot) freestanding sign under
discussion be permitted in lieu of the existing canopy
sign. Motion carried unanimously.
The rcmainder of the meeting consisted of a discussion
by the Commission of various planning items previously or
presently under consideration by the Council.
Motion by Grosshans, seconded by Ditter, that the meeting
be adjourned. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting
adjourned at 10:05 P.M.
Chai an
1
1
1
97
Minutes of the Proceedings of
the Planning Commission in the City
of Brooklyn Center in the County of
Hennepin and State of Minnesota
October 26, 1967
The Planning Commission met in special session and was
,�:alled to order by its Chairman, Robert Jensen, at 7:35 P.M.
Roll Call: Chairman Robert Jensen, Vice-Chairman Robert
Grosshans, Commissioners Helmer Engstrom, Adrian Dorenfeld,
Vernon Ausen, and Henry Bogucki were present. Also present
were C. E. Van Eeckhout, Jerry Dulgar, and Richard Cihoski,
Secretary to the Commission.
Mr. Jensen advised the Commission that although the
evening's meeting was a study meeting, he had requested
that a certain application be placed on the Commission's
agenda for purposes of discussion as well as the normal function
of reviewing the application and making a recommendation to the
Council.
The Application in question, No. 67050 submitted by
Davies Water Equipment Company, had been reviewed at a pre-
vious Commission meeting on September 21st, with the review
at that time relating to a variance from the setback require-
ments of the Zoning Ordinance to permit construction of an
industrial building with less than the required setback of 100
feet from the west property line, where the property faced
residential properties across Azelia Avenue. TheCommission
at that time had recommended denial of the variance, and the
request had proceeded to the Council. Mr. Jensen noted that he
had attended the Council meeting on October 16, 1967, and had
discussed the matter further with the Council. The action of
the Council at that time was to take no action on the variance
.request, and refer the matter of a site and building plan
approval back to the Planning Commission for its comments.
Mssrs. Davies and Jones of Davies Water Equipment Company
were present to discuss the site and building plans with the
Commission. They explained to the Commission the changes that
had been made in the plans since the original plan, used for
illustrative purposes during the variance request, had been
shown to the Commission and Council. The new plan, Mr. Davies
pointed out, incorporated a 35 foot landscaped area adjacent to
Azelia Avenue, and a 6 foot high concrete block wall on the east
side of this 35 foot strip, continuing as the west wall of
the building towards the southern part of the property. The
access to the property, including truck access, had been revised
to provide access only from Lakebreeze Avenue, and parking
for the industrial uses would be along the Lakebreeze Avenue
side of the property as well. The Commission discussed with
the applicants the various other alternatives to the plans
submitted, including a mixture of the various setbacks and
fences shown in previous plans. Mr. Jensen reviewed with the
Commission the Council's concern that the imposition of the 100
foot setback as per the Zoning Ordinance might, in fact, create
a greater hardship on the adjacent residential properties than
would a lesser setback, due to the use of the 100 foot setback
for vehicular parking and vehicular access, whereas the 35
foot landscaped area would have no activity within it.
Several of the members of the Commission expressed a concern
1
1
1
r�f
-2-
with the 100 foot versus 35 foot problem, but following
further discussion, the concensus of the Commission was that
the parking of passenger vehicles was not necessarily offensive,
but rather that the truck access along Azelia Avenue seemed
to be the major problem in the imposition of the 100 foot
setback.
Motion by Bogucki, seconded by Dorenfeld, that Application
No. 67050 requesting site and building plan approval be
submitted to the City Council without action of the Planning
Commission, as the Planning Commission could not approve plans
which are in opposition to the Planning Commission's past
action recommending denial of a lesser setback than 100 feet
for this property at 4010 Lakebreeze Avenue where it faced
residential properties to the west of Azelia Avenue. Further,
however, that the consensus of the Planning Commission is
as follows:
1) the building presently proposed to be constructed
by the applicant could, on the existing amount of
property, be built to conform to the existing setback
requirement of 100 feet where industrial property
faces residential property across a street;
2) the 100 foot setback requirement is, in the opinion
of the Planning Commission, still the best method
of transition between residential and industrial uses
facing one another across a street, but that it would
be unreasonable in imposing the 100 foot setback to
preclude any use of the property, such as vehicular
parking, but not unreasonable to restrict truck access
from Azelia Avenue;
3) although the presently proposed use may in fact be
a less intense use which might be able to co-exist
with residential uses with a lesser setback, there
is no guarantee that such industrial use will remain
on the property, and one of the other industrial uses
permitted by the Zoning Ordinance might in the future
create a detrimental effect on the residential properties
in the area;
4) the approval of site and building plans, or a variance
at less than the 100 feet required, would appear to be
a dangerous precedent applicable to other such
industrial property, unless of course, the City is
prepared to accept a lesser setback for other properties.
Motion carried unanimously.
Mr. Jensen reviewed with the Commission a letter which he
had received from Robert Eidem, Planner, of the State
Planning Agency, requesting that he represent the City in the
Fall Conference of the Minnesota Planning Association, and
asked the Commissioners for comments as to which portions of
the City's planning program he should stress in his presentation.
A discussion then ensued relating to the Commission's study
of drive-in type establishments, with the result that the
Secretary was requested to contact various representatives of
the drive-in industry to ascertain whether such persons would
��)
,.tip
--3-
be willing to attend a "seminar" type meeting of the Planning
Commission in order that t1te Commission might become more familiar
with the merchandising techniques and other problems of this
industry, with the object cof creating regulations which would
provide a reasonable business climate for such uses.
A short discussion of the proposed water tower for the
City ensued, with Mr. Van E,eckhout explaining the various
alternatives and choice of towers to the Commission.
Motion by Engstrom, seconded by Dorenfeld, that the
meeting be adjourned. The motion carried unanimously. The
meeting adjourned at 10:35 P.M.
Chairma
:j
1
1
1
Minutes of the Proceedings of
the Planning Commission in the City
of Brooklyn Center in the County of
Hennepin and State of Minnesota
November 2, 1967
The Planning Commission met in regular session and was
called to order by Chairman Robert Jensen at 7:34 P.M.
Roll Call: Chairman Robert Jensen, Vice-Chairman Robert
Grosshans, Commissioners Vernon Ausen, Paul Ditter and
Helmer Engstrom were present. Commissioners Dorenfeld and
Bogucki arrived later in the meeting as noted. Also present
was Richard Cihoski, Secretary to the Commission.
The first application to be considered was No. 67052
submitted by Village Builders, requesting rezoning from the
present R1 (Single Family Residence) classification to R3
(Multiple Family Residence-Townhouse) classification for the
property lying approximately 1/2 block east of Zenith Avenue
and 1/2 block north of 68th Avenue North, to the south of
69th Avenue. Mr. Richard Kauffmann, of Village Builders,
was present to discuss tLe rezoning request with the Commission.
Mr. Kauffmann explained that he wished to construct approxi-
mately 36 townhouse units on the property with access to the
property from 69th Avenue North.
(Mr. Dorenfeld arrived at this point in the meeting at
7:45 P.M.)
Mr. Jensen then called for comments from those present
who had been notified of the hearing.
(Mr. Bogucki arrived during the gathering of comments
from adjacent property owners at 8:03 P.M.)
Following the gathering of comments, Mr. Jensen explained
the planning concepts which had gone into the designation of
this property for townhouse use in the Comprehensive Plan by
both the Commission and Council. He cited the fact that
industrial zones exist to the east in the Brooklyn Center
Industrial Park, and that: the townhouse use had been proposed
as a transition between this industrial use and Shingle Creek
Parkway and the single family area to the west. He noted
that the Commission had originally recommended that this
property, along with property in the Brown Farm, be used for
high rise apartments, but: following public hearings at which
many of the adjacent property owners were present, great
opposition had been voiced to high rise, and the high rise
in this area had been switched with townhouse zoning in the
center of the Farm. Other members of the Commission commented
along the lines of the Chairman's comments.
Motion by Grosshans, seconded by Dorenfeld, to recommend
to the City Council that approval be granted to the rezoning
to R3 (Townhouse) as contained in Application #67052 submitted
by Village Builders (that: part of parcel 1015, plat 89034
lying south of 69th Avenue) for the following reasons:
1. the proposed rezoning is in accord with the
land use proposals contained in the City' s
Comprehensive Plan, which plan is based on
proper planning principles;
1
1
1
a r7
r8
-2-
2. the proposed zoning is in agreement with the
Planning Conunission' s past recommendations
and principles with regard to transition in
zoning.
Voting in favor of the motion were Ausen, Jensen, Engstrom,
Dorenfeld and Grosshans; voting against was Ditter; not
voting was Bogucki. Motion carried.
The next application to be considered was No. 67033
submitted by L. H. Haug and Mrs. Virgil Schafbuch, requesting
rezoning from the present: Rl and RB zoning classification to
R5 (Multiple Family Residence) for the properties at 7015
and 7019 Osseo Road. Mrs. Schafbuch and Mr. Lamkin, her
attorney, were present to represent the application. Mr. Lamkin
advised the Commission that since the previous tabling of this
application, Mrs. Schafbuch had contacted, at the Commission' s
suggestion, Mr. Dorn, owner of the property to the north of
the Schafbuch and Haug p<<rcels. The result of this contact
was that Mr. Dorn is agreeable to a zoning of his property
similar to whatever is applied to the Haug and Schafbuch
property to the south. Mr. Lamkin commented that it is
extremely difficult to sell the property with its present
split zoning, and the they City should attach R5 zoning to the
entire property. Mr. Lan►kin broached the subject of a possible
C2 zoning of the property in the future, to which Mr. Jensen
commented that the Commission had never recommended that this
property was suited to retail commercial use, the proposed
zoning for the area being Cl, and it would be highly unlikely
that the Commission would', consider a retail commercial
zoning in this area.
Mr. Jensen then reviewed the past history of the appli-
cation for the Commission., noting that the original reason
for tabling was to incorporate the Dorn property with the
Haug and Schafbuch property for a possible "package" zoning.
He then suggested that since the Commission appeared to be in
favor of the proposed R5 zoning of the west side of Osseo Road,
as being equivalent to Cl zoning, that perhaps the Commission
should initiate the zoning of the Dorn property, with the
thought in mind that if the property were zoned to a multiple
usage, that it would be incorporated by the developer with the
Haug and Schafbuch property. To this proposal, the applicant
stated general agreement.
Motion by Bogucki, seconded by Dorenfeld, to close the
public hearing on Application No. 67033. Motion carried
unanimously.
Motion by Ausen, seconded by Engstrom, to table action
on Application #67033 until the Commission's meeting of
November 30th, and to instruct the Secretary of the Commission
to initiate a rezoning hearing for the Dorn property adjacent
to the Schafbuch and Haug property for that same date. Motion
carried unanimously.
The next application to be considered was No. 67054
submitted by Darrel Farr, requesting approval of the site and
building plans of an apartment/townhouse development on the
property generally bounded by Kylawn Park, June Avenue, 58th
Avenue (County Road No. 10) and the west City limits.
108
1
-3-
Mr. Farr explained to the Commission that the project
would be constructed in stages, over an expected period of
30 months, with the 1st stage to consist of 3 story multiple
dwelling construction on the west side of the property, as
designated on the plans. After review of the plans, the
following action was taken.
Motion by Ditter, seconded by Dorenfeld, to recommend to
the City Council that the site and building plans submitted
by Darrel Farr under Application #67054 be approved, but with
the following conditions:
1. the building plans are subject to the final approval
of the Building Inspector;
2. utilities and drainage plans are subject to the
final approval of the City Engineer;
3. a performance agreement and performance bond (in
an amount to be determined by the City Manager)
shall be submitted by the applicant to the City
to guarantee the installation of the site improve-
ments :shown on the site plan;
4. no signery is being approved for the development;
5. a minimum of 2 parking spaces shall be provided
for each dwelling unit;
6. a walkway easement across the northeast corner of
the property between 592 Avenue and Kyle Avenue,
with the walkway to be constructed by the developer.
Voting in favor of the motion were Ditter, Grosshans,
Bogucki, Jensen, Engstrom, and Dorenfeld; not voting was
Ausen, who stated that he objected to the provision of only
two accesses from the entire project to public roadways.
motion carried.
Mr. Jensen advised the Commission that the application
submitted by Robert Keller, No. 67055, had been dropped
by the applicant, and no request for approval of site and
building plans of an apartment development would be forthcoming
from him for the property bounded by 65th Avenue, Camden Avenue,
65th Avenue (extended) and Bryant Avenue.
The next application to be considered was No. 67006
submitted by Home Federal Savings and Loan Association, requesting
a variance from Section 35-330 to permit erection of a
freestanding sign on the company' s property at 2901 Northway
Drive. Mr. Blake Scattergood of Home Federal Savings and
Loan was present with a representative of Federal Sign
Company, to explain Home Federal' s desire to construct a
freestanding sign on the south side of their property adjacent
to County Road 10, which would be approximately 172 feet in
height and 79 square feet in area. TheCommission reviewed
this sign request in relation to the standards for variances
as set out in the zoning Ordinance, and in light of its
proposed sign ordinance of January 5, 1967.
Motion by Ausen, seconded by Bogucki, to recommend to the
City Council that approval be granted to Application No. 67006
submitted by Home Federal Savings and Loan Association
requesting a variance from Section 35-330 to permit erection
of a freestanding sign on the property at 2901 Northway Drive,
in that a hardship does in fact exist in relation to
freestanding signery for commercial property, due to the
fact that the present zoning ordinance does not take into
1
1
1
5
-4-
account this common and necessary type of business activity
(freestanding signing) , but that the approval for such
freestanding sign at the location shown on the site plan
submitted is conditioned upon the following:
1. the sign shall not exceed 80 square feet in
area and 16 feet in height measured from the
finished floor grade of the Home Federal building.
Motion carried unanimously.
The Commission then considered Application No. 67056
submitted by Lowry Realty Company, requesting a variance from
Section 35-315 to permit erection of a freestanding sign on
the property at 7006 Osseo Road. Mr. Richard Rockstad of
Lowry Realty was present to discuss the application with the
Commission. He explained to the Commission that he had, in
July of this year, received approval of both the Commission
and Council to install certain wall signs on the Lowry Realty
Office at 7006 Osseo Road, advising the Commission and Council
at that time that he would, at some time in the future,
hopefully after the adoption of the new sign ordinance, wish
to install a freestanding sign on the property. Since the
time of the previous approvals he had determined that the need
for the freestanding sign was greater than he had originally
anticipated, and he therefore requests that approval be
granted to a freestanding sign on the property at the present
time. He submitted a drawing to the Commission of the
proposed sign which contained approximately 72 square feet
of area, and approximately 23 feet in height. The Commission
discussed the proposed sign in relation to the proposed
Sign Ordinance of January 5, 1967, and with regard to the
standards for variance as set out in the Zoning Ordinance.
Motion by Ausen, seconded by Ditter, to recommend to the
City Council that approval be granted to Application #67056
submitted by Lowry Realty, requesting a variance from Section
35-315 to permit erection of a freestanding sign on the
property at 7006 Osseo Road, in that a hardship does in fact
exist in relation to freestanding signery for commercial
property, due to the fact that the present Zoning Ordinance
does not take into account this common and necessary type of
business activity (freestanding signing) but that the approval
is conditioned upon the following:
1. the sign shall not exceed 36 square feet in
area and 8 feet in height, and shall be
setback a minimum of 10 feet from the Osseo Road
right-of-way line.
Motion carried unanimously.
The next application to be considered was No. 67057
submitted by Freeway Shell Oil, requesting special use
permission to allow the storage and rental of trucks and
trailers on the service station property at 6545 Lyndale
Avenue North. Mssrs. Richard Horstman and William Barry were
present to discuss the application with the Commission.
The applicant explained that he intended to install a
U-Haul Rental franchise on the station property, and possibly
also some rental camper trailers if such camping trailers
prove to be in demand. He noted that the station site was
an extremely large one, almost one acre in size, and in
116
-5-
addition to the parking which would be required by the
ordinances for service, customer, and employee vehicles,
there is sufficient space to the north and west of the
station building to stock a good number of trailers and trucks,
the actual number depending on the size of the items stored.
After a good deal of discussion between the Commission
and the applicant with regard to their future plans for the
rental units, the following action was taken.
Motion by Engstrom seconded by Ditter to recommend to
the City Council that approval be granted to Application No.
67057, to permit the rental of truck and trailer units on
the Freeway Shell Oil Service Station property at 6545 Lyndale
Avenue North, with the following conditions:
1. that a maximum of 14 rental units in any combination
of trucks and trailers be permitted on the station
property at any one time;
2. that there shall be no parking of the rental units
in such a manner so as to block the entrances to
the station site and no parking of such units
in front of the station building;
3. no signing is being approved at this time for
advertising the availability of such rental units;
4. the special use permission shall be reviewed in
one year from the date of Council approval to consider
the effect of this rental activity on the station
site with the possibility at the time of reviewal
of raising or lowering the number of units permitted
and to examine the question of whether the presently
vacant rear portion of the station property should
be paved or covered with crushed rock.
Motion carried unanimously.
The next application to be considered was No. 67058
submitted by Kentucky Fried Chicken Inc. , requesting approval
of site and building plans of a commercial establishment and
a variance from Section 35-330 to permit erection of a free-
standing sign, both for the property at 5512 Osseo Road.
Mr. Louis Hutchison of K.F.C. Corporation was present
to discuss the request with the Commission. Mr. Hutchison
explained to the Commission that the proposed Kentucky Fried
Chicken Store would be a company owned operation and would be
similar in operation to other Kentucky Fried Chicken franchise
outlets in the metropolitan area. He also explained that
there had been some concern by his firm with regard to the
freestanding sign which would be allowed on the property,
noting that apparently the City was quite restrictive on
freestanding signs. The Commission examined the plans, and
then commenced discussion of the freestanding sign request,
which discussion resulted in the concensus of the Commission
that this type of operation was most like a drive-in operation
and that the sign which should be permitted on this property
should be in line with the standards set out in the January 5,
1967, Sign Ordinance recommendation of the Commission for
drive-in establishments.
1
1
1
-6-
Motion by Bogucki, seconded by Engstrom, to recommend
to the City Council that the site and building plans submitted
with Application No. 67058, for the property at 5512 Osseo
Road, be approved, with the following conditions:
1. the building plans are subject to the final
approval of the Building Inspector;
2. a performance agreement and performance bond
(in an amount to be determined by the City Manager)
be submitted by the applicant to the City to
guarantee the installation of the site improve-
ments shown on the plans.
Motion carried unanimously.
Motion by Bogucki, seconded by Engstrom, to recommend
to the City Council that the variance requested in Appli-
cation No. 67058 for a freestanding sign to permit erection of
a freestanding sign on the property at 5512 Osseo Road be
granted, in that a hardship does in fact exist in relation
to freestanding signing for commercial property due to the
fact that the present zoning ordinance does not take into
account this common and necessary type of business activity
(freestanding signing) but that the approval of the sign is
conditioned upon the following:
1. the sign shall not exceed 250 square feet in area
and 24 feet in height above the finished floor
grade of the building on the property, and shall
a minimum of 8 feet of clear space below the sign,
and shall be non-flashing.
Motion carried unanimously.
The last application to be considered was No. 67059,
submitted by Howe, Inc. The application requested approval
of plans for an addition to an industrial office building at
4821 Xerxes Avenue North.
Motion by Dorenfeld, seconded by Bogucki, to recommend
to the City Council that approval be granted to the plans
submitted by Howe, Inc. , for an addition to their office
building at 4821 Xerxes Avenue North. Motion carried unanimously.
Motion by Ditter, seconded by Ausen, that the meeting be
adjourned. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned
at 11:56 P.M.
Chai
l
, ,,�3
:.,
113
Minutes of the Proceedings of the
Planning Commission in the City of
Brooklyn Center in the County of
Hennonbi and State of Minnesota
November 9, 1967
The Planning Commission met in special session and was
called to order by Chairman Robert Jensen at 8:05 P.M.
Roil Call: Chairman Robert Jensen, Vice-Chairman Robert
Grosshans, Commissioners F-.enry Bogucki and Paul Ditter were
present. Also present were Dale Hamilton, Superintendent of
Engineering, and Richard Cihoski, secretary to the Commission.
The Chairman advised the members that a single item
of business would be considered this evening, Application
No. 67060 as submitted by Brooklyn Auto Sales, requesting
approval of site and building plans for the proposed new and
used car dealership at 6801 Osseo Road.
Mr. Lowell Broin, the future dealer at this location, and
his architectural representative, Mr. Liebenberg, were present
to discuss the plans with the Commission.
A lengthy discussion ensued between the Commission and the
applicant, relating to his proposed operating in relation to
the plans submitted.
Motion by Grosshans, seconded by Ditter, to recommend to
the City Council that the site and building plans submitted by
Brooklyn Auto Sales be approved, with the following stipulations
and conditions:
1. the actual layout of the used car sales area, which
parking layout has not yet been finally determined,
may be at the discretion of the applicant, except
that it may not encroach on the perimeter service
drive, and the used car sales office may be moved
from its designated location to coordinate with the
layout of such used car area, as long as the revised
location is in accord with the setback requirements
of the Zoning Ordinance;
2. the building plans are subject to the approval of
the Building Inspector with regard to applicable
building codes;
3. the utilities plan for the development and the
driveway accesses from the property are subject to
the approval of the City Engineering Department;
4. lighting on the property shall not include incandes-
cent bulbs, and such lighting shall be directed onto
the auto dealership' s property;
5. no freestanding sign approval is being considered
in the approval of these plans;
a
`.
-2-
6. a performance agreement and performance bond
(in an amount to be determined by the City Manager)
shall be submitted by the applicant to the City
to guarantee the site improvements contained on
the plan submitted.
Further, it is recommended to the applicant that he seriously
consider the installation of a sidewalk adjacent to the Osseo
Road right-of-way, as a part of the Commission's recommended
walkway system for the City. Motion carried unanimously.
Ditter
Motion by Bogucki, seconded by , that the meeting
be adjourned. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting
adjourned at 9 P.M.
C ai an
�y
Minutes of the Proceedings of the
Planning Commission in the City
of Brooklyn Center in the County of
Hennepin and State of Minnesota
November 30, 1967
The Planning Commission met in special session and was
called to order by Chairman Robert Jensen at 7:45 P.M.
Roll Call: Chairman Robert Jensen, Vice Chairman Robert
Grosshans, Commissioners Helmer Engstrom, Vernon Ausen,
Paul Ditter and Henry Bogucki were present. Staff members
present were C. E. Van Eeckhout, Jerry Dulgar and Richard
Cihoski, Secretary to the Commission. Other persons present
were: six members of the Brooklyn Park Planning Commission;
William Thibault, St. Louis Park's City Planner; Mr. Glenn
Hubbard of Pure Oil Company; Mr. Arnie Cox of the Clark Oil
Company and Mr. Lee McNulty of Western Oil Company.
Mr. Jensen opened the meeting with a brief explanation
of the purpose of this study meeting: that of providing a
siminar-type discussion of trends in the service station
industry. He pointed out that the oil company representatives
present portrayed a cross-section of the industry, from strictly
petroleum sales through petroleum plus repair services, to
petroleum sales plus retail store sales. Following this
introduction, he asked that each of the three oil company
representatives present a brief background of their respective
type of merchandising, following which the floor would be
open for questions and discussion of trends and problems.
The oil company representatives made their presentations,
following which several hours of discussion ensued.
At the close of the discussion, all three of the oil
company representatives thanked the Commission for the
opportunity to appear in this open discussion, where no rezoning
or special permit applications were at stake, so that an
open forum could result. They commented that this was the
first time that they had been involved in such a discussion
and that it yould probably be good for both the oil industry
and local government if such discussions were held in other
c=ommunities as well.
Mr. Jensen thanked the representatives for coming and
also thanked the representatives of Brooklyn Park and St. Louie
Nark for their attendance and comments.
Motion by Engstrom, seconded by Ditter, that the meeting
be adjourned. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting
adjourned at 11:30 P.M.
1
1
dhaitf
164
.�
i
._}',
:�
�,�n �-
.. �� ; yy
�� � A•
�i.
w
i
Yy
:.��
���!'T
`N�,�
�.. ..
`�;`, �A.
Minutes of the Proceedings of
the Planning Commission in the
City of Brooklyn Center in the
County of Hennepin and State of Minnesota
December 7, 1967
The Planning Commission met in regular session and was
called to order by Vice-Chairman Robert Grosshans at 7:30 P.M.
Roll Call: Vice-Chairman Robert Grosshans, Commissioners
Paul Ditter, Henry Bogucki, Vernon Ausen, Helmer Engstrom and
Adrian Dorenfeld were present. Staff members present were
C. E. Van Eeckhout and Richard Cihoski, Secretary to the
Commission.
Motion by Ditter, seconded by Bogucki, to approve the
minutes of the regular meetings of October 5th and November 2nd,
and the special meetings of October 26th and November 9th, 1967,
with a revision to be made in the final motiop of the November
9th minutes. Motion carried unanimously.
The first item of business to be considered was Appli-
cation No. 67061 submitted by Jerry Harrington, requesting a
rezoning from the present R-1 (Single Family Residence)
classification to R5 (Multiple Family Residence) of the property
at the southwest corner of the intersection of 69th Avenue
and Trunk Highway #169. Mr. Harrington explained to the
Commission that he had a purchase agreement contingent upon
this rezoning to R5, and intended, upon rezoning, to construct
a 23 or 24 unit apartment building on the approximately one
and one half acres of land. He noted that, in his opinion,
the location of the property at the intersection of 69th
and Lyndale Avenue made it unsuited to a single family
residential use, and that a multiple dwelling, with a single
multiple dwelling structure could be so located as to mitagate
the undesirable effects of the adjacent heavily traveled road-
ways.
Following the gathering of comments from adjacent property
owners that had been notified of the hearing, who expressed
concern about the precedent such a rezoning might make,
member Bogucki moved and Dorenfeld seconded, thatthe public
hearing be closed. Motion carried unanimously.
Further discussion among the Commissioners ensued, relating
to the recommendations of the Comprehensive Plan for this area
as single family or duplex residential and the development
potential of the property for such uses, including the
stated principle of the Plan that single family residential use
with direct access to the heavily traveled roadways should be
discouraged. The Commission asked Mr. VanEeckhout to comment
on the possible future upgrading of Lyndale Avenue. Mr.
Van Eeckhout replied that the Highway Department had been
unwilling to make a definite commitment relative to this
future upgrading and widening. it is the Highway Department's
opinion that any upgrading would remain within the present
rights-of-way. The timing and extent of any upgrading would
be dependent on developing traffic trends in the area, the
extent of other highway improvements that might compete with
present or projected Lyndale Avenue traffic, and the proposed
East-West County Freeway in Brooklyn Park. During conversations
1
1
1
1
-2-
with the District 5 Design Engineer several months ago, it
was indicated that the upgrading of Lyndale Avenue was not
programmed and therefor construction was more than five years
away.
Motion by Bogucki, seconded by Dorenfeld, to table
Application No. 67061 to allow the Commission a further opport-
unity 'to study the application, with the provision that persons
notified of this hearing will be notified following the
Commission's action as to when the request will be before the
City Council. Voting in favor of the motion were Engstrom,
Dorenfeld, Ditter, and Bogucki; voting against was Grosshans;
not voting was Ausen. Motion carried.
Mr. Grosshans noted that his opposing vote was based on
his opinion that a tabling for a maximum of 30 days would not
be sufficient to determine anything in addition to what is
already known, as there are a great many development problems
in the area which can not be finally determined. Mr. Ausen
noted that his abstinence from voting was based on his
objection to rezoning for a single building, which could
take on the characteristics of a spot zoning.
The next application to be considered was No. 67067, a
rezoning hearing initiated by the City of Brooklyn Center in
relation to another application, No. 67033, submitted by
L. H. Haug and Mrs. Virgil Schafbuch, both of which involve
a proposed rezoning to R-5 (Multiple Residence) of the property
to the north of 70th Avenue on the west side of Osseo Road.
Mr. Grosshans asked if Mr. Dorn, the owner of the
property involved in Application No. 67067, or his repre-
sentative was present, at which time Mr. Richard Rockstad of
Lowry Realty presented himself 'to the Commission and stated
that he would represent Mr. Dorn in the hearing. Mr. Rockstad
stated that Mr. Dorn was not necessarily against the R5 zoning
for which the hearing had been initiated, but that he would
like the Commission to zone to the "highest and best use" .
To this Mr. Grosshans replied that the Commission, during pre-
vious hearings on Application No. 67033 had stated that it was
in favor of either R5 (Multiple Residence) of Cl (Service-
Office) zoning for the property, as the Commission considered
them comparable use classifications. Mr. Rockstad broached
the subject of a possible R6 (Multiple Residence-Low Rise)
zoning on the property, but this was not discussed further,
as the R6 classification does not presently exist. Mr.
Rockstad commented that he would attempt to coordinate a
combined sale of the Dorn, Haug and Schafbuch properties if
they were rezoned.
Motion by Dorenfeld, seconded by Ditter, that the public
hearing on Application No. 67067 be closed. Motion carried
unanimously.
Motion by Dorenfeld, seconded by Bogucki, to recommend
to the City Council that approval be granted to both Appli-
cations No. 67033 and 67067, and that the properties to the
north of 70th Avenue on the west side of Osseo Road, owned
by Mrs. Virgil Schafbuch, L.H. Haug and Earl N. Dorn (Parcels
28001 3000, 3400, and 5000 of Plat 89101) be rezoned to the
R5 (Multiple Family Residence) zoning classification, as the
1
1
1
C
r,
-3-
rezoning to such multiple residence classification is in
accord with the Comprehensive Planning principle of encouraging
a planned development area to the north of 70th Avenue. In
recommending approval of the rezoning of these parcels, the
Commission notes that Mr. Dorn's representative has appeared
and has expressed that he is not adverse to the R5 zoning
Initiated by the City. Further, the Commission is also
aware that one of the properties involved cannot be used
for R5 purposes by itself due to its limited size; the
Commission is hopeful that the rezoning of the four parcels
will encourage a "unit" development of the four properties.
Motion carried unanimously.
The Commission next considered Application No. 67064
submitted by Leroy Berg, the operator of the Pure Oil Station
at 6901 Osseo Road, requesting special use permission to permit
the sale of snowmobiles on the service station property. Mr.
Berg explained to the Commission that he would like to incor-
porate the sale of snowmobiles as part of his service station
operation. He noted that reference had been made in the
Planning Commission Agenda to the fact that he might wish to
sell a comparable sports item in the summer months. As far
as this is concerned, he had been thinking about the possibility
of boat sales at a later date if the snowmobile sales operation
were successful, but that if the business did branch into the
boat area, that another business site would obviously have to
be acquired.
Mr. Ausen observed that the intent of the Commission's
drivein-service station study is not to prohibit such things
as auxiliary sales on service station sites, but to insure
that sufficient space, preimarily parking space, is available
on the site for the auxiliary sales. He further stated that
if the sale of snowmobiles is to be permitted on this property,
the Commission should include in its recommendation acknowledge-
ment that parking spaces in excess of those required for the
normal service station operation are being provided for this
extra use.
Motion by Ausen, seconded by Engstrom, to recommend to the
City Council that approval be granted to Application #67064,
to grant special use permission for the sale of snowmobiles
on the Pure Oil Service Station property at 6901 Osseo Road,
in that the proposed use meets the standards for special uses
as set out in the Zoning Ordinance, and in addition, the
Planning Commission would desire to use this activity on this
site as an experimenL' during its study of drive-in establish-
ments to learn more about this type of operation on a service
station site. Further, however, the recommended approval is
conditioned upon the following:
1) the number of snowmobiles to be displayed out-
doors shall be limited to four, but the dealer
may have as many others as he wishes indoors;
2) no outside signing for the snowmobile operation
is being considered or permitted by this approval;
3) the special use permission for the sale of snow-
mobiles shall expire August 1, 1968.
1.70
-4-
The Commission further notes that it acknowledges the avail-
ability of three parking spaces over and above the number
required for the normal service station operation being
available for the additional snowmobile sales use.
Voting in favor of the motion were Dorenfeld, Engstrom,
Ausen, Bogucki and Ditter; not voting was Grosshans. Motion
carried.
The Commission next considered Application No. 67065
submitted by Petsuch Realty, requesting a variance from
Section 35-340 to permit erection of a projecting sign on
the company's office at 6748 Osseo Road. Mr. Petsuch appeared
and explained that the lack of adequate signing had created a
hardship for him in the conduct of his business. He explained
to the Commission that he proposes to turn the existing sign
on his building to be perpendicular to the Osseo Road, as the
present sign is practically impossible to see until the customer
is directly in front of the business and unable 'to turn in.
The Commission discussed with Mr. Petsuch the possibility that
some other factors might relate to the low level of business he
has been experiencing in his establishment, one of which could
be the fact that the location is entirely wrong for a real
estate agency.
Motion by Ditter, seconded by Bogucki, to recommend to the
City Council that Application No. 67065 submitted by Petsuch
Realty requesting a variance from Section 35-340 to permit
erection of a projecting sign, be denied, in that the requested
sign does not meet the standards set out for the issuance of
variances, and secondly, it is not in line with the provisions
of the Commission's recommended sign ordinance of January 5,
1967. Motion carried unanimously.
The next application to be considered was No. 67063
submitted by Dayton Development Company requesting rezoning
for the! (approximately) 5 acres of property at the northwest
corner of the intersection of Xerxes Avenue and County Road Not
10 from, the present RB (Residence-Business) and B2 (Regional
Business) to B2 (Regional Business) . Mr. Jon Abbott of
Dayton Development Company discussed with the Commission the
proposed rezoning, indicating that the parcel involved would
lie south of the future northwest extension of Northway Drive
from Xerxes Avenue turning southward to County Road 10. He
explained that this development plan had been in existence for
some time and approximately half of the property was already
zoned to the B2 classification, so in essence the rezoning would
be for . the northerly half of the proposed 5 acre parcel.
The Chair then called for comments from those notified
of the hearing who expressed concern over the proximity of the
proposed retail use to the residential elements to the north,
and questioned whether the strip of land (to the north of
future Northway Drive) adjacent to their properties would be
of sufficient depth to make possible the development of that
strip for commercial office uses.
Motion by Dorenfeld, seconded by Bogucki, to close the
public hearing on Application No. 67063. Motion carried
unanimously.
1
1
1
-5-
Motion by Dorenfeld, seconded by Engstrom, to table
Application No. 67063 to allow for further consideration
of the requested rezoning, with the persons who had been
notified of the rezoning hearing to be notified by mail
of the time and date at which the Council would consider the
Planning Commission's recommendations thereon. Motion carried
unanimously.
The Commission then considered Application No. 67062
submitted by Dayton Development Company, requesting rezoning
from I2 (Industrial Park) to B2 (Regional Business) . Mr.
:Jon Abbott of Dayton Development Company was present, and
explained that the parcel involved, bounded by Shingle Creek,
County Road 10 and Highway No. 100, was the site previously
proposed for a theater use, and that the requested rezoning to
B2 would be to accommodate that type of use on the property.
The Commission reviewed the rezoning request in relation
to the City's Comprehensive Plan, and subsequent to this
discus ion, the following action was taken.
Motion by Ditter, seconded by Ausen, to recommend to
the City Council that the rezoning from I2 to B2 as requested
in App ication No. 67062 for the property bounded by Shingle
Creek, County Road No. 10 and Highway No. 100 be approved.
Motion carried unanimously.
The last item of business to be considered by the
Commis ion was Application No. 67066 submitted by Bridgeman
Creamery, requesting a variance from Section 35-330 requesting
the er ction of a freestanding sign on its property at
6201 0 seo Road. Mr. Edward Benson, representing Bridgeman's,
was pr sent and discussed their desire to remove the existing
freest nding sign in front of the Bridgeman establishment and
to mov it eastward onto the green strip between the Osseo
Road and the service drive. Mr. Benson explained that his
company had noticed a marked decline in business following the
construction of the Brookdale Chrysler/Plymouth Auto Dealership
and th installation of the dealership' s signing and lighting
standards, and that his company had determined that the
solution to this problem would be to move the Bridgeman free-
standing sign closer to the Osseo Road to gain more visibility.
The commission discussed with Mr. Benson the possibility that
factors other than the construction of Brookdale Chrysler/
Plymouth may have caused the business decline referred to. The
commission examined the freestanding sign request in relation
to the standards for variances of the zoning Ordinance, and
the Ja uary 5th proposed sign ordinance, noting that provision
had been made in the proposed sign ordinance to allow free-
standing signs to be adjacent to street property lines, but
that the area of the present sign was in excess of that which
would le permitted under the proposed sign ordinance.
M tion by Ausen, seconded by Ditter, to close the public
hearinc on Application No. 67066 and table the application to
allow the Commission further time to examine the factors
involved. Motion carried unanimously.
M tion by Bogucki, seconded by Ausen, that the meeting be
adjourned. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned
at 12 midnight.
Chaff n
1.66
299
Minutes of the Proceedings
of the Planning Commission in the
City of Brooklyn Center in the
County of Hennepin and State of Minnesota
December 28, 1967
The Planning Commission met in regular session and was
called. to order by Chairman Robert Jensen at 8:00 P.M.
11 Call: Chairman Robert Jensen, Commissioners
Paul ritter, Henry Bogucki, and Helmer Engstrom were present.
Staff member present Jean Murphey as acting secretary to the
commission.
The first item of business was Application No. 67061,
requesting rezoning from R-1 (Single Family Residence) to
R-5 (Multiple Family Residence) of the property at the
southwest corner of 69th Avenue and Lyndale Avenue North.
The ptblic hearing on this application was held December
7, 190, and after hearing the comments from the interested
property owners, the Commission closed the hearing and
tabled the request for consideration at this meeting.
The Commission believes that the Comprehensive Guide
Plan which indicates single family residential development
of this area is correct and should be followed. The Commission
also feels that with the addition of service roads and
limited access to the heavily traveled streets, a good single
family residential development can take place in this area.
Following this discussion, a motion was introduced by
member Paul Ditter and seconded by Helmer 2ngstrom to recommend
to the City Council that Application No.67061 submitted by
Jerry arrington be disapproved and the rezoning from R-1
to R-5 be denied because such rezoning would not conform
to the Development Guide Plan and would constitute spot zoning
and would tend to endanger the Guide Plan. Voting in favor
of the motion were Ditter, Engstrom, Bogucki, and Jensen.
Motion carried unanimously.
The next application to be considered was No. 67063
submit ed by Dayton Development Company for rezoning from
R-B (R sidential Business) and B-2 (Regional Business) to
B-2. his application was tabled at the December 7, 1967,
meetin to allow the Commission time to consider the request.
The Camission has some concern as to whether the remaining
R-B zoning is large enough to provide proper transition
from tie an intense retail sales use and the single family
reside tial use which adjoins the R-B zone. The Commission
feels hat the applicant should provide a more specific
plan £ r the development and therefor the following action
was to an.
Motion by Engstrom and seconded by Ditter to recommend
to the City Council that Application No. 67063 be disapproved
and thq rezoning from R-B to B-2 be denied until the appli-
cant shall file with the Planning Commission, for their
review, a plan for the future development of all of that
area d scribed as Tract "A", Registered Land Survey No. 1142.
Voting in favor of the motion were Engstrom, Ditter, Bogucki,
and Je sen. Motion carried unanimously.
i �"�
\A`
-2-
The Commission next held a discussion of the minimum
size ok a townhouse development as per the City Council
direction of December 11, 1967, and took action as follows.
Motion by Engstrom, seconded by Bogucki,ucki, to instruct the
Secretary to prepare a resolution to be acted upon at the
regular Planning Commission meeting of January 4, 1968.
The Commission next considered Application No. 67066
submitted by Bridgeman's for permission to move the
existimg sign eastward onto the green strip between the
Osseo Road and the service drive. This application was tabled
at the December 7, 1967, meeting. After some discussion,
the Commission expressed a feeling that premised upon the
January 5, 1967, proposed sign ordinance, Bridgeman's are
entitled to all the benefits and should also be subject to
all the requirements as set forth in Section 3-1104 (A2) of
said proposed ordinance and therefor took the following
action.I
Motion by Bogucki and seconded by Ditter to recommend
to thelCity Council that Application No. 67066 be approved
and a variance from Section 35-330 granted to permit
Bridgeman's to erect one freestanding sign on their property
located at 6201 Osseo Road. Further, however, the recommended
approval is conditioned upon the following:
1) The total height of the sign shall not exceed
24 feet measured from the adjacent street curb.
2) The total area of the sign shall not exceed
250 square feet as determined under Section 3-1102
(Gross Surface Area of Sign) of said proposed
ordinance.
3) The sign shall have a minimum vertical clearance
of 8 feet above the centerline grade of the
street.
4) No part of the sign shall project over or beyond
the property line of the property upon which the
sign is located.
Voting in favor of the motion were Bogucki, Ditter,
Engstromn, and Jensen. Motion carried unanimously.
Motion by Bogucki and seconded by Engstrom that the
meeting be adjourned. The meeting adjourned at 11:30 P.M.
Cha.'rm n
zia